I never felt asleep,When I am watching TV.But when I am studying or listening to *Dhamma*, **sometimes** I have felt asleep. What may be the cause of this ? But I can say, if I am falling asleep while watching TV,it is because of tiredness. How can we stop become sleepy by developing *Sati*? ( I read the advice from *Lord Buddha* to *Arahant Moggollana* to overcome sleepiness.But I need to know the cause of sleepiness and how to prevent it before it arises)

In [The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha](http://lirs.ru/lib/sutra/The_Numerical_Discourses_of_the_Buddha,Anguttara_Nikaya,Bodhi,2012.pdf) , Sutta 3/56 titled Depopulation (on page 253; internet version here) and note 415 (on page 1645) provides the Buddha's explanation for the Depopulation of the World. In this explanation reference is made to Yakkhas -- wild demonic spirits, sometimes depicted as killing human beings....wild, nonhuman -- being released. Besides the Yakkhas, which are only the physical manifestation, Buddha explains the Primary Causes for this Depopulation. > "Again , at present people are excited by illicit lust, overcome by unrighteous greed, afflicted by wrong Dhamma. When this happens, the yakkhas release wild spirits. At a time when the world is engaged in combatting Yakkhas globally via lockdowns etc., are we falling short in addressing the Causes of this Depopulation as spelt out by the Buddha? If so, what should be our Strategic approach to this problem?

I was having a debate with a follower of another faith, and during it, this quandary came to me: Did the Buddha describe one law for sentient beings - that is, the law of intentional action? (I understand he taught 'only suffering, and the end of suffering'...) And can it be said the Buddha described two paths for this law? There is the path for the layperson, who embraces intentional action (as the teachings on kamma to laypeople within the Pali canon point to), and aims for a perfection of intentional action - suffering, but 'limited'. And there is the path of the monastic, who aims to abandons intentional action, for nibbana - 'the end of suffering'. But do they not still embrace the law, by only treading on that part of action that is beneficial to them/others, towards their goal, until that can be put aside? In other words, is the bodhisattva goal rooted in the same principle as the arahant goal? (perhaps clearer - is the path towards nibbana *in any way* outside of the described law of intentional action?)

Why we need Samadhi to attain enlightement ? Do people with better samadhi can think more than the people with less within short amount of time ? >experiment of people with low IQ, and high IQ, put them in the same room, and you give them the same job. Rob a bank. You’ll find out that the low IQ people probably do a much better job of robbing a bank, plotting the bank robbery, than high IQ people, who get all messed up with legal implications and stuff like that. - Michio Kaku Is widom something like that ? What is the connection between samadhi and wisdom ?

Is it the mind that think mind is owned by itself? Can any one provide insights, techniques, meditations that help me to understand that "mind does not belong to me"? I aware that thoughts are coming from nowhere and we don't intentionally make them. But this is not enough. Can you please provide me a deep explanation, especially a guided meditation to practice no-self?

When meditating mom claims that she enters in to deep emptiness and she would reside in that emptiness for the whole period. She also says she can’t even feel her breath or her self. She’s bit lost ATM. Any suggestions on this? Any reference preferably in Sinhalese if possible?

If someone offense me on physical things like "*You are not beautiful, You are poor, You are not smart*", I can bear it. Actually I don't care much. But, If someone offense me on my thoughts like "*You are not kind, You are greedy*", It's hard to bear. Sometimes, I got aversion. How can I overcome this ? I asked a related question here. -

I recently became aware of questions regarding the location of consciousness. The argument put forward is that the consciousness is separate to the body. This is not something I considered before. The first is conjecture by a Doctor Fenwick https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/think-well/201906/does-consciousness-exist-outside-the-brain "Hence, in Fenwick’s view, the brain does not create or produce consciousness; rather, it filters it. As odd as this idea might seem at first, there are some analogies that bring the concept into sharper focus. For example, the eye filters and interprets only a very small sliver of the electromagnetic spectrum and the ear registers only a narrow range of sonic frequencies. Similarly, according to Fenwick, the brain filters and perceives only a tiny part of the cosmos’ intrinsic “consciousness.” Fenwick is not a physicist, so I dredged the following link, the mind of wigners friend which supports the Fenwicks theory. The second is based on quantum mechanics https://www.jstor.org/stable/23040667?read-now=1&seq=1 The key points central to the article are "A. My body with its internal nervous system(explored to any future degree of physiological completeness) functions as a pure mechanism according to the laws of nature. Further more quantum mechanics is the ultimate basis of the mechanism. B. I am aware that by incontrovertible direct evidence of knowledge (information) entering my consciousness." The 3rd is offered as evidence of the first 2 links https://youtu.be/Uq8l4XVfgPA Am I correct in thinking if all the information in the universe exists in a timeless dimension(membrane) of space and our brains only access a part of it, making us who we are. Can we access more information towards enlightenment maybe? or sixth senses? via meditation a bit like the Buddha may have done? In particular can any one point out if there are any errors in the second link that might make its central argument incorrect?

The attached discourse was delivered a few days back from New York and presents a very comprehensive approach to face the corona pandemic from a spiritual standpoint. The wisdom of the Buddha is quoted at the very beginning and the entire discourse is structured on this quote. It would be appreciated if someone could source the original sutta from which this quotation is made. [Fighting Anxiety and Depression: Four Great Practices](https://youtu.be/vzFtOOVQPmA?t=255) > Buddha speaks of the nature of suffering as a person who is hit by an arrow. Imagine the pain and the shock of being hit by an arrow. And immediately after that, this person, unfortunate person is hit by a second arrow.

We lose interest to certain things (foods, vehicles .. etc.) with time. Is clinging the reason for this ? Is this the nature of clinging ? Are we able to maintain the interest level if we don't have clinging ? Does losing interest to do something (working on a project, studying, new year resolutions, etc.) means that I had the clinging to that thing (or end result) initially ?

Every day I struggle with an onslaught of negative thoughts (perfectionists with a huge ego). I came upon two different schools of thought in Buddhism teaching. One would be to try to ignore the thoughts, not give them energy, not identify with them, be present and in time they would go into the background. Basically they are just thoughts; they are not you. Another approach would be to sit down, meditate and try to go deep inside to find the root of those thoughts (I suspect I have myself deep down :P). Try to see clearly the constant river of thoughts that is happening inside (things I notice is just a small surface of things). I was never sure which one was correct.

I've heard both of these Pali terms translated to the English term "effort". 1: sammā-vāyāma: the 6th item in the 8-fold path. 2: virya: the 2nd of the 5 faculties/powers/Indrias. If 2 terms are used instead of 1, they probably represent slightly different concepts but the similarity and difference between these 2 is unclear to me. My best guess from my fuzzy understanding is ... Gil Fronsdal has identified virya as being a kind of "heroic effort". It's part of the 5 Indrias and Indra was the god that ruled the other gods so perhaps this refers to an heroic effort to rule over the hindrances? sammā-vāyāma is associated with the 4 right exertions. As such it seems to be about moving away from unwholesome states and towards wholesome states. The 2 terms seem very similar. The only difference I can detect is that the "heroic" modifier associated with virya suggests a stronger emphasis on courage and/or aggression. Is this correct?

There are many sutras and they are on different topics. Many people got enlightened by asking different sutras. Ven. Saripuththa thero got sothapanna by asking to cause and effect. Ven. Kondanna thero got sothapanna by asking to middle path and kamma. So, What is the core teaching of **all** the suttas ? What wisdom all they have in common ? **Edit:** I think all people have some understanding of the world. Lord Buddha recognized those and help them to complete their understandigs. Ex: When Ven. Sariputhta thero hearing to the Cause and effect, He already have the understanding of Impermanance. (Because of that, He started to find the truth).

Imagine a world (a planet with humans) without suffering that the people in there are always happy,nothing to worry about.What would be the characteristics of that world ? At least,Can we define the characteristics of that perfect world ? **Edit:** I got this question by listening to *Dhamma* on *Eight Worldly Conditions* (**Ashta Loka Dharma**). Either good or bad,every person have to experience profits,losses,praises,insulting ..etc.It is equal to a person in a heaven and also in a lower realm. If world have only 4 rules (only profits, praises ....),Would it be perfect ?

They say once you reach Nirvana you remove craving. However, don't we need to crave the state of Nirvana in order to reach it? Doesn't that contradict everything an enlightened person who reached Nirvana stands for? Because in order to continue this state, meditation and other things need to be constantly practiced which is a sort of craving in itself.

Is samatha concentration meditation's object always an idea, concept or something else? Why meditate on a concept and what else besides concepts are there to meditate on?

> "It is true, Kesi, that it's not proper for a Tathagata to take life. > But if **a tamable person** doesn't submit either to a mild training or to > a harsh training or to a mild & harsh training, then the Tathagata > doesn't regard him as being worth speaking to or admonishing. His > knowledgeable fellows in the holy life don't regard him as being worth > speaking to or admonishing. This is what it means to be totally > destroyed in the Doctrine & Discipline, when the Tathagata doesn't > regard one as being worth speaking to or admonishing, and one's > knowledgeable fellows in the holy life don't regard one as being worth > speaking to or admonishing." AN 4.111 Just so, is this subtle language? What then is an untamable person? Is it a being like an animal, who does not have access to Dhamma, or is it a being who has access to it, but disregards it out of hand, or something in between!?

As I am going deep into my meditations of Vipassana and Zazen I am also going deep in my subconscious mind. Some long-forgotten painful memories of insult surface up. As I look now with a different vantage point I understand that my own Karma, my own Ego, and my own behavior was also responsible for me getting insulted. So as the memories surface I say '**forgiveness and loving-kindness**', also I try to watch the painful memories without attachment and without the anger, **but this is all on the surface level or at the level of mind. Deep within I am hurt and I want to move away from them and go deep in meditation.** I want to ask how to deal with memories of past insulting behavior by others towards me?

What are great forty? What are the great forty according to following Sutta. I can identify 30. Noble tenfold path with mundane and supermundane account for 20 Wrong tenfold path account for another 10. What is the remaining 10? ============= “Therein, bhikkhus, right view comes first. And how does right view come first? In one of right view, right intention comes into being; in one of right intention, right speech comes into being; in one of right speech, right action comes into being; in one of right action, right livelihood comes into being; in one of right livelihood, right effort comes into being; in one of right effort, right mindfulness comes into being; in one of right mindfulness, right concentration comes into being; in one of right concentration, right knowledge comes into being; in one of right knowledge, right deliverance comes into being. Thus, bhikkhus, the path of the disciple in higher training possesses eight factors, the arahant possesses ten factors. https://suttacentral.net/mn117/en/bodhi

I have observed that while meditating if I turn my awareness from breath to 'what I am hearing' I have a heightened sense of present moment awareness. If I listen mindfully to what I am hearing the mind invariably comes in present moment. As the hearing can only happen in present moment. Also, I see that there are foreground noises and constant background hum, like a low-frequency sound in the background. I want to ask is there any meditation technique in Vajrayana or any other Buddhist tradition to remain aware of the hearing and transcend the sense spheres thereby? If yes, what is it and how to practice it?