In Buddhism's Kshanabhangavada,a Vijnana perishes fully,before its subsequent Vijnana Arises.so how can it condition it?Buddhism says that a Vijnana need not be permanent to store karma or samskaras because one Vijnana skandha simply conditions another Vijnana skandha.how is this possible if there is a interval between them ?

I heard it was one of the monk rules. What sutta says monks can’t show their powers to lay people? The Buddha showed his psychic powers to many lay people so why can’t monks?

> You see, there is only one constant, one universal, it is the only > real truth: causality. Action. Reaction. Cause and effect. (...) Choice is an illusion, created between those with power, and those without. (...) Beneath our poised appearance, the truth is we are completely out of control. Causality. There is no escape from it, we are forever slaves to it. > > -- The Merovingian, The Matrix Reloaded I've read/listened somewhere that the illusion of control and choice is a source of suffering. Does the Buddhist see it in a unyielding manner as the Merovingian? Does different groups of Buddhism view this point differently? **EDIT:** Please complement your answers. Beyond the views on causality (deterministic or stochastic perception) how these views relate to suffering? Is there relation between suffering and how someone perceives choice? The misunderstanding of causality and control can produce suffering?

Strong headache dissolved with little time of meditation. Previous experience was differ from this,when this type of headache experienced it wasn't dissolved by practiced meditation. And happiness slowly invading while headache dissolving. Insight came it as anatta. Is it true anatta?

How does the problem of racism relate to Buddha-Dharma? Can Buddhism teach us something about racism? Is there something in the teachings or texts addressing the topic, directly or indirectly?

this is the situation: a children is born from fornication years ago when the couple were young, years passed the guy married. the women gave the child for adoption. Now the women brings up the child (*who is an adult now*) to the guy who is happily married. What does the Buddhist texts or teachings say about the illegitimate children born from fornication?, Is there anything that mentions this?

I am trying to understand the meaning of the verse below: Verse 30 from Dhammapada . > *Appamadena maghava > devanam setthatam gato > appamadam pasamanti > pamado garahito sada.* > "By Heedfulness did Indra become the overlord of the gods. Heedfulness > is ever praised, and heedlessness ever despised." - Acharya > Buddharakkhita's translation of Dhammapada 30 . In above verse the word "*maghava*" is a Vedic word which means Lord Indra of Vedic times. During "Vedic Brahmanism", Lord Indra is superior of all gods. Does this verse means that Buddha accepted the existence of Gods? Also the verse mentions that because of *appamada*, Indra become the overlord. Does it mean Lord Indra has the insight of Nibbana ? Appreciate your answer.

The second fetter to break when one becomes a stream entrant is given as 'Clinging to rites and rituals'. I've always found that one a little puzzling. How do you know if you are clinging to a ritual? What would be the signs of it? Does the fetter apply exclusively to Buddhist rituals or does it apply to the little rituals we all indulge in as we navigate our way through daily life? I think I'm after someone to help unpack this one a little bit.

In Buddhism I have often heard the idea that there is nothing wrong with what you are feeling, thinking and sensing, it is only our relation to those things that define/judge them to be bad. Well this has me thinking. If there is such a thing as a "wrong relation" to our thoughts, that relation is itself a thought, which would mean that suddenly there is "something wrong" with our thoughts. So to me this is an apparent contradiction. Either there is something wrong with your thoughts that can be fixed by sitting, or there is not. If there is nothing wrong with your thoughts, feelings, senses, then why sit at all? If there IS something wrong with your thoughts or your relation to your thoughts, that seems to go against the whole non-judgemental awareness idea. In other words, in meditation we say that we are not trying to achieve anything and get anywhere outside the current moment. But getting to that state of mind DOES take effort and training. It IS trying to achieve something. It is moving towards something. It is applying effort in some direction. I can't seem to reconsile these two thoughts. It has been bugging me for a while now, I hope you all can help. Cheers!

I'm looking for something similar to this little book, [The Basic Method of Meditation](https://bswa.org/bswp/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/ajahn-brahm_the-basic-method-of-meditation.pdf) (10~20 pages) from Ajahn Brahm. Or something like this -- [Meditation: What is taught and practised in Pa-Auk.](https://www.paaukforestmonastery.org/meditation) Personally, I would need it to be Theravada and preferably be on the gentle side (unlike Brahm and Pa Auk which are pretty strict). But mainly what the title says: an outline of the practices going from beginner to jhana or streamentry.

This is a question solely addressed to those practitioners who state that any reference to 'gods' in the buddhist suttas/sutras is some kind of metaphor for something other than the kind of gods of other religions (i.e. gods that exist independently of the belief in them, although subject to conditionality). It does not matter the tradition the user may be following. **In your understanding, what does "god" mean?** **In what other words could "a god" be explained?** **What processes or phenomena are they trying to convey?** I'd also appreciate if you quote any canonical source, discourse or teaching of other masters that could support any claim made. Thanks in advance for your time and effort.

Is it essential to go to SN Goenka centre for 10 days to learn *Vipassana*? Or is it fine to learn *Vipassana* online?

In Mahayana literature,it is said that a Buddha has no sense perception and thus no consciousness.how can he interact with the world and create pure lands then?

> Following his enlightenment, the Buddha was said to have possessed and > discussed several supranormal powers attainable through meditation. > Such abilities include walking on water, walking through walls, > becoming invisible, levitation, and making copies of himself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Gautama_Buddha Just a doubt how could the abilities above is possible? Any details or proof on it especially walking through walls or becoming invisible. Sound like a magic?

Often around 2:00 p.m. after eating, my body falls tired. So I have to stop studying. I am myself a long term meditator, but I rarely meditate when I am tired. Is meditation a good substitute for sleep? In other words, around 2:00 p.m., if I am going to meditate mindfully for an hour instead of sleeping, will this meditation be able to replace sleep?

There are more and more horror movie during pandemic and tension moment. Hong Kong is one of the example before riots recently. Pretty much of productions of horror or ghost movie produced because the audience just like to watch especially they are in horror state as when there is a demand, then it will have the supply. Source - Protest in 2019 HK Below are some reasons why some people enjoy and what happens when watching a scary movie from Psychology view: > Horror entertainment can trigger the fight-or-flight response, which comes with a boost in adrenaline, endorphins, and dopamine. The brain can then process surroundings and conclude that the experience is not a genuine threat. Below are some causes and effects of watching a scary movie: > Excitation transfer: This theory states that people who experience an emotional response to horror also experience more enjoyment when threats are resolved. > Individual empathy: People who are less empathetic enjoy horror films more, according to Professor Ron Tamborini. He suggests that “viewers with high levels of empathy should dislike horror films because they react negatively to the suffering of others.” > Sensation-seeking: People who watch horror movies may want to stimulate sensory reactions. Studies indicate these viewers may be more aggressive than other people. **Source of Reference** - Concordia University **Ques** Ghost or horror stories/videos are appropriate from Buddhism view? As people like to watch now during pandemic to have temporary relief and feel good? Even some Buddhism stories itself talks about Ghost realms but it will give a bring back positive message. Post note - one or 2 horror must watch in a decade should fine like train to Busan right? but not during pandemic and I know I am far from enlightenment too. 

I read the following on the internet: > According to my present understanding of Dhamma, nobody will be able > to shake my faith. Can a puthujjana (unenlightened commoner still immersed in self instinct) have unshakable faith in the Buddha-Dhamma? What happens if a puthujjana does a meditation retreat and freaks out when in solitude or experiencing ego-death? What are the conditions or criteria for unshakable faith (acalā saddha)?

Is emptiness conventionally / provisionally non-empty? Please include reference to whose perspective you are replying from. ---------- By empty I mean non-substantial, how dharmas are constantly arising and perishing, and nothing is the same from moment to moment, but in flux. By conventionally I mean in the sense that enlightened beings can use "I" to refer to themselves, even though they ultimately lack any self identity at all or sense of "me and mine". BY non-empty I mean permanent. ---------- I know that there are debates about the identity of the conventional truth and emptiness, and Nagarjuna said that emptiness is empty. I read Gelek Rimpoche - Geluk lama - say that he'd "love to say emptiness is impermanent, but emptiness is meant to be permanent", because it is uncompounded and uncreated. And a translation of The Great Prajna Paramita Sutra, saying it is neither permanent nor impermanent. Personally, I would guess that it is identical to impermanent dharmas (there's discussion about that in early ch'an, seemingly explained by Zongmi), not permanent, and yet does not arise or cease, is not impermanent. Then it's both empty and non-empty: changing in accordance with conditions, but not dependent on any individual conditioned thing. Arguably, I am rich independent of any one of my financial investments, even-though it changes with all of them. Not a great analogy, but I can't think of anything else that could be "permanent".

Rephrased question: Sometimes we become absorbed in an activity, such as writing an article, with intense focus and absorption (intentionally). How would Buddhist principles address this state? -------------------------------------- Previous question as definition of mindfulness incorrect: In being mindful we are aware of our thoughts, feelings, emotions and physical sensations Sometimes we become absorbed in an activity, such as writing an article, with intense focus and absorption (intentionally). On the surface this appears to be in conflict with mindfulness. Is this the case?

How staying in the present moment(here and now) is different from awareness and mindfulness, and what according to you is better?