I gather from reading around that the rising/falling pitches that appear in Pali chanting by Thais is due to the tones in the Thai language . But when I see English-language chanting by monks from a Thai tradition, they still have rising/falling tones. See excerpt from the Abhayagiri Chanting Book , with the tones marked: It doesn't seem to match the equivalent Pali. Is there a system that they're using, such as shoehorning the Thai tone rules into English syllables? Or are they just making it up entirely?

I came to know His Holiness Dalai Lama serves his guests meat at his residency.... Is it dharma to ask your cook to kill an animal to serve your guest or further is it not your dharma to ask your cook to not kill an animal?.. So as to avoid confusion.. My main question is how will inactions contribute to our karma as much as our actions?.. Like here for eg. Our inaction of not stopping an animal being killed...

While the Pali scriptures address (or at least reference) a number of specific sufferings that a human being can be subject to (Jealousy, Anger, Fear, etc.), do any of the teachings deal with the specific suffering of Insecurity (and how to overcome it)? Meaning a lack of self-confidence, usually caused by the mind making itself subject to fears and illusions that creep in and which it lacks the strength to banish or prevent in the first place.

A while ago I remember reading part of the Pail Canon where it gave a comprehensive list of professions the Buddha considers **not** right livelihood. It has things like fortune tellers in the list. I remember the list was quite anachronistic in parts but also very interesting and instructive. Can anyone give that reference and perhaps copy in the original text if it isn't too long. Also is there an equivalent list of professions that would be considered right livelihood in the Pail Canon. Many Thanks

In the old game, Afterlife (Lucas Arts), there is a song that features a chant. The song is the most peaceful of the soundtrack, in my opinion, and I have always wondered what the chant was. The song can be found here: http://youtu.be/g3bXez65Fx0 . It seems that the song is Buddhist or Hindi inspired. It is similar to the chant played when founding buddhism in Civilization IV. A video of that chant can be found here: http://youtu.be/rUGH7x-i6ww . If anyone can help me figure out what the mantra/chant of the song is, I would be eternally grateful. I cannot find an answer via Google.

I watched a documentary of his life and he was using the remote to change the channels on his TV. Does this not break any of the rules? (227 bhikkhu precepts) Thanks.

What are *sariras* (Tibetan: *ringsels*)? I have seen those small crystal 'pearls' (exposed in bottles) at several (even small) monasteries in SE Asia. These *relics* remain (are found in the ashes) after the cremation of the body of (high appreciated) Buddhist monks. Is there a scientific explanation for those *sariras*?

A philosophical zombie is defined as follows, > Zombies **in philosophy** are imaginary creatures used to **illuminate problems about consciousness** and its relation to the physical world. Unlike those in films or witchraft, they are exactly like us in all physical respects but **without conscious experiences: by definition there is ‘nothing it is like’ to be a zombie**. Yet zombies behave just like us, and some even spend a lot of time discussing consciousness. > > Few people think zombies actually exist. But many hold they are at least conceivable, and some that they are possible. It is argued that if zombies are so much as a bare possibility, then physicalism is false and some kind of dualism is true. For many philosophers that is the chief importance of the zombie idea. But **the idea is also of interest for its presuppositions about the nature of consciousness and how the physical and the phenomenal are related**. Use of the zombie idea against physicalism also raises more general questions about relations between imaginability, conceivability, and possibility. Finally, zombies raise epistemological difficulties: they reinstate the ‘other minds’ problem. Using this definition, would a being which is "not conscious" have Buddha-nature? I ask because I want to know if the Buddha is dead and inanimate matter, and inanimate matter has Buddha nature, that means that the Buddha senses what inanimate matter does? Moreover, I want to know if a non cognition of emptiness is "like " a cognition.

In the Matrix, is Neo's character just Sidhartha in a new life? Does the movie have any implication to whether Neo is actually the Buddha? I know the movie is chalk full of notions of being Buddhist or at least explores some of it's foundings but Im asking is anyone in the movie, mainly Neo, seen as The Buddha?

I often hear nanas and jhanas mentioned together as if they are different but related concepts. Is that true are they different or is nanas the exact equivalent of jhanas? Are the different terms used in different traditions perhaps?

It is said that Buddha has divine eye (ability to see who're capable of realizing liberation) and psychic power. Is there any account in pali canon in which Buddha sees someone who could realize nibbana and travels outside India to teach? It seems to me there would always be someone outside or far from where Buddha dwells who can see Dhamma?

It appears in ancient India there was a style of debate that became associated with Buddhism and is still a part of at least Gulugpa Tibetan Buddhism. What is it and how would I get started?

According to the Dhamma(afaik), there are three types of heavenly beings . 1. Devas - Gods(male) 2. Apsara/Divyangana - Angels(female) who accompany the gods. 3. Brahmas(Rupa/Arupa) - ? We can use the word 'god' or 'higher-god' to refer to brahmas, but that doesn't clearly separate them from Devas who belong to the sensual world. Is there a better English word? P.S. I'm inclined to think that there's no proper English term because the Western world did not have the practice of attaining Jhanas . Thus no concept of Brahma realms or non-sensual realms.

I recall having read somewhere that monks are allowed to bathe only once every 15 days. What is the actual Patimokkha rule behind this ? Also, what is the reason behind this rule and what are its possible benefits ? Is there any specific story corresponding to this rule ?

Sorry for the noobie lay questions. Does the Buddha say that we can enjoy something for two different mutually exclusive reasons. E.g. enjoying reading a book because it is innately pleasurable and because it is an extrinsic good in teaching me something. It seems to me that there is no way to do so, that we cannot resolve opposites into one reason or meaning for being. That whatever you think of dialectics, nothing can be synthesized with an absolute opposite. I think then that any reason or meaning is had to the exclusion of something else, and there is a fundamental deficiency in thought, such that any meaning is absolute i.e. a lie, or contradicted.

I was raised in a secular family, went to CofE church a little as a young child, but only to support my mum. Actually I'm way more drawn to Nietzsche now than Christianity, though I cannot see any answers in his work. I visited Thailand as a teenager, took a few meditation classes, and would say I had a sort of conversion experience upon reading more about Buddhism, in general. But don't feel like there's any reason to keep my faith; it hasn't I think helped my mental health or my life, only got me to where I am today. Almost spiritually exhausted. In effect, I feel like I have nothing to look forward to and nothing to look back at. I am scared of dying, but not to the extent that I would assume a religion to cheer myself up. For a long time I believed that I won't be annihilated when I die, but the more I think about it, and I have done so a lot, the more it seems that this is an irrelevance, something that tells me about my life now not the future. But, I can sometimes feel good in the present moment, and wondered whether shikantaza might help me feel better about that. I can't find an exact phrase to describe that, but maybe Soto zen might help me to be how I am or want to be, in life and death, even though I am so tired with everything but this fluctuating enjoyment of now. Which incidentally, does not seem very Nietzschean: I don't place much value on happiness as a way of life hedonism etc. I have visited a local Soto group, without meeting a teacher there, and enjoyed doing so. The people seemed cool etc., too. But I wanted to ask if Soto meditation has the answers to the rest of my post, or what the answers were. Even what I am asking. Thank you for any encouragement or for any insight.

I'm going to try to describe this, but I'm honestly not sure how to. I have this vibration feeling just under my skin what seems like all the time. It's like a feeling of energy but it feels like it's vibrating. Oddly, if I get awoken abruptly, I actually feel the energy go CRAZY to the point my whole body shakes. Sorry in advance if this sounds crazy, as I really don't know the best way to describe it.

Can the dhatu elements (earth, water, wind and fire) be considered as permanent?

It is easy enough to see the power of developing mindfulness through walking meditation, eating meditation, and any repeated task including cooking. How does one develop mindfulness capacities **when doing new things involving struggle like studying, reading, problem solving or programming** without hindering one's progress in such a task?

I am asking because I think that if the past has buddha nature, and the dharmakaya is impermanent, then there is nothing left of the enlightened when they die.