I had a conversation with a friend and she was very upset that there were some gender division in the group I practice with. We have some single sex retreats and some study groups are single sexed. But mostly things are mixed. If my friend wanted to practice Buddhism with a group with no gender divisions whatsoever - what group would that be? So all study, retreats, events would be mixed and if there is a monastic community then that would be mixed too.

First, how is "pure consciousness experience" (abbr. PCE) defined for the purpose of this question? > A PCE is when one’s sense of identity temporarily vacates the throne and apperception occurs. Apperception is the mind’s perception of itself … it is a pure awareness . Normally the mind perceives through the senses and sorts the data received according to its predilection; but the mind itself remains unperceived ... it is taken to be unknowable. Apperception is when the ‘thinker’ and the ‘feeler’ is not and an unmediated awareness occurs. The pure consciousness experience is as if one has eyes in the back of one’s head; there is a three hundred and sixty degree awareness and all is self-evidently clear. Secondly, here are [some self-reports](http://actualfreedom.com.au/actualism/others/corr-pce.htm) by people of them experiencing PCEs. Here's one report: > Yesterday I had the first really clear and unequivocal PCE since starting with this ... previously, I had had what I call ‘mini-PCEs’. They lasted only very brief periods of time, say an hour or so, and I wasn’t really sure it was a PCE. Yesterday, however, I had no doubt at all about the experience, as it accorded in all details with what I have read about PCEs ... I had some trouble at work ... some old fears of mine concerning work, authority, success, etc. came up for me. I found myself in some turmoil about these issues and, investigating deeper into it, I once again saw the futility of a feeling-based life, a so-called ‘normal’ life of sorrow, malice, nurture, and desire ... I wrote in my journal to myself what I would do to bring about peace-on-earth, for myself and others. A little later, I sat in my chair and was still for quite awhile. The PCE experience started there and continued for the rest of the day, at times most vividly, at other times diminishing somewhat, but always lustrous, vibrant, and rich. One of the things I noticed most strongly was the intensity of sensation – the clearness and brilliance of colours, and the ability to hear every little sound around me ... at a gravel pit ... I saw a stone popping out of the ground that had some interesting features to it. I ran my hand along the exposed top of it and it felt to be alive. Similarly, the texture and surface of the stone appeared to be actually a living thing. It reminded me of psychedelic drug experiences I had when I was younger, except that it was natural and uncontaminated by any emotions of fright, fear, doubt, etc. Later on we went to the supermarket to do the week’s shopping. > > Another thing I noticed about the experience was how any object, even the most ordinary and mundane, instantly had become amazingly interesting and wonderful to look at. > >Everything I looked at had a life of its own. Everything appeared fresh and new. > > Everywhere I looked there were sensual delights to behold. Another thing was that there was some kind of very pleasurable sensation located near the solar plexus region. I find this difficult to convey but it was a very satisfying visceral sensation. I shall have to, in future, see what I can notice about it ... I found that I could refresh the experience by running the ‘How am I ... ’ question and by increased attentiveness to the feelings that contaminated the experience. A couple of times, the experience would come back in full bloom in all its lustrousness. The PCE stands out in such dramatic contrast to ordinary, every-day perception and sensation ... another key feature of the experience – no affective element, no feelings, no disturbance whatsoever – there was nothing that could disturb the experience, take anything away from it, or detract from it. In other words, there was no feeling ‘me’ to spoil the experience. How amazing. From this juncture, I have some specific questions: - Have anyone in the Buddhist history (a relatively unknown monk perhaps) advocated pursuing such a state? - Is there any Buddhist methodology that demonstrably leads to a PCE? - In what way (in regards to consciousness) is the official Buddhist goal different from PCE?

How can an understanding of emptiness help when experiencing physical pain, i have some understanding of emptiness from a mental viewpoint, and I understand that I can direct my mind to perceive the physical pain as karma ripening or that I have a choice of perception of my physical pain, I don't have to experience it as something to have aversion to. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

Before I started studying Buddhism I had desire for life and desires for more in life. That eventually led me to inevitable and immense suffering and eventually to Buddhism. Now as I practise Buddhism and as I study sutta and all I understand that rebirth is something we need to avoid by practising dhamma. We have to end this cycle of Life and Death and eventually suffering. Buddhism is a soteriological practise and philosophy which guides us out of samsara. Also lot of Buddhist suttas mention suffering as inherent and innate. Now this has led me to other end of thought spectrum of **aversion** towards life. As I learnt and understood '**craving for non existance'** is also a craving and should be avoided. But how can one think otherwise. Its either I want life or I dont want life and undertake an arduous journey towards Nirvana. How can one not feel aversion towards life if one desires and practises towards Nirvana. My question is how do I think or train mind to not have either desire or aversion towards life?

What type of community normally in a country to feedback on the Buddhism Study in the country or Buddhism Temple for improvement ? Sangha Community? Some Temple claimed they the HQ or Main branch ? How to identify the right place? I.e. if a temple selling talisman which is disallowed as I understand then where do I feedback normally ?

Is there a sutra which provides more info on the subject above? As per wikipedia, some monks should have such abilities as those found in Wikipedia page "Miracles of Gautama Buddha ": > Superparanormal powers the historic Buddha was said to have possessed > and exercised include the six higher knowledges (*abhiññā*): psychic > abilities (*iddhi-vidhā)*, clairaudience (*dibba-sota*), telepathy > (*ceto-pariya*), recollection of one's own past lives > (*pubbe-nivāsanussati*), seeing the past lives and rebirths of others > (*dibba-cakkhu*), and the extinction of mental intoxicants > (*āsavakkhaya*). Miracles found in Mahayana sutras generally play a more > direct role in illustrating certain doctrines than miracles found in > non-Mahayana Buddhist texts.

I know that many Jataka stories are illustrated, through sculpture and painting, in ancient Indian sites like Sanchi, Bharhut, Ajanta etc. I have found some of them in various books and websites. What I need is a comprehensive list of such illustrations. Can anyone please help me?

I came across a book about the 500 Arahants, and it briefly mentioned that Jesus is depicted as an Arahant in a particular temple in China. After spending some time Googling, I found out that it's actually true! The Qiongzhu Temple (筇竹寺) in Kunming has an Arahant Hall containing Arahant-Jesus, along with some other Western figures. Here's a [photo](https://img.91ddcc.com/14569013682359.jpg) of it. I'm perplexed as to why there is such depiction, and whether it can be considered a good idea. I read some news/articles about the temple, which used the reasoning that it shows the compassion and inclusiveness of Buddhism. There maybe an alternative explanation, unfortunately I have never been to the place, so this is the only one I could find on the Internet. *My question is*: Is it true that making an 'Arahant-Jesus" shows that Buddhism is compassionate and inclusive? If not, is such depiction valid/acceptable in Mahayana or any other school of Buddhism? I hope the title is not too ridiculous. Thank you :D

Can software development benefit from mindfulness? As I'm software developer and as I want to register for Vipassana meditation so far I couldn't because of time but still thinking if I could go for it. Today I found that meditation and eventually mindfulness can be beneficial for my profession or others. Even I was thinking that my focus will improved and I could study hard and well. Though it's titled software I think it's beneficial for other fields too. So let me share if software development benefit from mindfulness?

Hundred years ago there were many natural beautiful things to observe and it was also easy to cultivate happiness. But in today's city life, we are surrounded by long buildings, roads, and traffics. We rarely spend our time with nature and are mostly surrounded by man-made things. Although breathing meditation can be done anywhere and this cultivates a lot of relief from our suffering, I was just wondering whether Lord Buddha had given any suggestion on the contemplation of manmade things to cultivate happiness/peace? Is it possible to become peaceful by just contemplating on any man-made things and if yes then how?

Where can I find the sanskrit or original version that mentioning Guan Yin is "Goddess of Mercy" as this wording popping up everywhere online. The word "God" really needs to be carefully written and respected. I understand many misconceptions from most famous Buddhism movie and one of the top 4 Novel of China which is Journey to The West. I am not sure the wording is from the movie or novel evolution? The movie script writing and Buddhism teaching way too much difference yet making people claimed himself as Buddhist more superstitious or dont even know who is Buddha or worship at temple of out nothing. Post ques remarks Seem the naming is from Christian and not Buddhism Sangha/community https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_China_missions#:~:text=The%20missionary%20efforts%20and%20other,culture%20in%20Chinese%20society%20today .

Can someone explain sensuality, strings of sensuality, and fermentation of sensuality thoroughly? I want to know, 1. What is it? 2. The main cause for it. 3. The result of it. 4. Where it lies in the dependent origination? 5. Difference between above terms. It'd be very helpful if you provide Sutta references with the answer.

Is nirvana a conceptual construction - empty in that way? For any / only some Buddhists. I'm just trying to figure out how extinction can avoid the extremes of eternalism and annihilation. If it is a conceptual construction in the sense of having no reality outside what it is in conventional designation (blissful etc.), that *might* be an answer. If some rock has no qualities that we cannot define, then maybe there is nothing to add to its existence, nothing to puzzle over and ask why or how.

Where can I get the English translation of the Dharmaskanda Sutra or at least the original text?

What does it mean to "guard the sense doors"? What is the practical application of this concept in daily life? For example, does this concept mean that a heterosexual male should entirely avoid looking at women? Thank you

The Lotus Sutra’s parable of the burning house imagines inhabitants of a house in fire. They do not register the dangerous situation and therefore “the thought of getting out does not occur to them”. Later on, the Lotus Sutra ascribes the following comment to Buddha: “Even there, in that threefold universe that is like a burning house, they enjoy themselves and run about. For though they are being afflicted by a great deal of suffering, the thought that they are suffering does not occur to them.” I imagine a 21-st century Milinda brought up in critical thinking. He is alike to the elder Milinda in his attitude of questioning, but - different from him – today’s Milinda is not willing to accept a bunch of metaphors as a sufficent answer. 21-st century Milinda has no remembrance of past lifes. He does not expect a future life. In addition, he has learned to accept: Present life is not arranged to primarily satisfy human wishes. He asks his modern "Nagasena": 1. If I do not suffer from rebirth: Why worry about rebirth? 2. If I do not remember any actions in past lifes: Why worry about karma? 3. If I expect that death - quite naturally - ends the life of all beings: Why worry about nirvana? 4. I distinguish between questions with answer and questions without: Why strive for enlightenment due to meditation?

Not long ago, I encountered tough "barrier" in life, tried to break through it but ended up greatly humbled and forced to take step back. This got me thinking whether I should decouple from earthly desires like career, consumerism and similar. Was my experience divine punishment (karma) or display of better way ? Note: I realize this question is not necessarily specific to one religion over other, but I think this community is more accepting to this type of question.

Referring to the discussion between Milinda and Nagasena: Why King Milinda does not consider all together - pole, axle, wheels etc. - his chariot? Normally one defines a chariot a means for transportation consisting of pole, axle, wheels, etc. This would be the correct answer to Nagasena's question what the chariot is. Instead, when pressed by Nagasena he names *chariot* only *a designation, a description, an appellation, a name*. That is, Milinda rejects the correct answer. Now Nagasena has an easy time to defend the Buddhist principle of anatman.

I have read a couple of articles written mostly in passing by western translators on the influence of Sage Kapila (i.e Samkhya) on the Buddha, but I'm yet to find a detailed inquiry on a similarity of these systems. We read that *Alara Kalama* one of the teachers of the Gautama Buddha was a follower of the ancient Samkhya philosophy. it is also written that the Bodhisattva Gautama eventually equaled his teacher Alara, and went on inquiring further until he was fully awakened, Buddha. And after awakening, the first person he wished to teach was his former teacher Alara. I'm only mentioning that above to highlight why I venture to inquire in this direction, my question is mainly on the similarity of the two systems /thought. I will list some: - For both systems, the main goal is to 'End Suffering' by removing ignorance. - Contrary to most religious thought in India, both systems, although they accept heavenly beings, they reject the idea of a creator God. The gods they accept are just like humans bound within the cycle of suffering. Samkhya satirically declares 'No one no-where Is happy'. The idea of 'Brahman' is also rejected. - Again both say that there is no-self on forms, sensations, perceptions, and all mental activities including the mind's reason [Buddhi]. Now, there is a 'Self' in the Samkhya system, but on critical reading, it's beyond any of the non-self listed in the Buddist thought. It's not a self that transmigrates and pile-up karma it's unbound ever free self. What is Bound and what is freed is the mind, not the Self. Similarly, there are primordial matters in the Samkhya system. But Buddhism doesn't discuss or is not interested at the beginning of the matter, etc... There is a lot to list here but in short, when one compares the two systems it seems that Buddhism is a reduced version of Samkhya with some of the ideas removed as non-essential. Was the Buddha a reformer? Many Thanks

Buddha was omniscient and had knowledge over all materialistic things,then why did he need a personal physician?Also there are suttas which are to be recited for recovery from diseases which highlight the praises of Buddha,then why couldn't the Buddha and the Arahant Bhikkus protect themselves from the clutches of diseases?