In Theravada, we have established that eating meat does not break the first precept in many Buddhism SE questions (for example, this question and other questions linked in its comments). However, beyond not breaking the first precept, could vegetarianism be used as a practice of developing compassion (karuna) and being compassionate? Or does the practice of compassion require direct intention and direct action in allaying the sufferings of others, and indirect means are not relevant? Bhikkhu Khantipalo defined compassion (karuna) here as: > Compassion (karuna) is taking note of the sufferings of other beings > in the world. It overcomes callous indifference to the plight of > suffering beings, human or otherwise. Likewise, it must be reflected > in one's life by a willingness to go out of one's way to give aid > where possible, and to help those in distress. It has the advantage of > reducing one's selfishness by understanding others' sorrows. It is > Lord Buddha's medicine for cruelty, for how can one harm others when > one has seen how much they have to suffer already? It has also two > enemies: the "near" one is mere grief; while its "far" enemy is > cruelty.

Some websites show that it is ideal to get 1.5 m distance between the person and the *kasina* object. Is there any science behind the recommendation to get that specific distance?

No question that it isn't proper to let trades for world carry Dhamma, share Dhamma via market places, but what does one think in regard of receiving? Would Dhamma made avaliable by commerce take one out of this wheel? Could people, who are not willing in providing sphere out of faith fist, based on generosity, ever match even the base? Or will they simply stay bond where they wish to receive? *Question powered by...* grave defilements... 

Gautama Buddha is traditionally regarded as having a noble body with 32 signs of a Great Man and one of those signs are deep blue eyes. I came across many online discussions about Buddha's ethnicity where some stated that Buddha's family - Sakya - was from Scythian descent. I also met some Ukrainians claiming that Sakyas were precisely from the land that now belongs to Ukraine. Can someone answer the question providing *reliable* sources or evidence?

What is the difference between Sakkhya Ditthi and Attanuditthi? I have asked the same question at the Dhamma Wheel topic: [Sakkaya Ditthi is not self-view!!](https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=31361) --- In my opinion or view, SN 35.166 (Samyutta 34.16.11.(166)) says Sakkāya Ditthi - Self View is not the self view but it is taking this existence or five aggregate as pleasurable. > *34. 16. 11.* > > *(166) Sakkāya - Self View* > > *1. At one time the Blessed One lived in Jīvaka's mango orchard in Rajagaha.* > > *2. Then a certain monk approached the Blessed One, worshipped and sat on a side.* > > *3. Sitting on a side that monk said to the Blessed One: “Venerable sir, knowing how and seeing how does the self view get dispelled?”* > > *4-9. “Monk, by knowing and seeing unpleasantness, in the eye self view gets dispelled Monk, by knowing and seeing unpleasantness in > forms, eye-consciousness, eye-contact and whatever feelings pleasant, > unpleasant or neither unpleasant nor pleasant born of eye-contact, > self view gets dispelled. Repeat for ear, nose, tongue, body, and > mind* > > *10. “Monk, knowing and seeing thus self view gets dispelled.”* In my view or opinion, taking: - Anicca (the impermanent) as Nicca (permanent) is wrong view ie: Micchaditthi - Dukkha (the unsatisfactory) as Adhukha (happiness) is Sakkayaditthi - Anatta (not-self) as Atta (self) is Attanuditthi.

I am doing Vajrasatva purification practice, and wonder whether this is a training in Ultimate Bodhicitta? As stated in the Scriptures related to Mind Training: one should first train in Ultimate Bodhicitta. So is purification through Vajrasatva Practice the kind of training to be used to get accustomed to the view of emptiness? Also, is it the best antidote for attachment? Many thanks!

I have a friend say Dev. He always involves himself in flattery of rich people knowingly or unknowingly. Its clearly visible that he shows off in front of rich people or try to gain their friendship in comparison to normal people or people of his status (in terms of wealth). So suppose I directly accuse him by saying that you are a flatterer etc (a person who flatters others because they are rich). This may hurt his feelings. It may possibly hurt feelings of her family as well as my family and may destroy relationships. What are the chances that he is going to accept this as a positive thing and try to bring about a change in him? Another way to tell him is by telling him a story about some rich person who have many flatterers and making fun of those flatterers. In this way I am not directly accusing him and the other person will not get hurt and try to convey a message as well. What are the changes of this kind of conversation impacting him to bring about a positive change in him?

Buddha says Nibbana is *ajātaṃ* *abhūtaṃ* *akataṃ* *asaṅkhataṃ*. Out of all these four, only *asaṅkhataṃ* (unconditioned) is something that I have to achieve. So can I say *asaṅkhataṃ* is Nibbana and vice versa? and by the way what is real meaning of *asaṅkhataṃ*? Buddha says its end of greed, aversion, and delusion... But I dont think ending of these three means ending of all past *sankhara*.. So, in the state of *asaṅkhataṃ* still lots of *sankhara* are there. It's just that they are infertile. So unconditioned is not right meaning of *asaṅkhataṃ* ... Ideally, it should be unconditionable? What do you say?

Over a period of last few years I have ***almost*** completely eradicated the 'five hindrances ' to meditation. However, sometimes when I am in deep meditation, I feel an intense fear of '**getting annihilated**' and then my mind immediately becomes restless and meditation is broken. As the mind knows that total emptiness will be the end of 'mind' or 'ego' I think the fear springs from that idea. How can I overcome this fear when the meditation is going on? and also, I wonder why 'fear' is not listed as one of the five hindrances to meditation?

Title really. I am reading the tibetan lamrim version of the 9 mental abiding and trying to correlate it to the theravada 8 jhanas, I can't seem to find which jhana/abiding is which in regards to the other tradition. The practice for both is still samatha. If anyone has an informed opinion or understanding of the practices I could really do with some help understanding how the 2 different explanations coincide.

I've been attending a Triratna Buddhist centre for half a year now, and have learned a lot about Buddhist teachings from there. I'm curious, however, about how Triratna is seen from other schools such as Mahayana and Theravada, Zen, Tibetan Buddhism etc. In particular: 1. Is there any strong disagreement from other schools about the particulars of Sangharakshita's teachings? Or are they quite compatible? 2. Do other schools tend to regard Triratna as a serious tradition, or is the "Westernisation" of Triratna's teachings seen as a detriment? 3. Is the view of Triratna from other schools generally positive, neutral or negative?

What is the difference between imagination and intent? Does imagination also create kamma? Can someone help me explain this in simpler terms?

I keep pondering over the below questions and thought of posting it here. 1. Is the physical universe(the one we observe with stars, galaxies, black holes etc) contained in the 31 planes of existence or the other way around? 2. A "ten thousand world systems" imply that there are other universes besides ours, which gives support to the multiverse hypothesis in science? 3. Are there ten thousand of world systems or infinite of them? Just trying to ponder if its infinite, then imagine the probability of being born as a human and able to understand dhamma, that is mind blowing. That also goes to show the sheer magnitude of samsara.

According to the Buddhism's theory, one man's fate is destined by the past's karma. Suppose that he faced an unfortunate incident at birth, which is due to past karma. Besides, his genes are inherited from his parents. In other words, his brain is also initiated by past karma. In this condition, all his ideas are also affected by the experience he has had, which is determined by past karma. To elaborate more, some are clever, some less, which can again be explained by karma. But if the conventional human brain can be so strongly determined by the existence of karma, how can you say buddhism is not fatalism?

In my personal practice, I have found laziness to be my most clearly visible defilement. It plays a role in preventing me from getting out of bed, hindering my mindfulness throughout the day, and tempting me to abandon my daily meditation schedule. I am wondering if there are any tips beyond “just do it” regarding stuff like getting out of bed and meditating regularly, perhaps this is simply a kammic condition I must overcome. Thank you!

National Public Radio's [Buddhists Prepare To Observe Bodhi Day, When Siddhartha Gautama Became Buddha](https://www.npr.org/2020/12/05/943453999/buddhists-prepare-to-observe-bodhi-day-when-siddhartha-gautama-became-buddha) article and podcast begins: >These winter holidays are a time for fellowship, joy and, for religious people around the world, worship. For many Buddhists, Bodhi Day is December 8. And tomorrow starts the celebration. Bodhi Day marks the day that Siddhartha Gautama became the Buddha. Wikipedia's [Bodhi Day](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhi_Day) mentions Mahayana Buddhism and specifically Zen Buddhism. For those who recognize Bodhi Day is the Gregorian date of December 8 universal, or do some Mahayana Buddhists use a lunar calendar to place it?

Is Enlightenment a misleading goal? Is it more of a thought-form than just an experience? I am asking because there is a lot of discussion of awakening, enlightenment, satori, differences, levels, etc. and I think that this distracts from the simple truth of growing in awareness, which is both individual and collective. In other words, is it better to stop thinking about "how to get to 'it' " and just get on with life? In any field, we don't try to attain a specific goal, because - then what? Artists don't try to reach a level, they just make more art. So I would say, is it more helpful to not talk about enlightenment and talk instead about simply becoming more aware? My prompt for this question comes from what I read (long ago) about how people asked the Buddha after his enlightenment something like: "What are you? Are you an angel? Are you a devil? What?" and he said "I am awake." So, his answer was about a condition of being, not an endpoint. Like how a rainbow is an arrangement of circumstances, not a thing that you can touch. This is not coming out right... I think that the word "enlightenment" focuses on a rainbow - something that does not exist. Talking about it prolongs ignorance, perhaps? Is this addressed specifically in the Buddhist literature? Thank you.

I have been practicing two different meditations over the years, one is Anapanasati, i.e. mindfulness of breath as I learned from S.N.Goenka, and the other is Zazen or Shikantaza i.e. just sitting, doing nothing, as I learned at a Zen school. My trouble is, when I set to do breath awareness, then the mind gets triggered and I easily get lost in thoughts. It's difficult for me to be 'here and now' with the breath. On the other hand, with Shikantaza, my practice is really good. I can sit for longer periods without any thought in silence. But the problem is I did not read anywhere if we can attain to Jhanas or any other state, doing Shikantaza. As against this, I have read about gradual progression towards Jhana doing the Anapanasati. So, I want to know, if Jhana is possible through Shikantaza and if not, is there any other type of progression?

*I SUGGEST & REQUEST THAT YOU READ DN 10 (LINKED) BEFORE READING AND/OR ANSWERING THIS POST.* After contemplating DN 10 , several questions have arisen in me pertaining to the clarification of the sutta and the meditation practice. They are the following: 1. **When Venerable Ānanda talks about guarding the sense doors and not getting "caught up in the features and details" of sensual experience (the quote below), how does that translate into a meditation practice (in other words, what would one specifically do to do that in meditation)?** > ... > > “And how, student, does a mendicant guard the sense doors? When a mendicant sees a sight with their eyes, they don’t get caught up in the features and details. If the faculty of sight were left unrestrained, bad unskillful qualities of desire and aversion would become overwhelming. For this reason, they practice restraint, protecting the faculty of sight, and achieving its restraint. When they hear a sound with their ears … When they smell an odor with their nose … When they taste a flavor with their tongue … When they feel a touch with their body … When they know a thought with their mind, they don’t get caught up in the features and details. If the faculty of mind were left unrestrained, bad unskillful qualities of desire and aversion would become overwhelming. For this reason, they practice restraint, protecting the faculty of mind, and achieving its restraint. When they have this noble sense restraint, they experience an unsullied bliss inside themselves. That’s how a mendicant guards the sense doors." > > ... > > (DN 10 ) 2) **When reading the Satipatthana Sutta , I understand it says to "focus" or "discern" specific phrases and teachings and so too here in a way when Venerable Ānanda talks about having mindfulness and situational awareness (the quote below), but how does that translate into a meditation practice (in other words, what would one specifically do to do that in meditation)?** > ... > > "And how does a mendicant have mindfulness and situational awareness? It’s when a mendicant acts with situational awareness when going out and coming back; when looking ahead and aside; when bending and extending the limbs; when bearing the outer robe, bowl and robes; when eating, drinking, chewing, and tasting; when urinating and defecating; when walking, standing, sitting, sleeping, waking, speaking, and keeping silent. That’s how a mendicant has mindfulness and situational awareness." > > ... > > (DN 10 ) 3. **Would guarding the sense doors and being mindful and situationally aware lead to the hindrances being given up as well as entering the jhanas per DN 10 ?** 4. **When Venerable Ānanda speaks in DN 10 about extending and projecting the mind toward knowledge and vision, the creation of a mind-made body, psychic power, clairaudience, comprehending the minds of others, recollection of past lives, knowledge of the death and rebirth of sentient beings, and knowledge of the ending of defilements, are these supposed to be standard experiences and potential powers that one should only be aware of in meditation when Venerable Ānanda says to extend and project the mind towards them, or is one supposed to do something other than only being aware of them?** 5. **Would the "spectrum of immersion" per DN 10 refer to the meditative methods to achieve samatha (tranquility), would the "spectrum of wisdom" per DN 10 refer to the meditative methods to achieve vipassana (wisdom), and in that, does DN 10 express that both methods are suppose to be used in partnership to attain freedom from suffering (for reference of samatha and vipassana: AN 2.30 )?** *PLEASE REFERENCE THE TIPITAKA OR SOURCES STRICTLY USING THE TIPITAKA IN YOUR ANSWERS.* -Apannaka

As we know, in soto-shu we don't count nor observe the breath during zazen. I would like people who have a long experience with zazen meditation to explain if they consider that counting and observing the breath was helpful to progress in their meditation practice or not. Should a beginner start with counting breathing rather then go straight into shikantaza practice ?