What are the main differences in theravada and mahayana buddhism?

Does secular Buddhism have a set of texts that are particularly relevant to it. I can imagine that there are texts that won't have any relevance to secular Buddhists such as the twin miracles . But are texts that have particular resonance even insofar as developing in a set of texts that could almost be described as a canon (in the making maybe?)

According to Buddhism, does flora contain prana? Is this a cosmic energy that is set in earth, nature? Do organisms contain that energy?

In the Great Minds of the Eastern Intellectual Tradition lecture series Grant Hardy mentions that there is a Buddhist sutra or text when the Buddha gets a migraine (it's probably not described as a migraine I should imagine). It's apparently an example of the fruits Buddha's previous karma arising even after he was enlightened. Does anyone know the text that this happens in?

In many Buddhist stories we hear about people attaining enlightenment, stream entry and other blessings. It seems like it is much easier to progress in the path when there is a living Buddha around, is that right? Or is it related to the way society was, more religious and devoted?

Apparently there were 8 wholesome conditions laid down by Ananda when he was asked to be Buddhas attendant at the age of 55. What were they?

I find very hard to be always mindful of all activities (four frames of reference). At the beginning of practice, my persistence are aroused and gradually it becomes *indifference*/lax. Basically I am starting feel stress trying to be mindful..? Since it is necessary to have other factors like joy, calm (7 factors of enlightenment) to achieve wisdom, I assume I am doing something wrong. What I have learnt from sutta is 'sati' dhamma is cause for arising of other good dhamma. So what are the conditions to have this 'sati' ? .

I see many people telling that buddhism restricts the happiness of "gihi" (non clergy) life. What do you think? Does teaching in buddhism ask people to always think of uncertainty?

Most of the books about Buddhism I can find were made for Beginners, most are very good and touch the key points, easy to find and to buy. The problem is that after a while I started to look for more advanced books, made for people that have already studied the key principles of the Dhamma and wanna take one step further, this is very hard to find! Anyone can indicate a book about Buddhism (suttas, Abidhamma, techniques etc.) More suitable for advance students?

Since karma isn't the only thing that determines what happens to you, what are the other aspects? I remember hearing a dharma talk where someone explained that there were like eight things that determined what happened to you and that karma was only one. Is there a sutta referencing this and what are those other things?

Is there any relations between 3 deliverance, attha vimokkha and stages of enlightenment? During meditation (like anapanasati) , how does one *switch* to insight (into five aggregates) after gaining some concentration? > 1. the conditionless (or signless) liberation (animitta-v.), > > 2. the desireless liberation (apanihita-v.), > > 3. the emptiness (or void) liberation (suññatā-v. ). vimokkha

Buddha taught us that Anatta, non self, is a key concept of the Dhamma, one of the 3 marks of existence. Basically we have a mind, not a soul, that differentiates from other minds by the kamma-vipaka it will experience, not by any inherent or intrinsic quality In Tibetan Buddhism, there is this common search for the Tulku, reincarnated Lamas, such as HH Dalai Lama, but if we are all the same thing and there is no self, What is the meaning and the benefit or finding an reincarnation of someone? This is a curiosity, not doubting the process or questioning the reasons, I'm sure there are good ones. I don't mean to be disrespectful.

Sometimes I see perfect situations to teach something from the Buddha and help someone with it, impermanence, worldly concerns, etc... however some people will immediately shut down and not listen if they know it was spoken by the Buddha... still I want to help. So I try to focus on the teachings that can benefit them without saying in a explicit way it came from Buddhism (of course I do not say the teaching was mine as well, I just don't mention the source or say it is something I learned...) Is that wrong, unethical or a cause for bad Karma? I have never thought about it!

AFAIK, monks are not allowed to be away from their monasteries for more than 3 days during the rain season. But a monk I know had to travel out of the country due to some personal matter during this period for more than three days. So I'm curious to know whether there are specific situations in Vinaya where the monks are allowed to break this rule? If so, are they capable of receiving the Kathina robes?

It is very common to see people realigning their priorities after a near death experience or surviving a cancer. Things like money, career, fear of the future or anxiety don't bother them as much as before. In Buddhism how can one try to develop the same kind of behave? Only through meditation? Any specific meditation method to do it? (I thought about something related to death and impermanence, but it has to be something really powerful to achieve similar results)

How should western practitioners approach the sutras? What are the most important sutras from the main Buddhist traditions for westerners to study? When studying the sutras should that be considered a form of meditation?

From a Buddhist's perspective, is it wrong to watch such sports on television for example? Of course, I'm talking as a lay person. Monks have a completely different approach regarding entertainment. Does watching it create any bad Kamma?

I am questioning myself and my practice of answering questions and was stopped by the following website. http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/archives/sutra/level4_deepening_understanding_path/interferences/fourteen_questions_which_buddha_rem.html > There are fourteen unspecified points (lung-du ma-bstan-pa bcu-bzhi), > which are points about which Buddha did not specify an answer when > asked. Often this set of fourteen is referred to as the “fourteen > questions to which Buddha remained silent.” > > The Mahayana Version To those who believe in a true findably existent > “me” or “self” (bdag, Skt. atman) and a true findably existent > universe, Buddha did not answer when they asked are the “I” or the > “self” and the universe: > > eternal, not eternal, since they undergo gross impermanence at the > time of their destruction, as both, in the sense that some beings and > their environments, like the Creator Brahma and his heaven, are > eternal; while all else, such as his creations, are not eternal and > end at the time of their destruction, neither, since it is impossible > to know? Are “I’s” or “selves” and the universe: > > finite, infinite, both finite and infinite, in the sense that limited > beings (sentient beings) are infinite in number, but the universe is > finite in size, neither, since it is impossible to know? Does the “I” > or the “self” of a Buddha: > > continue to exist after death, not continue after death, both, in the > sense that the body does not continue, but the life-force (srog) does, > neither? Buddha did not answer these because there is no such thing > as a true findably existent “me” or “ self” for either limited beings > (sentient beings) or a Buddha, and no such thing as a true findably > existent universe. Therefore, there can be no question whether such > things are eternal or not eternal, or finite or infinite. It is like > asking do rabbit-horns, turtle-hair or chicken-lips last forever or > only a limited time. If Buddha said the “me,” and so on are eternal, > these people would fall to the position of eternalism. If he said they > are not eternal, they would fall to the position of nihilism, since > they would not understand his answer. Therefore, it was more skillful > not to specify an answer at all. > > To those who believe in a true findably existent body and life-force, > Buddha did not answer when they asked are the body and life-force: > > the same entity, totally separate and different entities? He remained > silent for a similar reason, since they would only misunderstand > anything he said. The question is in 2 parts, but they are really part of the same question of how questions and answers benefit our practice. A) Do you agree that the Buddha did not address these points in his sermons? (B) How does this questioning and answering aid our practice that moves toward awakening and what benefit can be derived from asking the type of questions we ask and answering the type of questions we answer?

I'm trying to find a specific story in the Pali canon (or commentaries, probably), where an anagami who looks after his mother makes a living by firing pots and putting them out by the side of the road. When people go by, he says "take what you like, just leave some beans or rice, or whatever you think it's worth." Anyone know where this story is found, or what the name of the anagami was?

A while back I was at a workshop by a Yungdrung Bön abbot who taught Guru Yoga using a visualization of the Master with a crystalline body where you visualize being purified first by fire, then wind, then water followed by beams of light radiating from the Master's brow-to-your-brow, throat-to-your-throat, and heart-to-your-heart. When this happens and at several other points there are specific prayers and syllables that are prescribed. I found a similar version in _Healing With Form, Energy, and Light_ by Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche which gives the ritual there, but without the strictly Tibetan elements. It clearly has the same bones (which is not surprising), but it doesn't contain the prayers or syllables. My question is: Does someone know the full version with the syllables and words intact (in any version, recognizing that there may be several variations) and/or a lead on where I might find it?