advice solicitated:i went to a wedding to perfect my mantra recitation and help around in the vedic work say,setting the "havan-kunda" etc.at night on the last day while i was sleeping in the outhouse,my sister was sleeping beside me, well aware of this fact,was in deep sleep,in my sleep i saw an arousing dream and then in a semi awake sate put my arms around her first in a brotherly way,but then lust gripped me,but i immediately retracted my hand and then went to bed..crying...my questions are...will god forgive me for my sin....moreover i did not spill my virya(semen)but i did commit a break in Brahmachari(out of the 8 breaks)so have i lost my rank of a Brahmachari ?????please help me.....(though this queation pertains to hinduism,i feel my Buddhist brothers and sisters can help)

Does Ichinen Sanzen include "wishful thinking," or am i getting it wrong? Also, does Theravada buddhism include "wishful thinking?" This is the text I read that made me have this question: http://www.sokahumanism.com/nichiren-buddhism/Practical_Meaning_of_Ichinen_Sanzen.html

I have heard that people mention long discourses (Diga Nikaya) are not authentic Buddha's discourses (not Buddha's words). The fact that makes me surprised much more is that they say "in Diga Nikaya, Brahmajala Sutta was not discoursed by Buddha". After I have studied Brahmajala Sutta; such bold words and complete coverage on Indian Brahman and Brahmin religious concepts as well as all modern religious concepts, I thought those kind of very complete specifications of 62 concepts/beliefs could only be named and discoursed origins of them by only Sammasambuddha or someone like Sammasambuddha (who has very complete Panna without any rival can claim or find loophole/falsehood or incompleteness in his discourses). - What could be the motive of such weak claims? - Is it more appropriate to find any incorrectness or loophole of Brahmajala Sutta and other controversially claimable Suttas in Diga Nikaya first before saying authenticity of these Suttas? - Could it be more easier to prove by saying specification and origins of 63 beliefs that was not covered by Brahmajala Sutta? - Is it correct way to say that Suttas from Diga Nikaya (start from Brahmajala Sutta) are ehipassiko? - At the time of Buddhahood of Gautama Buddha, all India regions are overwhelmed by Brahmanism and Brahmins. Buddha has only 60 monks which are from rich men of Yasa young guy and friends. It is not inappropriate to convert some Brahmins who had a sense that Atta of Brahmanism was in vain. It was obvious that Sāriputta and Moggallāna are disciples of Sañjaya Belaṭṭhaputta and they joined to Sanga society with 250 disciples of same teacher. DN 12 Lohicca Sutta might be counter question to those scholars who questioned authenticity of Diga Nikaya but actually it makes infinite loop about disagreement. - Another possible reason about Bramhajala Sutta is Suppiya did blaming on Buddha, Dhamma and Sanga but the sutta did not mentioned what were details words of Suppiya and to what extent Suppiya did false-fully accusing we do not have chance to know. If a leader of such Sanga society did not properly repeal wrong accusation, what kind of leader Buddha would be. - Sariputta claimed that Buddha's Sila was the best possible Sila a person can keep it clean, unbroken. In Brahmajala sutta, it is where we get a chance to understand/learn Buddha's Sila by grades and it is also role model to future Sanga nonetheless future Sanga has tendency not to keep as many as Buddha prefer to. - Propagation of Anatta views on Brahmanism overwhelmed Indian region is bold move of Gautama Buddha and many adversary effects should had been expected (need citations here). Scholars can logically do reasoning about it. Immediate decision about not to do any discourses to anyone just after enlightenment was nullified by request of Sahampati Bramha , so it is inappropriate or weak claim that Buddha would not do driving less dusty eyes Brahmins to become monks. - Gautama Buddha did offensive (if improper reasoning on his) remarks to Maghandi's daughter in Maghandi Sutta . But the explanation was Buddha had Karuna on Maghandi couples and only the daughter was completely out of picture. For this ages of valuation of women lives, this kind of remark will be viewed as very offensive to community and legal level but this was some kind of example that Gautama Buddha did speak if there was great benefit to save Brahmins from unfruitful believes of Atta view and/or Veda. - It seems like scholars cannot appreciate Buddha converting people who believed Brahmanism but they failed to notice that such big Sanga society cannot be done by overcoming adverse Atta view, worshipping Brahma and caste system.

Isn't it possible that whatever they have realised is just a psychological effect? Doing continuously hard practices leads to affect their mind and they tend to believe that, yes, this is the truth. They started lying to themselves that they know the truth? **I truly respect their teachings which shows us the path to live a good life. I am just talking about the real truth (if there is any).** With love.

I've read that some Buddhists do not believe in the literality of rebirth. As someone who is new to the study of Buddhism, this is confusing to me. My understanding, which perhaps is incorrect, is that a Buddhist seeks enlightenment in order to obtain emancipation from Samsara. Yet Samsara is a cycle of rebirth, thus if rebirth is not taken literally it seems natural to then not take Samsara literally. If this is so, then what kind of emancipation is sought after in seeking enlightenment? Isn't the goal of seeking enlightenment to eliminate rebirth? What then are other reasons for seeking enlightenment apart from the emancipation from Samsara?

The problem I find is that modern technology enables easy yielding to exciting moving images in a compulsive way via television, DVDs, cinema and the internet. How can I find free online Buddhist guidance to prevent and avoid online yielding to such powerful cravings which I find are so obsessive and compulsive in me.

> A kōan (公案?) (/ˈkoʊ.ɑːn/; Chinese: 公案; pinyin: gōng'àn; Korean: 공안 (kong'an); Vietnamese: công án) is a ***story, dialogue, question, or statement,*** (1) which is used in Zen practice to ***provoke the "great doubt"*** (2) and ***test a student's progress*** (3) in Zen practice. (4) Kōan Wikipedia 1. What are these stories, dialogues, questions, or statements? Where do they come from? How are they formulated? 2. What is "great doubt"? What is the goal of provoking "great doubt"? 3. What is being tested? What are the possible responses? How does the response quantify progress? 4. What is the overall goal of kōans? Perhaps considering a few kōans it is possible to illustrate the process from choosing or formulating the story, question, statement, or dialog, inspiring "great doubt", and how this measures progress and ultimately relates to the goal kōans / "great doubt" is supposed to achieve. Looking for an explanation based on any tradition using kōans including but not limited to [tag:zen] or [tag:mahayana]. Objective is to better understand the following content .

Recently I faced such thing. Occasionally I faced an orthodox guy. We were talking about marriage, then he came on this thing "My religion is xxx what is yours?" First I ignored him but he asked me again so I answered "Buddhist." He didn't really understand me and was pretending like he did. So if someone asks me this question in the future what should I say?

> ... does not have the appearance of origination and does not have the appearance of cessation, much less the cessation of origination and cessation. Thus, nirvana is right here. But although it is right here, there is no > concept of it being right here, which is why it is called everlasting > bliss. This bliss is not experienced by anyone, nor is it not > experienced by anyone. So how could anyone say there is one body much > less... > > ordinary fools call it death > > other sects claim it's the end > > those who follow the Hinayana > > think of it as non action.... From Red Pine's translation page 283. Are ordinary fools right to call "Maha Nirvana" death: is that an aspect of it?

I only have a passing knowledge of Buddhism. I keep coming across people (buddhaghoSha, shAntideva, nAgArjuna, vasubandhu, asanga, etc.) who wrote authoritative works on Buddhism. And yet, I don't see it mentioned that they themselves attained Buddhahood. Hence my question: who were some people who definitely attained Buddhahood after the historical Buddha, Gautama? Or would I be correct in my suspicion that no one did (but many came "very close"), and the next Buddha would be Maitreya? Many thanks in advance!

I have only started meditating for only 2-3 weeks. But now I cannot seem to meditate properly. Whenever I sit for meditation, there are several problems, like increased salivation, feeling of being pressed in the chest and like not getting breath after a few minutes, which to go away I have to take a deep breath. The same just process repeats itself for the whole 20 minutes I sit for meditation. I sit in the burmese position with pillow under my butt, on the bed. I would be glad if someone please helped me.

I found "The Blessed One" in English translation of Suttas. Because in Buddhism blessing is not legit/proper word to use to anyone, especially Buddha need not to be blessed, is it loosely translated or in purpose? I didn't see any part of Sutta that one can be blessed or a meaning that blessing can be done so far. What should be proper translation of "The Blessed One" in Sutta if it is bad translation?

The Buddha declare to venerable Sâriputra in the Lotus Sutra that he will become a Buddha one day as it read below, but Sariputta has achieved Parinibbana. Can there be becoming a fully-awakened Buddha one day after Parinibbana? > ...Again, Sâriputra, at a future period, after innumerable, > inconceivable, immeasurable Æons, when thou shalt have learnt the true > law of hundred thousand myriads of kotis of Tathâgatas, showed > devotion in various ways, and achieved the present Bodhisattva-course, > thou shalt become in the world a Tathâgata, &c., named Padmaprabha, > endowed with science and conduct, a Sugata, a knower of the world, an > unsurpassed tamer of men, a master of gods and men, a Lord Buddha.

I am searching for a sutta which gives a general guideline which helps in making ethical decisions. There are many suttas which give a skillful action for a specific scenario but I am looking for a guideline which shows us how to choose one action instead of another. Often in ethical decisions it is possible to see how any decision hurts others indirectly. For example: Should I read printed news or online news? Printed news involves cutting down trees and destroying habitats, online news requires burning fossil fuels and polluting which harms people. We can endlessly intellectualise about the results of actions but this is paralysing rather than empowering. I would hope that a sutta doesn't suggest to analyse all possible results of an action. I'm not sure what form the guideline will be in but I suspect that it will involve looking at one's own mind to see the motivations for an action or to see if any green/anger/delusion arises when taking the action. The differences between an ethical action, skillful action, and meritous action are quite slim so the sutta could refer to any of these.

Is there a benefit to "wishful thinking" ? not like in a very deluded way - but like if i think about meditating a lot during the day - or getting money to also give others and aid practice

In deep trance / Samadhi meditation does contemplating on the subject, before hand, give rise the mental image or Nimitta, or does it arise while contemplating? Put it in another way, do you have to stop the contemplation for the Nimitta to arise or does it arise while contemplating?

I am looking Thayodhamma Sutta but could not find it based on the following searchers: accesstoinsight.org search on Google , suttacentral.net search on Google . But references do turn up in a general Google search . Is it possible to give the Alternative titles of the Sutta, Sutta reference number and link to the Sutta or subsections in which appear in? I think this Sutta maybe know by a different title on some of these sites which is why it is not found.

Are there (small) differences between the vipassana meditation technique of U Ba Khin and S.N. Goenka?

Even after referring to several books I simply cannot understand what this picture is depicting. I am not a Buddhist and am hence finding it difficult to decipher. I found it on [this page](http://www.tibetan-buddhist-art.com/heruka-vajrasattva-by-carmen-mensink/) , whose title is, "The Buddha of Purification with consort". The description on that page says it depicts a manifestation of > "unity of the fully developed masculine and feminine energy: the complete purity and highest state of enlightenment". If that's an accurate description, could you provide the explanation of that phrase? The Buddha himself didn't want to get entangled in samsara, let alone unite with the other sex; so isn't this contradictory?

Is the emptiness of persons an emptiness of their essence, which (I think) would be a defining characteristic, like how "fire" is always "hot", or just substance? Do any Buddhist texts say no?