Does kamma bind or work with the physical realm? Such as a tsunami will kill you, but you will also die in such a way due to past kamma?

On http://media.sbinstitute.com/courses/spring2016/91/ , there is an Awareness-based meditation where we are invited to observe the various objects that we are aware off : thoughts, sounds, sensations, etc... Question 1 : a/ do these objects appear IN Awareness ? (like clouds appearing IN the sky) ? OR b/ do these objects appear FROM Awareness (and in this case my analogy with the sky is not correct; because clouds are not made of sky) question 2 : I more and more come across the statement that objects (thoughts, sounds, sensations) are in fact MADE OF Awareness; and hence are not distinct from Awareness. But my mind can't understand that... Has anybody analogies or explanations so that I can understand this (apparently) paradox ? Thank you all for your replies :) Namaste

what to do with these sensations,these happens all day,why i have to resist to itch i am wondering when i can simply itch that move on.

I remember reading in a sutta that the Buddha said not engaging in the sexual act is considered right action. Does anybody know the place where that is written? I don’t remember where I read it.

I noticed that I usually think in a very abstract manner, without images, just words and ideas. When I try intentionally to think visually, only then does lustful or worry-related images pop up. And, only then can I seemingly redirect my attention from these images. **If a person thinks very abstractly, is it possible that cravings or worries don't arise in consciousness? What is going on here?**

Is there a difference, in terms of mental fabrication, between creativity and imagination (which seem to rely on imagining what's not there) and empathy and mentalizing (which understand how someone's mind/mental affinities are)? Are empathy and mentalizing more *'mindful'* and produce less mental fabrication?

I recall there is a sutta where the Buddha said he "kills" some monks, that is, completely ignores them or something similar. Is this contrary to metta (unconditonal love)?

Where is ignorance, and why does it not end with death? Can we experience it? Does it have to be actively conditioning formations for us to experience it, or can we know this nidana even when freed from it? I'm interested in an answer from any tradition.

I have this misunderstanding about love and attachment as they relate to one another. It's hard to put in words, so I'll try with some examples first. My understanding is that love is something you give away without expecting anything in return. While love where you need or want something from the other person (like for example, expect that other person to make you happy, or you want to control the other person in some way, or try to change them to be more of how you would want them to be, etc) is actually attachment. One example of true love I can think of is love for your children. You love them unconditionally. You understand they are their own person, with their own dreams, aspiration, thoughts, etc, so whatever they do, good or bad, you support them, help them, etc. You don't try to change them, or influence them, or impose your ideas on them, or have them accomplish the things you couldn't (e.g. I couldn't go to med school, but my child will), etc. No matter what happens, you love them because they are your children, and you love them no matter what they do. Taking that further, even in the presence of death, I still can understand love (at least I think I do). Everyone dies. Your children might die. And even if you love them and will miss them if they are gone, or suffer after they are gone, that suffering doesn't linger. You continue to love your children even after they are gone (or at least the idea of them or the memory of them). But here is another example. You love your partner. You think you love them like in the example above. But then they cheat on you with some other person. If you loved your partner unconditionally, you would be OK with that... I think. If being with someone else makes them happy, you should be happy for them, right? But in most relationships, you expect from your partner that they don't cheat on you, or to behave in a certain way. When that expectation is broken, you suffer. Arguments start, resentment, maybe violence towards that person. Is this because of attachment to the person and not love? Because we expect them, and demand, that they behave in a way that doesn't hurt us or make us suffer, that we are attached to the idea that your partner is only ours to have? So I guess, my question is this: What is love and what is attachment in a relation with your partner? What happens to love and attachment when they cheat with someone else? (for most of the people I know, death is less painful than being cheated upon; suffering caused by death eventually heals, but being cheated upon lingers for much longer). Can you truly love someone with no attachment so that no matter what they do, you do not end up suffering?

Whenever an unbeliever starts inquiring regarding Buddhism or the Buddha's teaching, do Buddhists see this as providence leading the unbeliever to Buddha's faith or something else? Does Buddhism's notion of providence extend beyond karma?

In Christianity monks and nuns practice works of mercy which include caring for the terminally ill or doing what St. Teresa of Calcutta did. What works analogous to what St. Teresa of Calcutta did do Buddhist monks practice?

After a deep contemplation of why I couldn't move on from a relationship I found that it was because I am not getting admiration from anyone else. Actually, in past she admired me when no one else did. I was in great need of admiration and she showed me that just then. She filled a hole in me that time, made me feel good about myself. Now that we are not together, I am depressed, demotivated and not a man anymore. I am craving that admiration so much. I do not have any contact with any other girl in my life. I also realised why she admired me. But now I'd be foolish to seek the same admiration from someone else while I am not having those qualities that make people admire me anymore. Also she was my first love and soon I had developed sexual interest in her. So, admiration + first love + sexual interest made me feel on top of the world. I was teen back then. Now I can't move on. What do i do?

I have been through 34 years of life and am beginning to understand some things I couldn’t before. Not everyone is good and not everyone is bad, at least some of the time. Time is a tourniquet for scars but what heals the injury? Is power good, bad or necessary for both? If you feel lost, you can just answer the title question, no problem.

Can one person's karma be affected by the karma of another person or other persons?

I am not geographically close to this woman, nor do I ever talk to her, she's just my teenage obsession that lingers on my mind. I am too much attached to my perceptions about how she is, and because I cannot be near to her geography nor can I talk to her because of a past issue, I feel emptiness inside me. I feel lonely and I crave presence. I satisfying this craving my visualisations and fantasies. How can I get rid of this from deep inside. I have gotten rid of this from conscious thinking, but deep inside it still exists. Currently I am practicing 32 Body part meditation, Vipassana and Anapana Meditation. Can you suggest any specific exercise that would help me with this particular issue?

Is it possible to know if you have bad or good karma? A lot of things have happened to me in life that is very negative. I believe partially it is my own fault because the way I am and how others perceive me, but a lot of it I don't think I deserve. I often contemplate what did I do to be on the receiving end of all my negative karma. As a result, I think negative and become very introverted and isolated. Question: Are all the bad things that happen to me are negative karma or is it "just me"? How can I change my thoughts to be more positive despite a tremendous amount of negativity in my life?

I am a father of a now 13 year old daughter. She was born with the genetic disorder Achondroplasie (Dwarfism, "small people"). At the age of 11 we decided that she should undergo leg-extension surgery. Everything went OK, she woke up after the OP and talked with us, was happy to see her feet beeing longer, was happy to get back home. 2 hours later, while back in the patient room, she was unattended and suffocated. My wife found her, started resuscitation and called the emergency team who then took over. They brought her back. At least some of her. Today, 2 years after this horrible incident, she is now in a state of reduced consciousness. She has her eyes open, can groan and moan, feels it when you tickle her toes, even laughs when you tell a funny story e.g. about her cats (she had 4 and loved them). She can not talk though, chew or drink or use her body parts (like moving any part of it on intention). She is lying in a bed 24/7 listening to audio CDs with books for children. If the audio runs out, she starts crying and moaning. My wife, my son and I myself are devastated. She was such an active, life-loving kid, although she had this genetic disorder, she was best in her class and wrote essays and made drawings you would not expect from an 11 year old girl. And now she is forced onto the wheelchair, damned to stay the rest of her life in bed or this chair. So my question is this: what would Buddhism say that happened to my daughter? What is she today? Where is she? Is she still my daughter or has reincarnation taken place? What is the purpose of her being damned to this state? Thank you for your answers! Best regards Palerider

We all know our last Lord Buddha Was Gautama Buddha. My question is, before him who was the Buddha? And what was the time gap between that previous Buddha and Gautama Buddha?

I used to think that the beauty of Buddhism laid within the absence of rules and restrictions. That you won’t be condemned for foing what you think is right. That there is more to see than just “here” and now. But seeing it as a quest also makes me sad that if it doesn’t make sense to my senses and comprehension anymore. I’m the kind of person who cannot obey as wanted blindly, there must always be a reason when it comes to rules rather than spirit. I don’t really stay if this is what is required of me. I don’t need rules, I need companionship, wherever they are or are not. But I’m 35 this year and already I fear the setting sun. I too will haggle more poorly because I am beginning to know that my questing days will become shorter and shorter. I know that I too will need a house of my own, made of rules and rituals and security. How can I say anything against that, though I can’t muzzle my dread? I am beginning to understand why older people don’t change much, though I wish I can be their gentle mare.

Every now and then i see claims that a particular practice of the noble eightfold path (or alternatively, the threefold division) builds on a specific preceding practice. Two examples of claims (right or wrong) is that right view is a necessary foundation for the other seven practices, or that panna comes last building on the two other thirds in the threefold division. I am interested in suttas as sources for claims like this, so my question is what specific references there are for describing this type of order of the practices. (Please note that i'm primarily asking for references, and not personal opinions).