In one Sutta the Buddha said that one should constantly be mindful of the fact of anicca. In the Satipatthana Sutta he said that when one is dressing, eating, speaking etc. one should be aware that he is doing exactly that. Now my two questions (and yes I know that Sati is more than just present moment awareness in that it can also mean remembering something or calling somethibg helpful to mind) 1. The aspect of knowing what one is doing is connected with mental noting, right? Because the Buddha never (correct me if Im wrong) mentioned to note something as seeing, seeing, touching, touching.. etc. 2. If I am not mistaken the Buddha said one should constantly dwell/remind oneself of the fact of anicca but at the same time one should know what one is doing. This is confusing. When does one know when to use "what one is doing-mindfulness" and when to dwell on "impermanence-mindfulness"? 3. Is continous present moment awareness actually endorsed by the Buddha? Kind of confusing because first of one cannot be mindful all the time and secondly, how is one able to be present aware if one uses sati in the "remembering" sense when for example a hindrance is present? I think that the word "constant" or "continous" is just a word that puts strong emphasize on a specific activity, but I might be wrong.

from my last question I wonder: what provides wholesome pleasure and joy in a context of mental states and Buddhism? I wonder about: - *Objective pleasure*, i.e. engaging in meditation on compassion for example, or meditation in general, or engaging in "positive activities" as found in positive psychology - *Subjective pleasure*, i.e. engaging in an activity one enjoys which isn't harmful - *Goal-oriented pleasure*, i.e. fulfilling ambitions linked to one's aspirations And, again from the perspective of mental states, **is happiness always reliant on subjectivity to a degree?** Here, I mean to ask whether one's mood, or personal interest, or one's personality always play a part in generating pleasure and joy (aside, perhaps, from in meditation)?

I have read about different types of paths for spiritual aspirants. Namely: > - Śrāvakayāna > - Pratyekabuddhayāna > - Bodhisattvayāna Of the first, Asanga states their faculties are limited: > "These people are described as having weak faculties [...]" Of the second, he states they have medium faculties: > "[T]hey are said to have medium faculties [...]" Finally, he describes the bodhisattva as with sharp faculties. In the Sutra on the Ten Levels , it says the *sravaka* will have practised: > [...] through fear of cyclic existence and without [great] compassion, [...] ---------- I know that this is mainly a Mahayanist view. Nevertheless, my questions are : **(1) Should I conclude from this that faculties can really be different between practitioners? That, some individuals have greater facility for the dharma, and that enlightenment is not always feasible in one lifetime?** **(2) Does this imply that following a Buddhist path doesn't always result in great compassion? Can one follow a Buddhist path while neglecting compassion, and end up lacking it in the end? Or, can compassion always be developed, even at some later point?**

I am facing this problem currently. I am very sensitive and fearsome. I don't like to hurt others and am scared to argue with anyone. I become very hurt if someone has a bad attitude towards me. This only ends up in my stress levels increasing and losing patience and self hatred. Colleagues and friends say that I am not manipulative and very straightforward and that is what causes so many problems to me. I feel that I should not care whether others are good with me or are bad with me. But I tend to become over reactive suddenly and this is creating a chain of problems. I am sure in Buddhism, there would be the way to solve my problem.

I have a couple of questions due to a recent unfortunate event that had happened, happy if you guys could share your view base on your practices. 1) How does a Buddhist cope with grief and loss? Is there any most effective way that would helps eliminating the pain a little lesser? 2) In Theravada Buddhism, does one practices having vegetarian for 49 days after passing of a family member? 3) In Theravada Buddhism, does transferring merit to the decease works? Like chanting, donation, charity and etc. Thanks and sadhu sadhu sadhu.

Why Buddha praises the vedic Agnihotra as the foremost sacrifice and the Gayatri mantra as the foremost meter in the Pali Canon? > aggihuttamukhā yaññā sāvittī chandaso mukham. > > Sacrifices have the agnihotra as foremost; of meter the foremost is > the Sāvitrī "On the Buddha's Use of Some Brahmanical Motifs in Pali Texts"

It is very hard for me to find english translation tipitaka online, because it's classification look like very difference from thai and burma tipitaka. Also, english translation tipitaka online have not all tipitaka part. Many part of pāli canon looks lost from english translation.

Would love to get a word by word trnslation to this verse dhammpada 183 Verse 183: Not to do evil, to cultivate merit, to purify one's mind - this is the Teaching of the Buddhas. i mean what every word means - and yes im a bit lazy to do it not that important but i guess some people here know pali and it will be easy for them to do - if it takes more than a few minutes than leave it ... its still beneficial people see this verse which i think is great i just seen that sabba in the first word Sabbapapassa means "all" and "ku salassa" is kusala meaning good ? is it made of two words ? Sabbapapassa akaranam
ku salassa upasampada
sacittapariyodapanam
etam buddhana sasanam. taken from this link : http://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=183

What is the exact meaning of '*acala sukha'*? Is it mentioned in the Pali-canon? If so, where ? In what context ?

It's often used, this argument, for a good or a bad: "there are no people" equal to "there is no self": My person doubt either out nor for wisdom. Did the Buddha ever use such abstract arugents? What are possible bad impacts if arguing in such a way? How would people react if you tell them that they are just an illusion? Whould they be free of fear from you who thinks of others in such a way? Didn't the Buddha teaches cause and effect? It seems that an "is" argument is far away from Dhamma: How would people aruge valid to maintain such ideas? Can those who tell such things bear it to get beaten while the harming person says "Nobody get's beaten"? Would my person fails if saying that's [the "Dhamma" of the foolish Jhains](http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.070.than_en.html) ? >There are the contemplatives called the Niganthas (Jains). They get their disciple to undertake the following practice: 'Here, my good man. Lay down the rod with regard to beings who live more than 100 leagues to the east... more than 100 leagues to the west... more than 100 leagues to the north... more than 100 leagues to the south.' Thus they get the disciple to undertake kindness & sympathy to some beings, but not to others. > >"On the Uposatha day (medi sessions, discussions....), they get their disciple to undertake the following practice: 'Here, my good man. Having stripped off all your clothing, say this: "I am nothing by anything or of anything. Thus there is nothing by anything or of anything that is mine."' Yet in spite of that, his parents know of him that 'This is our child.' And he knows of them that 'These are my parents.' His wives & children know of him that 'This is our husband & father.' And he knows of them that 'These are my wives & children.' His workers & slaves know of him that 'This is our master.' And he knows of them that 'These are my workers & slaves.' Thus at a time when he should be persuaded to undertake truthfulness, he is persuaded to undertake falsehood. At the end of the night, he resumes the consumption of his belongings, even though they aren't given back to him. This counts as stealing, I tell you. Such is the Uposatha of the Jains, Visakha. When this Uposatha of the Jains is undertaken, it is not of great fruit or great benefit, not of great glory or great radiance. *[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]*

Would the Buddha shelter one from being offended by people? If so, how would he shelter one? If not, then why not?

Apart from right view of stress , origination of stress, cessation of stress and path to cessation of stress, I hold the view that humanity,which is under stress, must be saved. My question is :Am I holding the right view that humanity must be saved from stress?

In this TEDx Talk Youtube video at timestamp 12m 36s, Dr. Daniel Amen told the story of a nine year old boy named Andrew, who attacked a girl on a field for no particular reason and he had other behavioral problems. It turns out that he had a cyst in the left temporal lobe of his brain the size of a golf ball. Once it was removed, he returned to being a normal boy with normal behavior. Questions: 1. If his cyst was caused by past kamma, and if his bad behavior is caused by the presence of the cyst, then this implies that his present behavior is caused by his past kamma and he has no control of it. Is that true? 2. If his bad behavior was caused by the presence of the cyst, then would Andrew be creating bad kamma (by attacking the girl) due to bad intention, or would he not be creating bad kamma (by attacking the girl), because it was due to the cyst and not due to his own intention? 3. What did the Buddha teach about the physical body (including brain) and its ailments or conditions, affecting the mind and kamma? 4. How do we avoid bad kamma, due to mind-influencing effects caused by physical conditioning? 5. How could Buddhist teachings help a person like Andrew (before his cyst was removed)?

If something unexpected (and incredibly unlikely) happens, should we take it as something deeper or just a fact of life? Something highly unlikely and very positive happened at a very bad and negative point in my life, this event arguably showed a very different future to the one I imagined. Don't know how to read into it, or how my actions should be after the event, should I embrace the change?

What is buddhist point of view on money laundering and combating it (AML)? Are there any suttas that can be related to this topic?

If the number of buddhas is increasing, who was the first, and how did he become buddha without the dharma or a guru?

Let's assume modern scientific discoveries contradict or alter the Buddha's explanations. How are we supposed to approach this new information as it relates to the Buddha's teachings?

I just wonder why Buddha attain Parinibbana in fourth Jhana. Why not first or say second Jhana? [Maha-parinibbana Sutta: The Great Discourse on the Total Unbinding](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.5-6.than.html)

I attended a dhamma talk last month by a Thai monk but English translation were also provided on site. There was this westerner who is giving English translation but may not look like a full time monk? Although he was in white shirt, partial shaved head, but doesn't seem like wearing a rope. Was wondering, how would they be addressed as in monastery? Or they are just layman working for the monastery? Thanks. Sadhu sadhu sadhu

* Helpful: Is an idea of being helpful, such an intent, a secure attribut of skilful action? * Can intention of being helpful be very unskilful? Thinking on mercy-killing, or taking away dirt, which in unknowenly actually the food of the person one thought to help. * What is helpful? What might be right resolve, intent, leading a helpful and skilful act? * Does a helpful act always benefits both, or just one of giver and receiver, or how should it be understood? An illustration might be helpful: [The compassioned monkey.](http://sangham.net/index.php/topic,806.msg2492.html#msg2492) *[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]*