There is plenty of evidence in the Early Buddhist Texts common to both the major schools of Buddhism, that the Noble Eightfold Path was an accepted teaching, by the "Third" Buddhist Council at least, but it is only from the time of that Council that we have archeological evidence likely linking to this version of the Path. That is, by the likely supposition, that the 8 spoked wheel in Asokan pillars is representing this version of the Path, as the traditions hold. The eight spoked wheel has not been found in Earlier Buddhist art. Right View is known not to be Wisdom, from comparison of the Noble Eightfold Path with what can be called the Noble Tenfold Path, which differs only by having the extra two steps at the end: Right Insight and Right Liberation. Insight is known to be synonymous or at least directly related to Wisdom. Thus the 'Tenfold' Path fits perfectly the Three Trainings and one does not have to change the order either of the steps or the Three Trainings, as done by Bh. Dhammadinna [MN 44](https://suttacentral.net/mn44/) , which is followed by the commentator Bh. Buddhaghosa in his Visuddhimagga. The Three Trainings are accepted in both Mahayana and Theravada as a summary of the Path. The Noble Eightfold Path is only one of over 50 ways of presenting the Path in the Pali Early Buddhist Texts and there are only six others, which do not include the Training in Wisdom ([doc1](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Pyv1FOOqmRhHil-FXT6ejuKlMUtSude-/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116204971514462608468&rtpof=true&sd=true) and [doc2](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1acDIhERcjDfGYof2v45tqdXOipIh09_OYUfHwXWpVTY/edit?usp=sharing)) . The Buddha reportedly said he does not have a secret teaching, or the closed fist of a teacher ([DN16](https://suttacentral.net/dn16/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=plain&reference=none¬es=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin#2.25.9)) and he only teaches what is necessary ([SN 56.31](https://suttacentral.net/sn56.31/)) . Therefore, the Three Trainings are all necessary and he would teach them to everyone. That is what we see in the other over 40 ways he taught the path, with all the Three Trainings, to lay people and mendicants (see links above). Therefore those 7 ways of presenting the Path, could not be from the Buddha. Early Buddhism, by the time of the 'Third' Council and still today in some Buddhist countries, only really teaches Ethics and Generosity as the practice of the layperson. We can see this was established by the 'Third' Council, as I have not found the Noble Eightfold Path, taught to any layperson in the Pali Early Buddhist Texts. Therefore it was taught to mendicants only, which supports the theory that the second and third training, had lost their relevance by the 'Third' council. Hoping for other clear evidence, not just closed minded claims or sectarian propaganda. Best wishes Joe

I’ve been reflecting on ***the slide*** of the practice—that threshold where the "Doer" or the "Agent" seems to fall away and you’re just left with the flow of the process. Suttas like **AN 11.2 (the Cetana Sutta)** describe this beautifully. They show the path as a series of mental qualities that "flow on and fill up" through dhammatā (natural law), without needing an act of will (cetanā) to push them along. It's one thing to know the "map" of these links intellectually, but I'm curious about the specific point where that knowledge flips into a direct "Aha!" moment—witnessing the mechanics run themselves. How do the Suttas (or the broader tradition) describe this shift from just knowing the mechanics (ñāṇa) to actually seeing them unfold (dassana)? Is there a specific term for that tipping point?

Is this a grave mistake in DN22 translation? It appears both Ven. Thanissaro and Bhante Sujato have made a grave translation error [in DN22](https://suttacentral.net/dn22/en/sujato?layout=linebyline#1.7) . > “Mendicants, the four kinds of mindfulness meditation are the path to convergence. They are in order to purify sentient beings, to get past sorrow and crying, to make an end of pain and sadness, to end the cycle of suffering, and to realize extinguishment. > > “Ekāyano ayaṃ, bhikkhave, maggo sattānaṃ visuddhiyā, sokaparidevānaṃ samatikkamāya dukkhadomanassānaṃ atthaṅgamāya ñāyassa adhigamāya nibbānassa sacchikiriyāya, yadidaṃ cattāro satipaṭṭhānā. Ven. Vijithananda explain this in a different way. "Attangamaya" means not "make to and end of pain and sadness" but taking them as not I, me, or mine.

In the Upanisa Sutta it is said: > So, mendicants: ignorance is the vital condition for choices. Choices are the vital condition for consciousness. Consciousness is the vital condition for name and form… I’m not sure I understand the meaning of “choices” here and how ignorance causes choices to arise. Does this mean *poor* choices, or does it mean any choices at all? Without ignorance would there be no choosing? Also does “choices are the vital condition for consciousness” mean something like, once a baby realizes they can choose what to do, they develop a sense of self and consciousness?

Is the Eightfold Path exclusive to Buddhism? Buddha taught the **Noble** Eightfold Path. The way I understand, the eightfold path is a generic path not exclusive to Buddhism. However, the Noble Eightfold Path is exclusive to Buddhism. I was trying to convince many [in Dhamma Wheel](https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=38202) of this without much support. I would like to know the opinion of this learned Buddhist community.

Why is consciousness not discussed as internal and external in the Dhathu-vibhanga sutta (MN 140)? > "And what is the space property? **The space property may be either internal or external.** What is the internal space property? Anything internal, belonging to oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: the holes of the ears, the nostrils, the mouth, the [passage] whereby what is eaten, drunk, consumed, & tasted gets swallowed, and where it collects, and whereby it is excreted from below, or anything else internal, within oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: This is called the internal space property. Now both the internal space property & the external space property are simply space property. And that should be seen as it actually is present with right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self.' When one sees it thus as it actually is present with right discernment, one becomes disenchanted with the space property and makes the space property fade from the mind. > > "**There remains only consciousness: pure & bright.** What does one cognize with that consciousness? One cognizes 'pleasure.' One cognizes 'pain.' One cognizes 'neither pleasure nor pain.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, there arises a feeling of pleasure. When sensing a feeling of pleasure, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of pleasure.' One discerns that 'With the cessation of that very sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, the concomitant feeling — the feeling of pleasure that has arisen in dependence on the sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure — ceases, is stilled.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pain... In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain, there arises a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. When sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain.' One discerns that 'With the cessation of that very sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain, the concomitant feeling — the feeling of neither pleasure nor pain that has arisen in dependence on the sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain — ceases, is stilled.' > > https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.140.than.html

So I've been thinking about how in scripture, Buddha often refers to certain views as the "extremes". A famous example is the eternalists (eternal soul and afterlife) vs the annihilationists (no soul, no afterlife, pure materialists). The Buddha taught both of these as the two extremes and promotes a Middle Way. But is Buddha's own approach not a form of extermism? Consider the following: one extreme that I will call eliminationists (suffering is intrinsically bad and is to be completely eradicated - this is Buddha) vs masochists (suffering is to be sought out and maximized as much as humanly possible). The Middle Way here would be "We do not like suffering (though that does not make it bad or evil by itself), but it has important functions and is in some ways, simply inevitable as long as one is actively "alive" in any conceivable way, so we should seek to reasonably reduce unnecessary suffering as judged by us, but re-orienting the entire society for the sole goal of eliminating suffering can lead to other negatives and extreme behaviour". Why should we eliminate rather than lessen suffering? Isn't that one extreme (other being actively seeking out as much suffering as possible)? I can list many ways in which obsession with harm reduction can lead to a highly dysfunctional society and worsen conditions of many people. So why does the Buddha actively promote the Middle Way for other positions, but does not apply it for his own?

I have done Samatha and Vipassana for a few years. Now, I have lost interest in everything. Feel like I have no hope for anything. No desire. Isn't that what Vipassana about. Removing hope and desire? Can't even eat. What's wrong with me? Is this a result of Vipassana? Or laziness? I'm stuck where I am. Lots of past experiences are coming up and disturbing me. 🙏🙏🙏

Ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

This question is for experienced meditators. I’ve been practicing for a very long time, meditating often, yet I still notice my mind wandering all the time. I struggle to sit still. My mind is always trying to escape from this place to another. I’ve been recommended to simply watch the mental activity and wandering, but the mind wandering takes me away and I forget to observe. It feels straining to be in the moment. How should I approach it better?

Relating to this question, I am curious if it is a usual experience of duhkha that even people in good health, wealth, external circumstances also experience. Does it have a defined name within the factors of duhkha (in theravada terminology) or is it just lumped together as duhkha?

I have been researching the distinction between Samatha-Vipassana (Tranquility-Insight) and Sukkha-Vipassana (Dry Insight), and I am encountering textual references that suggest serious soteriological and psychological risks when the "dry" approach is uncoupled from its ethical and emotional foundations. Specifically, I am looking for Sutta or Commentary references that address the following three doctrinal pitfalls, particularly for practitioners who may be isolated from a Sangha: - The Misunderstanding of Desire (Chanda vs. Tanha): The Brahmana Sutta (SN 51.15) establishes that Chanda (desire/zeal) is necessary to complete the path ("desire to end desire"). Is there a recognized danger of a practitioner confusing Chanda with Tanha (craving), leading to a state of "spiritual apathy" where they suppress the very volition needed to emerge from suffering? How does the Abhidhamma distinguish the function of Chanda in the Iddhipadas from the craving to be abandoned? - The Near Enemy of Equanimity (Indifference): The Visuddhimagga (Chapter IX & XX) identifies "Indifference" (aññāṇupekkhā or gehasita-upekkha) as the "near enemy" of Upekkha (Equanimity). Doctrinally, how does one distinguish between a noble "letting go" and a pathological "dissociation" or depression, particularly if the practitioner is experiencing "dry" insight without the counterbalancing factors of Piti (Rapture) or Pasada (Faith)? Are there suttas that warn against adukkhamasukha (neutral feeling) being mistaken for wisdom? - The "Salt Crystal" Dynamic and Mitigation of Kamma: The Kimatthiya Sutta (AN 11.1) links Sila (virtue) causally to Non-remorse and eventually Samadhi. Furthermore, the Lonaphala Sutta (AN 3.101) suggests that a "developed mind" (large body of water) mitigates the "salt" of kamma. If a practitioner skips the cultivation of "wet" virtues (generosity, community, active merit-making) and dives straight into "dry" observation, does the canon predict a specific type of "meditation sickness" or mental rigidity? Does the Sivaka Sutta (SN 36.21) offer a corrective to the view that all physical/mental distress during practice is "karmic purification" that must be passively endured? I am interested in whether the texts treat "Dryness" not just as a technique (no Jhana), but as a potentially dangerous deficiency in the Seven Factors of Enlightenment (specifically the lack of Piti-sambojjhanga), and if such a deficiency is linked to "Wrong Deliverance" or Niyati-ditthi (fatalism).

> When that pleasant feeling had arisen in him, it didn't invade his mind and remain because of his *development of the body*. from MN 36 Maha-Saccaka Sutta translated by Thanissaro. Pleasant feeling (vedanā) is not limited to five senses, but can also be experienced by the mind. To understand the sutta, it seems important to understand what exactly is meant by *development of the body*. > When that painful feeling had arisen in him, it didn't invade his mind and remain because of his *development of the mind*. Here the Buddha makes a clear distinction here between 'development of the body' and 'development of the mind', and from MN 119 > [The Blessed One said:] "And how is mindfulness immersed in the *body > developed*, how is it pursued, so as to be of great fruit & great > benefit? **What did the Buddha mean by 'development of the body' versus 'development of the mind'?** Then, how does one develop the body?

According to the Buddha, what is samsara made of? 1. Karma? 2. All the Buddhist realms of existence? 3. Your moment by moment mind and body experiential arisings as they happen? 4. Isn't samsara what arises when you meditate satipatthana?

As per title. To be more specific: The rule, or the working way of Karma - is it part of the world and thus uniquely determined within the formation of our world? Or is the working way of Karma some superior rule higher than the formation of our world, that all worlds (we know Buddhism believe there are many parallel worlds in time and space) follow a same set of Karma rule? Take as an example, SA 527 , which says: > a novice monk stole monk's 7 fruits, so he was punished by Karma, that he fell into hell for many lives, and even if he reincarnate into a human after these sufferings, hot iron bullets will penetrate his body from time to time Is such karmaphala penalty for stealing monk's fruits (i.e. falling into hell and later becoming a human penetrated by bullets), - (a) the same or similar across all worlds, or - (b) unique of our world, or - (c) unique only to Sakyamuni Buddha's era in our world? There is a similar question but not well-answered either. ------------------- Note this question is not "is Karma part of materialistic world". Karma itself is obviously bound with sentients in this world, but I want to know whether the rule of Karma also bound to us.

This question was inspired by [an earlier one](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/51807/do-any-sub-sects-of-buddhism-have-the-concept-of-eternal-hell) . In [DN27](https://suttacentral.net/dn27/en/sujato#10.2) , it was mentioned: > As the cosmos contracts, sentient beings are mostly headed for the realm of streaming radiance. I recalled hearing a Dharma talk ages ago that as a great aeon ends, all the lower realms are emptied (perhaps, destroyed?) and beings are reborn into the higher realms. This appeared to be what the above sutra is alluding to. Correct me if I am wrong. Does this mean that all the hell beings (even those in the lowest hell) will also be promoted to the higher realm? What happens to their bad karma, is it suspended? Or is the contraction of the universe halted until these beings had expired their bad karma?

Caucasian skin is peachy and sandy (due to having no pigmentation) while the great man's body in nibbana is, according to the 32 perfections of a great man , "his skin is the color of gold". White skin requires some pigmentation. Currently my journey with white skin represents the Trix rabbit's (1994 commercial) attempt to take his own cereal. All he gets is "silly rabbit Trix are for kids!" And the fact that some saints may have received such a miracle to change their skin color forever makes the pain that much more serious. And what should I do regarding the psychologist? I am visiting one to drain my emotions of this, and that might make my eternity as a yellow man all that much more permanent!

I remember reading offhand on a website a Zen Buddhist Koan that had not worrying as its theme, and one of the lines was "if you're about to go to Hell, don't worry". That's all I can remember of it. If anyone of you knows what I'm talking about, please share the name and text of this Koan. Thank you in advance.

I came across this contemplation in [DN 22](https://suttacentral.net/dn22/en/sujato#5.3) : > It’s as if there were a bag with openings at both ends, filled with various kinds of grains, such as fine rice, wheat, mung beans, peas, sesame, and ordinary rice. And a person with clear eyes were to open it and examine the contents: ‘These grains are fine rice, these are wheat, these are mung beans, these are peas, these are sesame, and these are ordinary rice.' > > And so they meditate observing an aspect of the body internally … What kind of wholesome qualities on the 8-fold noble path does contemplating the bodies of people like sacks of different grains of rice and wheat inspire? Like sinews, muscle tissue, synovial fluid, neural tissue, skeleton. Contemplating this rotten body as a sack of grains in a linen bag, just like one the Buddha would have seen being carried around when he was a child 3000 years ago in India? Picture this, young Buddha seeing someone on the street by his palace, carrying a sack of rice for cooking a meal for him, and seeing the cooks in the kitchen? Thanks. sukhi hontu

Confidence, For a few weeks now, I have lost confidence in almost everything. Like doing even simple stuff. I feel like, I can't. Like, no future. Motivation, For few weeks now, I feel like sleeping or meditating in bed. Like being free from any work or doing any stuff. Why can't I be happy mentally only?. For reference, I did Samantha, Vipssana for the last 4 years, when I have time.