Have there been any Buddhist texts addressing geometry, calculation or abstract algebra? I recently read a composite biography of several mathematicians through history. While some had schizophrenia, few had serious mood disorders. Cardano was mentioned as a possibility. Proofs require a mindfulness of thought. There is also the stereotype of ivory tower nerds being emotionless or stoic. There seem to be therapeutic effects of learning mathematics or minds resistant to emotional pains are better at math than average. Buddhism has a lot to do with handling emotional pain. Has me wondering if mathematics might have been a point of interest. Numbers seem to be. Four Noble Truths, Eightfold Path, Three Marks if Existence. On the other hand, a straight forward, linear, literal approach to understanding doesn't quite feel like Buddhism .

The motivation behind these two questions, is I suspect the Buddha emphasized some meditation practices above others for some reason or other. Obviously everything the Buddha taught would have useful applications at some stage, for some reason. But some practices have been touted as being especially useful for a particular purpose, such as metta to counter ill will. Anapana breath meditation, was the practice the Buddha engaged in on his personal retreats, he seemed to favor that above all else. The 7sb awakening factors, are the samadhi engine that takes in any Dharma (meditation practice) that sati-sambojjhanga (awakening factor) 'remembers' and feeds into the 7sb samadhi engine. The 4sp satipatthana are defined as 'samadhi nimittas', equivalent to the Dharma that sati remembers and feeds into 7sb, and as such, would cover every meditation subject. So what we're looking for, in these two questions, is whether the Buddha used certain key terms to designate a small number of meditation subjects as being exceptional, among so many meditation topics taught. Two questions: 1. how many meditations have the word 'sati' in there? I'm aware of 3: * Ānā-pāna-s-sati 16APS🌬️😤: in-breath (&) out-breath remembering, * maraṇa-s-sati 💀🧟: death remembering * kāya-gatā-sati 🏃‍: body-immersed-remembering They all have 'sati' in there name. I'm not including anu-s-sati practices (such as Buddha anu sati, Dhamma... Sangha....). And not including sati-(u)patthana. Am I missing any? I think those are the only 3. 2. what are all the practices that are touted to be of "great fruit, great benefit" (maha-p-phalā, mahā-nisaṃsā)? The 3 sati practices above are. the 4ip iddhi pada are. What else? I believe there are more.

I read the following on the internet: > I think that in Buddhism the word refers to elements of experience -- > and that the words represent subjective or perceived qualities of a > thing. For example, I don't know, ice might be hard and wet and > not-hot so it seems to be composed or (or is perceived as having) > those two elements. Does "dhatu" in Pali refer to "elements of experience"?

I find that a good number of believing Christians and Muslims think that Satan literally exists and is a very real actor in the real world. Is "Mara the Evil One, the Tempter" a rhetoric device in Buddhist tales -- a personification to enable the construction of a certain kind of parable? Or is "Mara" understood by contemporary Buddhists as an evil being who actually exists in the physical plane that we inhabit?

Just a practical question on attachment to trifling material things. I struggle to put it in words but from my younger age, I have a habit of being angry when someone takes a minor item without asking. He/she could be my best friend but still, the feeling is there. I don't think it been stingy because been asked or not even asked I would give the same person or even a stranger x100 times the value of the item but when taken without my consent it is all a different matter. My question is how do I get read of it? A thinker once told me: if you claim to not-care for these things then when someone takes these items and you feel the anger go burn two more of the items to show that you're in control... this method did help me to quench the anger, but the character still lingers? Many Thanks.

I just wondered, is it bad karma at all to disagree with an arhat? I'm not saying I would, I just wondered, because killing one is phenomenally bad ! What about disagreeing with a Buddha?

Recently I'm discussing five elements of nature with an atheist he cleared our body is composition of 11 elements [Composition of the human body](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_of_the_human_body) . These elements are enough different from those 5 elements. My reply to him : >"How we can say different, when those 11 elements are form of 5 elements and vice versa." His clarification is as follows: > Form ? These are 5 elements in which Buddha believed - > 1. Earth- Earth is just a planet that’s diameter is 8000 miles while our body’s diameter is barely 600 mm. We live on earth. How our body could be composed of a whole planet ? 2. Air- Air is a mixture of dust particles and gases such as- nitrogen, oxygen, argon, carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is dangerous to humans. Argon is also dangerous in close areas. The only real elements are nitrogen and oxygen. If we breathe dust particles, they will make negative impact on our cardiovascular health. 3. Aether- Aehter is what you look up AKA space. How our body could be composed of sky ? Our body has opposite energy of sky. 4. Fire- fire is just a result of atomic transitions of elements rather than an element itself. 5. Water- Water is constituted from Hydrogen and Oxygen so it is not an element either. > For qualifying the definition of an element, it must be the smallest substance which cannot be broken into more forms. The Buddha was contemporary of Aristotle so this speculation was very famous at that time. Both philosophers believed in same speculation. I am quoting the critics of Aristotelian physics- Modern scholars differ in their opinions of whether Aristotle's physics were sufficiently based on empirical observations to qualify as science, or else whether they were derived primarily from philosophical speculation and thus fail to satisfy the scientific method-[Aristotelian physics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotelian_physics) So how our body/soul is composition of five elements of nature? Is there have any sutta that explained? I'm assuming may there would have philosophical explanation.

When the life of a Sotapanna ends, let's say he/she reincarnates as a human. Does that mean, the reincarnated is capable of demonstrating the qualities of a Sotapanna since a very young age? Or, does it take years of practice (again) to regain Sotapanna qualities ? And how long roughly does it take ? And is there anyway to tell if a kid attained Sotapanna in his/her past life ?

My understanding is that, in order to hear the correct dhamma, one must hear it from somebody who displays the outward marks of humility, generosity and selflessness. Otherwise, one cannot be sure one is hearing the correct dhamma. Are there any Buddhist organizations or monastic orders that teach dhamma to lay believers, and do humanitarian work, either in poor countries, or for the general public where they are based? I'm thinking things like refugee resettlement, addiction treatment and recovery, fundraising for medical research or vaccination drives, tutoring special needs children, etc. Can you recommend/provide links for your "favorite" organization? And secondly, is there a "better" or different karma for donating to Buddhist humanitarian work conducted by celibate monks, vs donating to Buddhist humanitarian work conducted by lay followers? Is there a better or different karma for hearing the dhamma taught by celibate monks, vs hearing the dhamma taught by experienced and intelligent lay followers? (Having been raised an evangelical Protestant, I was taught to believe in the "priesthood of believers" and that, for example, bread for communion can be consecrated by any Christian, not by priests only.)

Let me explain. I have met, got enchanted and started to slowly study Buddhism on my own quite some years ago. But then time passed and life consumed me. I have never abandoned the beautiful and deep perspective on reality that doctrine taught me. But over time you get still and staggered; and life begin to rot your way if you don't keep it fed and healthy. Well, I am talking In my case. I feel that I'm losing my path and I deeply want to grow again in peace and understanding. In this world so void of physical masters and lonely, buddhist teachings have given me great relief and energy to fight on. So, to the point: may any of you please recommend me a good reading to start meeting and discovering teachings again? If I may add please, if you know of something not too heavy or obscure... Started reading the bodhisharyavatara, which is beautiful but get a bit dense as you follow, so I can't read much at a time and don't understand much neither. Buddhism scriptures and texts are so huge in numbers that you kinda feel lost in it. I think I would resume it like this: a great reading, no matter the school or the time. I deeply thank you for these place and for your time and help. Yours, David

One thing that seems fascinating about the rules of the monastic life, the rules of poverty and celibacy, and so forth, is that as strict as the rules are, it seems that compliance is voluntary. A monk could, at any moment, choose to disrobe and leave the order, and he would still be welcome to hear the Buddha and practice as a lay believer. It seems almost as if he is lauded for acknowledging his limitations rather than continuing to struggle without making progress, and continuing to eat the alms food in vain. I haven't yet read any sutras where a lapsed monk is told that he earned himself a rebirth in a bad destination. Am I mistaken? Does a lapsed monk earn bad karma from leaving the order, or from having mistakenly joined the monastic order? On the other hand, is it possible that he earns good karma and a good rebirth for having been in the Sangha? Suppose that his time in the Sangha makes him more wise, compassionate, forbearing as a lay person than he was previously. Suppose a recently divorced banker or stock broker resolves to join an established Therevadin order for exactly seven years. He will memorize the teaching and meticulously follow the rules during that time, after which he will return to his profession (and find a new wife). Is this permissible and beneficial, according to the Dhamma?

**Anyone reaching nirvana in recent years?** People practise buddhism for many years but no one achieves nirvana. No one reaches *anātman* (pali: anattā). The only theories Buddhism offers are anātman, nirvana, and the five aggregates, so my question is this: Is the Buddha's path corrupt, because no one achieves the goal?

Eckhart Tolle is a spiritual teacher who is influenced by Christianity and Buddhism etc. Now he says that there are Buddhists who claim that his teachings are not really Buddhist. But in what way are his teachings not really Buddhist?

What is the difference between lay person and a person who achieves sotapanna?Does sotapanna person experience less thoughts?Would they experience as dukka,happiness,pain like mind states?

I am primarily interested in following the teachings of Mahayana. Mahayana refers to the path of the Bodhisattva, a person capable of achieving Nirvana, a state in which the practitioner is released from the effects of karma and the cycle of death and rebirth, but instead chooses to save other beings from suffering. Zen and Tibetan Buddhism are two different schools of Mahayana. What is the essence of these two paths, and how do I determine which path to follow in order to become a Bodhisattva?

Some people believe in rebirth after this life because (for them) it seems that the suttas claim literal rebirth. And it somewhat makes sense because in some passages it'd be harder to believe in "just" mental birth, especially here: "With the break-up of the body, re-appeared in..." (difficult here ro believe that body means the "body" of the 5 aggregates) & here: >"Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of suffering: **birth is suffering**, **aging is suffering**, **illness is suffering**, **death is suffering**; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering. “Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of the origin of suffering: it is this **craving which leads to renewed existence**, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination. SN 56.11 ________________________________________________________________ Elsewhere I read that birth (jati) means birth in a particular realm (mind dwelling), which is caused by a sense of "I", and this in turn is caused by craving & the underlying asavas, but even if this is true (& per the sutta it arguably is), **Why have samvega (sense of urgency that death may strike) without believe in literal rebirth** Why not live a normal life? This may sound provocative, but it really should not. Surely one can reply "because suffering", but most people living their live imperfectly okay, with some suffering here & there, but still find meaning & go through live with all its ups & downs. With warm wishes.

What is the difference between "Khandha" and "Kaya". Are the words related? The translations for khandha that I've found are "groupings", "aggregates", "heaps". Also for Kaya I have found that the most used translation is "Body", but the meaning can also be "heap", "collection", "group". There's also an interesting document that says that "kaya" did not originally mean "body" but "sentient being capable of consciousness". The argument proposed by Kuan is in Chapter 4, "4.2.2 Kayagata sati/ kayasati and the individual possessed of consciousness", page 100. https://www.amazon.it/dp/B001QEQR92/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 http://watflorida.org/documents/Mindfulness-in-Early-Buddhism_Kuan.pdf It seems to me that understanding the word Kaya correctly can be very important for practice and right view.

In Buddhism there are six levels of heavens in the 31 different realms . These are ranged from the lowest heaven up to the highest heaven . Then , what is Nirvana ? , Is Nirvana the seventh heaven ? The ultimate heaven ? Is Nirvana the 32 th realm ? . If there are so many pleasures and happiness in the 6 heavens (in the 31 realms) , then what kind of pleasures and happiness we will find in Nirvana ?

Physical body always change with time. But I can't say this is me because I am not child now. I am Not teen now. I am lose with time slowly slowly.

In terms of Buddhist thought Is this accurate? It doesn't seem to jive with cause and effect which is more often referenced.