During insight meditation no hearing of sound aware and cittarupa disappears like a mirage during meditation seen as no thoughts. Feel like cessation of mind. Is it anicca?thoughts disappear and citta goes inside without control. What is the stage of insight meditation is that?

_I am looking for a public domain copy of the Tibetan book of the dead (in original Tibetan script, not a translation) online in text format (i.e. not a PDF). This lead me to the main question..._ My question is, I have seen the large volumes of the [Kangyur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangyur) and [Tengyur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tengyur) , but then independently there is this book [Bardo Thodol](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bardo_Thodol) , _The Tibetan Book of the Dead_. They say it is from [Nyingma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyingma) literature. Being a novice, I am trying to understand the relation between Nyingma and Kangyur/Tengyur. And thus how the Tibetan Book of the Dead fits in. Wondering if one could outline the relations between them.

Is there a difference between this two Pali expressions: *'janami passami'* and *'nana dassana'*?

Everybody is born under his own Karma. Indeed, while respecting the Dharma, we need to follow our own paths. Monks live an undisturbed life inside closed communities apart from samsaric suffering. And when they are ready, they try to enlight others under the Bodhisattva_vow If Sunyata is the ultimate reality, why hasn’t anyone achieved the ability to save others nowadays? UPDATED: How (and with all respect) the Dalai Lama and other monks can have reached the Enlightenment if he wasn't able to free in this life ALL human beings? They are not reborn KNOWING TO BE a Bodhisattva. They can maybe get near it with a hard work and faith, and so they cannot free others from bonds in this life. Furthermore, they can teach a path, which is of course important, but the basic logic of BEING a Bodhisattva contradicts this flow. How can Bodhisattvas enlighten others if they themselves are not fully enlightened? If they are enlightened, then they would not have been reborn in the first place. If they were reborn, then it means they are not fully enlightened and therefore still working towards it and at this time, cannot liberate others because they themselves are not liberated. And they cannot be liberated until ALL beings are liberated, due to the Bodhisattva Vow. That's the paradox of the Bodhisattva path. How can the paradox of the Bodhisattva path be resolved?

In one sutta a monk was teaching, that there's something that is behind our existence, that is permanent (opposite of non-self). Buddha asked for this explicitely, got confirmed, and corrected the view. Which sutta it is?

The question is complete, no additional explanation of the question is needed. I just need the suttas. For reference: > “And further, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the > infinitude of consciousness, (perceiving,) ‘There is nothing,’ > Sāriputta entered & remained in the **dimension of nothingness**. > Whatever qualities there are in the dimension of nothingness—the > perception of the dimension of nothingness, singleness of mind, > contact, feeling, perception, intention, consciousness, desire, > decision, persistence, mindfulness, equanimity, & attention—he > ferreted them out one after another. Known to him they arose, known to > him they became established, known to him they subsided. He discerned, > ‘So this is how these qualities, not having been, come into play. > Having been, they vanish.’ He remained unattracted & unrepelled with > regard to those qualities, independent, detached, released, > dissociated, with an awareness rid of barriers. He discerned that > ‘**There is a further escape**,’ and pursuing it, he confirmed that > ‘There is.’ > > “And further, with the complete transcending of the dimension of > nothingness, Sāriputta entered & remained in the **dimension of > neither perception nor non-perception**. He emerged mindfully from > that attainment. On emerging mindfully from that attainment, he > regarded the past qualities that had ceased & changed: ‘So this is how > these qualities, not having been, come into play. Having been, they > vanish.’ He remained unattracted & unrepelled with regard to those > qualities, independent, detached, released, dissociated, with an > awareness rid of barriers. He discerned that ‘**There is a further > escape**,’ and pursuing it, he confirmed that ‘There is.’ > > “And further, with the complete transcending of the dimension of > neither perception nor non-perception, Sāriputta entered & remained in > the **cessation of perception & feeling**. And when he saw with > discernment, his effluents were totally ended. He emerged mindfully > from that attainment. On emerging mindfully from that attainment, he > regarded the past qualities that had ceased & changed: ‘So this is how > these qualities, not having been, come into play. Having been, they > vanish.’ He remained unattracted & unrepelled with regard to those > qualities, independent, detached, released, dissociated, with an > awareness rid of barriers. He discerned that ‘**There is no further > escape**,’ and pursuing it, he confirmed that ‘There isn’t.’ > > > > [https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN111.html] > > > : https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN111.html > “And I have also taught the step-by-step cessation of fabrications. > When one has attained the first jhāna, speech has ceased. When one has > attained the second jhāna, directed thought & evaluation have ceased. > When one has attained the third jhāna, rapture has ceased. When one > has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breathing has ceased. When > one has attained the dimension of the infinitude of space, the > perception of forms has ceased. When one has attained the dimension of > the infinitude of consciousness, the perception of the dimension of > the infinitude of space has ceased. When one has attained the > dimension of nothingness, the perception of the dimension of the > infinitude of consciousness has ceased. When one has attained the > dimension of neither-perception nor non-perception, the perception of > the dimension of nothingness has ceased. When one has attained the > **cessation of perception & feeling**, perception & feeling have ceased. When a monk’s effluents have ended, passion has ceased, aversion has ceased, delusion has ceased. > > [https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN36_11.html] > > > : https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN36_11.html > “And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of stress: the > remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, > release, & **letting go of that very craving.** > > [https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN56_11.html] > Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance > comes the cessation of fabrications. From the cessation of > fabrications comes the cessation of consciousness. From the cessation > of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the > cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. > From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of > contact. From the cessation of contact comes the **cessation of > feeling**. From the cessation of feeling comes the **cessation of > craving**. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of > clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes > the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the > cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging-&-death, > sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the > cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering.” > > [https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN12_15.html] > Then there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of > the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, (perceiving,) ‘There > is nothing,’ enters & remains in the dimension of nothingness. That is > its transcending. But that, too, I tell you, isn’t enough. Abandon it, > I tell you. Transcend it, I tell you. And what is its transcending? > > “Then there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending > of the dimension of nothingness, enters & remains in the **dimension > of neither perception nor non-perception**. That is its transcending. > But that, too, I tell you, isn’t enough. **Abandon it**, I tell you. > Transcend it, I tell you. And what is its transcending? > > “There is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the > **dimension of neither perception nor non-perception**, enters & remains in the **cessation of perception & feeling**. That is its > transcending. > > “Thus, Udāyin, I speak even of the **abandoning** of the dimension of > neither perception nor non-perception. Do you see any fetter, large or > small, of whose abandoning I don’t speak?” > > “No, lord.” > > That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Ven. Udāyin delighted in > the Blessed One’s words. > > [https://www.dharmatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN66.html] > > > : https://www.dharmatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN66.html > Then there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of > the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, (perceiving,) ‘There > is nothing,’ enters & remains in the **dimension of nothingness**. If, > as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing > with the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, **that is an > affliction for him**.… > > “Then there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending > of the dimension of nothingness, enters & remains in the **dimension > of neither perception nor non-perception**. If, as he remains there, > he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with the dimension > of nothingness, **that is an affliction for him**. Now, the Blessed > One has said that whatever is an affliction is stress. So by this line > of reasoning it may be known how unbinding is pleasant. > > “Then there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending > of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters & > remains in the **cessation of perception & feeling**. And as he sees > (that) with discernment, effluents are completely ended. So by this > line of reasoning it may be known how unbinding is pleasant.” > > [https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN9_34.html] > > > : https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN9_34.html > “Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of > the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is > **feeling**. What one feels, one **perceives** [labels in the mind]. > > [https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN18.html] > > > > > : https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN18.html May all beings be happy and liberated ❤️❤️ Metta 🙏🙏

Yesterday, I was eating some vegetable sausages and I noticed that there was just a set of teeth rhythmically opening and closing like a lonely metronome with no meaningful sensory instrumentals. It reminded me of one those animations in a Pink Floyd video where unidentified mechanical machinery rocks back and forth which then took me on various excursions through the woeful realms. Afterwards, the thought occurred to me although with some slight linguistic embellishments here: "isn't it marvelous, isn't it astounding, isn't it stupendous that, amongst the processed and compressed remnants of soy beans shaped into a sausage, one can be brought to the very edges of the cosmos and back again but not actually traverse one single cubic meter of space." Even going down to the shops in the car to purchase various types of cruciferous vegetables, movement is sometimes stillness. In the Diamond Sutra, which I very carefully studied for four years, (I don't mean 'study' in the conventional or academic sense) the Buddha eludes to this by saying, "Subhuti, if any person were to say that the Buddha is now coming or going, or sitting up or lying down, they would not have understood the principle I have been teaching. Why? Because while the expression ‘Buddha’ means ‘he who has thus come, thus gone,’ the true Buddha is never coming from anywhere or going anywhere. The name ‘Buddha’ is merely an expression, a figure of speech.” At this juncture and with the notion and fallacy of time and space falling away, intention and striving seem somewhat superfluous. Striving perhaps takes a new manifestation; one that shimmers ever so slightly rather than presenting as various forms of vigour. In fact, in the Buddhist sense, striving seems counter-intuitive to its original dictionary definition and certainly debunks the overly enhanced ideas derived from the noise that motivates a materialistic-ridden society. The strange thing about the latter is that there is something ever so right about mundane human striving even in the face of its ensuing sufferings; that this rightness is the product of its own realising tendancies but through various infantile spasms - not infantile in the pejorative sense, but an infancy that is embodied by innocence and love. This is too subtle for me to embrace just now but I see it teetering on the very edges of my awareness prancing alongside some odd luminosity and unmitigated terror. In the above context what is the meaning of striving to awaken? Does the initial intention behind striving suggest a network of flimsy ideas indoctrinated by ones chosen context as a form of pacifying the mind from worldly distractions and that these spirituality fabricated artefacts must be later seen to be a hindrance? Currently, my intention seems to be informed by the way my mind has been previously exposed to the practice which is to say: raw personal experience, but I question the flickering baubles we call spirituality, Buddhism, Theravada, Zen, Mahayana. Is this suitable? NOTE: I understand it might sound like I'm all over the place but please be assured that this is not the case. I would rather not have a flurry of misdirected aims in this manner. The theme here is striving and intention and how they might be perceived - in the fullest range of perception - by different people and their traditions. Thanks.

In the game Cyberpunk 2077, you can encounter a character labelled only as "Zen Master", who offers your player character the opportunity to engage in meditations with him. However, the content of the meditations he offers doesn't seem to be based off of actual Buddhism from my understanding of it, though I am not a Buddhist or an expert on Buddhist philosophy or practice. Rather, it seems much more like Western New Age philosophy. Here's a video someone made compiling the player's interactions with him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=In8etjG6LMQ Does this character present an accurate representation of Buddhist philosophy and/or practice (especially Zen Buddhism, given his name), or is the portrayal as bad as I think it might be? If it is bad, is it to the point of being offensive?

The suttas about the 32 marks of a great man, such as MN 91, appear to describe the Buddha used psychic power towards Brahmins however they do not appear to say the Brahmin layperson was cognizant of the fact the Buddha used psychic power. For example: >So the Buddha used his psychic power to will that Uttara would see his retracted private parts. > >Then Uttara thought, “The ascetic Gotama possesses the thirty-two marks. Why don’t I follow him and observe his deportment?” > >MN 91 In SN 41.4, a layperson discovers a monk has psychic powers. The monk later performs a demonstration of psychic power to the layperson but then, as a result, decides to leave that locality of the layperson that became enamored by his psychic powers. In MN 37, Moggallāna performs an act of psychic power to Sakka the Ruler of the Gods but it is not clear whether Sakka can be classified as a "layperson", as follows: > Then Moggallāna used his psychic power to make the Palace of Victory > shake and rock and tremble with his big toe. Then Sakka, Vessavaṇa, > and the Gods of the Thirty-Three, their minds full of wonder and > amazement, thought, “It’s incredible, it’s amazing! The ascetic has > such power and might that he makes the god’s home shake and rock and > tremble with his big toe!” Please list any other Pali suttas that describe the Buddha & monks demonstrating psychic powers to laypeople. Thank you.

Can buddha attain Nibbana without Devadatta's throwing a rock and hurting Buddha's foot? I read somewhere that buddha redeem his past karma by getting hit from that stone hence my question I am sorry for my bad english Metta 🙏🙏 UPDATED: But there were present karmas that even buddha needs to undergo do you assert that the enlighten one don't need to undergo present karma at all?

I’ve learned that all things are impermanence. This is causing depression and anxiety in my life. I’m sad and scared that my relationships will one day come to an end. The fact that all things are impermanence just make me sad. How do I feel better?

How are/would newly discovered Suttas (and Sutras) be dealt with, specifically be they of content contradicting -- or even just differing slightly from -- previous material and/or for totally new, original material discovered? Can example(s) be given on how whatever is done, or not done, happens -- especially any instances kept from the public.

After long time and back to BSE. My question is; according to science all the existence are sequenced as matter made of alchemy (chemistry) , molecules , atoms, sub particles then energy. I think base of science is depend on this sequencing and it is considered as a reality. However science possesses its own controversies as unable to provide proper explanations as result of limitations of five senses and their extensions.(e.g...eye and hi tech microscopes) i think science stuck at "energy" in sequencing the subtle level of existence. but it is so clear what have found up this level of scientific finding.science came across massive breakthroughs such as finding of atom, artificial memory, artificial intelligence , MRI etc...and science based on proofs. at the subtle level science manipulate energy at best level becomes it can do everything as "energy is everything" including our mind. Think I've made concise explanation of what science can do if i am not mistaken. Now we turn towards the Buddhism as a great philosophy. Can Buddhism provide concrete explanations on above questions? what is the absolute, final, subtle level of existence? how is energy defined in Buddhism? Is there anything beyond energy? If there are, what is the proof?

How do we as Buddhists deal with a world that creates and embraces illusions and fabrications? For example, government is an idea and a fabrication, it is not a person or a thing, it just a group of individuals. A lot of people believe in this idea and accept it as something real; they believe it so much they follow without thinking. Next, covid. WOW! talk about following non-truth. This something that has never been proven to have been isolated, therefore it does not exist, yet people follow the the other illusion's advice (government). Why do people follow an illusion of an illusion? As a Buddhist who has learned to strip away many of these illusions, I still find it difficult to fathom. Particularly when others illusions start to directly affect me and my safety. Even other Buddhists have bought into this covid illusion, why? How do we stay on the path, when our actions of not following these illusions makes a target, by not wearing masks, taking vaccines and not following government illusions?

My field of perception is very wide. It often becomes so wide that it loops back onto itself in some odd kaleidoscopic fashion. This has rendered my previous methods of concentration unhelpful. Previously concentration was very deliberate and contrived and my surroundings would phase off into obscurity in favour of a pin-point focus on my chosen object. It opened up some interesting doors. The application of attention on a particular event such as breathing is very different. It is different because it is inclusive of all other phenomena, like the universe is doing the concentration from which no personal claims can be made. I find this to be a distraction but there is a part of me that wants to embrace this inclusiveness. This leaves me with some dissonance between the previous method - in particular my attachment to the results incurred from that method. Moreover, when I try to apply myself in the previous way, I suffer - I guess I've just answered my own question in some ways. Is this change in concentration to be expected? Can you share any resources from either Theravada, Mahayana or Zen that would help me further my understanding of this matter? Best wishes

I have been recently experiencing tremendous fear, but as I look through my eyes at the world and the objects it contains, the fear does not accord with what I see. The world itself is beautiful but people's minds seem tarnished by a neurosis. They seem to define themselves by this very neurosis. I notice all the little behavioural patterns they play and how they are trapped by them. I find this very fearful, and it affects my ability to integrate with people. Furthermore, I often find myself 'playing along' but knowing that I'm playing along. This seems disingenuous and somewhat incongruent. I have avoided television for 4 years because of this falsity, but it is becoming very prominent just now. Only the other day I caught a few seconds of a TV program where they were discussing Covid-19 death rates like it was some kind of sporting event. I find humans very peculiar. At the level of mind I am able to see the danger present in the world and act accordingly but this comes from a natural inclination instead of from a fear-based story. This doesn't stop me feeling fear for that mode of being we call samsara. It is possible - or highly likely - that this fear could be my own samsaric turmoil looking to find a footing in the world as someone who is fearful of others and that its real plight lies in keeping the wheel turning. My question is, from a Mahayana perspective, how can I come to love the samsara that I see in others? I'm happy to welcome answers from other traditions. Be well.

According to buddhism , does the enlightenment have a continuum from an initial momentum or can have also regressions? I suppose if a specific state of mind has been acquired from innumerable causes it can’t return back, can just evolve toward a vector even if we force ourself in a condition of ignorance, so the bodhisattvic principle.

As asked in the question, what are the characteristics by which a thing is classified as 'living being' or 'non-living' ? How is a lifeform defined in Buddhism, I mean, like how humans consider themselves as living beings due to various facts such as: their experience in this world due to consciousness, their actions (kamma), etc. If lifeform is defined as something that has consciousness and capable of producing kamma, what things are concious? Is a plant a living being/conscious? Is a **stone** living being/conscious? Is the universe conscious? Is everything a lifeform in some way? Is rebirth possible only as a lifeform? (I mean, by rebirth, just a transfer of consciousness/experience subject to different conditions. Please correct me if I'm wrong) Can our next rebirth be as a stone/whatever, other than the 5 predefined possibilities (human, god, ghost, animal, hell) in Buddhism? I'd be glad if all the questions are addressed :)

Receiving alms is definitely part of the monastic life. Is begging for alms acceptable for lay persons? Is begging for alms considered Right Livelihood for lay persons? Is begging for alms considered skillful for lay persons, compared to earning their livelihood in accordance with the five precepts, principles of Right Livelihood and teachings of the Pali Canon (or other scriptures)? Or is it considered laziness?

What are the proper relax / Sleep practices for a practitioner of meditation methods? As to Buddhist point of view what is sleep and how to cope with it?