Can one be ordained as a monk and yet take up an office job part time and be a monk part time? In other words can one be beyond a lay practitioner yet not lead a full monastic life?

Buddhism begins with The Truth of Suffering. That seems like the best point to get someone's attention, and is basically indisputable. The Truth of Impermanence is fairly easy to accept, because we see things change, and everyone dies. But the Truth of Not-Self - no separate, permanent self - is the major departure from Hinduism, and all other religions, as best I know. Realization of this truth amounts to nonduality. If someone can realize Anatman then is this not basically the whole teaching? With the large number of Self-Inquiry groups and websites devoted to nonduality and the many interviews and books about it available, it seems like a more direct path to realization, and more accessible than Buddhism (in its many forms). Is it? **EDIT:** I seem to be drawing fire for my phrase "the whole teaching". OK, disregard that but the point is: if you "get" Anatman, doesn't everything else have to fall in to place over time? With that one realization, you can realize everything, and without it, you will never make it all the way. Is that not so?

We know Shakyamuni was a prince and had all the lavish life a prince should have. He was isolated from every pain and suffering as we are told. As he traveled countryside he began to feel pain and suffering in others and witnessed death. He could have been ignorant or at most have donated some of his wealth to the commoners, but he didn't. He left the life he had, and set out to seek the ultimate truth of life. At Gaya, he meditated and got enlightened and became a buddha as most of us are told. OK, above mentioned is what we all know. Problem is, what if he had not decided to leave the prince-hood? What if he didn't have that curiosity? **Isn't the first step he took by leaving his old life behind, a sign of becoming buddha?** I believe that step as the sprout of enlightenment. Please, explain if I am wrong.

In Zen-Buddhism there is the concept of the "Beginner's mind" called "Sho Shin " which I find fascinating. I haven't heard of something analogous in "regular" buddhism (meaning the forms of buddhism relating closer to the historic buddha). Does it exist and have a different name, or is it something that conflicts with the original teachings of the buddha?

And maybe to save two related questions, why does Samantabhadra ride an elephant and Majursri ride a lion? I was meditating with Kwan Yin statute and that was the main distraction, I had no idea why Kwan Yin is on a sea turtle.

[Image courtesy of ThaiSmile.jp](http://www.thaismile.jp/FotoGallary/ThaiPics/e_ThaiPhoto_MaeHongSon_WatChongKamChongKlang.html) Visiting Buddhist temples, I often notice several statues of Lord Buddha. As far as I understand, they represent different Boddhisattvas. However, these statues are often attributed to different days of the week. I tried to ask Buddhist people why this is so, and they have answered me that this is because each Boddhisattva has had some important event in their life (and in Lord Buddha's life as well), and that event has occurred on a corresponding day of week. But I still can not figure out why these events have never clashed and occurred precisely on different days of week. How can it be? In other words, why have two or more events **not** happened on the same day of the week? Can it be that such attribution only has metaphoric sense?

I am reading books on Buddhism and I come across this sentence in every book. **It states that our world view will change and we will know actual working of the world during insight meditation.** It doesn't provide any explanation on how different it is / will be from the view which I have. Whether this actual view of world is same for everyone who does insight meditation or it is different based on the experience one has? What is difference between these two views?

Dharmakāya is tricky business to explain. If you were to explain it to someone who has never heard of the concept where would you begin? How does it fit in with attraction and aversion? At the same time the explainer would have to make sure to cover the different ways the word Dharmanakaya has been used.

As I know Buddhism, it says 'Nothing is permament' I just came across this in Wikipedia : > ...a Buddha is immortal. Even though he descends in the samsara to > preach Dharma and save sentient beings from suffering, his original body remains in a transcendent realm. That body will not die upon the death of the physical body of Buddha, and hence a Buddha is beyond arising and passing away... It is given as a Mahayana Perspective of the Lotus Sutta. So, what does this really mean? Is it that there exists something even after Parinirvana? Or have I understood it wrong?

I was reading the SEP article on the two truths According to the abhidharmakosa: > An entity, the cognition of which does not arise when it is destroyed > and, mentally divided, is conventionally existent like a pot and > water. Ultimate existence is otherwise The article adds that: > For a thing to be ultimately real is for that thing to be > “foundationally existent” (dravya-sat / rdzas yod) Does any Buddhist school claim that what arises when it is divided or destroyed, whether or not that exists etc., is the self?

I really like Ajahn Brahm's Darma talks on YouTube. But, I can perfectly understand what he's saying on 2x speed. Am I losing anything by listening at this speed or is it ok as long as it's not for any other reason than I can understand it so I can watch two in the same amount of time as one?

Sometimes people have fear of success, i. e. get agitated and nervous, when, for example, * some important person behaves exactly like they wanted (and they didn't expect it), or * they achieve a minor success, which indicates that their plan is working. Think of a small business owner, who creates a successful advertising campaign and then gets upset about too many clients. What **actionable** recommendations (protocols) does Buddhism in general and Diamond Way Buddhism in particular have for people, who want to overcome such fears?

This question may sound strange, but in my secular frustrations, I'm thinking about "the past" as some kind of ***womb*** which has nourished and given birth to "me" *now*. Do Buddhists, of any sort, have a name for **the past**? How does it feature in any doctrines of Buddhist salvation? Does anyone equate the past with the womb of the Tathagata?

While reading an answer to [How to overcome the suffering of attachement to the body's continued existence (in Western modernity)?](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/13802/57) , I began to wonder about a related matter. In the answer: >In preparation for death you should: 1) accept the fact everyone must die and let go of the fear of death OK, but how about this situation: Let's say I have terminal cancer, and the doctor says I will only live another 6 months. However, if I get some difficult treatment (let's say chemotherapy that often causes severe pain), I may live up to 10 years longer. So from a Buddhism point of view: 1) Would there be any concern if I didn't get any treatment? It isn't suicide, but I am not taking an action will hasten death. 2) Would there be any concern if I did get the treatment? Does that imply a fear of death, by postponing the inevitable? And since a goal of Buddhism is to reduce suffering, while understanding pain can be managed, can voluntarily increasing ones suffering be justified? In each case, is there any impact on karma looking to the next rebirth? Finally, I am not referring to medical treatment in general. Only when it is very invasive and severely impacts ones normal life (and lifespan).

I moved to France, Paris recently. I am seeking any meditation centres vipasana, zen, Insight etc., where I can also communicate in English, since I don't speak much French. Can anyone here who knows about any such places or websites please let me know?

Are there differences between a person who progresses through insight while looking for the different stages and someone who progresses through insight ignorant of the stages? What are the pros and cons of each approach?

What are the possible symbols of mercy and/or compassion in Buddhism? As always answers with supporting references are appreciated.

What is the meaning of the word ***suffering*** or (pali) *dukkha* when it is referred to in topics around Dhamma and Vinaya or Buddhism?

Recently i was wondering about Love and these thoughts came to my mind, i want to know if they are correct or not. --- As to Buddhism all sorts of love is "Attachment". And the is no such thing called a person. So essentially the "Love" we fall in can be explained as... --- >Example :- Part 01 :- Sam saw Jenny and he fell for her the second he saw her. (Sam's eyes saw light which was recognized by his brain+mind as a woman. His mind remembers that Sam is straight so it immediately start to examine Jenny's body. There is an understanding in Sam's mind about his taste and it sees Jenny is a perfect fit. As Sam hast lust+attachments for such a body,mind starts a stream of thoughts signaling that there is a hot girl nearby.) Part 02 :- They date for sometime and go to a serious relationship. (Sam and Jenny both find their attachments in real life and decide to hold onto it.) Part 03 :- Sam and Jenny are married now and its been 9 years. (They both did not wanted to loose what they found because of the strong attachment they built in their own minds. The attachment and fear of loosing+fear of not finding a substitute kept them together for nine years.) --- What i see is that there are two minds at work trying to find attachments in real life. And then two minds find those in the image of two bodies. Then the attachments grow and the minds get more attached to each other's bodies as it works as the Identity. --- > Is this correct according to the teaching or is it wrong? > > If there are wrong details what are the correct forms of them?

What do you have to do in order to transfer merit. Do you just do something wholesome, and wish for someone else to receive the karmic result? Etc…?