https://suttacentral.net/dn26/en/sujato How could humans have lived 80 000 years in the past? And how could we live 10 years in the future, with people reaching sexual maturity at five, when life expectancy is constantly increasing?

### Question Hi all, i would like to ask if anyone knows the difference in meaning between these three pali words: * Kamma * Kammanto * Kammanta ### What i've found so far I can see from looking at the pali words for "right action" that this is called "samma kammanto" (sometimes "samma kammanta"), so i'm guessing that these two are the same? I'm also guessing that Kamma is a more general term which includes speech and thought/intention as well as physical action? ### Context I'm building a to-do-list and life-organizing application and since i have a Buddhist background i'd like to give the application a name inspired by Buddhism

Is wanting to do something = desire ? Doesn't enlightened people want to do anything ? They just react to whatever comes ? ( "react" may not be a suitable word). A related question that I hope to ask in Buddhism SE: How a enlightened monk differs from a enlightened lay person ? As I know: 1. Monks have intention to teach dhamma to others. 2. Monks can live more than 7 days. The first one have some relation to this question.

Sometime i read that the current mara is a bodhisatta. It seems hard to believe a bodhisatta can be reborn as mara, who oftens damage buddhism. There are two types of bodhisatta, the comfirmed one by a Buddha which will surely become a Buddha, and the not comfirmed yet, maybe mara is the later who can still return to normal being. So, can a bodhisatta, comfirmed or not, reborn as mara?

In general, the monks are expected to preach the *Dhamma* and the laity should listen. But "behind the scenes", so to say, should monks really be learning from at least some situations they run into without the attitude they know better or that they already have the full truth? I think I might know the answer, but I am looking for any sutta/tipitaka references or analyses. Also, additional/complementary *mahāyāna* point of views and references are welcome.

The title is provocative but sums up my problem: when I am immersed in Buddhist thought, I can no longer love my wife. Buddhism clearly contradicts romantic love. It tolerates it up to a certain point: but in the absolute, the practitioner is invited to (or naturally abandons) his wife to become a monk. To love one's wife romantically: it is to discriminate, it is to love her more than a cat or a neighbour for example, it is therefore to judge and prioritise. It is also to become attached: not wanting to share his wife, wanting to be with her, being sad when she is not there. It is impossible to love your wife romantically without becoming attached and/or without discriminating, putting her on a pedestal. In the end, Buddhism invites us to be indiscriminate and have only unattached love (metta). From this point on, how can one continue to be married if one is sincere in one's practice? Love your wife in this way, unattached and loving her as much as anyone else, and tell me that she is satisfied. The Buddhist ideal love is not romantic. Even if in theory the disciple can reach the sotapanna stage by staying married, isn't it hypocritical to stay married with that in mind? To love your wife until that stage knowing that you'll have to abandon her afterwards? How can you love your wife romantically, find her attractive, desirable and endearing, when you know that sooner or later this relationship will lead to pain and dissatisfaction and come to an end? I'm not clear, I'm mixing everything up, but I'm really frustrated and angry. If I had realized all this before I got married, I wouldn't have done it. But here's the thing, now I'm married, and I feel trapped. Either I stay with her and make a cross on the Nibbana, or I leave her to become a monk like the Buddha did and I make her suffer. How do you tell your wife that you will love her forever? How can you love her when you know it won't be forever and you directly perceive the dukkha of this relationship? As soon as I clearly see impermanence and dukkha, I can no longer let myself be caught up in the flow of life and love unconsciously. I hope that I am clear, I expect the usual answers "it is not all black and white, a married disciple can reach sotapanna" etc., but this kind of arguments do not work with me, I live them as pure hypocrisy. I should forget the impermanence and the dukkha of our relationship, stay in the sweet reassuring illusion of our romantic love and tell her that I love her knowing that I should abandon her after sotapanna? I love her, that's not the problem, I'm angry that my commitment contradicts the absolute truths of Buddhism and is an obstacle to my progress. I hope I am clear and that you understand me... In short: how do you succeed in loving your wife romantically and not abandoning her when you know that you will need to abandon her after sotapanna, that you will never be able to reach Nibbana by loving her, when you see directly the dukkha of your marriage, when you know that it is touched from the start by the seal of impermanence, when you know that it is an attachment from which you will have to free yourself, and so on? To put it plainly: how can one love one's wife romantically when this act contradicts all the truths of Buddhism? By deliberately remaining lukewarm and settling for half-truths?

How can we correlate Buddhist cosmology with astronomical cosmology? Basically I have following questions. 1. Moon is considered 51 yojan in height and 50 is the sun. Sun is self illuminated and heat is the outward. Inner is made of diamond. But with modern physics sun is extremely large star fueled by nuclear reactions. Moreover are stars and planets are small elements or are stars like sun as in astronomy? 2. Is Earth flat or sphere? 3. Where can you find the great Mahameru mountain? In science there's an opinion of center of the Galaxy. But it's an opinion and not a theoretical teaching. 4. Can a loka dathu have one moon and sun each or more? Sun and moon is rotating around great Mahameru Mountain. Then how can we correlate that with moon orbiting around earth and Earth orbiting around sun. 5. Is Jambudweepa mentioned is the entire earth or is a part of Earth? Where can we find the other 4 continents. Since there are lots of opinion based answers on internet, I would like if there is a more theoretical answer. Thank you all. May you all attain Nirvana. Theruvan Saranai.

How Buddhist theory of causality anticipates modern views of Einstein relativity.

I was just wondering how many different types of meditation techniques did Buddha teach? I know the below Anapana, Vipassana, Charnal Ground, Metta Bhavana, I am looking for a list of meditations for my research purpose.

Should every monastic unconditionally be considered a noble one, and treated as such, to abstain from bad kamma at the very least? or are lay people, and other monastics, free to use personal judgement based on the personal qualities, or lack thereof, of a given monastic? If the latter, then am I free to verbally express my concern/blame, without producing excessively bad kamma? For example due to not agreeing with the way the Dhamma is presented, or timing thereof, or not agreeing with the arrogant attitude of the monk, or pointing out flaws in the behavior/methods/views of that monk?

I sincerely want to practice Tibetan Buddhism. It is a tradition which places great emphasis on one's relationship with their teacher. This makes a lot of sense to me. I plan to visit a Karma Kagyu centre near me when the coronavirus pandemic and associated quarantine measures subside and it is open to the public again. Are there any "safe" preliminary practices I can do in the meanwhile given that I have not formally taken refuge, received any empowerment or explanation and all my knowledge comes from literature? I am particularly unsure about whether it is a good idea to practice mantra meditation and mandala offerings without a teacher's guidance and my current view is that it is not. For what it's worth I have been practicing breathing meditation and calm abiding (zazen) daily for a few months now as well as reading Buddhist texts and commentaries. But I don't feel like it has led to any non-intellectual understanding or insight yet.

At certain point of meditation,I feel like I can't breathe properly as in the beginning of meditation(lose of oxygen) and thus I stop meditating and try to get oxygen into my brain. I do no know why this is happening or how to overcome this condition. Is that not a correct way of meditating? Or what am I doing is wrong ?Or do I have to push through?

In the book, "Handbook for mankind" Buddhadhasa Bikkhu describes two types of concentration: - One "as a result of organized practice", which he refers to as vipassana-dhura, and is mentioned in post-tipitaka commentaries. - One that "come about naturally". In the text, there are no pali words given for the latter, and the only reference given is that it is described in the Tipitaka. My questions are, - Is there a name in pali for the latter type? - Are there specific descriptions of the second type of concentration somewhere in the tipitaka or elsewhere? (Please note that i'm not asking for the correctness, efficacy, or other evaluations of the statements above. This is primarily a reference request).

Will it helpful to do the opposite of not skillfull things without having deeper knowledge of that thing ? Ex: I asked a question on **Laziness**, [here](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/37264/how-come-enlightened-people-dont-have-any-laziness) . But didn't recived a satisfying answer. So,Can being aware on laziness and being not lazy help to understand laziness ? Some other similar topic : conceit

I just heard that enlightened people have zero laziness. How is it possible? What is "laziness" ? What is the connection between laziness and ego/desire? Edit: Also that monk said: "Laziness is caused by ignorance."

Buddha says all sanskars are annicca. If harmony is a sanskar then disharmony is waiting to happen. Therefore my question is are we waiting for disaster to happen ?

>“Here, bhikkhus, some person has a confident mind. Having examined his mind with my mind, I know that if this person were to die at this time, as if carried there he would be placed in heaven. What is the reason for that? It is because his mind is confident. It is because of the mind’s confidence that some beings here, when the body perishes, are reborn after death in a good bourn, in a heavenly world.” > > [Iti 21](https://suttacentral.net/iti21/en/ireland) Why we must have a confident mind ? What is a confident mind according to the Lord Buddha ? What are the differences between confident and 1. Conceit 2. Clinging to a view

Can we make our daily activities as a meditation practise ? I'm not asking about being aware on what we are doing. When we do samatha meditation, we focused on the breath only. I'm asking, When we do day to day activities, focusing only what we supposed to do. This practise will give good materialstic achivements for sure. But, is this help to be enilightened ? Did Lord Buddha advice us to do something like this ? I lost interest to do day to day things. Because, the results gives from those are impermanant, useless in the long run (samsara). I'm looking for a way that help me to maintain the life while help me to be enlightened. **Edit:** We all have a certain level of focus when we do something. Is building a intense focus on something (materialstic things) a good practise ? Will it help me learn dhamma ?

Isn't **uncertainty** and **cause and effect** conflict each other ? Did Lord Buddha teach about uncertainty ? (Ven. Ajahn Brahma thero on uncertainty - [Life is a series of unexpected events](https://youtu.be/B30aqzhP5mc) ) **My understanding:** To the Buddha, life is not uncertain. Because Lord Buddha knew his and other people's past karma. He knew almost everything about the universe. So, He had ability to predict the future. But for us, We don't have that knowledge. So, Life is uncertain to us.

Buddha said he is Buddha. Did Buddha carried a false sense of self like you and me?