I mean Chinese Chan Buddhism, not Japanese Zen or Korean Seon. If not, what is the best course of action if one wants to become a monk in Mahayana Buddhism, but not in Theravada and not in Vajrayana? I am especially fond of Master Xuyun, are any of his disciples still around?

An important point I see is how one furthers death and lying. Through working, you are taxed, and taxes fund the breaking of the precepts. Taxes fund war and espionage, so killing and stealing are definitely two which you break just by earning income. If one abstains from paying taxes, then your wage will be held. So nothing is really achieved here, since you are just laying the karmic burden on another person, which is arguably worse. Also, just being a consumer, even if say you make less then the taxable amount in your country, then you still fund abusive working conditions and abusive companies and practices. You fund massive amounts of suffering, since the money you pay goes into the company and then into warfare/espionage funding through the company's taxes. So, to leave such a life would really upset my relatives. My question is, is it more important to not cause suffering to my mother and father, and am I just being over reactive about this issue? Because the way I see it, I am certainly breaking the precepts of killing and stealing through proxy, yet if I were to leave, I would cause a massive amount of suffering to some of the most important people in my life. Also it may cause people who know me to really disrespect Buddhism, thinking "oh what a lazy/crazy person". Yet I cannot help but feel that contributing to the death of millions of people is less compassionate. Any thoughts please! This is a difficult situation. I am practicing Mahayana and am currently adapting the Bodhisattva vows.

I work as a software engineer. I've been working at this workplace for around 2 years. But, I don't find the work challenging enough (just boring bugfixes only). Given that I spend 8 hours at my workplace, I probably do just around 3 hours of productive work. I think I am wasting my time. Is it bad if I want better work ? Should I consider this as my aversion and just continue with my work ?

There is no self that is permanent. All this results from 5 aggregates, then who is experiencing the non self?

I am a business woman and my job is stressful. It is entirely motivated by greed. I want to leave my career but I have a dream to help poor people in my country and also to make my parents proud of me. Could anyone please tell me what kind of career is compatible with Buddhism?

How did this idea of next Buddha formed? Is it the influence of other religion where they say Kalki or Christ will return. Also does Pali Canon mention many other Buddha before Gautam Buddha?

How are "all types of beings originally formless"? - p100 The Sutra of Hui-neng, Grand Master of Zen: With Hui-neng's Commentary on the Diamond Sutra I'm asking because this page [quoting His Highness the Dalai Lama] says > Immediately thereupon, the intermediate state begins—except for those > reborn in the formless realms of infinite space, infinite > consciousness, "nothingness" or peak of cyclic existence, for whom the > new life begins immediately upon death If we all are originally formless, then our original nature has no intermediate state, while our unenlightened state does. How can that be?

Ajahn Martin claims so in this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tsu3GEsoMT4 at 14:25. What's his source for this claim?

Is a buddhist's goal to transcend a culture's social roles? How do enlightened beings see social roles? As buddhists try to not make distinctions between people, I would imagine that they are not particularly concerned with social roles. Is that true?

If these stories could be taken to be truly narrated by the Buddha, it gives some interesting twists to the generally understood history of India and Indian philosophy. For example, there are Jataka stories such as Dasaratha Jataka and Ghaṭapaṇṭita jataka that give the Buddha's previous birth as either a character in the popular epic Ramayana, or as kin of a character in the popular epic Mahabharata. There are also other Jatakas that narrates some of the other characters of Mahabharata, but in all such cases, with much less dramatic than their depictions in the epics. As of now, the general Indian belief is that the epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata (and thus the philosophies depicted in them) preceded the Buddha. However, in the Suttas there is hardly any reference to them, unlike the references to many other schools of thoughts. Thus, I would assume these epics were non-existent at the Buddha's time. In my knowledge, the first reference in the Buddhist literature to these epics in its present form is in Buddhacarita, the biography of the Buddha written by Asvagosha in the 1st century CE. In that Asvagosha presumes that these epics were fully developed before the Buddha's time, and hence bring references to those in conversations people had with the Buddha. So, I was concluding that these epics would have formed sometime after the Buddha, but before the 1st Century CE. And, Asvagosha's references to Ramayana and Mahabharata are more in line with its present day form than its depictions in the Jatakas. (And, I would assume Asvagosha's narrations may be fictitious) If Jataka commentaries can be taken as being based on the narrations passed down from the Buddha, rudimentary versions of these epics are coming from the Buddha's narrations. They come as isolated accounts, not connected together as a grand epic. They stories also lack the dramatic turns and glorification of characters that are found in those epics. In addition, the character depictions in the Jataka are inconsistent with the depictions in the epics known at Asvagosha's time. So, I was thinking about two possibilities. 1. If the commentaries are regarded as completely based on the narrations given by the Buddha, then the epics developed later by deriving inspirations from Jataka stories. In other words, the glorious characters of these epics were created by altering the original narrations by the Buddha. (I tend to believe this. However, I need to make sure that the Jataka commentaries are authentic and in existence at least at the time of the first council to assert this.) 2. Alternatively, these stories were inserted later when the epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata became popular. In that case, characters from the epics were adopted to convey a message. I believe this is unlikely, because Jataka depictions of these characters are much less attractive and plain compared to their depictions in the epics. And, the rest of the Pali Suttas are matter of fact depictions and not later concoctions. So, I prefer to assume that Pali Jatakas also hold the same authenticity as the rest of Pali Suttas.

How important is the hand gesture of a Buddha statue? I heard in a video that I should definitely get a Dhyāna Mudrā (Meditation) statue or a bhūmisparśa (calling the Earth to witness / touching the Earth) statue to deepen my practice... Which is unfortunate because I'm on a tight budget and found a good deal I'd like to snag on an Abhayamudrā (gesture of fearlessness/giving refuge) statue. Secondly, is it okay to buy one with a (small) crack in the plate behind the head (not sure what it's called)? As some have pointed out that could symbolize impermanence... I just want to make sure it's "kosher". Lastly, can I keep my statue in storage until I have a shrine or at least a clean and appropriate room? Or should I wait to until I have a good place to set it out? Thanks in advance!

The 5 criteria of killing 1) There is life present 2) The person knows "there is life present" 3) Intention to take away the life 4) Action or speech that causes "life is taken away" 5) Life is taken away Is it possible for a person to fulfil criteria 1, 2, 4 and 5 but not 3? For example, a person orders me to kill and I did it unwillingly. Many times, I've heard people insisting that it's not counted as killing because the intention to kill is absent. But I kind of disagree thus posting this question for advice. Perhaps, to explain my understanding. You know an action will cause life to be taken away but chooses to act upon it. That choice itself is the intention.

How does Buddhism view conscience? Do you follow your conscience or Buddhist morality? Your conscience does not always in line with Buddhist morality. For example, cakes are not poison but generally are not considered as healthy food, Buddhism does not prohibit you from selling cakes to other people. But your conscience says, it's better to sell something that can make contribution of health to people at large e.g. healthier food compare to cakes. Do you ignore your conscience or follow it? EDIT Although selling cake is not wrong livelihood but your conscience tells you to choose healthier contribution. It's easy to fall into extreme. Buddhism is the middle path. How do you keep it balance and not neglecting your conscience at the same time? If selling cake is better than selling drugs, selling healthy food is better than selling cakes and so on. I am wondering what is the use of Right Livelihood as in the Noble Eightfold Path, are they all considered Right Livelihood, except drugs? What I meant was which one do you listen to? Listening to conscience is necessary, as you said. But what you think is right or wrong does not necessarily true or middle path. If selling healthy food is better than selling cakes, logically one will follow what is best, we consciously put the latter one into the "not to do" list and choose former one as our Right Livelihood. But how do you know if you follow this kind of thinking you're not going to fall into extreme? We create our own version of Right Livelihood. Both cakes and healthy food are not considered wrong according to Buddha.

Does anyone know of an API for Buddhist texts along the same lines as this one for the Bible . I do some spare time software projects and I would like to hook up to Buddhist text API just as part of playing around with some new technologies. Currently I'm using the Google Books API for it. What I'm imaging is that one could make a web request to a URL such as http://buddhisttextapi/dhammapada/verse/12 and you would get back the 12th verse of the dhammapada in whatever translation. So for the technically minded I'm interested in some kind of REST API - preferably under active development or at least with some decent documentation. Many Thanks

If one is having sexual relationship with minor (protected by parents) and parents disapprove the relationship, that is breaching of the third precept. What if an adult child having a (sexual) relationship with someone without the consent of their parents, of course everyone has their rights, but the question is is this breaking the third precept?

An answer has prodded me to completely reconsider my understanding of Buddhism and emptiness[ \[this answer\]][1] . I never realized that Buddhism involves the dismantling of preconceptions and false certainty. Due to some spiritual experiences, I feel it's clear that the path to a happier life for me is changing this. However, I know for a fact that I continuously generate such preconceptions and approximations almost pathologically. I feel that doubt greatly arises from this, in my mind; I keep making inexact and hasty conclusions, and assuming things. I cannot merely *not know.* My question is: **What are the ways to dismantle such biases of mind? I specifically mean those of speculation, stereotyping, jumping to conclusions, and so on.** Simply put, I'm wondering how one trains or comes to accept uncertainty.

Questions: > Is it normal to shy away from your family when it is hard to interact > with them because they are so caught up in defilement and shaming my > practices? > > And is it proper to not respond to other people's questions or > comments such as "wasn't that so good" or "do you like/dislike that?" > or even "you believe in God, right, and you're a good Christian, > right?" I seem to get these questions and have a hard time putting > together an answer.

Is the seer and seen different? Is th watcher and watching different ? Is the observer and observe different? camera and picture are different ? For example I saw a tree? Tree and "me" different? Tree and "me" same? It is very difficult question. Please correct if i use wrong grammar

Bhikkhu Yuttadhammo mentioned that one shouldn't build up a meditative-self while being a meditator. How can I prevent this from happening, as I have been quite stiff and getting quieter and more serious lately. Or is that not have to do with a 'meditative-self' view? Please help!

Would the eightfold path help someone transcend gender dysphoria? Is gender dysphoria a matter of clinging or a matter of hardwired biology?