According to Buddhism, how would the end of times look like? Would it just be the end of a pre-defined period, or would it be something different like the **Rapture ** in Christianity?

Should concentration improve? I sit for an hour in the mornings and most days my focus does not stay on the breath for more than 2 breaths before I notice thoughts again. Is this normal? I find my mind full of doubts because of this. I think to myself that after 7 years I thought concentration would improve but maybe I'm incorrect. When the doubts arise I usually mentally note them. Yuttadhammo Bikhu says to mentally note the rising and falling of the abdomen on the breath then if pain arises for example then to note pain until it goes then gently bring awareness back to the breath. But many times for me the pain does not go. It remains for the entire hour sit. Do I just sit there noting pain the whole time? Another practitioner told me that if I can't seem to focus then to try not focusing on anything. I tried this but find I just become lost in thought even more.

Many times I hear people say it's neccessary to have a teacher. I'm a bit lost as how one finds one. I've been to sanghas, talks, retreats but haven't met anyone who ive felt I could approach and ask to be my teacher. The Buddha never had a teacher. If he became enlightened without one then I presume anyone can. I find that the more people I talk to the more confused I become because so many people have so many conflicting condradictive perspectives. From what ive heard and read if you sit and practice mindfulness of breathing etc you will gain insights into the true nature of reality.

I have almost finished reading D.T. Suzuki's 'Essay's in Zen Buddhism'. There are many stories of disciples attaining state of Satori (which according to book is akin to Nirvana) when the Zen master does something illogical like twisting the nose or giving an absurd answer to what is asked. As I am thinking about this it must be that the disciples mind must be in certain state that when the push is given by master it attains Satori. Do we have any analytical understanding of this state? Its psychology? Is it a silent persent moment awareness for a long time? Is it something special to the culture and/or mind. Do we have any such examples of monks attaining Satori in present times?

While contemplating both terms I could not find a difference between mental elaboration and mental fabrication. Aren't they one and the same?

In the essay "Buddhist Reflections on Death ", V.F. Gunaratna wrote: > The terminal thought goes through the same stages of progress as any > other thought, with this differences that whereas the apperceptive > stage of complete cognition known as *javana* or impulsion, which in the > case of any other thought occupies seven thought-moments. At this > apperceptive stage the dying person fully comprehends the death-sign. > Then follows the stage of registering consciousness (*tadalambana*) > when the death-sign is identified. This consciousness arises for two > thought-moments and passes away. After this comes the stage of death > consciousness (*cuti-citta*). Then occurs death. This is what happens > in this existence. > > Now let us consider what happens in the next existence. Already the > preliminaries for the arrival of a new being are in preparation. There > is the male parent and there is the female parent. As explained > previously a third factor, a psychic factor, is necessary to complete > the preliminaries for the arising of a live embryo, and that is the > relinking consciousness (*patisandi-viññana*) which arises in the next > existence in the appropriate setting — the mother's womb. On the > conjunction of these three factors, life starts in the mother's womb. > **There is no lapse of time, no stoppage of the unending stream of > consciousness.** As I understand, the last consciousness of a lifetime (*cuti-citta*) and re-linking consciousness (*patisandhi-viññana*) are terms coming from the Abhidhamma. They explain the continuity of the stream of consciousness from one lifetime to the next. This together with *bhavanga* and *javana* (see here ) explains the continuity of the stream of consciousness between thought-moments both in this lifetime and the next lifetime, and between the two. On the other hand, MN 38 seems to imply that there is no continuity of consciousness and that consciousness arises conditionally based on dependent origination. > The Blessed One then asked him: “Sāti, is it true that the following > pernicious view has arisen in you: ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught > by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and > wanders through the round of rebirths, not another’?” > > “Exactly so, venerable sir. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the > Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders > through the round of rebirths, not another.” > > “What is that consciousness, Sāti?” > > “Venerable sir, it is that which speaks and feels and experiences here > and there the result of good and bad actions.” > > “Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in > that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways consciousness > to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no > origination of consciousness? But you, misguided man, have > misrepresented us by your wrong grasp and injured yourself and stored > up much demerit; for this will lead to your harm and suffering for a > long time.” So, how does the Abhidhamma reconcile the concept of re-linking consciousness (*patisandhi-viññana*) with MN 38 above? Also, even in the current lifetime, is there any real continuity of consciousness or does it merely appear so?

They seem to be both elements that promote a healthy perception about things in life. I have a hard time differentiating between one and the other.

I am in the habit of getting the concepts samatha and samadhi mixed up. To me they seem like related or even similar concepts. Is that correct? My understanding is that samatha seems like the process of integration and samadhi seems like the result of integration. Is that the correct interpretation? As a related point are the underlying concepts related if you consider the Pali origins of the words i.e. do they have similar roots in the language?

The new Sutta Central translations have translated the Pali word "abhinibbatti" as "reincarnation", as follows: > *And what is rebirth? Katamā ca, bhikkhave, jāti?* > > *The rebirth, inception, conception, **reincarnation**, manifestation of the aggregates, and acquisition of the sense fields of the various > sentient beings in the various orders of sentient beings.* > > *Yā tesaṃ tesaṃ sattānaṃ tamhi tamhi sattanikāye jāti sañjāti okkanti **abhinibbatti** khandhānaṃ pātubhāvo āyatanānaṃ paṭilābho.* > >*SN 12.2* What evidence is there in the Pali suttas that the word "abhinibbatti" means "reincarnation"?

How does Buddhism define “self?” I read in some book that Buddha would avoid such questions, but I wonder why.

This was a birthday gift I received a couple of weeks ago. I'm trying to figure out where it came from, what the images mean, and about how old it is. It's at least a hundred years old.

I feel like focusing on the feeling of my feet on the ground is easier than focusing on the sensations of the breath. Is this a viable object for access concentration/jhana?

A close relative of mine who I shared the living space with has passed away recently from an unrelated injury. The relative was a good person but inherently "bossy", always getting their own way and intruding my personal life and space in ways I was not a strong enough person to continuously tolerate. At a certain point I've "had enough" and decided that severing all communication was the best course of action for us both to avoid painful arguments, so I did that. I did not feel contempt to that person and understood a lot of their antics were due to their very old age and difficult childhood, I was wishing them well, and was hoping they would make a first step and apologize eventually, which they never did. As a longer term solution I was hoping to move out and live alone, confident that would help me regain my bearings, but there were setbacks in my apartment search, so I did not make it in time either. Now that they're gone, I wonder how a person following the Buddhist precepts would have handled this. Showing compassion every once in a while is one thing, having your life and personal space invaded with petty commands, requests and criticism day after day, even when you're trying to meditate, seems like another.

What prompted the great BodhiDharma to go to China to spread his teachings- why not at home in the first place. Was he the founder of kalari payattu which has become somewhat unknown to us?

May I use this Tibetan flag above door and will this protect house from negative and bad energy? I know importance of chanting **OM MA NI PADME HUM.** So is it helpful or just ***feng shui*** thing? I thought to ask before having one above the main door.

Vipassana-style meditation has been adapted to treat patients to prevent recurrence of depression and anxiety through MBCT, and to treat chronic pain and stress through MBSR. More info on this can found in this answer . On the other hand, there have been some reported cases (see here ) of people who attended the 10-day Goenka vipassana retreats and became psychotic and suicidal. I have also heard that such negative effects may be a normal part of a meditator's progress, called the "dark night" or "death of the ego" (according to this answer ). These could be part of the sixteen stages of insight (according to this page ), namely bhaya nana or "knowledge of the appearance as terror" and adinava nana or "knowledge of the contemplation of disadvantages". Questions: 1. Are episodes of psychosis resulting from 10-day vipassana retreats the result of something not right (e.g. pre-existing mental conditions, the side effect of combining other techniques such as mantra or tantra with vipassana), or is it a normal part of progress in vipassana meditation? If the two are different, then what is the difference? 2. For lay people, are the Goenka retreats considered too intense and thus out-of-moderation? Is it better for lay people to attend weekly sessions and spend less than an hour daily in meditation, rather than the intense and rigorous Goenka retreats? 3. Is it better for lay people to practise in such a way that they will not reach the "dark night" stages because these stages are more suited for monks? 4. Is it required for lay people to find a teacher who can determine what is moderate for them, or can they just follow generic instructions?

In this previous question, I listed the results of my investigations into how each nidana (link) in dependent origination appears to be 'singular', except 'sankhara', which is plural. The 'jati' ('birth') link also appears to be singular. However, what is unusual about it is the singular 'birth' that occurs appears to have 'plural' components. It is translated as follows by Bhikkhus Bodhi, Thanissaro & Sujato: > *Katamā ca, bhikkhave, jāti (singular)? Yā tesaṃ tesaṃ sattānaṃ (plural) tamhi tamhi sattanikāye (plural) jāti sañjāti okkanti abhinibbatti khandhānaṃ > pātubhāvo āyatanānaṃ paṭilābho.* > > *And what, bhikkhus, is birth? The birth of the various **beings** (**sattānaṃ**) into the various orders of beings, their being born, descent, production, > the manifestation of the aggregates, the obtaining of the sense bases. > This is called birth. (Bodhi)* > > *And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent, coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of > [sense] media of the various beings in this or that group of beings, > that is called birth (Thanissaro).* > > *The rebirth, inception, conception, **reincarnation**, manifestation of the aggregates, and acquisition of the sense fields of the various > sentient beings in the various orders of sentient beings. (Sujato)* Now, each link of Dependent Origination appears to apply to the sense experience of an individual. Or, alternately, the Buddhaghosa interpretation over 3 lifetimes appears to be about the reincarnation of an individual. This being so, why does 'birth' ('jati'), seemingly a singular process, seem to refer to the birth (yā jati) of multiple beings (sattānaṃ) into the multiple orders/groups of beings (sattanikāye)? Why is the plural Pali word 'sattānaṃ' contained in the definition of what appears to be a singular process called 'jati' ('birth') in Dependent Origination?

'Om Mani Padme Hum' (translation: 'Hail the jewel in the lotus') is a six syllable invocation (mantra) of Avlokitesvara, one who is invoked as the Protector from danger. Does it mean protecting from danger as purifying **:** - **Om** (Pride / Ego) - **Ma** (Jealousy / Lust for entertainment) - **Ni** (Passion / desire), - **Pad** (Ignorance / prejudice) - **Me** (Greed / possessiveness), - **Hum** (Aggression / hatred)

I found a clay tile outside on the street that appears to depict the Buddha. It has a man in lotus position on one side and four scenes along with some text on the reverse. It is roughly as broad as my thumb. I'd be curious to know what scenes are depicted, the meaning of the text, what this tile is called, and what the function of the tile is. I'm guessing it shows his youth, becoming enlightened, being a teacher, and his death, but I don't know if it's more specific or different than my interpretation.

What is the difference between Tanha and Upadana? Why Buddha did not say Tanha Paccaya Bhava (instead of Upadana Paccaya Bhava)? And there are three kinds of Tanha in Sutta (Kama, Bhava, Vibhava): please explain how these three link to Upadana? --- I read the topic https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/17746/254 but that does not answer my question -- I want answers which specifically discuss this in line with three categories of Tanha with Upadana in Dependent Origination. Please give me a practical answer than a technical answer which are found in many places.