I'm interested in the *1st Buddhist Council*, i.e. why was it held, where was it held, who attended it and what were the outcome? I'm not looking for an in-depth and detailed answer. More like an overview of the 1st council and preferably a text-reference. Thank you for your time.

This question springs forth as I haven't found yet any sutta showing this premise, has the Buddha ever taught anapanasati to lay followers ? And if not, what could be the reason ? May you be well.

When Itry to reach to the toothbrush in the morning I saw my mind intention to take it and the hand movement is felt like as I was in a magnetic field. What is it ?

In MN4 does the Buddha subdue the fear by: - Observing it with mindfulness until it goes away, thereby seeing the Three Characteristics? - Subdue it with samatha meditation, i.e. to shift attention away from the fear, thereby gaining temporary seclusion from it? > So when fear & terror came to me while I was walking back & forth, I > would not stand or sit or lie down. I would keep walking back & forth > until I had subdued that fear & terror. When fear & terror came to me > while I was standing, I would not walk or sit or lie down. I would > keep standing until I had subdued that fear & terror. When fear & > terror came to me while I was sitting, I would not lie down or stand > up or walk. I would keep sitting until I had subdued that fear & > terror. When fear & terror came to me while I was lying down, I would > not sit up or stand or walk. I would keep lying down until I had > subdued that fear & terror. MN 4

When practicing meditation (samatha and vipassana) intensely it feels like the sense of self is disintegrating and breaking apart. What causes that?

The more I meditate the more weird I become. I feel stressed out while being with groups of people. I don't know what to say and I find the conversational topics deeply boring, meaningless and useless. As a consequence of this I tend to isolate myself, communicate via social media and meditate many hours daily in my apartment. I don't really like to be around people when I meditate intensely. I feel this life is more and more useless and sometimes I want to become a monastic and live in a jungle or forest. I can't do that right now because of paying off my student loan. If I didn't have that loan I would have gone forth by now. It seems like I can't find a balance between the life of a meditator and as a lay person. Meditation pulls me inwards and makes me not want to be around people but the lay person in me still wants lay life type of things. I'm deeply ambivalent and conflicted about this. I feel like I'm being pulled in opposite directions and it feels like the meditation practice is ruining my life. Is it possible to find a balance and still live in this world as a meditator or do I have to give up either the meditation practice or the lay life?

Context: I'm considered a skeptic of rebirth in my tradition which is the Gelug branch of Tibetan Buddhism. I'm asking this question to help me understand what other traditions think. In my tradition it is believed that rebirth is a semi-obscure phenomena the truth of which can be fully known through reasoning alone. I have a hard time understanding how and do not find any line of reasoning I've heard to be particularly convincing. The strongest reasoning I've seen others in my tradition give for rebirth is that each instance of consciousness must have a substantial cause. And that brain/matter cannot be that substantial cause because brain and consciousness are fundamentally of two different natures. Therefore, each instance must have been proceeded by a previous instance as its substantial cause leading to an infinite regress/progress back/forward in time. Here is an excerpt from His Holiness the Dalai Lama's book - Kindness, Clarity and Insight - where he briefly summarizes this reasoning: > "... the nature of > the mind is mere luminosity and knowing. Mind is something that has > the capacity of appearing in the aspect of whatsoever object through > the force of the object’s casting its aspect to it and is an entity of > mere clarity and cognition, with a nature of experience. It > disintegrates moment by moment. However, among its many > causes—classified into substantial cause and cooperative conditions—it > must, as an entity of conscious experience, have as its substantial > cause an immediately preceding cause which is a former moment of consciousness. It is not > possible for an entity with the character of luminosity and knowing to > be produced from external material elements as its substantial cause. > Similarly, an internal mind cannot act as the substantial cause of > external elements. Since each moment of consciousness requires a > former moment of consciousness as its substantial cause, there is no > way but to posit that the basic continuum of mind is beginningless. > Some specific types of minds [such as desire for an automobile] have a > beginning and end, whereas other types [such as the ignorance > conceiving inherent existence] have, in terms of their continuum, no > beginning but an end. However, neither a beginning nor an end can be > posited to the mind of luminosity and knowing. Therefore, although > mind disintegrates moment by moment, its continuum is beginningless." > I believe this reasoning is basically equivalent to Chalmer's Hard Problem of Consciousness. To be clear, I think it is a hard problem for scientific reductionists who believe that consciousness can be reduced to physical matter and energy arranged in a specific way. On the other hand, it is also equivalent in a different formulation to another famously **hard** problem: Descarte's famous mind/body problem which assumes the dichotomy of mind/body above and then asks if these are of such fundamentally different natures, then *how* do they interact? It would seem that positing any mechanism of interaction would betray the original assumption: that they are so fundamentally different that one could never give rise to the other... that they could never *touch* if you will. Which leads to the question: what *is* the substantial cause of an instance of consciousness? 1. Mind 2. Matter 3. Both 4. Neither 5. Pineal gland did it! Would prefer answers with reasoning to help me understand.

A "moderator" from certain sect, corrected a post (not sure why it came up there...), telling: >Dhammapada is not "a teaching of the Buddha himself". Jains have a text which is 90% the same, so looks like it comes from before Buddha. It would be interesting to read this pre-Buddha-Dhammapada, is such actually exist, to possible look then if it is "the same" or just as such assume-able, as: >...there are Jain anthologies that contain verses clearly related to some of those found in these Buddhist anthologies... So the question here would be to react, either with support or with rejecing such claims (which have serious effects if wearing a mods hat), in ways that may provide things possible new to the Buddhas gathering. Wishing inspired and concentrated googleing. *[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for an escape from this wheel]*

I have been practicing mindfulness of breathing for some time. But I am having doubt regarding my practice. When I focus on a single point on nostril and keep attention there, and note natural breathing. It breaks attention. It seems like there are two objects to concentrate. feel on nostril or breathing? What am I doing wrong? > "He breathes in experiencing the whole body, he breathes out > experiencing the whole body": that is, with well-placed mindfulness, > he sees the beginning, the middle and the end of the two phases, the > in-breath and the out-breath. As he practices watching the in-breath > and the out breath with mindfulness, he calms down and tranquilizes > the two functions of in breathing and out-breathing. Meditation on Breathing

In the Dhamma talk *"Sleeping and dreaming"* , by Ajahn Punnadhammo, he mentions that in the Anguttara Nikaya (no specific sutta mentioned) the Buddha talked about the origins of dreams and different kinds of dreams. He taught that some dreams could be visions of the past and future, messages from Devas and "Wind in the belly" meaning random content with no real significance. What sutta is this? Thank you for your time.

For example in [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_cosmology_of_the_Theravada_school#Arupa-Loka_(Formless_Realms)) it mentions: "The inhabitants of these realms are possessed entirely of mind". Also, "They do not interact with the rest of the universe". In "In the Buddha's Words" (Bhikkhu Bodhi) it mentions "The lifespans ascribed to these realms are respectively 20,000; 40,000; 60,000; and 84,000 great eons". I'm looking for that kind of descriptions of the formless realms but in the suttas (or other source Theravada texts).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkKOyV_pJ74 Refer to the image and video above, Venerable Guan Cheng explains that meditation should be practiced after proper moral virtue/Sila been achieved for the monks. **Question 1:** Does side effects occur due to basic or minimum of Buddhism Precepts or Sila (requirement) not been achieved yet? Most Common side effects could be hallucination, feeling dizziness or more example below Meditation side effects Unpleasant side effects of meditation **Question 2:** As a lay Buddhist, is it a right practice if the sequence is wrong or Sila/Precepts and Meditation being practiced together? If no, then at what stage of requirements? Well, i know at least not after being drunk and go meditate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_precepts **Post Note**: In the Youtube video above at 57:00, Venerable Guan Cheng explains that those monk only focusing on Moral Virtue before start meditation for the first five years. I had recently re-verify with another Bhante and he mentioned also must follow the sequence.

A certain Brahman (lay priest, as he uses this term) here told: >Nibbana is simply what is experienced by the mind which is free from defilements and fetters. It is not an Ultimate Reality or Ultimate Truth. So according this, Nibbana isn't real but something, a maybe 'unconditioned Mind' experianses, and mind is obiviously assumed to be real. What did the Buddha told in regard of Nibbana and Mind? "Nibbānaṃ anicca. Cittānaṃ saraṇaṃ hotu."? *[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other worldbinding trades or to entertain the mind, but for an escape to lasting freedom from debt]*

If we are trapped in Cyclic Rebirth, we are then being held against our will.. If we are being held against our will, who or what has set this trap? If I escape, where am I escaping to? As with all of my questions, I am seeking a person who has experienced and truly knows the answer. Hopefully, and with respect I am not seeking mere recital of texts ☺️

Are there hints, in the Theravada traditions, at parallels to be possibly drawn between the progression through the four stages of awakening (stream winner, once returner, non returner, arahant ) and the penetration of the four foundations of Mindfulness ? Thank you dearest friends for your insights and comments. May you be well and safe.

Actually from [another question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/41786/19889) before, but since all are part of certain communities here, good to work out seperate: **"Does the Buddha have any practices for groups and societies that would lead society to less suffering?", or say to prosperty, not to decay.** May the advices, as seen coming from the Sublime Buddha, elders, monk, Brahmans, Insider, are also of good for you community here and elsewhere. (And since this all about Buddhism is a steady encouragement in practical way, a meta with metta issue, also the link to the current place of practice and reflection of yours: [2020 Community Moderator Election](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/election?cb=1) , since where do you like to run again away and consume further without to pay as your past merits run out... and not free from desire, craving yet?) *[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchanges, other world-binding trades and entertainments but for going on, going forth, escape from this wheel]*

We find in Thig 3.3 the following verses : > I attain the meditations on emptiness and signlessness whenever I > want. > I am the Buddha’s rightful daughter, always delighting in quenching. How, dear friends, would you relate the attainment of the signless to the jhana of neither perception nor non perception ? Thank you for your most appreciated insightful comments. May you all be well and safe.

I already know this much https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/35802/17220 Still ,there is a particular case where ,I have no experience/knowledge which is below. Person with 27 yrs. of age and above. Parents are alive. No responsibility over Person. Person is having **exemplary character & is unmarried. Person is unsatisfied by any meditation center , monastery , ashram , yogi etc. ,so want to meditate alone in forest alongside other *religious meditators.** Parents are not ready to accept buddha or buddha's teachings for their child cause they think that it(buddhism) is only to destroy householdness. It tears down parents if person flees away to forest or even tries to do so. **Update** Under these circumstances, is permission required **,if yes ,then how to convince parents.** **Note::** 'To be a monk' means 'to go forth to be' :: detached one , beyond all sense of his own name and form. Without any existence of I, my or mine. Not to grieve if his name and form entity were to decay and deteriorate.

One of the main station of insight before stream entry is _bhanga-ñāṇa_. In some explanations this seems to be subdivided further into 1st (paṭhama) and 2nd (dutiya) _bhanga-ñāṇa_ ("knowledge of dissolution"). What is the difference between them?

>>Has the Buddha taught anything about how one should approach fixing society? >>Does the Buddha advocate for striving to make society better? >>Does the Buddha have any practices for groups and societies that would lead society to less suffering? >>Does the Buddha have any teachings about Justice and Social Justice?