Do we know, or have a good idea, what language the historical Buddha (Siddhārtha Gautama) spoke. I've just assumed it is Pali but a moment's thought tells me this is probably wrong since the Pali canon was written hundreds of years after the Buddha died. If we know what language he spoke do we know if this language had a wide geographical area and if it is likely that he would have preached in this language or would he have used one more associated with religious practice.

I recently started watching a documentary about Buddhism and animals and am curious to understand how the relationship extends to often what we as humans consider "repulsive" e.g. rodents, cockroaches, etc. If the intention is to keep these at bay without harm, how does one achieve that?

I may be able to get into meditation. again. I wondered if it was worth setting oneself the goal of meditating on pain / frustration. Perhaps a little masochistic, but it really does feel like the ultimate. Ideally zen, but anything welcome.

Recently, I discovered in the Pāli Canon there is a text titled Buddhavamsa that describes the lives of 28 Buddhas . Now, I am familiar with the significance of Gautama Buddha and Maitreya Buddha , however not the previous 27 Buddhas. I am curious, what is the religious significance of the previous 27 Buddhas for teaching the dharma ? How does reflecting on the 27 or 29 Buddhas help one reach enlightenment? Buddhist men at the Sule Pagoda in Yangon, Myanmar, paying homage to the 28 Buddhas described in Chapter 27 of the Buddhavamsa. Courtesy of .

This community wiki post is about gathering lists that serve as a ***quick-overview*** of the different Dhammas in Buddhism. We are looking for dhamma-lists from all traditions. If you have found a list and want to post it please follow the same formating style.

Are there any contradictions between the Catholic Christianity and Buddhism(main stream)? Can someone be a Christian and Buddhist at the same time? I am looking for **contradictions**. Would you specify the **inconsistencies** between the two ideas? Do these ideas logically negate each other? And besides, Are there any ritual or ceremonies in one system that are opposed in another?

A Buddha/Bodhisattva is one who has Awakened and is free from some basic laws of the universe such as karma, reincarnation, the fetters, and various other afflictions. *In the sutras, such as the Surangama Sutra and Diamond Sutra, such Ones are also able to manifest many other effects -- well beyond **beyond cause-and-effect**, able to shape shift, squeeze thousands of beings into a small house, etc.* This is understandable considering that a One is already beyond cause-and-effect and thus would be able to manifest such things skillfully and according to needs. **So my question is... how is this possible?** According to my teacher, it is the transformation of the aggregates including form and volition... it is still within realm of cause-and-effect... a Buddha is not free from *all* laws of cause-and-effect. I'd like to know what others know about this rather unimportant topic.

Let me start off by saying that I can do Vipassana meditation for about 20 minutes at present. Accepting thoughts as they arise, noticing sensations without judging is relatively easy, compared to doing Samatha meditation. However, even though my body may feel relaxed and calm after doing Vipassana, my mind is still cloudy and obscured (I suffer from brain-fog and Depersonalization Disorder). Depersonalization Disorder is a sense that you don't really exist, almost as if you are outside your body, lost in a cloud. I feel calm, but my mind still feels foggy. If I focus on the breath (Samatha), I find that I only manage to sit still for about 3-4 minutes before becoming physically agitated (to the point where my body will curl up in tension). I feel as if I need to go for a run; my mind kind of shouts at me, saying "Go, go go! Get up. Go do something". There is no anxiety, just physical and mental agitation. My mind feels fine doing Vipassana, jumping from moment to moment, letting things be. But when I tell the mind to focus single-pointedly, all hell breaks lose. Should I carry on with the breath, even though I can only do it minutes at a time, or should I do something entirely different?

After attaining Nirvana, what happens to the person(conscious) after death? Does the person cease to exist? If not, does the person go to some peaceful place?

If the result of one's karma is the combination of cause and condition, how does one account for all variables in the culmination of an effect? If one is unable to include all variables, isn't that simply a limited view of the effect?

Having read multiple sources about karma, there appear to be different interpretations. Some suggest that physical volitional acts bear the seeds of karma while others such as this one , suggest that karma is borne by thoughts. This is extremely confusing especially for someone new to the concepts since there doesn't appear to be an authoritative answer or reply. If there are "unwholesome" (since i don't know what are wholesome or unwholesome aside from causing direct harm with no ill intentions) thoughts, is this considered thought crime in Buddhism?

The Noble Truths make us aware that the cause of suffering is desire. Isn't it a desire to become enlightened and attain Nirvana; thus, causes suffering? If you drop the desire, will it be possible to attain Nirvana, or for that matter, do anything at all? > "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming." -The Buddha (Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta)

If everything in unstable, unsatisfying and out of control then what is the point in living? Isn't the 'point of life' meant to be a journey to stability, satisfaction and self control? Thanks :).

Regardless of the medium, or the path, do you know of any other traditions, or religions, or ways to attain wisdom? Wisdom as it's known in buddhist tradition: Seeing things as they are.

Fellow travellers, As I have experienced myself major benefits from the practicing of asanas the past two years; plus from my raw vegan diet the past three years and qigong meditation the past year; I was wondering if these concepts/ways of life could be combined with Buddhism in the context of a monastic life. The past year I was living like an 'urban monk' or something; meaning that I am spending most of my free time on my daily routine disciplines (lengthy meditation both sitting and walking; asanas; qigong meditation). As I also have to work to make a living, I have come to realize that this is an unequal struggle for me; walking some steps forward and then going backward. Which keeps me away from the development of my spiritual Self; and that is what I am interested about the most in my life. Concerning the raw vegan diet I have found amazing benefits in both mind and body. Alive food provides higher levels of energy and a lightweight sensation, both bodily and mentally (as what we eat affects both mind, body and spirit). We consume the alive consciousness of other forms of life such as fruits; greens; sprouts and that has an instant effect in our "own" consciousness as well. That led me to realize that.. in fact in fact, it is **not** our consciousness in action, but instead, its the outcome of what we put into our system; and that is raw; alive; which changes us from within. It's not something dead, consuming food from the same kingdom (meat/flesh) as ourselves. Dark leafy greens have a higher alkaline pH, which aids to radiant health and elimination of all diseases. All these three years I was never sick. All diseases arise in a highly acidic environment. All processed foods and especially meat create a high acidic pH in our body. Therefore, the effects of a raw vegan diet are instant and they work deeply, in a psychosomatic level, affecting all that consists of what/who we are. Combined with the asanas from yoga and the qigong meditation, where I learn to sense the pranic/chi bioenergy field around me, and how to work with it and use it in order to heal my body, all these disciplines are essential to me. The body is the temple of the mind. «Νούς υγιής εν σώματι υγιεί» were saying the ancient Greeks. Which means "Healthy mind in a healthy body". As the body is the temple of the mind, both affect one another; a normally fit body will not suffer when we will be old. We are training our body as we are training our mind; these two go hand in hand for me (and for millions of others as well). I won't go much into personal details, to not make this a lengthy post. As about Buddhism, I am new, but as it seems from my research, it's the only system that offers this freedom of both spiritual; psychological and philosophical expansion and betterment in one system, which is what I need (not want), in order to develop myself from within (the only true development). I would heartily appreciate your advice on this very important path in my life. I am glad that I have found you. Peace and harmony to each one of you ~ Grigoris

According to most sources, a soul stays in *samsara* until it concentrates enough *karma* to get yet another rebirth. However, I failed to find any sources explaining if this process is eternal. In other words, what happens if a soul has committed so many sins that it's unable to accumulate enough *karma*? Or, in other words, is there a "dead end" when no more rebirth is possible?

Question is in the title. I was wondering about the benefits of practicing with a teacher vs. practicing alone. By alone i mean when one has a great deal of time to practice and no worldly responsibilities such as a marriage, children, being the owner of a car, house, flat etc. meaning that one can then spend a lot of time on studying and practicing the dhamma.

Do Buddhists see reality as consensual or individual? Are all persons' realities joined in a seamless whole, or is each person a window onto nothingness that can never be seen by anyone else? I am not finding easy words for my question which seems clear to me... I see two real things (only), that are one: the Void, and Experience. So for me, everything in Experience is one thing, whether I perceive that or not. Yet each is also unique. Are we all connected like fingers on one hand, or more like ants in a colony: each distinct and un-mergeable with the others? Please provide a reference that I can read. Thank you! **EDIT:** I have this well-known quote attributed to the Buddha: *"We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we make the World."* So, my question is: The word **"We"** - does it mean collectively, as a plenary (not by assent but in fact), or does it mean each of us individually? The word **"The"** World - does it mean the common reality, or each of our individual "realities"? Simple, yet subtle.

Question is in the title. I was wondering about what this Qigong practice is and how it relates to Zen Buddhism. I've heard that it's a way of developing internal energy but I'm not sure what it's used for. Thanks for your time. _Click on photos for full size_ [](https://i.sstatic.net/GN8QQ.jpg) [](https://i.sstatic.net/eQZoE.jpg)

There is not *[was not]* a tag for nonduality. Would someone please make a correspondence between nonduality and Buddhism as to "stage" or "attainment", qualifications, or whatever is applicable? **EDIT:** I was thinking of Nonduality as a stage, but it is apparently seen more as a position or way of describing things? Mariana Caplan, in the book *"Eyes Wide Open - Cultivating Discernement on the Spiritual Path"* has this paragraph at the top of page 163 (paperback): > Ngakpa Chogyam, a Tibetan Buddhist teacher from Wales, offers a > perspective on nonduality that includes all of life as a direct > expression of the nondual core of truth. He explains that nonduality, > or emptiness, has two facets: one is empty, or nondual, and the other > is form, or duality. Therefore, duality is not illusory but is one > *aspect* of nonduality. Like the two sides of a coin, the formless reality has two dimensions -- one is form, the other is formless. When > we perceive duality as separate from nonduality (or nonduality as > separate from duality), we do not engage the world of manifestation > from the perspective of oneness, and thereby we fall into an erroneous > relationship with it. From this perspective it is not "life" or > duality that is maya, or illusion: rather it is our relationship to > the world that is illusory. This accords with the Heart Sutra. So, I was actually asking about **the Experience of this**, rather than whether it is true or not. *"Both is, and is not. Neither is, nor is not."* (Buddha) **Second Addition:** I find a correspondence between the **formal / post-formal operations** distinction and the observation that some people get stuck when thinking of abstractions like nonduality, and others do not. Some people are more literal and fundamental, and others are more mystical. I think this is the key to understanding differences, and post-formal thought is an ability that develops through use. Here is a link from a teacher's experience .