As far as I know, many Buddhists believe in multiple gods. Doesn't this contradict the idea that the world is governed by the law of karma? Is praying to gods allowed?

Right Livelihood, as stated in the :Vanijja Sutta >"Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison." Could I argue that video games are intoxicants that allow players to escape from reality? Could one also say the video game maker is an adrenaline seller?(genre dependent) If I make a game with simulated weapon usage against other humans, is that business in weapons? Or is it harmless fun?

Or must we just count our breaths and repeat the phrase? I was asked I think "what is your original face" - and I think it's the way / tao, but that's just something that occurred to me, I wrote down on a computer and it seemed alright. It's not that I want to be a part of some tradition or church, really. But all I got out of counting breaths was a lot of leg pain, somewhat (but not completely) offset with some nice feelings and lots of stuff like this /<<<^^^^^

The path factor *Right Effort* in the noble eight-fold path contains 4 steps which are ; 1. Prevent the unwholesome that has not yet arisen in oneself. 2. Let go of the unwholesome that has arisen in oneself. 3. Bring up the wholesome that has not yet arisen in oneself. 4. Maintain the wholesome that has arisen in oneself. I understand 1, 3 and 4 but have trouble understanding no 2 - *"Let go of unwholesome that has arisen in oneself"*. Is that done by using the noting-technique and then observing and noting the phenomena until it disappears? Or is it that when e.g. anger has arisen and other techniques dont work then one uses Metta meditation as an anti-dote? Thank you for your time. Lanka

I am attending a class in Vipassana meditation. It's a series of three courses. The second course is almost over. The third course starts May 5. The instructor says the third course will teach "Inner meditation" and "Outer meditation". He won't say what that means yet. The instructor told me he learned meditation from taking the Sarah Powers course. I noticed you have a video called 'Insight Yoga with Sarah Powers". A reviewer on Amazon says you explain "Inner meditation" and "Outer meditation" Can you give me at least a brief explanation of what that means as I am trying to decide whether or not I want to move on with the next course

For example, Newton's third law is that if a body acts another body, so the other body reacts to the acting body. Now consider a mental action, for example one person who loves another person: that action doesn't always cause a reaction, the other person doesn't love a person who loves. Is not the law of action and reaction, of cause and effect, also true for mental actions as it is for physical actions?

Does there exists records of the Buddha talking about something that could be interpreted as an "out of body" experience? Wikipedia defines this as, > An out-of-body experience (OBE or sometimes OOBE) is an experience > that typically involves a sensation of floating outside one's body > and, in some cases, perceiving one's physical body from a place > outside one's body. A related, but different, question: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3853/buddhist-view-on-out-of-body-experience-obe

I just listened to a audio dhamma talk by Ajahn Punnadhammo. Its called *"Stop thinking"* and can be found here . In the last 5 minutes of the talk Ajahn Punnadhammo mentions some good exercises for learning about reality. He says that a good exercise is to try to be conscious while entering the dream state from waking state **because the stages of falling asleep exactly mirror the stages of dying!** He says its like a sneak preview of what happens when one dies. My question is; if one trains in this and succeeds in being aware and conscious throughout the death process and into the next life will one then be able to remember the previous (this) life? Thank you for your time. Lanka

In the same way the buddha referred to those who wander through Jhana as foolish cows, can individuals wander and get lost within the cycles of insight? >When the meditator has thus become skilled in achieving the fruition attainment, he should resolutely set his mind upon the task of attaining to the higher paths and fruitions. What should now be done by one who has set himself that task? Just as before, he should carry out the practice of noticing (anything occurring) at the six sense doors. Can next path start without being skilled in fruition attainment? For example, if I am able to advert to A&P but not able to advert to fruition, is that proof I am still reviewing the last path, or can it be that I moved on too soon? Sorry if this is convoluted, I am looking for an actual answer as opposed to a non answer.

I've dropped out of three stable relationships back to back in 4 years, even though the women involved were very much in love with me, and were in quite a lot of misery when I left. Rather than get the motivation to put my back into making things work by relocating or changing my life or whatever was required, each time, I took it to the point where firm commitment was needed and then backed out because I didn't see why it is worth it. A voice inevitably rings in my head that such effort is better expended in meditation and a life of service and purity rather than on silly selfish samsaric satisfaction. Anyway, I'd also see exactly how the relationship would fail a few years down the line, or where the cracks would appear and lose my energy. I have had at least one very stable shift in my consciousness since at least 3 years now, which has reduced my mental/emotional chatter to nearly 0-5% of what it was, and I don't get attached to anything including partners the same way anymore. I've been almost coldly unemotional about victory or loss in love and death, and most other things that would make people ride emotional highs and lows. I don't really care to define this change as an awakening or as a kensho/satori or whatever - I think these are useless definitions that don't matter -- still, it is a change whose vast effects on my life I can't deny. I can feel an all encompassing love and compassion for everyone yet a detachment from everyone. Which kind of complicates romantic life - do I really love my current partner any more than the rest of the world including exes etc. Confiding these feelings with the partner has never helped of course. Worse, they would very soon sense that I am not really bound down by anything, and resulting insecurity would lead to conflict. Sure, I can still get angry but it is a powerless anger, and if I reflect on the anger or whatever mental feeling I have even for a moment, it will vanish instantly. If I choose to, I can always see the pure heart in anyone and fall in love. There was a period of intense thoughtless equanimity in my life, about 6-8 months after the awakening that lasted for several weeks. My mind had a vastness that left me in awe. At this point a bomb could have exploded next to me, and I would have observed it without a flutter, as if it was very normal. There were several other brilliant characteristics to this period, but the most important was a profound sense of balance I had between the ultimate truth and conventional truth. I could perfectly balance my inner life and my outer life without conflict no matter how heavy the samsaric context. There was an ever present wisdom that enabled this. I didn't really care what I did with my life, there was no "I" - I did whatever was appropriate, I reacted to life perfectly yet effortlessly, as if I wasn't there, life just flowed and I with it exercising only the gentlest of effort to produce the wisest action possible. This seemed like a stable reality until it ended, and since then I've really yoyo-ed between ultimate truth and conventional truth. One moment wanting a relationship and the next day or week wanting to be a monk. My ability to lapse into universal love means I have even strayed to infidelity, due to deeply loving several people, and continuing to love to this moment everyone who has entered my life. Without the perfect wisdom that I had for those few weeks relationships feel like an accident waiting to happen, so I've now sworn off all relationships until I figure out what exactly to do. Any ideas?

Do we sense the ['mindstream' (citta-santāna)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindstream) ? Or is it inferred? I think it is inferred, and that this means we cannot say "I will die", except as a fictionalized explanation. But, is it inferred? And anyway, what do Buddhists say about explanations ?

I wondered (after this threa d) what Buddhists have said about this question. Can anyone, monks, Buddhas, ordinary people, be aware of a sensation without consciousness of it? And moreover to link it to that question more explicitly, can such a sensation still be pleasant unpleasant or neutral. Thanks :) !

I stumbled upon this story about a 200 year old buddhist monk found in Mongolia where its claimed that he is not dead but instead in a very deep state of meditation. I have heard about dead meditating monks before where its been claimed that they are not really dead but in deep state of meditation. Here are some quotes from the story: > "Now, an expert has claimed the monk may have been in a rare spiritual state known as "tukdam"." > > "When his body was examined by Buddhist monks in 1955 and again in 1973, Itigilov apparently remained in the lotus position and his body did not appear to show signs of decay." > > "He said while the salt in the coffin may have played a part in slowing decay, other factors may have included the soil and the coffin's condition, adding the possibility of "some secret process of embalming" could not be ruled out." Are these stories ought to be taken as fake or superstition or are there any reliable proof based on facts if such can even exist? Thank you for your time. Lanka

I'm look more for an epistemological Buddhist answer to this question. If I am anatta (not self because composite) then who is the one responsible for his/her actions? Why am I still responsible for my karma? What is it that transmutes from life to life? Who is the one making the choice? Why is it even possible to do good (as opposed to fatalistically going along with things)? How do you resolve this paradoxical quandary? Edit: To clarify the cause of my question, it was not mere metaphysical musings. I want to know more about the Director, the Leader, the Chooser because not only is it more conducive to proper behavior but actually because I want to more practically cultivate the specific aspect of Buddhism which indicates that we can direct our rebirths to a very high degree after death. The answer to this question I believe is Awareness as Tibetan Buddhism would indicate where it is repetatively emphasized that we should cultivate so as to be aware throughout the death process and not startled by the manifestations. Thus, we can choose and direct our rebirth with clear functioning.

I have a no close internet friend who just got stabbed. Now, seemingly there's nothing more to it than he got in an argument, things were said, and the guy stabbed him. So, my friend doesn't want to involve the police, doesn't want to get any kind of angry revenge toward the perp, he just wants to let it be and carry on doing what he was but with less anger. Now, for me this seems like an amazing attitude, whether or not he's being hypocritical - which he may not be, it's amazing to have that self control and not even thirst for anything - any kind of sick justice or even self concern. So, I wondered if there was any way to control my thirsty anger at this turn of events? I don't mean I'm gonna beat the perp up (I don't even know who it was) but yeah, it's wrong to feel anger on someone's behalf, right? Thanks.

I am sensing this disenchantment from letting go. Meditating on impermanence feels like nihilism to me. There is a fleeting moment of joy from the liberation and just watching emotions go by. And I also notice the joy of it but I let it be and not cling. Then suddenly comes this pointlessness feeling. Something like nihilism. I also don't cling to that but it worries me I may lose control and just do things carelessly. Any guidance on this?

I am very new to buddhism, so my understanding is very basic. My previous world views were very materialistic and deterministic. It might not be surprising that the most confusing concept I find so far is rebirth. Lets take this theoretical situation: Somebody is declared brain dead. - Does this person gets reborn? - What if medicine improved and we would bring this person back to life? - What if this person would be left in this condition forever by keeping that person alive with medical resources? Thank you for your help!

First time poster here. I am very new to buddhism, so my understanding is very basic. My previous world views were very materialistic and deterministic. It might not be surprising that the most confusing concept I find so far is rebirth. Lets take this theoretical situation: We created AI that is indistinguishable from a human, capable of superior understanding of all the scientific concepts known to human and beyond. - Will something have to be rebirth into it? - Imagine this AI starts to multiplicate unstoppably, from where will we source all the consciousness to get rebirth into it? Thank you for your help!

In his lecture course Sacred Texts of the World , Grant Hardy said that the Buddha had instructed that the minor rules for monks could be ignored. However the Buddha didn't say which rules he considered minor so when the Vinaya was being compiled all the rules were included just to be sure. I find this intriguing. Does anyone know where the Buddha said this - is there a reference in the Pali Canon or elsewhere about this. I believe this happened near to the Buddha's death so it could be one of the sutras about his paranirvana. Also, within the Vinaya or commentaries is there any indications about which rules are considered minor or of lesser importance that the others. Did any of the Buddha's intention in this matter make it into the texts - assuming that Grant Hardy is accurate in this issue.

This is something I have been wondering about karma for quite some time. I have been told that intention is what matters when one does an action but what about when I know that a side effect of my intention will cause harm. For example when I intend to drive my car to work and I hit many insects along the way- I am aware that I will kill insects but this is not my intention, yet in a way I do intend to kill insects now that I know it is a side effect of driving. The insect thing would seem similar to intending to feed myself and so I kill an animal. Of course there are other ways to feed myself but there are also safer options for transport.