A advise that I was given is to be "mindful" when I'm not meditating. However, it seems that mindfulness is incompatible with daydreaming (especially those in which we can get really engrossed and lose our sense of the present moment). Therefore, is daydreaming/fantasizing bad?

Today, I have realized that I have lot of expectations about my life and about others. Until today, I didn't aware of it because,today I face a big disappointment.So, Experiences of expectations and hopes breakings are way to understand the nature of expectations. Other than that, What can I do to avoid expectations ?

Although I have read some basic articles and book about buddhism, they are all written by modern western sources, and I would like to get to know the foundations. Even when reading this site, I sometimes feel at a loss because I miss so many of the particular terms, and all the names of the classical texts are kind of mixed in my mind, I don't even know where to start. My question is then: What would be a good "programm" to introduce myself in buddhist (foundational) readings? I am aware of other questions dealing with introductory texts to Buddhism, but, as I see it, that is easy to find. What I want is sort of a guide to start navigating the important foundational texts of which I keep hearing/reading a lot, but that I cannot grasp. Also, I would love to learn at least a bit of the languages (Sanskrit, Pali) to improve my understanding of what I read, and some references in this sense would also be much appreciated.

What are the examples in ancient texts or in history when a trained Buddhist sustained their equanimity and well-being through torture, forced isolation or other unfavourable circumstances? Which tools given in Dhamma do you think would be useful if one had to survive, for example, through the years in prison? Could it be possible to keep on the development of skilful qualities in places like this? Would you consider suicide as a solution?

For the last couple of years there has been growing research on so called compassion fatigue among social workers/therapists/social workers, and their likes. In short, compassion fatigue can be described as exhaustion and/or vicarious traumatization in different forms of healthcare/emotional labor. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion_fatigue) . My question is - if and how - one can understand these phenomena based on buddhist dharma? As far as i understand there is no mentioning of these types of specific phenomena in the suttas. A few personal hypotheses is that compassion fatigue is the result of one or more of these factors: - an imbalance between the five indriyas/faculties and the five pancabalani/strengths, leading to - akusala padhana/unwholesome effort. - upadana, grasping for being overtly supportive at the expense of own health, or clinging to a self-view as a tireless helper. I realize this may seem counter to popular buddhist notions such as the brahmaviharas, for instance. I still can't help but wonder if this can explain compassion fatigue, or if there are other alternative interpretations based on a buddhist framework? (This is a sutta reference request)

During the time of Buddha, it is said many people at one gathering attained enlightenment by listening to only one one of his sermons. How can a mind develop such a achieving within matter of hours. There are millions of devoted Buddhist in the world now but I have not heard a single person achieving higher mental status. Are there any other explanation this other than karma?

I recently noticed that perhaps fewer than 10 bugs seem to be in my shower. I can try to remove all of the bugs from the shower before using it so that they don’t get washed away and killed. However, some of the bugs are very small and hard to see, so I can’t be sure I can remove all of them. Also, even if I remove all of the bugs in the shower, it is possible bugs will return, so I don’t know if I need to check the shower for bugs before each time that I use it.

How can we have determination with this impermanent world, if determination is one of the paramitas? "*I will do that thing (A) whatever happens*" is determination. But something else (B) can happen on the way that makes (A) a useless thing. So, how can I have determination in the right way?

I always wonder that my self. People scam me because I am not wise. What happened? Is there always something I did that causes that? How do I know that?

Our own thoughts make something wholesome or unwholesome. Not what other's think. So, is there a need to ***care*** about what others think regarding a certain thing? We can do good for others, but they might think that we do something bad for them. Isn't it their responsibility to think in a wholesome manner? The title of this question should be "Should we care about what others think?", but I found a related question here: However, it doesn't have any answers regarding this case (karma). Kind regards

Why should we care if we have no-self or have a self. Ultimately it is of no help. I know any buddhist teacher will say that feelings or body are not-self, so you shouldn't get attached to it, but even if we do assume that we have no-self still we face the consequences of kamma. We just can't pretend that this body is not-self and cherish once it starts to decay. Everyone understands that no-self is truth but how can it help us remove our suffering? The only option I see is that you pretend that because of no-self your suffering has lessened, but does this pretending ever help? No,never. In short, how does the theory of no-self help us in a real sense, not just in pretending sense. Why is this no-self so important to Buddha?

The following phrase comes from DN 13: > “ayameva ujumaggo, ayamañjasāyano niyyāniko niyyāti takkarassa > **brahmasahabyatāya**, yvāyaṃ akkhāto brāhmaṇena pokkharasātinā”ti. T.W. Rhys Davids translated here as: > ‘This is the straight path, this the direct way which makes for > salvation, and leads him, who acts according to it, into a state of > **union with Brahmā**. I mean that which has been announced by the Brahman > Pokkharasādi.’ Bhikkhu Sujato translated here as: > “This is the only straight path, the direct route that leads someone > who practices it to the **company of Brahmā**; namely, that explained by > the brahmin Pokkharasāti.” What does "brahmasahabyatāya" mean? What does "sahabyatāya" mean? This translation could be meaningful. "Union with Brahman" sounds like the modern Hindu concept of Moksha which is a union with God or Ultimate Reality. On the other hand, "company of Brahma" sounds like rebirth into the Brahma realm. What's the correct interpretation?

Well, first of all, I don't consider myself a strict Buddhist, but I want to study Buddhism -- both Theravada and Mahayana -- for educational and spiritual purposes. I am very excited with scientific studies of Buddhist meditation, and I'm sure that the Buddhist teachings have a lot of interesting and helpful things to offer... I have one small book on the philosophy of Buddhism, there are 19 sutras with the commentaries on each sutra. But the book is a bit wordy due to its specificity, and heavily influenced by the author... The texts (I suppose) are translated well, with the meticulous description for every specific term (like, "Tathagata", or "dukkha" etc.)... But when I decided instead to start to read the Pali Canon directly, not this compilation, and found out that Pali Canon is huge, even Sutta Pitaka alone seems to be way bigger than the Bible... And it seems that the sutras are not composed chronologically or from simple to difficult, so I suppose there is no need to read the book in strict order... So, how do you suggest reading the sutras? In strict order? Randomly? Or, from the 'popular' sutras to the 'unpopular' ones? Do I even need to read the whole Sutta Pitaka? Do I need to read Abhidhamma Pitaka and if yes, in which order? And what of Mahayana's important texts? I'll appreciate all of your recommendations (and don't be afraid to correct my grammar, because English is not my native language).

I am reading Practical Insight Meditation: Basic and progressive stages by Mahasi Sayadaw. In the book he elaborates on the 16 stages of insight meditation as a kind of road map of what to expect. I was wondering if these stages are part of the Theravada tradition or an integral part of the Dharma canon.

When Lord Buddha's wife Yashodhara also joined Sangha (become bhikkhuni), what happened to her ? Did she also get enlightened ? Did his son Rahula get enlightened ? This , This answers says **Buddha can never be a woman**

Is mind the most valuable thing according to the buddha that we should protect by doing anything to everything? Are there any metaphors said by Lord Buddha on the value of protecting the mind vs doing other things ?

As we all know, Harmony in the Sangha is one of the most important attributes of the practicing community which necessarily live and work together. Yet, it is almost inevitable for people - imperfect as we are - to be drawn into squabbles and/or unwittingly hurt one another's feelings in our daily interactions (or non-interactions) with one another. Association with the enemy, as it turns out, is one of the 8 Dukkha's expounded by the Buddha. So: What are the Buddha's advice for people who cannot get along? How should people resolve conflicts when they arise? What should you do to protect yourself if you were deeply hurt by someone close to you?

In the Sabbasava Sutta (MN2) , the view that "I have no self" is listed as one of the six wrong views and one who holds this view will not be freed from suffering. Questions: 1. Why is "I have no self" a wrong view? 2. Why is this not a contradiction to anatta? > "As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view > arises in him: The view *I have a self* arises in him as true & > established, or the view ***I have no self***... or the view *It is > precisely by means of self that I perceive self*... or the view *It is > precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self*... or the view > *It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self* arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: *This very > self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the > ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, > everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will stay just as it > is for eternity*. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of > views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. > Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is > not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, > distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & > stress.

The phrase comes up -- especially when discussing 'militarism' -- in the secondary literature; e.g. > that “one must sacrifice the lesser good for the greater good”; so too > must “our heroes sacrifice their lives in order to preserve the naition... Buddhism and Politics in Thailand, p154 Did the Buhddha say anything like this? The closest I know of is "be a lamp unto yourself", but in effect that could legitimize all sorts of errors. Specifically I mean examples analogous to serving in the military: when some wrong doing is permitted due to "the greater good".

Im asking about the Vajrayana or Mahayana view, but theravadan views are fine too. Buddhism rejects a first cause, but how can birth and death go in infinite regress? How did samsara start? Ultimately nothing arises yes, but then there would be no movement or action, right? The only way I can posit a solution is the cyclic universe theory where mind and appearances have always existed, and are dependent upon each other. Thus they can be said to give rise to one another in a sense (but not in succession, just that without one the other cant exist). I think this is what Guru Rinpoche also said somewhere? Is this the Buddhist view? By the way, I have recently converted to Buddhism after having debated it in the past. I want to understand it more, so this is not an attack on buddhist Pratityasamutpada. This is very hard for me to understand. I am hoping someone more knowledgeable than me can provide some insight. Edit:I think I have found an answer with the theory of the Five lights in dzogchen.matter and consciousness(wich is a element)are always there,and have always been there.