As everyone is entitled to their own opinion to a question of this nature, let me first say this. Now I recognize that they’re both forms of conceit. If we learn the proper use of conceit: the confidence that, yes, you can do this; other people can do it, it’s something human beings have done—you’re a human being, you can do it too. Once you’ve got that amount of conviction, then it is time to drop the “you,” drop the “me,” the “I,” and then set to work. That right there makes it a lot easier. And this way you become your own best friend.

I am an Australian monk at Pa Auk Tawya in Myanmar. For my studies I need some tipitaka translations to read on my kindle (available from amazon). I have no means to pay for these. Any suggestions? With metta

I'm wondering what do other meditators see when they analyze closely the arising of a visual representation of an object in their mind? Please do this experiment: go into meditation and think of a visual representation of an object of your choosing. Look carefully how that visual representation of the object arises in your mind. Please describe here what do you see, from the moment there is "nothing" in your mind, to the moment when the visual representation of the object arises in your mind. Please also give an estimate how many hours of meditation have you practiced in your life. Here's what I see when I do the above experiment: What I'm seeing is that first, there arises the wish/want/decision/effort (I use different words here, but I'm referring to the same thing). Then, there arises a subtle subtle subtle feeling of the object (no visual representation of the object can be seen yet). Then, the more I wish/want/decide/effort, the stronger is the feeling of the object (no visual representation of the object can be seen yet). Then, when I wish/want/decide/effort even more, an incomplete/dimmed/unclear representation of the object can be seen. Then, the more I wish/want/decide/effort, the more complete is the visual representation of the object in my mind. In my life I practiced meditation for about 450 hours. **UPDATE:** I know that in Buddhism this rule applies: "it is not appropriate to reveal personal insights" ... the reason I'm asking you to describe your personal insight in the experiment above is to see it first hand why this rule applies: "it is not appropriate to reveal personal insights". I personally don't know any experienced meditators, thus I have nobody to ask this same question and see how personal insights of others differ from mine ... that's why I'm asking here. Hope some experienced meditator will give some description of his personal insight by answering this question.

Do ascetic practices create saṃvega? If so, how? (I am trying to find ways to create samvega - and I understand ascetic practices can help in that).

How do you find out the source of a sutta? For example, MN 109 , SN 56.11 begin > I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One How do we know who this author is? Is there general guidance on who to attribute the suttas to?

Other than personal preference, are there known to be advantages or disadvantages to meditating in a group instead of alone?

'Sal Tree' is revered by most people in sri lanka and most temple in the country grown it. Is this tree mentioned in the buddhist tradition?

recently i read an article about a troubled young man who was brought to attention by one of his friends to a temple. Here is a brief description.... > A young guy suddenly started acting really weird which was noticed by a good friend of him. This person was a regular guy and he suddenly developed an unnatural state of mind which his friends first assumed to be a typical porn addiction. > >But his behavior soon became worse and he started being really indecent and started doing some perverse things like groping women on the bus and such. > >He was accompanied by his friend when they traveled to **"Ruwan Weli Stupa"** *(The monument with highest number of Lord Buddha's remains on earth)* in hopes that some advice and worshiping the stupa would be sufficient to re-discipline him. > >As he was worshiping he started acting weird and the friend asked for the help of monks. As Monks were chanting (In suspicion of the influence of a lower realm) he started talking in a rough voice. > >The voice said.... > >I will not go away without taking him, he is like us. >I was passing by one day when i saw him looking at a picture box, he was by two humans in coitus (Porn) and i cling on to his body. I liked sex too, specially the taste of men. Now i only influence him he watch it and i get to feed. > >After further questioning These were revealed.... > >We are building power among humans, it is easy now that they are seduced easily in the present. Food for us is not rare anymore. > >Our kind cant know each other's gender until the season comes. When it comes they rip each other with claws to feed on each other. So we find satisfaction while clinging on to humans and letting them do our bidding. > >We have captured the other parts of the world (this happened in Asia), almost all of those humans are born among us when they die. Soon we will establish our power here too (Asia) This is not some article but a national newspaper published by a one of the most well respected monasteries. **What can we take as reference from the teaching to understand this & What would be the proper cause of action other than precepts?**

In Buddhist doctrine there is always the problem, that for the sake of understandability, certain concepts are being presented in a solid, substantial way, while actually, one has to keep in the back of one's mind, that by the central tenet of *anattā*/*anātman* these concepts are **actually** not like that. The same applies to *kamma*/*karma*, which can be presented as **something** that a being accumulates and carries with itself in this life and to the next and the ones following. Now, actually, there is nothing substantial that transmigrates from one life to the next, as is clear from the similes that are used to explain rebirth without soul: a candle that lights another, an echo, a mirror image, the imprint in wax of seal. In these cases, though there is some link between the two sides, nothing actually goes from one to the other (the case with the echo should maybe be reconsidered according to the old Indian theories of sound and the echo). So, what is *kamma*/*karma*? How does it stick to the individual? To take this question one step further, if we admit now that *kamma*/*karma* is near-identical with the concept of *saṃskāra*/*saṃkhāra*, and therefore with volitions and *cetanā*, as in this quote from AN 6.63 : > cetanāhaṃ bhikkave kammaṃ vadāmi > > Intention, I tell you, is kamma and that by karmic unwholesome action the consciousness "leans towards" unwholesomeness, then how are these leanings supposed to look, how are they thought to be transported from one conscious moment to the next?

I quote Andrei from [here](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/40/461) : >Apparently, Buddha's first teacher, Arada Kalama, taught Shukla Dhyana through visualizing oneself in the center of progressively empty context (village --> empty field --> empty sky --> nothingness), culminating in a state of thoughtless concentration with no content. On a TV show**1** I once heard a description of a guided trip on magic mushrooms, which reminded me of -- that description was: > You're on a ship → then the ship's gone → the water's gone → you're gone. What might have been the role/relevance of drugs, when Arada taught the Buddha? Is it possible that Arada (or his students) might have used some psychoactive drugs? And is it right to find the description of Shukla Dhyana comparable with the documentary's description of "the ship gone, etc."? --- **1** It was a TV documentary of Albert Hofmann, where they investigated to medicinal usage of psychedelics to help people suffering from severe depression.

I'm very confused about this sutta ( http://suttacentral.net/en/dn1) specially in the part "Mahāsīla" Many of what the Buddha stated as wrong livelihood is very common in some Buddhist centres these days, things like: Astrology, selling lucky gems, offerings to deities etc... if you read the list in the sutta you will see it. Is this sutta not part of some Buddhist cultures? Am I interpreting it in the wrong way? Or is it simply being ignored??

How can you define the experience of *the proces* (or the flow) of raising and passing away of all conditioned things?

In the answer to [another question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/17693/where-can-i-get-buddhas-teachings-of-the-dharma-practice) user Dhammadhatu wrote that according to the *Four Noble Truths* 1. suffering is to be comprehended, 2. the origin of suffering is to be abandoned, 3. the cessation of suffering is to be realised, and 4. the path to the cessation of suffering is to be developed. That's the theory. Is it correct that this process needs to be applied to different types of suffering separately, like explained below? Imagine that on a given day I experienced and registered following phenomena: * Someone said something and I was upset for 15 minutes. * I was angry at the people around me in a crowded place and wanted punch them in the face. * Instead of doing something productive, I watched a movie I saw many times before. All three are **symptoms** of suffering. In step 2 (origin of suffering is to be comprehended) I find out, what exactly it was that **caused** my suffering. - In the first example it may be my wish to be accepted by all people, and when someone reacted in an unexpected way, I interpreted it as if thy weren't liking/accepting me. - In the second example the cause of the suffering was my emotional (I just don't like it) and fact-based (among every 100 people, there are at least 5 rude idiots) aversion to crowded places. - In the third example the cause of the suffering was my thought that I'm too weak resisting the habit of watching movies I already saw. Step 3 maybe the goal -- how do I want to behave in future, if I experience a similar situation? What could be a better response to it? In the first example I could realize that the number of people, whose opinion really matters to me is very small, and the person I was upset about wasn't one of them. In the second example I could decide to * avoid crowded spaces at all (e. g. by coming and going to work outside of the rush hours), * when I experience bad emotions I use them as motivators (emotional fuel) for work (say to myself "work hard now in order to never see those ... faces in the public transport"). In the third example I could decide to * allocate a quota of my weekly time for entertainment and then use it for that purpose without guilt, * define a healthy reward for not watching that movie (if I work instead of watching the movie today, I'll do something fun tomorrow), * during that work I'm supposed to do, regularly think about why (to what end) I do that work and artificially create a feeling of joy during work so that gradually it will become a reward in itself (more attractive than watching a movie). The final and fourth step is to implement these solutions, i. e. develop a habit of reacting to old challenges in a new way. Then, other types of sufferings will appear, which I handle in an analogous way. Note that for every type of suffering I design a separate strategy. Is this how the Dharma practice is supposed to work?

I'm kind of curious, some people may have looked a little aloof and cold from the outside, and get commented on this too but deep down she/he isn't like this. She/he are probably just quiet and doesn't mingle around, don't think it's a wrong trait? How can metta help on this? And how can metta be practiced on situation like this? Thanks.

What does Buddhism say about how to manage other people's anger? Does Buddhism suggest any specific attitude when we are facing angry people, especially when they are unable to control their anger and/or unaware of their anger? Intuitively I try for example to listen to the person, understand him/her and remain calm myself as much as possible. What kind of recommendations or advice does Buddhism offer to help us in such situations?

How I can live longer and healthier as well as peaceful by following practices taught by Buddha, Buddhism and Sanga? I like to live long as a normal person (not being a monk). Live long here, I means if possible 100 years. If not, 90s. If not I like live longer than average of people at least. I like to live longer but I don't want to lose the opportunities of - 1. Having many things to see which make me cheerful and pleasing. 2. Listening music which make me pleasing. 3. Smelling good things and fragrances. 4. Savour what I like and people says the best things I can have in life. 5. Touch of aesthetically pleasing woman, touch of delicate fabrics I would like to follow the practices, rules, dos and don'ts said by Buddha or Buddha's teachings or from Sanga or from a Buddhist monk. The goal I like to achieve is to live longer and heathy (practically live much more longer than current generation like 100 years, 90-100 years). Is it possible instance that I can achieve if I am passing my teenage years? Or If I am not, is it possible for age of child or new born baby by applying teachings, guidance, practices and care by Buddhism, he/she can live longer and healthy for the rest of his/her life? Can you point me out any reference about **living longer and healthier** from Buddhism teachings, book of monk, audio/video recording, web link or Suttas?

There seems to be this reoccurring phrase to describe a specific type of person in the suttas. For example in MN 45 > "And what is the taking on of a practice that is painful in the present and yields pain in the future?" > >"There is the case where someone is a cloth-less[1] ascetic, rejecting conventions, licking his hands, not coming when asked, not staying when asked. He doesn't consent to food brought to him or food dedicated to him or to an invitation to a meal. He accepts nothing from the mouth of a pot or from the mouth of a bowl. He accepts nothing from across a stick, across a pestle, from two eating together, from a pregnant woman, from a nursing woman, from a woman lying with a man, from a food collection, from where a dog is waiting or flies are buzzing. He takes no fish or meat. He drinks no liquor, wine, or fermented drink. He limits himself to one house & one morsel a day, or two houses & two morsels... seven houses & seven morsels. He lives on one saucerful a day, two... seven saucerfuls a day. He takes food once a day, once every two days... once every seven days, and so on up to a fortnight, devoted to regulating his intake of food. He is an eater of greens, millet, wild rice, hide-parings, moss, rice bran, rice-scum, sesame flour, grass, or cow dung. He lives on forest roots & berries. He feeds on fallen fruits. He wears hemp, canvas, shrouds, refuse rags, tree bark, antelope hide, strips of antelope hide, kusa-grass garments, bark garments, wood-shaving garments, head-hair garments, animal wool, owl's wings. He is a hair-&-beard puller, one devoted to the practice of pulling out his hair & beard. He is a stander, one who rejects seats. He is a hands-around-the-knees sitter, one devoted to the exertion of sitting with his hands around his knees. He is a spike-mattresser, one who makes his bed on a bed of spikes. He is a third-time-in-the-evening bather, one who stays devoted to the practice of bathing in water. Thus in a variety of ways he stays devoted to the practice of tormenting & afflicting the body. With the break-up of the body, after death, he goes to a bad bourn, destitution, the realm of the hungry shades, hell." I really don't understand what is meant by this. Can anyone please give a simple explanation or some reference to other translation or commentaries?

The Bhūmija Sutta in the Nidanasamyutta of the Samyutta Nikaya appears to be a very important sutta for the Sri Lankan Mahavihara & Buddhaghoṣa school that came to dominate south east Asian Buddhism. For example, it appears that from the Bhūmija Sutta comes the rationale for the translation of the Dependent Origination terms '*kāyasaṅkhāraṃ*, *vacīsaṅkhāraṃ* & *cittasaṅkhāraṃ*' as 'volitional or kamma formations' despite these terms being explicitly defined in a different manner in MN 44. (Of note, monks such as Buddhadasa, Nanavira, Nanananda & even a certain work by Thanissaro have used the MN 44 definitions in their explanations of Dependent Origination). The Bhūmija Sutta appears to begin by stating the Buddha does not teach as the "proponents of kamma" do, namely, maintaining that happiness and suffering are done by oneself or by another. Yet the common translations then appear to later show the Buddha explaining that: > *"...on one’s own initiative (sāmaṃ), Ānanda, one generates (abhisaṅkharoti) that bodily volitional formation (kāyasaṅkhāraṃ) conditioned by which pleasure and pain arise > internally...."* More questionable is the different terms 'kāya­sañ­ceta­nā' (as 'bodily volition') & 'kāyasaṅkhāraṃ' (as 'bodily volitional formation') appear to be translated in essentially the same way, as follows: > *Ānanda, when there is the body, because of bodily volition (kāya­sañ­ceta­nā) pleasure and pain arise internally...with ignorance as condition...Either on > one’s own initiative, Ānanda one generates that bodily volitional > formation (kāyasaṅkhāraṃ)...* Now it should be noted the suttas, such as AN 6.63, clearly state that: "volition is kamma" & conform with the start of the Bhūmija Sutta by starting happiness & suffering are dependent on contact. > *"Intention (volition), I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech & intellect....Contact is the cause by > which kamma comes into play."* Therefore, is there a contradiction in the translation of the Bhūmija Sutta where the "proponents of kamma" are refuted yet essentially the same doctrine of 'self-generated-kamma' is translated as the doctrine of the Buddha?

(This may be more of a philosophy stack exchange question; feel free to move it. Actually, the example I give below is probably off topic or something since it's the real meat and potatoes of the question: money.) In general, where does Buddhism and the philosophy of effective altruism split, when one spends all their time Earning to Give ? (Again this question assumes many things, a chat would greatly be appreciated.) While reading *The Middle Way* by the Dalai Lama (give as a gift) this question keeps surfacing. In the book is says, "the aspiration to bring about **others' welfare** and the aspirations to **seek buddhahood for this purpose**." Maybe I'm misdefining the translation of "welfare"...but this point will come up again and again when reading about Dharma anyway. Please help answer the essential question, and not the details of this specific quote. It is arbitrary for the main game. Perhaps what I mean is better though an example: Somehow assume that a person has this extraordinary altruistic resolve, or even bodhicitta (if that's close to correct). And they decide to spend much time Earning to Give. Let's assume they work 16 hour days (from one job being professional, such as an electrical engineer, and a second in a similar job or a factory job--six days a week). Try to also assume they get enough sleep (7.5 hours), stay hygienic (taking a shower during a break at the factory), manage to eat bagged lunch, and everything else to spend virtually no money on unnecessary expenses such as rent (by sleeping in a van near both companies). And so, after all that, there is no time to meditate. Literally, every waking hour is spent Earning to Give. How on earth can this person seek buddhahood?! And wouldn't others' welfare be all what this person lives for anyway? (Additionally, since this question is seeped in money, also assume that 'Robin Hood tactics' are not a means to Earning to Give...)

How to do death contemplation ? it seems i really dont care about dying that much how long can i do it ? is there a formal technique to do it ? cause just thinking about it dosnt seem to have no effect at all i do seem to care about others who die though but not on myself - and even on others i care much more about them being ill and suffer than them dying so any tips you have to add to make this more effective would be great and just to make it clear : i want to do this to get a sense of urgency so i will meditate more so i will get chanda