In the Ten Ox Herding Pictures of Zen the final picture is commonly depicted as returning to the marketplace. Enlightenment is said to be doing the most ordinary things in a most extraordinary way. It is very different at many levels from the Theravada model of an Arhat who recollects past lives, walks through walls, flies in the air and so on. Though there are references to *vasanas* which prevent the Arhat from Buddha like perfection, they are not commonly what comes to mind when one thinks Arhat. It is reinforced by the belief that one who has such attainment will leave the family, never have romantic worldly ideas, become a monk and generally be holy, strictly confirming to popular ideas of what is holy - i.e separate from this undesirable world of samsara. The Zen model doesn't even have the label Arhat that makes such attainment separate and special. Zen masters are of course famous for doing silly things like playing with kids, drinking wine, teaching in whore houses and so on. I've read similar things in the Tibetan tradition. Though it's another matter that most Zen masters obsess with lineage, robes, proper form and such. I'm looking for sutras, books, biographies or examples and generally any text that deals with returning to the marketplace in various traditions. Any tradition is fine. Does the Theravada canon have such ideas anywhere at all? Perhaps Tibetan? Thanks.

In Buddhism as I have been taught it, the mind is included as part of the six senses. So in contrast with the 'normal' five senses we have those five plus mind giving us six. However mind still feels different in some way to the other senses. Is there anywhere in the Buddhist texts where it is acknowledged that mind is in some way special or separate from the other senses. Or is that just an illusion and closer reflection would reveal that actually it is no more different to the others than hearing or vision.

When we sit down and practice samadhi we would naturally want to enter absorbtion.But what if by practicing samatha we manage to calm and refine all the five senses,to the point where all five senses dissapear. What's left would only be the **mind sense** with **no outer stimuli from the five senses**. If this happens then won't the mind grasp the Bhavanga State? So my question is How does the Bhavanga State relate to the Jhanas?Are you suppose to go through one before entering the Jhanas.Or are you suppose to avoid lapsing into one in the first place.

On the site I often read posts referencing gurus. My Buddhist group (Triratna ) doesn't really have a concept of gurus - certainly no-one uses the term. Which traditions have gurus? I most associate it with Tibetan Buddhism but I could be wrong in that. Also is there an difference between a Buddhist teacher and a guru or are they really just the same thing?

I was unable to meditate today and this left me feeling frustrated, disappointed and anxious about my practice. This type of emotional reaction seems equivalent to what occurs when one is prevented from gratifying one's sensual desires. So, I am concerned about a potential addiction to meditation practice. Did the Buddha have anything to say about this? If not, any advice from others? Thanks.

I am doing vipassana meditation as taught by Goenka. I get numbness and tingling in my feet from nerve pressure while sitting cross legged. I put up with it for quite a long time and then the sensation becomes so unpleasant I have to move. Do I have to get to a point where I can put up with quite severe discomfort in order to progress in meditation or can I progress even though I have to move. At the moment my choice to move feels like a damage to my progress.

An arahant is one who has eradicated all defilements and broken all 10 fetters , namely *sensual desire and conceit*. Why would an arahant mention that he is one and does the texts say anything about the purpose of mentioning that one is an arahant?

In the Anguttara Nikaya it is said that by possessing seven qualities one can attain direct knowledge of the Four Analytical Knowledges: >41. Mastery. > >"Bhikkhus, possessing seven qualities, Sāriputta exercises mastery over his mind and is not a servant of his mind. What seven? Here, (1) Sāriputta is skilled in concentration, (2) skilled in the attainment of concentration, (3) skilled in the duration of concentration, (4) skilled in emergence from concentration, (5) skilled in fitness for concentration, (6) skilled in the area of concentration, and (7) skilled in resolution regarding concentra- tion. Possessing these seven qualities, Sāriputta exercises mas- tery over his mind and is not a servant of his mind". > > "Bhikkhus, when he possessed seven qualities, Sāriputta realized for himself with direct knowledge the four analytical knowledges". > >-- T*he Numerical Discourses of the Buddha - A Translation of the Anguttara Nikaya by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi: The Book of the Sevens, Sutta 39, p. 1023* What are the Four Analytical Knowledges?

I have a question that I would like some input on. Lately, I have been able to see the fruit that total acceptance and surrender can bring to one's experience. I have tasted moments of pure joy, compassion, and equanimity. In these states, everything appears very clear and I'm able to rest with the experience and not cling on to these pleasant feelings. Everything I have read about and heard from teachers seems crystal clear. Perception is completely altered and the mind is clear. Inevitably, these experience fall away and hindrances make their way back into the mind. In my experience, the hardest of these hindrances to overcome is doubt. Once doubt enters, it's easy for ill-will to follow as well as other hindrances. Intellectually, I'm aware of the Four Noble Truths and that desire causes suffering, and even that desire for the cessation of desire causes suffering. I'm aware that aversion to whatever state of mind and feelings are currently present only perpetuates them. However, when the pleasant states are gone and hindrances arise (especially doubt), I begin to question everything I know. I have told myself and written down tips and advice on how to handle these kinds of situations when my mind was unhindered. Even though I know in my heart to trust my own words and experiences, when doubt is strong enough, everything is deluded. I don't have a single question, but I would appreciate input on how to handle strong moments of doubt and ill-will towards that doubt. In the past, I have always managed to accept the feelings and allow them to pass, which is what I know I need to do, however in the moment it can be incredibly difficult. The toughest thing for me to work with is getting angry at myself for not accepting the unpleasant feelings for how they are. I know that to move past them, I need to accept non-acceptance, but that is always easier said than done. This leads to a downward-spiral of aversion towards aversion of doubts. Any words, tips, or tools you guys have are so very much appreciated. Edit: I apologize if this is too much of a discussion-based question without a real definitive answer. I am new to SE in general, so please forgive me if this isn't an appropriate question.

I started to read _Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha_ (the PDF, version 3). Before page 22, there's some text which says that (I paraphrase) sensations are fleeting and that consciousness-of-sensation is consciousness just of the echo of an already-previous sensation. Then, on page 22, there's is a description of an exercise, which I quote below. He introduces it as being "useful for jump-starting and developing insight into impermanence"; later, says that this same exercise promotes concentration and stability; and finally says that it was the only technique he used for five years. Can you tell me more about this? Is it some hybrid/mixture of insight and concentration? Is it at unusual exercise? It seems to take '*two*-pointed concentration' as its object, which I haven't ever read about before. Are you aware of any specific advantages or disadvantages of this technique (or, whether and when it ought to be recommended or not recommended)? Is there something it does well, too well, not well enough, not at all? > In one of these exercises, I sit quietly in a quiet place, close my eyes, put one hand on each knee, and concentrate just on my two index fingers. Basic dharma theory tells me that it is definitely not possible to perceive both fingers simultaneously, so with this knowledge I try to see in each instant which one of the two finger’s physical sensations are being perceived. Once the mind has speeded up a bit and yet become more stable, I try to perceive the arising and passing of each of these sensations. I may do this for half an hour or an hour, just staying with the sensations in my two fingers and perceiving when each sensation is and isn’t there. This might sound like a lot of work, and it definitely can be until the mind settles into it. It really requires the concentration of a fast sport like table tennis. This is such an engaging exercise and requires such precision that it is easy not to be lost in thought if I am really applying myself. I have found this to be a very useful practice for developing concentration and debunking the illusion of continuity. You can pick any two aspects of your experience for this exercise, be they physical or mental. I generally use my fingers only because through experimentation I have found that it is easy for me to perceive the sensations that make them up. > In another related exercise, I do the same sort of thing, sitting quietly in a quiet place with my eyes closed, but instead I concentrate on the sensations of the front and back of my head. With the knowledge that the illusion of a separate perceiver is partially supported by one impermanent sensation incorrectly seeming to perceive another impermanent sensation which it follows, such as the sensations in the back of the head incorrectly seeming to perceive the sensations of the front of the head which they follow, I try to be really clear about these sensations and when they are and aren’t there. I try to be clear if the sensations in the head are from the front or the back of the head in each instant, and then try to experience clearly the beginning and ending of each individual sensation. > This practice also requires a table tennis-like precision. Half an hour to an hour of this can be quite a workout until the mind speeds up and becomes more stable, but this sort of effort pays off. When I am engaged with this practice, there is little room to be lost in thought. I have also found this a very useful practice for developing concentration and debunking the illusion of continuity and the illusion of a separate self (more on that later). The section ends with (one page 25), > For five years of my practice I was basically a One Technique Freak, and that technique was noticing how sensations flicker. I would do it as often as I could, i.e. basically whenever I didn’t have to be doing something that required concentration on the specifics of my life. I would be riding an elevator, just trying to see when I could feel each foot, or lying down to sleep and noticing how many times I could experience the sensations of my breath in each second. I also tried to notice this aspect of things for every single sensation that occurred during my formal practice. I used lots of objects, usually those that were presenting strongly at that time, and would use some variations on the above techniques as well as some others that I will mention shortly to keep me from getting stuck, but the aspect of my world that I tried to notice, things flickering, was always the same. I found that by making this sort of commitment to understanding one of the most basic assumptions of insight practices I was able to make fast progress and gain the ultimate insights I was looking for. --- Earlier (e.g. on page 20 and 21) it was talking about becoming aware of some number of sensations per second ("maybe up to forty times per second") which he calls "vibrations", and combines with a breath meditation, > [...] It is also useful to check out exactly what happens at the bottom, middle, and top of the breath if you are using the breath as an object, and to examine if the frequency stays stable or changes in each phase of the breath. Never assume that what you have understood is the final answer! Be alert! Explore carefully and precisely with openness and acceptance! This is the door to understanding. > One last thing about vibrations: looking into vibrations can be a lot like any other sport. It can be thought of the way we might think of surfing or playing tennis, and this sort of game-like attitude can actually help a lot. We're “out to bust some vibrations!” as a friend of mine enthusiastically put it. [...] I searched this site for the word "vibrations" thinking someone might have written something from this perspective already (if this were a well-known technique or "basic dharma theory"), but no, I don't see this mentioned in any previous topic.

I've been researching about Buddhism and their pursuit for peace and i have some questions. - Do you believe that Buddhism has shaped society today. If so how? - How has Buddhism influenced your life? - Where in Buddhism does it say that you have to live your life in peace? - Do you believe that a pursuit of peace is necessary in today's society? - As a Buddhist, how does a pursuit of peace begin? (How do you pursue it, what does a "pursuit" of peace entail and when does your pursuit end?) - Do you believe that all people should follow a life of peace? - As a Buddhist, do you think that Buddhism has the idea of changing the world? - If Buddhism values finding peace within yourself, how is each person finding peace among themselves going to help change the world? Thank you.

There are two things I want to understand here. Firstly, though I'm not overly disturbed by thoughts during vipassana sitting, I just don't know how do I treat them. What I presently do is just try to ignore them and continue observing the rising and falling. But if the thoughts are too strong and persist, I tend to observe them impartially until they leave of their own accord (but during this time my observance of anicca has stopped). Am I doing this thing rightly or not? Secondly, I want to understand the *reality* of thoughts. I know that ultimately none of these have permanent reality, but compared to conditioned reality of sensations what is the conditioned reality of thoughts? Basically, I want to know whether they have any objective reality, or they are subjective (just things in my head)? I recently read in a book that reality keeps vibrating each and every instant, and we need to look into the arising/vanishing of these vibrations, as that is what anicca is all about. My question is do these vibrations apply to thoughts as well or just sensations?

There is no Theravada monastery in the country I live in. I just read a short brief about lay people going together and forming a forest monastery in Norway , and was wondering about how a monastery is established? Who initiates the process and who makes the decision (lay people, monastics, both in combination, or either)? Thinking in terms of whether it's just monastics moving back to their home country to spread the Dhamma, or if lay people gather support and invite monks. *Not so much about the religious or practical considerations, just looking for a helicopter view.*

I have seen some questions on what the scope of right/wrong livelihood is, however most of the questions I have seen only touch on a specific point, so I would like to consolidate these questions and include new ones, so we can have a better view to comment on: 1. If I work on a controversial industry (alcohol/weapons/pesticide/tobacco...) but doing a job not directly related to the product, not making, not selling, not marketing it (HR/Finance for instance...). Is that a breach of right livelihood? 2. If I work in a meat business in a simple position, let's say a cashier in mcdonalds selling burgers, is that a breach of right livelihood? 3. If I'm a shareholder of such companies and earn dividends (mcdonalds, brewers, etc) is that a breach? 4. If I work in a controversial business and tried to leave it several times, but couldn't find anything else, and was dependent on it to live, is that right livelihood? Where are the borders drawn for right livelihood in cases like these?

In reading this answer to another question there were many references to "the peaceful and wrathful buddhas" in the quote from The Tibetan Book of the Dead. This is a tradition that I'm not very familiar with. Is it possible to explain what a wrathful Buddha is and how Buddhist teachings on considering anger as a poison might align with the idea of a wrathful Buddha? Thanks for any clarification on this.

Theravada monks have to follow the 227 Patimokkha rules and the Vinaya Pitaka from the Pali Canon. But how is it for monks from the other traditions like East Asian Mahayana, Zen and Vajrayana traditions? I read online that Tibetan monks have dinner after 5pm, which is clearly not allowed by Theravada rules. They don't seem to have to do alms rounds, and they can take Tuesdays off. In certain traditions, can monks receive raw cooking materials and cook food themselves? Can they grow their own food? Can they manage the finances of their monastery? And why are they different? Do different traditions decide for e.g. that the rules should be made more relaxed, more strict or more adapted to their local circumstances or to modernity? ---------- In the Maha-parinibbana Sutta , the Buddha did say: > "The growth of the bhikkhus is to be expected, not their decline, > ... so long as they appoint no new rules, and do not abolish > the existing ones, but proceed in accordance with the code of training > (Vinaya) laid down" But the Buddha also said: > "If it is desired, Ananda, the Sangha may, when I am gone, abolish the > lesser and minor rules.

I have heard that a practitioner does not go from first jhana directly to second jhana or from second jhana directly to third jhana and so on. Instead, they go through momentary and access concentration to get to first jhana; then they drop out of first jhana and go through momentary and access concentration to get to second jhana and so on. First of all, is this correct, am I totally wrong or is there debate with regards to this? Secondly, do the factors of access concentration change depending on which jhana someone is trying to enter?

By "event" I mean something that happens over some interval of time. Am I right that for Buddhists, intervals don't exist (everything lasts only for an instant): so neither do events? If so may I ask about the experience of "now" or the present: i.e. the experience of impermanence? Is the experience of impermanence an event (i.e. with duration) or is it too only an instant?

In the booklet "A Discourse on the Bhāra Sutta", by The Venerable Mahāsi Sayādaw, I read the following: "As we make great efforts to fulfil desire, kamma and mental formations are brought into play. They create new aggregates. So, after one life we go over to another in a new groups of five aggregates, by virtue of the craving prompted by delusion. As a result, we are left with the burden of aggregates to carry." Please refer to Part II (Table of Contents), Threefold Craving (Section), Sensual Craving (Subsection) Is this process to be learned or understood during the course of vipassana meditation, or taken on faith in the course of instruction?

Can someone produce merit without impacting directly another person? For instance: Meditating alone. I appreciate all answers but I'm more curious about Theravada view. While meditating with Tibetan teachers (Mahayana) they did mention meditation alone can create merit.