Nacca gīta vādita visukadassanā mālā gandha vilepana dhārana mandana vibhūsanaṭṭhānā veramaṇi sikkhāpadaṃ samādhiyāmi. I undertake the precept to refrain from dancing, singing, music, going to [see entertainments](http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than_en.html#shows) , [wearing garlands, using perfumes, and beautifying the body with cosmetics](http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than_en.html#scents)

In which places or societies is the old Buddhism (mainstream Buddhism) a formative world-view which guides and dominates daily life? **Added to focus my question.** By *mainstream Buddhism as guiding and dominating daily life* I mean that the people do not follow the capitalist ideal, that they do not earn and spend their money for the newest technical equipment or the latest fashion. Instead, that they prioritize and practize Buddha's 8-fold path.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I understand a lot of buddhism is about relieving of suffering through practicing of detachment. Removing detachment is a long process. Until one removes those attachments, there will still be suffering. My question is: until one removes all of these attachments, one will suffer. How does one deal with these sufferings? Should one try to escape these sufferings in the moment? How does one suffer "well"? And not try to escape the sufferings?

So there is a mind (one that asks this question) and there is the body (fingers typing this question of the mind). This is not "I" or "me". So when the body goes running and when the mind or brain is thinking, why does it get tired? Or is it just the illusion of tired?

Does Buddhism have any recommendation for particular time of day for meditation? Can I meditate before going to sleep at night if I don't feel drowsy before I go to bed? Is there any Sutra which talks about this?

I am not following any particular tradition of Buddhism. How does *anatta* feel to a sentient being? How can it be tested or experimented? This is being asked because mere intellectualization is not enough obviously. And what's next?

There are many repetitions of categorization of the different worlds in the Pali Canon that make me a bit confused. I'm not trying to rationalize them as metaphorical or as a "later addition to the scriptures". I am also not searching for a confirmation. The universe is probably endless and we percept only a tiny fraction of waves coming to our ape senses. There could be myriads of other planes and beings that are present but undetectable with any human-made tools and observable only by an enlightened mind. But why did he even bother to start on this topic? He wisely answered with Noble Silence to other existential questions that could bring additional disputes and disagreements (like the Buddhist cosmology does today in "Buddhism vs. Scientific Worldview" debate despite scientists allow themselves to make up concepts like "Boltzmann brain" or "multiverse" without any issues). And then there is this strict distinction between these worlds although they are not even "real realms" but a flow of dependently originated events. Like we're saying "human world" and "animal world" but in the modern eyes they are not even separate. So what am I missing? Why the Buddha couldn't reduce it to "bad karma leads to hellish worlds, good karma leads to heavenly worlds" but went for this detailed naming and descriptions of beings, deities living there?

I understand that craving stuff leads us to suffering (Second Noble truth) and that getting what we think we want won't lead to happiness. However, is there any explicit indication that it's even good **not** to get what we want? (any similarity with The Rolling Stones' lyrics is just a coincidence). The only quote I can find is from the Dalai Lama: 'Remember that sometimes not getting what you want is a wonderful stroke of luck.

I want to know the original quotes by the Buddha and their sources.

I'd be grateful for references to some of the major Pure Land schools' versions of the Three (or Four) Marks (Seals) of Existence: - Impermanence (*anicca*) - Suffering (*dukkha*) - No-self (*anattā*) - Liberation (*nirvāṇa*) Addendum -- pointers to the individual topics in any Pure Land tradition would be fine -- does not have to be all together. Jan 6 -- beyond my own answer, with three references, I would still be grateful for further items, plus explanations of where the three marks (that is, the somewhat philosophical ideas so crucial to Theravada and Tibetan schools) fit into Pure Land in general, and on the specific texts I found.

1. How a person can cultivate his own **sexual energy** to **creative one** with the help of Meditation? 2. can we handle Sexual energy when it arises with breathing technique or Meditation?

The definition of ahosi kamma is defunct kamma which no longer bears fruits. As we know every action has its consequence. From Buddhist point of view, AFAIK, it's impossible to remove any vipaka completely. If an "old-kamma" can become exhausted, then what is the difference with no consequence? If a kamma is inhibited by a more powerful one, then the consequence is still there, maybe it is minimized or delayed. But if an action has no consequence, I think it's hard to understand it from the law of cause and effect point of view.

A year ago I bought one and I just got it is NDC (Nuclear Disarmament Campaign). I don't mind but I wanted feeling peace through everything what I need to having it. And soon I'm gonna practicing vipassana meditation. Can I wear pendant that I have ?

So there is a lot of teaching out there focuses on meditating on death. A lot of it talks about living life as if it was your last day, week, month... in that this way, you don't take life for granted and it wakes you up instead of just passing time... These same teachings talk about how life should be lived in reality and not in your mind. My question is... isn't "pretending" it is your last "day", "week", "month"... itself a construction of the mind? Doesn't that distort reality? Is that really the "correct" thing to be practicing?

I like to Meditate, I like to read about Meditation, I like to think about Meditation; but the word ... > "MEDITATION.. MEDITATION.." ... is always in my mind, I am attached to it. How can I avoid this attachment? I don't want to make Meditation as a PROBLEM. I just want to use it as a Solution. I think it will lead me to SUFFERING. How I will meditate but remain unattached to it?

Can Metta be practiced in a partnership or as a team? I can think of - two people practicing Metta together, or - a group which meets for meditation, or - across borders, across continents people meditate together at a certain time. Are there any indications of a Sutta? Are there practices of a tradition?

Are there any references to spirit of ancestors in Buddhist folklore? As seen in some movies, communication with spirits is shown. Is this practical ? What is the Buddhist view on spirits?

What is the Origin and History of Milindapanha? When was it 1st written? How did evolve over time? What are the notable changes to it if any? Since when was it in the current form?

One book I like very much is *The Myth Of Freedom* by Chogyam Trungpa. Of particular interest is the section where he distinguishes the realms of existence as mental states and ways of being. I've yet to find this discussed elsewhere in any way that resonates. Everything I find merely talks about *Buddhism and psychology* and speaks about it in terms defined in the latter. Trungpa nourishes the metaphor and *generates a rich unanswerable question*. Other writings I've found prey on the metaphor and *regurgitate a definitive answer*. The former offers opening for insight; the latter suppresses thought. Does anyone know of anywhere else this subject is written upon with the type of creativity I've alluded to?

There is a lot of talk in Buddhism about merit. I think the word merit sounds a bit like a good grade in school or some star the teacher puts in the book. - Is merit something that follows my thoughts and actions as a consequence? - Or is merit more like an acquired disposition to act and think in certain ways? - Or perhaps it's both an acquired disposition and a consequence? - Are we born with a certain "amount" of merit due to karma? - How does a person know that s/he is accumulating merit?