I feel like this is a naive question, but I'm wondering what is the difference between experiencing discomfort and distress in meditation versus in daily life outside of meditation. **Do the *same* states generate different results in each case, depending on the co-arising factors?** EDIT: For example, suffering in daily life might undergo rumination and even being acted upon. In meditation, perhaps the same suffering will be diminished by the arising qualities from meditation, like equanimity or compassion. **Is this the case?**

I am wondering about the nature of lust and its remedies. I know Buddhism posits that lust depends on the sense organs, and contact with an object. Thus, I've read it promotes decreasing this contact and guarding the senses. Yet, I find myself experience lust seemingly detached from contact, or rather, lust with a subjective emphasis. It is my imaginations that flare and cause me to experience lust, but only at certain key moments. I specify this because *most* of the time, I do not experience lustful thought processes. Only at certain moments does it almost seem like my guard is down, and my mindfulness absent, and lust resurfaces in an almost obsessive way. I have not managed to find a way to decrease the periodic surfacing of lust I describe. It seems more inherent to myself as a subject than caused by objects intrinsically. In terms of remedies: (1) I wonder whether natural masturbation without erotic material is bad. Could it potentially reduce these types of surfacing lust? Or, rather, would abstinence decrease lust more effectively. I feel in this second case the libidinal drive might simply increase, whereas in the first libido is kept even. But perhaps I am wrong. (2) Is there any Buddhist information on interior causes for such lust? Thanks for any answer.

It seems that the answer is no, but in this case, why would you want to become a monk instead of staying "normal" ?

What or who is the cause that a realm of existance comes into being? Or is such accidentally? Or an unconditioned phenomena? A material-alone phenomena? What causes your world you "be", have "been", could or will "be"?

How do Buddhist monks deal with meals while traveling across different time zones?

I have read this question but I'm seeking more advice. So it is quite obvious in the activity of software programming that we cannot help but think about programming concepts and also end up creating objects as concepts (as in Object Oriented Programming) and make something work. Now, I understand their usefulness in the context of what I am working on. Invariably, I get flustered and frustrated sometimes when something doesn't work because I am lost in the process of creation of that thing which I am currently working on, the cause being I am not mindful. Because mindfulness means there is an observer observing the mind and thoughts, which may lead to emotions. But in this activity the mind is busy creating things which would work on a system. Also, sometimes work is incomplete, and you do get an urge to work on something but also you could spend the time to do samatha or vipassana. How to decide efficiently in these cases? How to balance mindfulness, be equanimous and pursue this kind of creative activity at the same time? Or is this a curse that you cannot do it effectively in the process of creativity? I would like to know if someone dealt with this and how? Thank you.

I have set the amount of time I meditate (focused attention/shamatha) at merely 15 minutes per day. Despite this, despite all my best efforts, I seem to still skip a day or two now and then. **Why is this? Would changing the type of meditation help?** I had read positive emotions help develop a habit. When I meditate mindfully on the breath, there are no such emotions; doing compassion meditation, positive affect arises. **Would this affective benefit motivate a meditative practice?**

If I want to read through the origins of western (really, Greek) thought about the virtue we generally call courage, I know exactly where to go: Laches, Republic, Nicomachean Ethics, etc. Meanwhile, while courage has played a central role in many of the dharma talks I've listened to, if someone asked me where to look for a Buddhist theory of courage I wouldn't know any particular place to start. Within the most widely accepted Buddhist scriptures (especially but not limited to the Pali Canon) are there are any "go-to" sutras on the subject of courage? (Especially from a philosophical, psychological, or theoretical standpoint - whether or not that theory is grounded in narrative or discourse.) [This question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/25817/compassion-is-a-result-of-knowledge-but-what-about-courage) gives several interesting references for modern writings about courage, but said I'm particularly interested in the older premodern stuff.

I have attended seven 10-day and one 20-day Goenka course, but never experienced either the "subtle sensations" or the "free flow." I have stopped going to Goenka retreats because I get frustrated hearing about how after the first day I should be experiencing such and such, etc. I still practice anapana for a couple of hours a day and study the Dhamma, and am resigned to being apparently incapable of having these experiences, which they also say are not important, lol. However, Goenka talks about them over and over in the courses and about how various people get "good results." I wonder if others have this experience also, and how they have dealt with it.

I want to start practising meditation, but breathing exercises extremely psyche me out. I find any activity that involves intensely focusing on a part of my body distressing, sometimes nauseating. So the traditional "focus on your breath" mindfulness meditations aren't really ideal for me. I like the idea of meditating listening to sound, for example the sound of rain or waves on my phone. But I'm completely new to meditation and am not sure how best to implement this practice. Should I wear over ear headphones, or is it best to have the music ambient and not directly my ear? Should I be sitting up or lying in bed? (I don't really have any other comfortable spots in my house besides my bed.) Should it be light, dark or semi-dark? Eyes open or closed etc.? The basic question I'm asking is: what are the best practices and practicalities for mindfulness meditation using sound?

Do the Pali texts on jhana actually mention Samadhi and/or One-Pointedness by name in the jhana descriptions or is this mention apocryphal?

Several years ago I did something that was totally legal, but very much against my upbringing, my world-view, and my ethics. It was a spur of the moment thing and I have regretted it massively ever since. However, it has haunted me mentally (and to an extent physically, due to tension) ever since. I might add, this event didn't hurt anyone else. What can I do from a Buddhist perspective, to completely cancel out this action and its resultant negative thought-stream once and for all?

There are those who not only deny one's faults as a "Dhammic" approach, but also are very anti-social (absence of gratitude and dutyfullness), with tendencies found in "[I don't like people but I like buddhism](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/30692/i-dont-like-people-but-i-like-buddhism) " and certain answers. This attitude seem common given modern consumerism and individualism, yet ignores the fact that material goods have no goodness but are dependent on people's voluntary or forced sacrifices. So is it with some "Buddhists". There is no Buddhism without gratitude for people who sacrificed a lot that is not possible to repay. How can such an attitude of "I don't like people but I like 'food'" ever justify itself? What might be the long term effects for people of such wrong views and trained to consumerism/householder-equanimity? What will be the bill to pay, sooner or later, for grave wrong view? *(note that this is not given for exchange, trade, stacks or nourishing bonds to the world but for liberation)*

This is a request for sutta references. I'd like to know the sutta's that describe how one can dedicate offerings in the name of a dearly departed one so that (s)he can, hopefully, have a better rebirth. Does anyone know of sutta's describing dedicating of offerings? Thanks.

I've noticed (and have been told) that formal sitting meditation is required and beneficial, as opposed to merely being mindful or compassionate in daily life. **What aspect of formal sitting causes this?** Is it the relaxation? The recurrent location or time? The stillness? The consistency? Thank you

I am looking for references to any (obviously modern) practices that might be described as "mindfulness of brain" or "meditation on brain" -- using the brain, part of the brain or nervous system, or any neuroscience concept as a meditation object or theme. An example might be using Daniel Goleman's idea of "amygdala hijack" for meditation on fear or other problematic emotions -- thinking about the amygdala during meditation or even trying to visualize it. This might include subtle body techniques (chakras, channels, winds, etc) that make explicit reference to brain or neuroscience concepts (which would be highly speculative, scientifically speaking, but that’s ok for my purposes). I am seeking references to established teachers or meditation systems or programs -- online or in books or papers -- *not* just ideas about how to do it, or the pros and cons of the notion. I'm also *not* seeking programs -- which abound -- that talk conceptually about brain or neuroscience but don't integrate that material into specific meditation material or themes. ---------------- addendum -- 2/28 As I said, I am not looking to discuss pros and cons of "mindfulness of brain". I just want to know if anybody is even attempting it. This is a small part of a larger research project on the consequences of current neuroscience for Buddhadharma. In fact, if nobody is doing it, that would confirm a hypothesis. But there are a lot of people drawing connections between neuroscience and meditation, so it's conceivable that someone is attempting "mindfulness of brain". If so, I'd like to know the story. If nobody responds, that's fine. It will be some evidence of non-existence, though obviously not definitive. It's all but impossible to do an online search for this idea because all the conceptual material on neuroscience and meditation gets retrieved first. That's all -- I'm not advocating it. Thanks.

Did the Buddha address the idea of making amends for past wrongs? I understand that we really only have the present moment in which karma is made, and where past karma manifests. But say one was a thief in this lifetime, stole much, but then found Buddhism and the path. According to the Buddha, should this person make an attempt to repay the victims of his/her theft?

If something is both relatively and ultimately correct can it still be false in the center ? I'm looking for a "yes" from any extant or historical tradition.

I realized that, when I meet *new* people and especially people I have a romantic interest in, to value and idealize them disproportionately. This seems very ingrained in my personality. Here, cemetery contemplation seem less pertinent as its novelty rather than lust. **What does Buddhism have to say about such novelty? What are the potential ways to reduce it or alter one's perspective about it?**

In this article http://aeon.co/magazine/world-views/logic-of-buddhist-philosophy/ Philosopher/Logician Graham Priest talks about some of the differences that Western logic has with Buddhist logic. Quickly said: Western/Aristotelian logic doesn't tolerate contradictions (principle of non-contradiction) and everything has to be either true or false (principle of the excluded middle), but Buddhist logic follows a system called the catuskoti which implies that statements can be true, false, true and false, or neither true nor false. Tibetan philosopher Gorampa even included the 'ineffable'. My question is this: In buddhist logic, where does "hey man, that's illogical!" fit in? I mean, it pretty much seems everything can be valid in Buddhist logic, and there's just no place for the illogical, which pretty much points to the inefficacy of that system.