Let me restate this question. Its a difficult question for myself. When I mean guide line i guess Im assuming a general Fundamental line then I assume traditions would vary from this one line, but I dont know. Its difficult to find these guides or fundamental aspects from the sources I've tried looking at. I find most sites all agree on Four Noble Truths, Eight fold Path, Five Aggregates, Meditation, Non Duality, Non self, Impermanence, Metta Suttra, Dhamapada, Pali Cannon, Just these concepts I've come across. The hardest thing would be there is no experts around my area, no meditation centers, nothing to go on at all. Just simply the internet an depending on who you talk to you get a different question so I find it confusing at times trying to get a view point of what to search for. I tried googling the answer an I find many sites that just tell you their point of view an dont even offer a fundamental line to follow They offer a few bits an pieces of what Siddhartha said. It was really the reason why I joined this site was to find a expert or master to help me understand Buddhism. I dont have a tradition in general, just trying to seek out the exact teachings of Siddhartha. Maybe this is a better way of putting the question. In less Buddhism is just a pick an choose philosophy, where you start an continue where ever you want in the path

Humans like nearly all other species have their genetic base as a mixture 50:50 from the genes of their father and from the genes of their mother. Each generation represents a new combination of genes from the gene pool of the species. The genetic basis determines to a large amount who we are. Does this fact contradict the rebirth of individuals?

I have heard from a Buddhist monk that hungry ghosts usually return to their familis searching for food, which makes me believe they have easy access to memories of their previous life. Some hell beings also know what they did to deserve their punishment (according to what I have heard) so they have access to memories as well, I'm assuming devas should know it too. Apparently only Humans and animals do not remember previous lifes, is there a reason for that in the teachings?

Paul Bloom: The origins of pleasure describe pleasure based on information. To further elaborate original artwork is worth more than a duplicate, how we get attached or less attached to a person on additional information we have, how a artifact gains value because it was used by a famous person, and how you experience pain and pleasure due to additional information you have. How is this explained through a Buddhist perspective in terms of how attachments works.

> ... The architect Rutch from Breslau had already designed a monastery with huts for monks, and the plan was that Bhikkhu Sīlācāra and other disciples were to join Nyanatiloka there. ... (Wikipedia entry on Nyanatiloka) Who is the monk mentioned above? What is the contribution that he has made? Any books by him?

Venerable Nyanatiloka had tried to setup a monastery in the West. Were there previous attempts? How successful were they? Do they still exist? If not, what happened? Following is the link "Plans for a Theravada Buddhist monastery in Europe " with regard to this exercise. Extract as follows: > Upon returning to Germany, Markgraf planned to found a Buddhist Monastery in the southern part of Switzerland and formed a group to realise this aim. Enrico Bignani, the publisher of Coenobium: Rivista Internazionale di Liberi Studi from Lugano had found a solitary alpine hut at the foot of Monte Lema Mountain, near the village of Novaggio overlooking Lake Maggiore, and Nyanatiloka left Burma for Novaggio at the end of 1909 or the beginning of 1910. The architect Rutch from Breslau had already designed a monastery with huts for monks, and the plan was that Bhikkhu Sīlācāra and other disciples were to join Nyanatiloka there. Nyanatiloka's stay and plans drew a lot of attention from the press and several journalists visited him to write about the him and the planned monastery. However, Nyanatiloka suffered heavily from bronchitis due to the cold weather, and also from malnutrition, and after half a year left Novaggio with the German monk candidate Ludwig Stolz, who had joined him at Novaggio, to try to find a better place in Italy or North Africa. In Novaggio he worked on his Pāli-grammatik (Pāli Grammar) and his translation of the Abhidhamma text called Puggalapaññatti (Human Types).

There is a story about how the Buddha will knock on your door if your house is on fire, but he will not kick it down because you have to answer the door yourself. This is analogous to the Four Noble Truths, in which one must realize their suffering, and from that they can make the effort to find the path to the cessation of suffering. The Buddha will not force you down that path, nor will he be your savior; he will only help you if you ask him. However, the Buddha also asks those to practice sincere compassion for others. My question is: if I see a friend suffering (let's say from a slight alcohol abuse or they think that they are ugly), yet I think they will never understand their suffering, how can I give my compassion to that being that needs help to deal with their suffering, when their understanding of suffering must come from within? They need to come to the realization of their suffering, but I know that these people will never see the light themselves. Where's the balance in this tricky situation? These friends are unwilling to change their unhealthy habits, but I, as one who tries hard to practice compassion, find it hard to just let it slide and hope someday they will realize their suffering and understand that it exists, and that there's a path to the cessation of it. Any insight would be much appreciated. And I hope my thoughts make sense to some of you.

[Sigalovada Sutta: The Discourse to Sigala The Layperson's Code of Discipline](http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html) includes, > "These four, young householder, should be understood as warm-hearted friends: > > (1) he who is a helpmate, **(2) he who is the same in happiness and sorrow,** (3) he who gives good counsel, (4) he who sympathises. And > (2) "In four ways, young householder, should one who is the same in happiness and sorrow be understood as a warm-hearted friend: > > (i) he reveals his secrets, (ii) he conceals one's own secrets, (iii) in misfortune he does not forsake one, (iv) his life even he sacrifices for one's sake. I thought I could guess the correlation between being "warm-hearted" and being "the same in happiness and sorrow"; but, my guesses didn't really match any of the four ways given, except for the 3rd way (i.e. perhaps I understand why "being the same" includes "does not forsake", but don't understand the others). So: - Does "being the same in happiness and sorrow" mean [Upekkha](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upekkha) ? - Does "warm-hearted friend" mean [Kalyana Mittas](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaly%C4%81%E1%B9%87a-mittat%C4%81) ? - Why are revealing and concealing secrets mentioned? What kinds of secrets? What do "secrets" have to do with being "the same in happiness and sorrow"? - The last item, "his life even he sacrifices for one's sake" -- can that be reconciled with the answers to the question, [How to be compassionate to a friend in need](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/4053/254) ? Those answers seem to suggest that you can only help yourself.

Is wishing for a pain to go away an instance of aversion(Dosa) or an instance of craving(Lobha)? Or both working in tandem? ex: leg pain while doing sitting meditation. Aversion is obvious, if the pain becomes unpleasant. But there is also the wanting for it to disappear(Vibhava Tanha ) or the desire for the non painful state. An Abhidhamma answer would be much appreciated.

In [this](http://www.traumaticbraininjury.net/files/2011/07/Diagnostic-and-Statistical-Manual-of-Mental-Disorders-and-the-Buddhist-Jathaka-Stories.pdf) interesting take on Buddhism and modern psychology via the Jataka Tales and the DSM, is this passage: > The Jathka storyteller elegantly portrays the clinical picture of a > monk (in Dummbala Katta Jathakaya) who had fear feelings, flashbacks, > hyperaousal, avoidance and startling reactions. The monk named Marana > Bhiruka Bikku fits in to DSM criteria of PTSD. Can anybody locate the Jataka tale mentioned here? I tried but did not succeed, probably because of variations in transliteration.

Is there any scientific studies that have observed through different bias the differences and similarities between those three type of meditation? For exemple difference in EEG or brain plasticity in long term meditators, or various psychologic-cognitive tests that would give different results depending on the type of meditation.

This question refers to "Buddhist Modernism" however I'm not sure what it is. It is a term that I have heard crop up in a few other places. Is it a reformation movement within Buddhism? If so what is it reforming and when did it occur? Is it particular to one school of Buddhism? Is it a related concept to Navayana Buddhism perhaps? Is it a real movement at all or just convenient shorthand for Buddhism as it enters the modern world?

Both are in the nine qualities of the Buddha but I can't see a distinctive difference. Is there supposed to be a distinctive difference or are these qualities an example of repetition?

Yes it is asking for opinions, which i will investigate further on my own. opinions would be helpful in this particular circumstance.

For example... If a senior monk is basing his judgement on personal opinion and not the vinaya, creating dukkha in the community and sowing discord... how would another person (monk or lay) go about addressing this hindrance?

I need to know if "Dwesha" anger and fear are connected according to the Buddhist teachings? Also how to overcome fear or phobias with the practices of Buddhism?

How to speak or act with a pure thought when people tell joke and use rude language towards you, trying to upset you according to Buddhist teachings?And how to change the unwholesome thought to wholesome when the mind is full of hatred and aversion and cultivate loving kindness?I hope this make sense.

In a quest to find the Buddhist meaning of life , I stumbled upon The Unanswered Questions and the Unwise Reflections (Sabbasava-Sutta), and I am surprised that The Buddha actually advised against thinking about these questions: >Am I? Am I not? Did I exist in the past? Did I not exist in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, did I become what in the past? Shall I exist in future? Shall I not exist in future? What shall I be in future? How shall I be in future? **The reason given is that it causes attachment to self, and some others say because they are founded on false premises.** Firstly, this is the Wikipedia, so I am not 100% sure of its accuracy, but as per my interpretation, this means that, for example, "Self" is only a concept or theory that may be false and incompatible with reality, and a question like "Who Am I" is then founded on the false premise of the "Self" concept. In short, it preoccupies us with confusion. All good so far. Even though what I gather generally is that Science and Buddhism are consistent in approach , is Science's relentless search for answers bad for people as well? Does The Buddha (1) recognise the possibility of finding the truth for these questions, or (2) is it impossible to find the truth, or (3) is it detrimental for us to know the truth? Is there a better (than Wikipedia) explanation why we should not reflect on these questions? P.S. this question was partly inspired by the 14 questions left unanswered question, which I think does not answer my question. In the quoted text, it does not state what Buddha thinks of the "findability" of the answers to those questions. It only states that Buddha thinks the answer will confuse us, therefore choose to be silent. However, we are 2000 years later now and we may have better science to explain certain phenomenon. Are Buddhist scientist advised or permitted to delve into such questions? Furthermore, I am specifically asking about the "Unwise Reflections" in Wikipedia in the bottom section, rather than the 14 questions.

How does one remain dedicated to the pursuit of nibbāna, when one has seen clearly that ultimately there is no separate nibbāna. What does one aspire towards now? Prajñāpāramitā Hṛdaya sūtra: «There is no suffering, no cause of suffering, no end to suffering, no path to follow» >Where beauty is, then there is ugliness; where right is, also there is wrong. Knowledge and ignorance are interdependent; delusion and enlightenment condition each other. Since olden times it has been so. How could it be otherwise now? Wanting to get rid of one and grab the other is merely realizing a scene of stupidity. Even if you speak of the wonder of it all, how do you deal with each thing changing? > > ................................................................................................~Ryokan

I'm going through a lot. It's very easy to be lost in thoughts and worries about the near future, and that leads me to a life of unhappiness. I also feel guilty when I fell happy, because I feel I should be worried. For me it's very hard to accept the idea that the universe is impermanent and hence I should live the present moment when I'm responsible for things to go wrong or right. How can I solve my problems if I'm not totally immersed in the future, thinking about all the possibilities? If I need to think about the future, there's no way to not be anxious.