My Christian wife is dying and the doctor has prescribed morphine and tranquilizers. She is losing her mind and the drugs may be contributing to that. I don't want her to suffer but I also don't want her mind to be in a bad state for rebirth. Is there any Buddhist scripture or comentary that could give guidance in this situation?

There's not much background to this question. Did the Buddha ever receive a teaching after his enlightenment; a teaching that he accepted and made use of, either his own or another - or perhaps a teaching from another being other than a human. Please provide sutta references. I'm asking because of this term commonly found near or at the end of suttas: *'the job has been done, there is nothing more for this world'* Another way to put it: can one be independent of the teachings? If not, what situations would call forth the remembering and practising of the teachings for an enlightened mind? Thanks **ADDITIONAL EDIT:** In my quest to answer this question I had found a sutta in which the Buddha had asked Venerable Mahacunda to give him a teaching on the enlightenment factors. You can read it here. Also, the second part of the question is answered here which references this sutta here.

How could one know that Nibbana is the cessation of consciousness if there is no consciousness? I can't see how one could know.

Being married, I have of late been coming across the dilemma of whether to have a child or not and if yes, if a biological child or not (which by itself may be another question which I may ask separately). So, when I ponder on the subject, I get the thought if it may be more meaningful to adopt an orphaned child instead of having a biological child. But again, although at the surface adoption appears to be an altruistic and more meaningful thought, if I think deeper, I really wonder if the desires as a result of which I would want to have a biological child (and which I want to avoid) are pretty much the same as those which want me to adopt one. Additionally, adopting a child has its own administrative and emotional complications, which may result in unhappy experiences and which may therefore defeat the entire purpose. So, I thought it may help me build a perspective on the subject, if I come to know what is the opinion on child adoption with regard to the Buddha's teachings. So, my questions are:- 1. Is there any mention of the merits/ demrits of adoption in the Tipitika or any other Buddhist writings? 2. Is there any incident from during the life of the Buddha in which child adoption was involved? 3. Would it help to strengthen one's ethics by adopting a child? 4. How can we compare or weigh the merits of dana to several orphan children vs adopting and nurturing one?

*"In the seen will be merely what is seen”* I’ve red this http://theeyeofdhamma.blogspot.com/2013/10/ditte-ditta-mattan-bhavissathi.html?m=1 I’m still not sure how I should apply & practice this in real life? For an example, if I see some delicious food, instantly, craving naturally occurs and think “that looks yum”. After that, with a tiny force, I think that, this is how my mind is trying to objectify the feeling and remind the example given on above post: *“An example given is the image (or shadow) falling on water when one looks into a pond. We cannot interact with this image by touching or smelling and it appears when we look into the water and disappears when we move away. If we try to touch it we can feel the water but not the image.”* I’m really confused how to put this in daily life. Really appreciate if anyone could guide me..

I am meditating now regularly for last 4 months. I always sit in a cross legged position with my head slightly bent down. I started developing a neck pain for last 10 days and it distubs me a lot. I couldn't do a chin up position because if i do it then my forehead part feels heavy after meditation. I tried various positions like chin slightly tucked in, it still puts me under pain. Everything was good but this neck pain now disturbs my meditation. Does anyone experienced it ? Any suggestions for me to come out of it.

'Contentment' means being at ease with what you have and not desiring more. But, of course, if I am content with my present situation I will not strive towards Nirvana, and if I am not content and desire for more I invite suffering. **Is 'contentment' described in any of the Buddhist scriptures? How to make use of it in the path towards Nirvana?**

Without any thought automatically start the walking and it's last for 15 minutes. How it's related to meditation.

Hi I'm just seeking advice if it is possible to identify a Lama incarnation, whom to speak to etc.

I recall, years ago, reading about Buddhist treatises on rebirth, composed some long time after the Buddhas death. It was a very brief reference of Johannes Bronkhorst's, probably in a footnote. I've searched various of his big works looking for it, and numerous papers. If anyone happens across a likely candidate, would you please let me know? It seemed to indicate there was a period in which one faction was trying to convince another that the Buddha taught rebirth. I'm interested in learning anything I can about how far back the debate that lives on today goes. Thanks for any and all help.

What did the Buddha mean in AN 5.38. when he said: > “Mendicants, a faithful gentleman gets five benefits. What five? > The good persons in the world show compassion first to the faithful, not so much to the unfaithful. They first approach the > faithful, not so much the unfaithful. They first receive alms from > the faithful, not so much the unfaithful. They first teach Dhamma > to the faithful, not so much the unfaithful. **When their body breaks > up, after death, the faithful are reborn in a good place, a heavenly > realm.** A faithful gentleman gets these five benefits. Emphasis mine. I am trying to discern what this means with reference to the answers for the word upapajjati in this question which discussed the meaning of the word which is being translated here. Also, what did the Buddha mean when referring to the "break up of the body, after death" and has that been correctly translated?

I completely understand the second noble truth which says > origin of dukkha, which arises or "comes together" with taṇhā > ("craving, desire or attachment") in plain English, > Desire is the cause of Sorrow. But if one has not renounced and not living as a monk one has needs to maintain the Samsaric existence. As a layperson, you need money for thousands of things, pay the bills, get the wood for the fire to cook, pay for children's education, etc etc. Now I understand that core desire like, "I want more money" will lead to suffering, but you need an intention to become prosperous as time passes, i.e. grow in the samsaric world along with a spiritual goal towards Nirvana. How can one grow without harboring desires? I understand that, the thoughts like, "I want a Ferrari" is a blatant desire, but I do want a decent car to drive few miles to my work. How is this basic necessity dealt with without desiring? How is this situation dealt with in the bounds of Dhamma? I am not talking about attachments to already possessed things, but working towards a prosperous living. After all, Nirvana or not, nobody wants to live in adversity.

If a person have a small Buddha statue in their room and they (sorry) masturbated in that room, is it considered sexual misconduct? Sorry if this question is unappropiate.

In the [Kosala Sutta (AN 10.29)](https://suttacentral.net/en/an10.29) it quotes the following: > "As far, bhikkhus, as this thousandfold world system extends, Mahābrahmā there ranks as the foremost." So basically as far as the sun and the mood illuminates the light a world system is there. 4 hells, human world , 6 humans and so forth. And thousand of this is called a thousandfold world system. So according to the above quote, does this mean that there is only one Maha Brahma to all these thousand world systems? Or are there 1000 Maha Brahmas in this thousand world system? Or is it just 1?

Did Nagarjuna aspire to Buddhahood in a way that he wouldn't be a 'ariyasavaka' type of disciple who attains awakening to the truth during a Buddha's sasana?

As far as I've heard, Mahayana Buddhists aspire to become Buddhas themselves in the future or want to become followers of a future Buddha like Buddha Maitreya. So, are Mahayana Buddhists discouraged from attaining enlightenment within the Gautama Buddha Sasana ? If yes, wouldn't that be limiting the scope of enlightenment compared to Theravada Buddhism? Wouldn't that also make the taking refuge in the Triple gem meaningless, as they do not want to follow the teachings of the Gautama Buddha to attain enlightenment.? If the answer to the first question is 'no', any links to Mahayana specific texts which encourage one to attain Nibbana within this Sasana would be appreciated.

One of the suttas where the Buddha is critical of a monk as not living the holy life the right way and at the same time by not disrobing missing out on the pleasures of the householder's life. In effect the meaning was: missing out / depriving himself of both opportunities - not only the higher one but the lower one as well. ---------- **Update** Found the sutta, posted own answer. Thanks ruben2020 for sharing the dhammapada suggestion, and Yeshe for the formatting of my own answer.

I had questions regarding the laity, monastic relationship. > 1) How exactly (the step by step or explained) does the process work > in which the monastics rely solely on the laity? > > 2) How do monks publish works (such as books) and not deal with the > money involved in their lives? Metta!

I have heard Ajahn Brahm say in a talk, if I recall, that modern science or psychology has demonstrated anatta in some way. It seems unnecessary to invoke science to validate any of Buddhism, but until one can see no self from direct experience, looking at science may be beneficial for the purpose of gaining an intellectual understanding. Is there any useful research or writing is there that shows anatta from the perspective of modern psychology or neuroscience? I'd think something like this would be produced by the Mind & Life Institute. All I could find is this blurb crediting Evan Thompson. It doesn't say much.

I read the following on the internet: > The reason that Secular Buddhists (who do not admit the conventional > existence of rebirth) do not commit suicide is because they believe in > the true existence of the self in this very life. Are there any Buddhist scriptures or teachings that say belief in true existence of the self prevents suicide?