You know, and increase risk of others getting the illness and such?

I know Lord Buddha is worthy of every respect but what is the correct answer/what has the Lord Buddha himself has said? What makes a lord Buddha worthy of worship as to lord Buddha are there any reference from suttas that we can find?

For a person to have a will to change, there must be some dissonance between its real self and a mental image of ideal self. To put simply, one must be dissatisfied with oneself somehow. This dissatisfaction, or "unacceptance", is the driving force that push people toward better, however they define it. Let it be a stronger physique, better social skills, greater knowledge, better money management, whatever. One can think that such unacceptance of one's flaws is a good thing. But here comes Buddhism, and tells you to 'let it go'. To stop focusing on your flaws, to stop creating mental images of yourself, to accept the world (including yourself) as it is. (I say generally 'Buddhism', since I believe this teaching is universal, although I was exposed to Zen mostly) Now the question: **how does Buddhism reconciles the teachings of dropping the ego with having goals to improve ones flaws?** It seems contradictory to me, as I assume it's impossible to work on my flaws without focusing on them and relating them to the image of myself, which I'm supposed to drop.

One Day i was thinking about the "Thrikoti parishuddha sila" (The ultimate version of five precepts) Let me give an example how this version works.... - You can't kill - You can't aid killing - You can't hire to kill - You can't order to kill - You can't admire / promote killing - If you can stop a killing you must stop it *These can be applied to all of the precepts...* --------------- So while i was thinking about this and this came into my mind. If i see an animal getting eaten by another animal what should i do? If i see a someone having an extramarital affair what should i do? and so on.... My question is some of these are without doubt only result in a good way but some will give suffering or pain to that person or animal so doesn't that generate bad karma for me??

Understanding of 'Anatta' is key to so much Buddhist meditation practice and philosophy that I've been exposed to but (call me conservative) I gain great confidence when the Buddha himself had something direct to say about the term / concept. There seems to be common consensus that 'anatta' means there is no abiding self / Self. Christopher Titmuss in his list of what the Buddha did not teach says: > **No-Self.** The Buddha remained in noble silence when asked whether there was a self or no self. He simply stated that body, feelings, perceptions, mental formations, including thoughts, and consciousness were not oneself and did not belong to self. he taught not self as vehicle for liberation from misperception. Anatta literally means ‘not-self’; if the buddha had meant ‘no self’ he would have said ‘na-atta’. What the Buddha did not teach Having studied Avaita Vedanta for some years, I recognise Buddha's early approach as pure self-inquiry i.e. recognising that the self is not in any of the skandhas, that we normally identify with, which leads to directly to the real Self. Is it true that there no support in Digha, Majjhima, Samyutta, Anguttara, or Khuddaka Nikayas for the commonly held doctrine? I feel this is an important question as this view has implications for the commonly held view that Buddhism is humanist, nihilistic, compatible with atheism, secular etc., when the Buddha himself held no such position.

Can anybody provide a full translation of Lord Buddha's First teaching. I am referring to a Sutta called "Dhamma chakka pawaththana".

Earlier this year I finished the _Buddha_ series by Osamu Tezuka , and really enjoyed it. I liked the blend of historical references with fictional dramatic elements (and the art, of course). I also read and enjoyed Siddhartha in the past. My question is: Can anyone recommend other similar pieces of Buddhist fiction? Fictional works with Buddhist themes, period fiction with a Buddhist element, or anything similar? (I've been reading so much serious material lately that I'd like to take a break with something a bit more relaxed.) Thanks in advance!

I think I get what qualia means, intuitively at least: > Feelings and experiences vary widely. For example, I run my fingers > over sandpaper, smell a skunk, feel a sharp pain in my finger, seem to > see bright purple, become extremely angry. In each of these cases, I > am the subject of a mental state with a very distinctive subjective > character. There is something it is like for me to undergo each state, > some phenomenology that it has. Philosophers often use the term > ‘qualia’ (singular ‘quale’) to refer to the introspectively > accessible, phenomenal aspects of our mental lives. In Buddhism what is the word for this "introspectively accessible" aspect of "what it is like"? Is the term just "phenomena" or is there some other more subtle translation, like "awareness"?

I have some understanding about the "Four great elements" But i have these questions... My chair is solid **wood**, So i understand the "Solidity element (Patavi)" but how do i understand the rest of the elements in it *Expansion* My chair is solid **Iron**, So i understand the "Solidity element (Patavi)" but how do i understand the rest of the elements in it -------------- My chair is Plastic, So i understand the "Solidity element (Patavi)" but how do i understand the **"State of flowing or Fluidity element"** in it

We all have done bad karma,so if something is bugging my mind constantly (Like killing some mosquito) what is the solution for me,what can i do to overcome it/or to forget it?

Thinking about the fourth stage of Mettā meditation practice, which is traditionally said to have you focus on a "difficult person", I wonder: - Does the person have to be someone that you know personally? - Could you, for instance, focus on someone in the media or a celebrity (whom you don't know personally, but believe to be a "difficult person")? - Is it important that you have a personal connection with this person at this stage of practice? Thanks!

We as Buddhists consider "Dhamma / Dharma" to be holy.But do we know the reasons that make it holy?

Let’s suppose the primary object of my meditation is breathing. I usually just notice the exact point where my breath touch my nostrils and in my mind without words I just acknowledge this finding without words. Now I wonder if, instead of just realizing it, I can also use words and short sentences in my mind like “the air touch there”. I was reading about a vipassana technique call “noting”. If I understand it correctly when my mind drift to a secondary object I can just mentally talk to myself that I notice it and go back to the primary object. I am curious if the same could apply to the primary object. I mean if whenever I notice something about the primary object I can tell about it to myself with mental words.

During the last days I experienced that I felt total dependent. I was walking from A to B and there was no choice for me to make, neither to stop nor anything else. In fact, I felt like a robot... Is there a name for this kind of total dependance?

During his time, did the Buddha visit the northeast state of India known today as Assam? If so, did he give any discourses there? Thanks

I'm practising Vipassana meditation and I noticed that most of the time my mind thankfully doesn't wonder about things (past, future, judging). But I notice that my attention is not really sharp. It's like my mind its in standby not really paying attention to anything in particular. I lost my attention of my breath, sensations, etc.. but not because of wondering. What's is happening?. Could I get further information about this issue?

I know Buddhism stresses the importance of being a content person, but I can't help thinking that any action such as walking or even shifting my foot is a form of dissatisfaction for current moment. Why would I change anything if I am content?

I am currently following a vipassana retreat at Panditarama Lumbini (where you are asked to notice the rise and fallings of the abdomen). The first 5 days were OK (even if I maybe was pushing too much with crossing the legs, hurting for one hour periods) but I have a problem since two days ago (even if I stooped pushing hard crossing my legs): When I sit down for meditation, my blood flow increases so that I can feel it everywhere on my body including head and abdomen, to the point that I feel both the breath and the blood flow when putting the hand over my abdomen. Also, I started salivating a lot (only when I sit down for meditation). Also after only one or two minutes of starting the meditation, my breathing speeds up (instead of speed down as usual). I have had this problem already for two days now. What can be the real problem and how to solve it? Shall I stop the retreat? (I feel that stopping now the retreat without having experienced a nice insight would be a bad idea because I probably wouldn't retry the retreat never again)

Humans or most of the organisms in this world can perceive three dimensions. Does buddhism explain about dimensions? If so how many are there?

Many people believed certain Paritta/Sutta have certain magical power, for example Bojjhanga Sutta for curing illness and Om Mani Padme Hum having a great (even greatest) magical power among other Mantra (i refer Mantra to Mahayana tradition and Paritta to Theravada tradition). What do you think about this? Does the Buddha has spoken **by Himself** - that His follower can re-chant his words (Sutta/Mantra) to gain specific magical power? If He has, please kindly tell me what Sutta is it, Note : Please dont be offensed, i love listening to Sutta, but im curious about this one.