> "There are these five inhabitants of the states of deprivation, inhabitants of hell, who are in agony & incurable. Which five? One who has killed his/her mother, one who has killed his/her father, one who has killed an arahant, one who — with a corrupted mind — has caused the blood of a Tathagata to flow, and one who has caused a split in the Sangha. These are the five inhabitants of the states of deprivation, inhabitants of hell, who are in agony & incurable." > >AN 5.129 If someone tries to kill an arahant, Buddha or their parents but they don’t get hurt even a little bit, do you still go to hell for “attempting” to kill them? Or is it only incurable if you have succeeded in killing them?

I learned many meaning of vitaka.. Like initial thought, or thought seed or directing mind toward object.. Whereas vicara is continuity of thinking about that object. Similarly nimitta is arising of some mental sign/clue etc. Like I remember today's event, or I heard something etc. There is sanna also in conjunction with nimitta... I want to know whether vitaka and nimitta same or different? If different I want to know practical understanding of the difference between them ?

Vaṇṇā-[maccharia](http://accesstoinsight.eu/en/dictionary/macchariya) , stinginess in regard to one's honor, reputation, not't letting make others use it, envy to lose it, is one of the five kinds of maccharia, based on ingratitude, wrong view, and a quality not only absent in all Noble Once, but also a [hindrance to attain whatever Jhana, path or fruit](http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.254.than_en.html). What are practices to train to learn not being stingy in regard of ones honour, beauty, sublimity? What and where to give into? What traditional practice is done by faithful followers in that regard? ___ *A/the realated topic with given space for discussion and possible answer can be found [here](http://sangham.net/index.php/topic,9322.msg19061.html#msg19061).* *(note that this question is not given for trade, stacks, exchange or entertainment, but for ones work trough maccharia to escape the wheel here and liberation)*

Is it called akusala garuka kamma only if the action is completed? For example, Angulimala once tried to harm The Buddha (but did not succeed), and Nandopananda once tried to harm Moggallana Thera (also did not succeed). Their actions are not considered akusala garuka kamma because they did not succeed?

If remembering correctly I once heard a Dhamma talk about the Buddha finding solace in/with the investigation of energy while (at least once) experiencing physical pain. What's the sutta reference(s) for this please?

A person told me that the Buddha coined certain words as part of his teachings. I don't remember which words, but perhaps "samadhi" was one of them. Is there any evidence the Buddha invented new words? If so, do we know which ones?

Given the wide variety of possible solutions from keyboard firmware to operating system specific solutions, I'd like to leave the question wide open in order to discover which solutions are actually most commonly used by people who have this need in 2021. I am personally most interested in solutions that work for the macOS and Linux operating systems. Although iOS and Android solutions are also of interest to me.

This is the version I am referring to: > Thus shall ye think of this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream; A flash of lightning in a summer cloud; A flickering > lamp, a phantom, and a dream.

I'm searching for this Jataka where a monk is brought by The Buddha to heaven, and then to hell, where the monk sees a vacant place(?) in hell and asks a hell officer about it. The hell officer answered that he was waiting for a heaven inhabitants who will reborn in hell. Hearing that, he monk was shocked and trained harder to be free from the samsara. Maybe anyone here knows about that Jataka? Thank you

When I first started meditating, the body scan phase confused me. For a long time, I imagined the shape of a body in front of me in the distance, and scanned down through it. More recently I’ve realised that you get much more out of it by scanning through the feeling of my own body “in place” — but I still sometimes get muddled about which perspective I am “seeing” or “experiencing” parts of the body *from*. I’ve had the same challenge with the visualisation of the white pinprick at the solar plexus. Sometimes I wonder whether I should be looking “down” from my eyes, through my neck and into my chest… or if my “eyes” should themselves move to the chest … or… something else? At the moment I am practicing with the visualisation of the red pearl / red lotus at the throat chakra, as recommended in the book *Dream Yoga* by Andrew Holocek. The same puzzle keeps coming up! Where should this shape be relative to my mind’s eye? What angle relative to my spine in three dimensions should it be in, where should the “camera” of my mind be in relation to it, and what should the resulting image actually look like? How should the feelings of my body relate spatially to this shape? Here’s another example, a simple description of a visualisation from this blog entry that puzzles me: > Picture the energy of your root chakra as a ball of ruby light centered on the base of your spine. With each breath, see this ball becoming larger. In this example, should I be “seeing” my body in front of me, like watching a mirror, so that I can look at the base of my spine? Or should I be feeling the base of “my” spine where I know it to be? In which case, “where” is the “ruby light”? My eyes can’t see the base of my spine when they are looking roughly ahead with eyelids closed. I feel *very* confused, especially as I have managed to feel very “in” the breath and body at this point in my practice, but visualisation always humbles me. I’d welcome any guidance about this, including simple steps and theoretical underpinnings. Am I somehow too attached to the position and perspective of the eyes in my head and, if so, how would you loosen that and what replaces it? Is this a known challenge of body visualisation? Nobody seems to talk about “where” in experience a visualisation should emerge. It’s a bit disheartening.

In the Simsapa Sutta the Buddha said; > "In the same way, monks, those things that I have known with direct > knowledge but have not taught are far more numerous [than what I have > taught]. I would take the meaning that there were many things that the Buddha did not talk about because they were not important for leading the holy life towards Nirvana. But then in the Maha-Parinabbana Sutta , the Buddha says; > ...I have preached the truth without making any distinction between > exoteric and esoteric doctrine: for in respect of the truths, Ānanda, > ***the Tathāgata has no such thing as the closed fist of a teacher, who keeps some things back***... I would take this to mean that the Buddha says that He has not kept anything untold or unsaid...that, he has said everything that there was to tell to the monks. Why is there a seeming contradiction in these two suttas. Did the Buddha told everything or not...or I am misunderstanding something?

Mappō (a.k.a mòfǎ, mạt pháp) is a term used by the majority of Mahayana Buddhism branches in East and Southeast Asia. It was mentioned in the Mahayana Mahaparinirvaṇa Sutra, signalling the declination of Buddhism and corruption of society as a whole. The sutra painted a grim picture of Buddhism's future, where monks violate the precepts and preach a perverted version of the Buddha's teaching. Most of the times where this concept is mentioned, it is to achieve political purposes, e.g to gain legitimacy by demonising other people or sects. This has happened since more than a thousand years ago, in ancient China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and is still going on. Personally, I found the concept and its details unhelpful since it gives practitioners (especially beginners) the feeling that the world is falling apart. I'd like know why such description is necessary for Buddhists to know, and what is the optimal way to address it?

As I see and learn there are typically two different positions of palms and hand that I see people meditating in. One is keeping the palms turned up and kept on knees like this picture; which is a classic yoga pose and the other way is to keep the palms in your lap with thumb tips touching each other, like this; the classic zen pose. When I meditate I keep on changing between these two, as I feel comfortable. The two poses yield different mindfulness for me. I think, most of the Buddhist meditate like the second pose, but the first one also yields better meditative awareness. I want to ask are there any instructions in the suttas about this. Is there a Buddhist pose and Non-Buddhist pose?

When your mind is wandering during Anapana, you may use "Hard Breath" (intentional breath). What is the Pali word for this technique? What is the Pali text explaining this "hard breath" technique? This is a major technique we are taught in a 10-day Vipassana course taught by S.N.Goenka. There are several rules to use this intentional breath but we are advised to minimize the number of intentional breaths if it's not necessary.

I remember hearing that on one, two, or maybe more occasions the Buddha attempted pretty much unsuccessfully to intervene in war or battle. Maybe one had to do with fighting over water rights. I also remember arrows being transmuted into flowers, but unsure if this is related.

In advaita vedanta, consciousness is the self. Consciousness has 2 modes: it can be pure consciousness, and it is described as "being aware of being aware" or the "I that I am knows that I am"; while the other mode of consciousness is consciousness entangled in objects, like feelings and thoughts. Is pure consciousness, or being aware of being aware, the same as what the Buddha called the "unconditioned"? Or is the unconditioned the cessation of consciousness, as Buddhism sees consciousness as impermanent and not self? They said if consciousness was not aware of itself, none of us would know that we are aware. I have this problem, my friend had the same, so we wanted to ask you if you could help us out.

Every Buddhism believe in Eternity or Samsara . So, how can I imagine of **Samsara**?. What is the starting of it ? Any suggestions would be really appreciated.

I saw an article on the Internet about the fact that Buddhism is compared to solipsism or nihilism. In particular, they talked about Japanese and Chinese Buddhism, since the teachings of Yogacara are present there. On this I want to ask questions about these schools. My questions: 1. Do the schools of Buddhism Soto, Rinzai, Jodo-shu, Jodo Shinshu, Nichiren, Shingon in Japan teach Buddhists, Buddhas and Bodhisattvas any varieties of solipsism and any varieties of nihilism? 2. Do the schools of Buddhism Chan, Pure Land in China teach Buddhists, Buddhas and Bodhisattvas any varieties of solipsism and any varieties of nihilism?

In his book "Tibetan Buddhism from the ground up", Alan Wallace describes a part of the (human) rebirth process as follows: >"In [this vision] one sees (...) [the parents-to-be] in the act of sexual intercourse (...) and the bardo being is lustfully drawn to this event. Moreover, Buddhism says, this lust is directed toward the parent of the opposite sex of that being which is about to be conceived." I have some questions about this: - Is this the usual Buddhist view? If yes: What's the original source? - Do I understand it correctly that "lustfully drawn to" means sexual attraction? - If heterosexual attraction is a fundamental part of the human rebirth, how is this process supposed to work for homo- or asexual people?

I read here that on the night before the dawn of Buddhas Nirvana, the Buddha made a resolve that; > ‘I shall sit under this tree and meditate upon my questions. And I > shall not move until I have my answers. Even if my skin rots and my > body decays, I shall not budge till I see the light,’ he decided. Does this resolve go against the middle path that there should not be extreme asceticism and indulgence? I mean if He was not going to get up until He attained enlightenment then wasn't it extreme of asceticism.