Let's say that the summon of meditation is enlightement or nirvana. It is supposed to be a good 'thing'. But is it good because there is no suffering any more, or did you get something instead of it that is good in itself?

When I am not judging any moments of life and taking it all in, should I give importance to feeling anything at all? I tend to get very rational and "accepting" about things. A feeling of letting go arises, which makes me feel very passive? It feels like there is no time for a feeling because we are losing the next moments by living inside a feeling, either positive/negative. Also am I doing this right? Sometimes, it is like I am shutting that emotion up because I don't want to give in to a feeling. Why would I not want to give in to a feeling that makes sense at that point of time? That is mere repression. Any thoughts on this?

According to the Agganna Sutta we humans beings from Abbhassara Brahma world. They are mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving through the air, glorious. So basically a much more advance species than humans. Because of desire they deteriorated to what we are right now.

But evolution on the other hand basically talks about the reverse of this. That out ancestors were primates/chimps who had less developed intelligence. While the evidence to support the theory of evolution has been compelling still it remains unproven, however, still is widely expected as the most plausible explanation for the beginning of man kind.

Is there anyway that both of these can mean the same although it seems to contradict on the surface?

I have a strong believe in buddha but i am not much in karma logic. Had the buddha said anything of karma? If yes then what and if not then how? I am seeing some people getting back in a very amazing way whatever they had done in their respective past. Sometimes it is related to extreme past events, even. Like having a generation gap, too.

As a follower of Buddha I believe in sansara, a never ending cycle of death and birth which only ceases by cessation of desire. I have many friends who are of different faiths that don't believe in this. They strictly believe in one life and thereafter a judgement day where god holds accountable everyone for what they have done during there lifetime.

The point that I use to support my claim is that we are all born different, some poor some rich, some healthy some sick and so on. But they counter argue by saying that it is all God's test. If you are rich they it is either a reward or a test to check if that privilege is used live a good life and consent to the will of god. If one is poor that is also a test by god. While I have some points to counter argue I have never been able to give a convincing answer.

My intention is not to convert them or to undermine their faith in god. But it would be nice if I could rid them of some of the delusional thinking that they got going so that some day they would realize life for it really is. How can I do this?

In Buddhism there is a concept of mindful activity. But what actually is mindfulness? How does it differ from mindless activity? Please help me to understand that: I've googled it a lot, but failed to gain insight into it. I hope that some concrete examples from daily life might be the best way to explain it. I am really bad at understanding theory, so if you can please give examples is daily life: for example, is watching a movie categorized as mindless or mindful? How to make it a mindful activity? EDIT: After receiving various kind help, I gain more insight into mindfulness. There are 4 types of mindfulness of phenomenon of the living: - the awareness of existence of the phenomenon of body - the awareness of existence of the phenomenon of feeling. such as pleasant, unpleasant, neutral feeling that arise - the awareness of existence of phenomenon of mind - the awareness of existence of phenomenon of mental quality according to buddha teaching. (i have not fully grasp of the last part) Do not think that one of those four as the ultimate awareness. All of those awareness make whole awareness. mindlessness is like being a robot that fully functional. mindfulness is like being a fully functional robot that gain awareness of itself. please excuse me with the example reference: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html

a few months ago I looked up one of the questions, and there was a link to a specific letter exchange. However, no matter where I look here or on search engines, I can't find it. If I'm not mistaken, it was between a female student and a Zen teacher/master. The student was terminally ill, but managed to attain higher forms of consciousness/enlightenment. Shortly after she attained enlightenment, she felt that she was dying and informed the Zen teacher of this, who then came in the last few days of her life to pay a visit. The Zen teacher then published this letter exchange, where he also made notes on the letters, explaining how she developed further and further. Does anyone know about this and can post a link?

I self diagnose myself of having hyper vigilance, maybe as a result of having psychological trauma in the past. It is a condition where I can't really trust other human being. Often perceiving other human being around me as a threat. I am completely relax near animals or very-close person. My condition is not severed, only fired up if certain condition arise. For example when speaking to new business acquaintance, I am in alert condition frantically trying to gather and analyze as much information as possible before giving out comment or response. Somehow I have feeling that I will be doomed if I didn't give a perfect response. what kind of buddhist teaching that can ease this symptom?

So let's say an army officer is caught by the enemies and wants to spill the beans. The patriot officer can either lie and mislead the enemy and get killed or can betray the country by telling all the secrets of the state. So according to Buddhist principles which is worse? Lies or betrayal? Can you lie for a greater cause? If one's intentions are for the greater good can it still be bad karma?

Based on the knowledge I have the only law for a layman in Buddhism is that no child can be ordained without the permission of the parents. However, something I see in this society (especially in rural areas) is that children are handed over to the temples to be ordained (mostly based on something to with their horoscopes) even when the children protest. Am I wrong to say this but doesn't a child's consent matter as well? You cannot be forced to be ordained.

The answeres to the following question: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/13686/is-the-ocean-samadhi-a-metaphor-or-an-actual-meditation implply there are 8 types of conciousness in Chinese Buddhism. What are these? How did they originate? Is this there a common text with Theravada which is cited deriving or rationalising this?

In Huayen related documents I see the phrase "ocean samadhi" a lot. (also ocean mirror samadhi, ocea seal samadhi) Here is one source: > Huayan teaching features a range of holographic samadhi instructions > drawn from the Flower Ornament Sutra. These practices help clear away > limited preconceptions, foster fresh perspectives on reality, and > expand mental capacities by expressing our deep interconnectedness. > > ... Another model is the > "ocean mirror" or "ocean seal" samadhi. In this image, awareness is > like the vast ocean surface, reflecting and confirming in detail all > phenomena of the entire universe. Waves of phenomena may arise on the > surface of the ocean, distorting its ability to mirror plainly. But > when the waves subside as the water calms and clears, the ocean mirror > again reflects all clearly. Our individual minds are like this, often > disturbed by turbulence, but also capable of settling serenely to > reflect clear awareness. > > Ref . I searched Cleary's Avatamasaka translation and only found the word Ocean used as a metaphor or simile. (The kindle stops searching at 500 hits, well before the end of the book) Anyhow, can't tell if this is a sort of visualization exercise, literally involving thinking about waves and the ocean, or if this is just a metaphor for the meditative states achieved in samyak-sam-bodhi.

I mean, free from misguidance, from being wrong and misdirected?
And if it the case, where is the evidence?

I think the title says it all.I know that an enlightened person's soul will go to nirvana after their death, but what is really nirvana? Is it some kind of a place or something like that?

I am a being. So are you. According to Buddhism there is not soul and maybe there is nothing called myself which makes this a very tough question to ask. I am living my sansara. A never ending thought processes taking different forms (Human, Deva etc). This thought process or sansara does not overlap with any others or does not branch out. My theory is that the total number of beings (may not be the best word to use) or sansaras of different thought processes (again maybe wrong use of terminology but I hope you get the picture) does not change unless someone attains nibbhana/ becomes an arahath. Is this correct? or can it reduce without it being due to the passing of an arahath? Can it by any chance increase?

I don't even like to post a question like this but I just want to share a misconception that people from other beliefs have regarding Buddhism. Please what this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0ws36pd-Q0 .

What this person says is that according to the third noble truth sorrow can be eliminated by getting rid of desire. And when desire is eliminated there is no reason to have a fourth noble truth which talks about the 8 fold path. This is just absolute illogical and misleading statements. But I just do not have the proper knowledge to make my Muslim friends understand why this is wrong. Please do share your views. Thank you

I was recently listening to a sermon on Agganna Sutta that was on Youtube. I will share my thoughts and questions on the Agganna sutta in a different post. Let me share few passages first and then get to the question.

At that period, Vasettha, there was just one mass of water, and all was darkness, blinding darkness.... And sooner or later, after a very long period of time, savory earth spread itself over the waters where those beings were. It looked just like the skin that forms itself over hot milk as it cools. It was endowed with color, smell, and taste. It was the color of fine ghee or heated butter and it was very sweet, like pure wild honey (1) > > Some of the creatures of light (the Abbhasaras) who had curiosity and > a greedy nature began to dive and taste the savory Earth's substance. > At that moment, the creature found out that it tasted so delicious. > Thus, greed started to seep in and it ate the substance voraciously, > greedily, also calling its comrades (who were flying above and on > earth) to join in the feast. Not long afterwards, the creatures began > to eat greedily, and due to the huge amount of the mud substance they > could feed on it for a very long time And this is about the story of Adam and Eve. > Adam is told that he can till the ground and eat freely of all the trees in the garden, except for a tree of the knowledge of good and evil, of which he is prohibited from eating. Subsequently, Eve is created from one of Adam's ribs to be Adam's companion. However, a serpent tricks Eve into eating fruit from the forbidden tree, and she gives some of the fruit to Adam. God curses the serpent and the ground. God prophetically tells the woman and the man what will be the consequences of their sin of disobeying God. Then he banishes 'the man' from the Garden of Eden. According to what I learned from the Agganna Sutta Buddhism is about taking our selves back to where we came from (Brahmas) but not stopping there and attaining Nirvana. In Abrahamic Religions it is also mentioned that people should strive to go back to the initial innocence of humans (Adam and Eve to be particular).

I find it strange to see that all chaos began from eating something that they were no supposed to in both teachings. Whether it was meant to be metaphorical I do not know. Shed some light to this if you can.

This is probably by far the most interesting theory that I have heard (Yes a theory or you may call it a story. I just don't have a reference to back this up!) about the life of Gautama Buddha.

The "Animisa Locana Pooja" was a act of gratitude. This is what I know and have been taught. Lord Buddha stared (wish I had a better word for this) without blinking at the Bo tree that gave him shelter during his enlightenment. But is it really the reason why he kept looking at this tree? For one whole week? I met this really interesting guy when I went on a pilgrimage that asked me these questions. And all I had to say was "Yeah he was being an example to us all by showing how to show gratitude".

Then the man asked "Son, Buddha is possibly the most perfect being we know, at least from a Buddhist's perspective. Couldn't he have been a better example by showing gratitude to his father perhaps right after enlightenment? Even as normal people whenever we achieve something the first person that we tell to are our parents. If you win the Nobel prize for literature would you rather show gratitude to your parents/teachers or your pen?"

I would be lying if I said I wasn't annoyed at this point. "Do you mean that as an insult?" I asked. He burst into laughter and said "Yes, but not an insult to Buddha but to the person who came up with the gratitude story. Son, he never showed gratitude to the tree. When Buddha attained enlightenment, at first, he felt that he had been liberated from all of the sorrows. But there was still doubt within himself as to whether he was actually a Buddha or just an Arahath. So he sat facing the tree. Using all his past lives experience and knowledge he looked at the tree and imagined that it was another Buddha and started a mental conversation with this imaginary Buddha to convince himself that he himself was a Buddha".

Honestly I was astonished! Was this man lying to me? To be honest I sort of do believe he is correct but I just could not ask him where or how he found this piece of information. What do you think? Is it what it is?

I read somewhere (don't remember where) that the Buddha mentioned, that he has taught only a fraction of what he could discern with his eye of wisdom (about existence). Does anyone know which Sutra describes this?

Where can I find the law of karma and rebirth in Buddha's own words? Which scripture mentions it explicitly, as told by Buddha, and accepted by all sects of Buddhism?