I'm observing around me, family and in society. I want to know while Dr. B.R Ambedkar gave the way to peace to Dalit(Backward people) . I could see still my family into ritual other than Buddhism. And also so many people who are just called Buddhism but still following Hinduism rituals. In society, t.v. channels supporting and their relational perspective. I seen in serials they celebrating festivals but never seen celebrating Vesak Day and they calling themselves secular. When Buddhism is an ancient religion and was speeded all around the world very well. I read many present Hinduism temple and mosque was Viharas. And people also wouldn't change their mind. They following myths. I'm really feel very bad about it and for Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. When it's sole way to the peace.

By marathi language "Buddhi" means intellectual so what is meaning of "Buddha" or is same as Buddhi? Does people started call him Buddha ?

Sitting in front of the rising sun, observing atmosphere and self. Mostly all of come to me in a very unexpected way. Yes, it is easy to achieve what he and a few of holy them have achieved. Is it not a kind of craving?

Ok for starters allot of talk is about the mind in Buddhism... So the question I'm posting is there only really (truthfully ) awareness ? For example thinking has awareness.. Feeling has awareness... Seeking ..studying all have awareness as the common factor ...if there was no awareness non of the above is possible so is it really awareness in a conclusive form that is there and mind is just a term for it?

...I have been working on this one question for a while so can everything we experience in life internally and externally be used as our teachers from a Buddhist point of view?examples.. Anger = powerful emotion active in a person when one is threatened or insulted ,,an injustice over a issue etc also known to protect the persons personality ( possible to say anger is a friend then ! ) anger is an emotion that is automatically generated ,defense mechanism. It is repetitive and has been for x million yrs within the human psyche. We could also say it exists in lower beings birds ,goats , dogs etc so anger could be an important link to other forms of life by now I think you'll get some idea about just one state of mind that's revealed so much ...

A year or so ago an ex-New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) German Tibetan Buddhist living in a monastery in Italy referred me to an article online for $35 that (he claimed) proved that the Pali Canon was invented by Western Orientalists. Since I didn't have $35 to spend at the time I didn't order the article, and now I've lost track of it. Anybody know the article and its location that I am referring to or have any information about this somewhat dubious claim? Just to clarify, I am asking whether you know the title, author, or location of the article. There is no doubt about the article's existence - I saw it (I just didnt buy it). I believe it was located on one of those academic websites where you have to pay for articles, if that helps. Secondarily, I am also interested in what the article's author's argument might be.

Is it a truth in Buddhism that all beings have past lives? How does Buddhism explain new life? For example, would the increasing amount of population be explained by some us having shared past lives?

So now I fully understand Samatha Bhavana meditation and the goal of all meditative practice - thanks to some of you guys' helpful answers. However I fail to grasp how to practice the second type of meditation : *Vipassana* Bhavana. I've looked at most of the answers attempting to answer similar questions to mine here on this website, but didn't find them *that* helpful. I know of course what the position you're supposed to adopt is - most traditionally you'll do it sitting, the back straight preferably against a surface such as a wall, etc. But what is your *mind* focusing on during Vipassana ? Thank you

What I believe is what I look up to, everyday. Every belief originates me. Then am I a phenomena in itself?

With the election and all the hyperbole on both sides in the US, I've never seen emotions running this high.. ever.. and I've been though elections since the 1950s. Like just about everyone in the US I've gotten sucked into this incredibly unmindful sickness and it definitely has had an negative impact on my practice in the last month - I own this. I had been trying to practice loving kindness with both candidates and felt like it was working, but realized that there is a slightly more subtle emotion than raw hate that metta practice addresses, but not head on and I was sucked in. So I wanted to comment on it - both because I suspect it may be tripping up others and see in general if anyone thinks it worth commenting on and has any advise. It concerns this word, and its effect on one's practice: > **scha·den·freu·de** ˈSHädənˌfroidə/ > noun: Schadenfreude; noun: schadenfreude > pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune. Though I'd felt like I wished them both happiness, health, and to be free of suffering and its causes - and convinced I sincerely felt it. I had discovered with some introspection a huge amount of glee felt when the candidate(s) not of my choice had some significant misfortune. It may sound obvious to many, but it wasn't to me.. Somehow it seemed rather innocuous to laugh when something bad happened to them and it didn't come to the forefront of my awareness like naked hatred - though it really is in a thin disguise. I realize just how much work I need, and that there is still a lot of media I now avoid. I would appreciate any constructive advice. Be Well! yetanotherguy

So far I have been exposed to some frontier thinking (thanks for those who truly are helping). Where did the "hindrances" originate from? The question is, who or what transpired for us to have these negative conditions? For example, the Bible talks in mystery about "sin", which is a transgression of "divine law". So in Buddhism, somewhere in the universe of mind, is the origin of the hindrances something like craving/desire that gave birth to suffering? From what was that born out off, and for what reason if any?

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160421-the-evolutionary-argument-against-reality/ Fascinating read, and I wondered what the wisdom of the crowd was on how closely they thought this notion fit with the principles of Buddhism, most notably the idea of reality being an illusion, and the liberation of ourselves from the chains of perception?

Does Buddhism do anything to prevent sexual desires? Do they do anything to lower sexual desires? Prevent eating certain foods or something similar?

in lord Buddhas time their was many kingdoms in India. these kingdoms had many kings. kings had many wives. some kings had 500, 1000 (Antappura) wives but they all have main 1 queen & other wives used for sex uses.most of these kings became followers of Buddhism & Buddha & they obtain nirvana (1st 3 stages as below) 1. The First Stage – Skt srotaapanna (The stream-winner) 2. The Second Stage – Sakridagamin 3. The Third Stage – Anagamin (The non-returner) so my question is after these became Buddhist & obtain nirvana did these kings given freedom to these Wives who use for sex uses?

Want to know about big bang in terms of Buddhism point of view

I'm stuck on this for now ...does the Buddha say anything about why we exist ( mankind ? I know how much he stated about reasons why we should not exist such as Nirvana being the highest goal to escape from the karma bond!! Just like to know for balance of reality.

In Ancient India when Prince Siddhartha became Lord Buddha, Buddhism started. After that so many people in India followed Buddhism. As per this Map in India shows very little stats having Buddhism, so my question is if Buddhism is a very good religion why didn't it go all over India, Why is Buddhism not popular in India in Lord Buddha's time?

I remember one just one of my treasured books 1955 copy of " the teachings of a compassionate Buddha" where I read that the Lord had a morbid fascination with death ..suffering etc and inquiring of death ( possibly a force //entity within)he gained insight into a possible way out of suffering ..rebirth etc pls let me know if this is true ? For example there is reference made to countless past lives of the Buddha by him so I guess he was able to tap into his own death.

Put this in an answer before, but actually wondering what the texts would say is the correct course. You wake up and find yourself faced with two options (you are placed in this position by a third actor). Option A, kill 1 person. Option B, 100 other people are killed (by that third actor). (There is no option C, I would put suicide is better than causing harm to others, but assume this is also not possible) Moral system 1: Killing = Evil (100%). Knowing that 'Killing = Evil', you choose option B (with your Essential certainty in the wrongness of killing, there is no reasoning that can convince you to pull the trigger yourself. And as you do not personally pull the trigger, you are not the 'efficient cause'. You have done no wrong within your moral framework, the person damned is the person who executed the 100 people. Moral system 2: No killing > less killing > more killing. Logically, B is never reasonable, you choose A. The second moral system reduces suffering. It is non-essential, therefore being more in line with anatta (imo). Whether you choose A or B (regardless of your moral system), the end result is conditioned by you (by choosing B within the first moral system, you have not escaped the fact that you have chosen, you have just escaped being called the efficient cause). The first moral system 'treats this as that', which the Buddha warned against. In addition, moral system 2 is equivalent to moral system 1 apart from very extreme cases like above, where a thing is compared to itself. Let's say you are on the Buddhist path. Faced with the above situation, following system 1 and choosing B, you end up not personally causing harm, but there is no escape that you are a condition for the effect. Choosing A, you are plainly no longer in communion as you have broken the 3rd expulsion rule.. And in that the Buddha did not 'invent' anatta, but came to it through a deep and unbiased analysis of empirical experience (the 5 aggregates), would you be pushed to adopt the non-essential system (and choose A)? Does the Buddha feeding the tigress in a past life point to A being a better answer? In that story, he sacrificed himself out of compassion. Killing someone is not compassionate, but avoiding the deaths of 99 extra people at the expense of becoming a killer (with the consequential karma) surely is! (Also the efficient cause must matter more than progressively less proximate causes, otherwise the butterfly that flapped its wings and inadvertently flooded New Orleans with that hurricane is heavily damned too! :p ) (putting it in maths terms, choosing A you do less damage but are closer to it, therefore whether A is better than B can't be determined simply)

Presently I found an old steel bangle belonging to the sheik faith ...and I started to think of circle and unity how pleasent it would be to flow freely, and then I had the ephifany that this is possible except for the friction caused by opposites that have put a stop to my flow. Is it me or are we as yet not free from this cosmic and earthly struggle between contradictions ie good and evil //heat //cool ..night //day there seems to be a checker board pattern emerging to me . the sessation of suffering according to my knowledge of Buddhism is to recognise the hindrances. And rectify them in order to escape from the karma wheel of cause and effect . so again .. Conflict if opposing ideas or suggestions would be suffering to me as well as all sentient beings in this case I'm yet again asking like many before me can there exist harmony amongst chaos ? Or good amongst evil both subjectively and objectively ....good - a small Daisy flower evil - this very flower will kill a person allergic to it!!