I recently asked a question here and like always some good friends helped me, Their references were right on point and they referred the correct Sutras and i'm forever thankful for that. But when i kept on reading i found it very hard to forgive the author of this **particular article** on Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta. I do not know who that person is but he has written a review on the teaching on a site that most of us use as a reference source. The only question was that he had taken the teaching and given historic definitions of his own to certain parts of that sutra. He somehow say that "King Alexander the great" is the person that Buddhists took inspiration to form a story on Devas and the great king who make earth his empire. **Here is some....** >*Discourses such as the Mahāparinibbāna Sutta (D 16) and the Mahā Sudassana Sutta (D 17) allude to “the celestial city of the devas,” Āḷakamandā,28 which could be Alexandria on the Indus, founded by Alexander the Great in 325 BCE, or Alexandria-of-the-Caucasus,29 some 150 km north of today’s Kabul in Afghanistan. Possibly, the stories about Alexander (the prototype of the world conqueror) and the subsequent presence of the Indo-Greeks,30 inspired the ancient Buddhists to formulate the “great man” ideology.* So according to this person Sutra pitaka of tipitaka is a work of fiction. I want to be honest, i was real angry when i saw someone quoting the teaching and telling the world that it is a work of fiction, i was very ashamed of the fact that one of his own references was from a man from my own country.I would also like to request our good friends here to read the whole article before posting as an answer,because someone might get caught up in the wrong side of the isle after reading some person's foolish efforts to review Lord Buddha's realization. Please give me some good advice on how to deal with such people. (I would love an answer from Ven.Samana Johann)

My friend was healthy and normal. There was a sudden bleeding in her brain due to an AVM and went through a serious brain surgery. Now around 3 weeks she is in a coma status. How can I understand this in Buddhism. Does she hear us? Can she feel what is going on? Is she in pain? Thank you.

I'm curious as to what the difference is between meditation 1) with distractions / without distractions, and 2) for a long and motionless period / while in the business of motion and surroundings. I have been practicing mindfulness in my day to day life, and I wondered whether this was not meditation, or even a complete waste. I feel as though certain states or insights are achieved in the process, but I'm really wondering the following: Does meditation, to even 'begin' or 'gain momentum' require the succession of non-distracted states which bear a similarity to one another? I.e. by varying the type of meditation or the states one experiences, and by having some slight distractions between them, is the whole meditative effort undermined? Also, I feel a great resistance to actually sit down motionless and attempt to concentrate on a specific point, or engage in a continuous / repetitive mental effort. I am unsure why this is, as I believe I can apply much effort otherwise. Ideally, I would like to practice dry vipassana, and I hope someone can answer how this would be achieved in the context of what I have explained. I am willing to expend time and effort, but simply wish to know what is the *ideal* way to proceed. Thanks for any answer. (Also, how many distractions can one tolerate without too much impediment to one's meditation? Especially in regards to noise.)

When was taking refuge in the 3 jewels of Buddha, Dharma & Sangha started? Was it started by the Buddha in his time or was it after him? When I mean taking refuge, I mean for a lay Buddhist and not for a Bhikku. What is the source of the 3 refuges mantra: Buddhaṃ saraṇaṃ gacchāmi. Dhammaṃ saraṇaṃ gacchāmi. Saṅghaṃ saraṇaṃ gacchāmi.

I was having a conversation with a non buddhist about consciousness I was struggling to define some key aspects and it kind of led into not self, but I was looking for a concise simple definition.

I can't find the breath (sometimes I can, but the majority of the time I can't) - I can't notice the rising and falling of the stomach even when lying and putting my hand on it and also to notice the breath in general is very hard for me. Now I understand I can say if I don't notice it "knowing" or "breath" etc - but then I wait and wait and nothing - and in the mean time lots of secondary objects come up. If I follow them though its not good- because you should have a primary object to build concentration, so I need an "anchor" So when I say "knowing" and then what should I do? Just focus on my belly? And if i don't feel anything? Not even in other areas like the nose - what should I do - focus harder? Follow secondary objects only? I have practiced for a long time now (did retreats etc) and I thought this problem would fix itself, but I still have this problem. When I meditate I do 1 hour walking, then 1 hour sitting (mahasi style).

If a human being consists of two parts as mind and body, is it then possible to live without mind? Appreciate your ideas.

Different Buddhist traditions have some mention of an [original, primordial mind](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_mind) of some sort. If there is one, what are its attributes.

Now this may sound silly but I'm new to mediating and I hear that when you have a thought you just let it go. But if I'm focusing on the breath do I go off it, accept that I'm thinking then go back to the breath or just stay on the breath and if I get distracted go right back to it and not even focus on my thoughts?

When I did bit research, I found that. All the Goddess in Buddhism are Demons (**Yesha**) by origin. After getting enlightenment and following from Buddha's teaching, they are transform from Demon to Goddess. For Example: **Hārītī Ajima** who use to kill and feed on human children, become the goddess to protect infant children (Very Interesting Story). I am just interested to know more about Buddhism. I heard there are certain steps or processor that need to achieve to reach such **Divine** stage. So just wondering what are those process or steps called and there definition?? If possible can, someone can share sites with interesting and motivation stories on Buddhism??

One of my friends got himself into some serious debts. I've loaned him money, helped him get his admin organised, I've helped him move into a new apartment....and I single-handedly moved his stuff back out, after he had fled the country in an attempt to run away from his debts. Now, he's back and I've managed to get him into a program to pay off those debts over the course of the next three years. Until recently, we were quite close and he shared many of his fears and thoughts with me and I was glad to be there for him, any way I could. His life seems to be improving now and I'm happy for him. Two weeks ago he started ignoring me and blocking me, because his current girlfriend doesn't believe our friendship is merely platonic. (it really is, though) I do not regret helping him; I did it for him, not for myself. I'm happy he's trying to rebuild his life. I don't think he's in a nurturing relationship right now, but I think that's for him to figure out by himself. My other friends keep telling me he's using me and he's not treating me with the respect I deserve. I agree partly: I do not feel respected anymore. I feel ambivalent. What should I do next? End our friendship? Keep a low profile? How does that teach him not to forsake his friends for romance? We've all been blinded by love before, so I understand why he's doing this right now, however, when I reach a point where it's hurting my feelings, should I end the friendship? I've tried to talk to him about it, but he remains incommunicado. Still I am doing his admin for him and making sure he stays in the afore mentioned "debt program"; it's not helping him to move forward, though, because currently he's not an active part of sorting out his admin. Please advise me....

I have heard about "Mahabhutha" as 4 elements but in few occasions as 6 elements with the addition of "Akasha" & "Vijñāna". Can someone explain why there is a difference and how they connect with the other 4 elements?

If a person has health reasons that make sleeping late (say, 3am-11am) a necessity, can such a person appropriately hold monastic vows in the Geluk tradition of Tibetan Buddhism? Are there certain sleeping restrictions mentioned in the vows?

I'm wondering whether when people refer to concentration meditation such as shamatha, they mean that there is still conceptual thought or its absence. For example, I am capable of meditating upon an object, e.g. breath, and focus with an intensity that no thoughts or very few emerge. However, I am also capable of simply paying attention to the object while thoughts emerge, but I redirect attention to the object when thoughts have done so. I am basically asking whether genuine concentration is more like the first or the second. What exactly is referred to by absence of thought, or the fact thought helps meditation until the jhanas. Do we mean gross thought, such as sentences and ideas, or do we mean the intelligence of awareness, discernment? If possible, can anyone relate this with calm abiding and special insight, and what is meant by these terms? Thank you

Following are the instances of Lay Arahants that I'm aware of; 1. Uggasena the acrobat 2. Santati the King Pasenadi's Minister 3. King Suddodhana [Looking for reference]
What are the other instances of lay arahants (excluding Paccekabuddhas) in the recorded history?

I recently encountered an aggressive panhandler. To be exact, he was a peddler who was selling a small good at a profitable price. I didn't end up buying anything from him because I simply didn't need the small good he was selling; but now I'm conflicted as to whether I should've just bought the item to help him out. On one hand, I recognize that he is making a tough living and I admire him for that. I could've easily spared a few dollars to buy the item and help him out. To be honest, I really wanted to buy the item out of pity but I couldn't reason why I should treat this man differently from any other salesman I come across. All beings are suffering, and material wealth is illusory and insignificant at the end of the day. I am confused as to whether not giving (through refusing to buy from the peddler) is just me being stingy, and this is my attempt to rationalise my actions, or indeed there is no point in saying 'yes' to every salesman I come across selling something I don't need just to help them out with their livelihood. Just to clarify this man was clearly not a drug addict or alcoholic who would use the money to feed his addictions, probably just an honest man trying to make a living. I guess what I'm trying to ask in essence is from a Buddhist perspective, **should we treat those who are poorer and 'worse off' better by accommodating them than we do to those who are presumably 'better off'?** I understand that we should give whenever we can, but if the act of giving is accompanied by the moral high ground I take by deeming this man as more deserving of my sympathy, is it really the way I want to give? On another note, this man was also aggressively trying to guilt trip me by saying that I could just give him money and it wouldn't make a difference to me but I didn't think this was relevant because I'm sure he has his reasons for any malevolence. **I'm more troubled by the fact that I could've helped him, but I didn't simply because I didn't feel I should judge him differently from other salesmen and I really didn't need the small items he was selling.**

You read the suttas, understand their meaning, and put the teachings into practice. At the end of the day, how do you know if you have attained Nibbana? I think this is an important question because Nibbana is the ultimate goal and you need to know if you have finally reached the end.

I have planed my life and want to stick to it . But the problem is My self control . For example I tend to waste a lot of my time in youtube watching documentaries . You know it starts like I 'am going to do this for only 30 minuets and then loose the rest of the day watching videos or etc. I was wondering if meditating on my future goals could help . And I mean doing something like imagining how it would feel if achieved my goals and then imagining the consequences of wasting my time or uncontrolled life . Is this a good method to gain self control and achive my goals ? Is there anything else I can do ?

As I research I am hearing people say pick a single point and focus on that. Then I hear other say you should just focus on the sensation that arise in your body. Personal one point focusing is much easier and I often get distract on if I should focusing only on the breath or move it to the inch on my leg or the numbness from sitting. Most people from the east that I hear say single point focusing more western meditator that hear say focusing on different sensation. Which is it?

I recently visited Nanzō-in Temple, Fukuoka Prefecture, Japan, home of a very large bronze reclining Buddha. In front of the statue are many vertical metal cylinders. My initial thought was that they are prayer wheels - and you may tell me that this is the case - but I did not see any obvious means for them to rotate. What are these cylinders? (image from Wikimedia Commons, licensed CC BY-SA 2.0. Original at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanzoin_temple#/media/File:Reclining_Buddha_statues_of_Nanzoin.jpg)