I recently started attending Karma Kagyu meditations and did the guided Guru Yoga meditation. Is it suitable to be done (with youtube for example) at home or just at Sangha? I feel like I'd like to be doing that more than twice a week. Is doing it elsewhere technically considered a breach of tradition?

When Siddhārtha Gautama left his home to become an ascetic, he left a wife, son, father and step mother. His achievement of enlightenment and subsequent teachings of the 4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Noble Path has brought obvious benefit to the world for the potential of the cessation of suffering. But what is known about the suffering of the Buddha's personal family due to his leaving? As the Buddha, did he ever speak of this matter?

If the doer disappears, all the external objects disappear, what remains is the knower. Knower is known and knows. Knower is consciousness,inner aspect. Knower,outer aspect,objects. Sankhara appears for Knower If sankhara disappears pure consciousness will arise. Which kind of a meditation sankhara disappears?

When doer and knower disappears is that the state where anatta found? Have reached the state experience of a mirage in appeared on doing work. Which samadhi has involved?And mind restlessness appeared when closer look at the restlessness it will disappears with samadhi.

There are several consulting firms out there that teach mindfulness to corporations as a livelihood. Is it bad karma since they are essentially taking this from the Buddhist teachings, adding their own neuroscience research on top of it and selling it as a product for better productivity and emotional health. On the other hand, many mindfulness centres in the west offer retreats in exchange for "suggested" donations. Does this kind of transaction corrupt the dharma or is it propagating the dharma to a wider audience?

While doing meditation thoughts developing on cittarupa and the what is appearing on the field too disappears together feel like anattma(non self).At that moment citta goes out into the field and light appears from the point it has gone.no attachment it is freed and moved towards. No sensations of body has appeared. (Eg sound ....,...,)what is this experience?

Namo Buddhaya. I am a beginner.I want to dedicate rest of my life developing mindfulness.I know there are four ways of attending mindfulness. I understand all the four ways. However I am not sure how to undertake all the four ways of attending mindfulness. Is there any progressive way of attending different mindfulness techniques? Should I choose different mindfulness technique at different times ? Which mindfulness technique would be useful for me ?

Buddha explains how world came to be by saying eye and forms come together to create eye consciousness. Coming together of eye, forms and eye-consciousness created contact. Contact lead to feelings which lead to birth , death and suffering. Same applies to ear , nose , tongue , mind. But when we sleep the eyes are shut yet we see the dream. How is that possible ? In that dream I am able to see, hear , touch and feel. Due to which contact in this real world am I able to live the dreams ? My question is : due to coming together of which internal and external senses does the dream arise ?

In discourses given to monks in AN11.1 , AN11.2 and AN11.3 , the Buddha gave very similar messages on the purpose and benefit of virtue (sila) and how it leads to knowledge and vision of release. I quote the Thanissaro translation of AN11.1 : > “Thus in this way, Ananda, skillful virtues (sīlā) have freedom from > remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward. > Freedom from remorse (avippaṭisāro) has joy as its purpose, joy as its > reward. Joy (pāmojjaṃ) has rapture as its purpose, rapture as its > reward. Rapture (pīti) has serenity as its purpose, serenity as its > reward. Serenity (passaddhi) has pleasure as its purpose, pleasure as > its reward. Pleasure (sukhaṃ) has concentration as its purpose, > concentration as its reward. Concentration (samādhi) has knowledge & > vision of things as they actually are as its purpose, knowledge & > vision of things as they actually are as its reward. Knowledge & > vision of things as they actually are (yathābhūtañāṇadassanaṃ) has > disenchantment as its purpose, disenchantment as its reward. > Disenchantment (nibbidā) has dispassion as its purpose, dispassion as > its reward. Dispassion (virāgo) has knowledge & vision of release as > its purpose, knowledge & vision of release (vimuttiñāṇadassana) as its > reward. According to the Yuganaddha Sutta (AN4.170) spoken by Ananda, insight can be developed before concentration, or concentration can be developed before insight, or both can be developed in tandem. However, in the AN11.1-3 suttas spoken by the Buddha, the chain of causes starts with virtues (sila), and passes through rapture (piti), pleasure (sukham), concentration (samadhi), then goes to "knowledge and vision of things as they actually are" (yathābhūtañāṇadassanaṃ). To my understanding, "knowledge and vision of things as they actually are" is the goal of vipassana (insight), right? So, I take it that AN 11.1-3 implies the following sequence: - Every person (monk or lay person) should start with the cultivation of virtues (sila) - the starting point for virtue according to other suttas is the five precepts - Virtues (sila) eventually leads one to rapture (sila), pleasure (sukham) and concentration (samadhi), which is the goal of samatha (tranquility) meditation. - Samatha (tranquility) meditation then leads on to vipassana (insight) meditation - Vipassana (insight) meditation results in the "knowledge and vision of things as they actually are" So, is my interpretation correct that the correct sequential order of practice is first sila, followed by samatha, followed by vipassana? On the other hand, MN 149 does say: > Thus for him, having thus developed the noble eightfold path, the four > frames of reference go to the culmination of their development. The > four right exertions... the four bases of power... the five > faculties... the five strengths... the seven factors for Awakening go > to the culmination of their development. **[And] for him these two > qualities occur in tandem: tranquility & insight.** So, which is the right interpretation? - The one in AN 4.170 stating that insight before tranquility or tranquility before insight or tranquility in tandem with insight, are all good. - The one in MN 149 stating that tranquility and insight happens in tandem - The one in AN 11.1-3 stating clearly that virtues should come before tranquility, and tranquility should come before insight?

I was sitting among my friends when I realised none of them are mine. They will change or perish. I felt detached and disconnected. I no longer focused on what they were saying. I appeared absent minded to them. I appeared as one who doesn't understand or care or love. My question is : Why should I focus on people or serve people who are not mine ?

I've seen it mentioned once or twice, a great teacher or master who has knee injury due to lots of sitting practice. I know that if the posture is incorrect or if one is forcing it, it will lead to injury (I've read scary reports of people who permanently harmed their body because they tried it without proper guidance). But, seeing some teachers with such injuries as well made me wonder if even with a correct posture one may still harm its own body. I don't know if those cases I heard are exceptions (does anyone have seen other cases as well?). But, if this is because of *really* lots of practice, perhaps other "safer" postures could have prevented that? So, my question: given ideal conditions, such as correct posture and enough strength for it, is lotus position more susceptible to injury (in the long run) than other postures, such as burmese or half-lotus? Or, are all these injuries we see due to lacking necessary conditions? If someone could point me to a reference, that would be great.

As far as I know, the concept of the Universal Mind (一心, yixin) was first coined in the 'Awakening of Faith'. In studying Zongmi, Yanshou, Chinul and Wonhyo, I found different translations such as: Universal Mind, All-encompassing mind, One Mind, One Nature, Pure Nature. Some say it is synonymous with mind-nature (xinxing). But neither alternative translations nor synonymous tell me what it is. In studying Yongming Yanshou systematically, I have come to identify what he says it is, its characteristics, and its functions. **The issue is that it ends up being identified with so many phenomena that it becomes confusing.** Its entity: 1. The dharmadhatu 2. The mind of suchness 3. The mind of arising and ceasing 4. A mind that is unperturbed and enters the dhyanas 5. A mind that arises in dependence upon practicing concentration and contemplation 6. The mind that is transmitted from a Chan patriarch to another patriarch
Its characteristics: 1. The origin of nature and characteristics 2. The basis of all things 3. A phenomena in which pure and impure, samsara and thusness intersect 4. A principle that unifies all the teachings of the buddha 5. The great tenet 6. The grand progenitor 7. The source of all truth 8. ‘Universal’ in that it includes mundane and supermundane dharmas.
Its function: 1. Illuminating the myriad dharmas as if reflected in a mirror. 2. Entering the dhyanas. 3. Producing prajna. 4. Perfecting [the actualization of] cessation. 5. Perfecting observation. The best explanation I have found so far explains that the One Mind is identified with so many phenomena because it is all of them. **Do you know of a more more detailed account, a clear explanation, or an authoritative reference?** In 'Wŏnhyo’s Theory of One Mind', Eun-su Cho says: > The One Mind is an evolution and merger of the concepts of > ālaya-vijñāna and tathāgatagarbha. It is a well-known fact that the > ālayavijñāna and the tathāgatagarbha originate from different branches > of Buddhist thought. The womb of the Tathāgata is a concept developed > from the optimistic idea that any sentient being has the possibility > of becoming a Buddha, a concept already described since early Buddhism > as the “innately pure mind.” And: > The One Mind is at times equivalent to ālayavijñāna, to the > tathāgatagarbha, or to original enlightenment, but its characteristics > contain the attributes of all. The One Mind represents an optimistic > and all-encompassing philosophy of the mind, surpassing both > ālayavijñāna and tathāgatagarbha. Additionally, the One Mind possesses > the meanings of unity and concentration.

I've read that things like aikido, yoga, swimming, running are not meditation. How is walking meditation different?

Does someone actively practise this type of meditation for a longer period of time? I feel like that it does not really work. Is there something to keep in mind to increase its effectiveness? I think that pictures or even better real life situations are better than self created images in order to see the repulsiveness. Any ideas?

I have found a text which states that > nibbāna is a description meaning not-self. The meaning of the text is clear. Nibbana is nothing but not-self. Moreover I have also found a sutta(SN22.45) which says that after understanding and realizing not-self the person attains Nirvana. > At Savatthi. “Bhikkhus, form is impermanent. What is impermanent is > suffering. What is suffering is nonself. What is nonself should be > seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this > I am not, this is not my self.’ When one sees this thus as it really > is with correct wisdom, the mind becomes dispassionate and is > liberated from the taints by nonclinging . . . > “By being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by > being content, he is not agitated. Being unagitated, he personally > attains Nibbāna. My question is :Does Nibbana mean not self?

There is an entity called Rohit (knowing subject) who has his own liking, disliking, habits etc. Or maybe these liking, disliking, habits etc make up the entity called Rohit. By constant awareness of self identification ( and eliminating things which I'm not) , I have started losing I-ness. It is difficult to explain in entirety but it is like death of the entity. Although this death of the entity giving a sense of peace and thoughtlessness, but it has started giving fears also. Fear of losing self - all liking, disliking etc along with social associations. It's kind of void & nihilism. It's like vanishing of selfhood & my own existence. So, my question is what should I do in this situation? Why it is happening? Should I go ahead against fears & continue my endeavor of non identification or I should step back (stopping the meditation & start identification again)? Or If I continue in unbecoming, what are the suggestions would you give? Note: I'm aware of paradoxes I used while posting details, ignore them as there is no any way to ask other than using 'I' wherever required.

What enters the mind of a Buddha when left idle? Suppose a Buddha were confined to a hospital bed or prison cell. One cannot remain within the conditioned states of jhana indefinitely. If one is unconditionally content, even in states of pain, it would seem there is no need to reflect or contemplate anything. Can you cite specific examples from the Buddha's life?

I read on some online page that the time before going to bed and immediately after waking up is benificial to meditation. I searched over internet but there aren't any specific instructions about any such Buddhist practise. Is this true? Is there any special meditation we can do in this time?

**Does anyone know if the Buddha said anything about social anxiety and how to deal with it?** I believe social anxiety is common in our day and age because people are more isolated now, but may not have been as common in the time of the Buddha. So if there is nothing specifically about social anxiety, can you provide info on what the Buddha said about dealing with anxiety (in general) (Also as a related question: Is anxiety considered a mild form of fear or are they separate in the Buddhist teachings?) Please provide sources if you can, thanks!

A lot of suttas mention the case of sudden enlightenment, during the time of the Buddha. Do these cases speak only of stream-enterers, or can they even be full arahants? For me it's unbelievable, that either others or I must simply (!!) understand impermanence, in order to become an arahant. Thanks