I have a dog that i love very much.I don't feel like his a dog.I have a lot of respect for him.And treat him like an old friend.As he is old now.I heard somewhere that animals who hear the Dharma can be reborn as a human??I don't know if that's true or which sutta it's in.But I have formed a habit of either reading the sutta to him,chanting in Pali,or sometimes just talking to him about the Four Noble Truths.As that's the one thing i want to remember when i die.I know it seems too silly but i just feel like somewhere inside he can understand me.He has a very serene and calm demeanor too.I hope that there is a sutta about animals hearing The Dhamma having a better rebirth,because this dog has qualities that even i as a human being lack.I hope that there is some way to share the greatest gift(The Dhamma) to our animal friends. **Is it true is there a way to benefit animals by helping them come into contact with the Dhamma? Such as teaching them the Dhamma?**

What is the opinion of Nichiren Buddhism on the concept of a Creator or Supreme Being?

What is the relation of sukhāvatī to 蓮華藏莊嚴世界海 ("the lotus's vault, the perfected lokadhātu, the ocean") attested to in the Buddhāvataṃsakanāmamahāyānasūtra T279 & Āryasaddharmapuṇḍarīkanāmamahāyānasūtra T262, wherein arahantaḥ, according to the Mahāyāna as attested to in aforementioned scriptures, perfect Buddhahood? Context: > Inquiry: in the Arhat's past lives the causes and conditions for being > subject to embodiment necessarily ought to have been eradicated, in > light of this they dwell where to perfect buddhahood? > > Response: when attaining arhatship, the three realms' myriad outflows' > causes and conditions are exhausted, there is no more birth again in > the three realms. There is a pure buddha land, beyond the three > realms, where not even the word affliction has a name, in this kingdom > of the Buddha, they hear the Dharma Flower Sūtra [i.e. the Lotus > Sūtra], with this they perfect Buddhahood. As in the Dharma Flower > Sūtra's words: "There are arhantaḥ, for example, who’ve not heard the > Dharma Flower Sūtra,themselves they call 'ones who have attained > cessation'; I in another realm for them speak this matter, that you > all shall become samyaksaṁbuddhāḥ." > > (Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśaḥ T1509.714a9) Furthermore, these pure lands, what relation do they have to ākaniṣṭaghanavyūha?

I have read a decent amount on modern meditative practices, but I am curious to read the way in which ancient monks described their techniques. This is not suggesting that modern meditative practices differ from their originators, as I wouldn't know if they do. I am simply curious about the ancient texts as one would be to read an ancient cookbook.

Would it be helpful, wholesome, skillful and wise to investigate the root condition of (each of) the three poisons/unwholesome roots of greed, ill-will and delusion (raga, dosa, moha)? [Why these three and not some random qualities like baseball, terpenes and a Farm Aid concert?] And why do vast amounts of beings seem to tend more towards lust, ill-will and ignorance instead of wisdom, wholesomeness and skillfulness? Why is our true nature still mostly obscured?

From what I understand the aggregates aren't self but now when a person dies and the material aggregates of his body dissolve then what remains who gets reincarnated ?.If there is no soul then what carries the **information** of this person to go to another life for example what defines that this is the person and not someone else do we have a serial number :) ?. When the new material aggregates of the new body are born then they are different from the ones of the person who died .What defines that **THIS** person is in **THAT** body?.

We all now that habits which are not acted upon wither with time. However, is it possible to reduce cravings to a point where the specific cravings are close to non-existent? How does one go about to achieve this? Let's take sexual desire or sensual desire as an example: If I don't engage in sexual activities then craving will probably reduce in intensity and frequency, but I doubt that external objects have no control in how I process them. If I see an attractive woman or tasty food isn't it inevitable that I at times will feel strong craving?

I have a lot of trouble dealing with rebirth, mostly because of my previous "skeptic" past. However, buddhism has helped me a lot to open my mind and to get detached from any point of view that might be incompatible with the wisdom shown by the practice of the Dhamma. This aperture to new perspectives has made me reconsider the possibility of rebirth. Thus, my question. From the point of view of paticcasamuppada, ignorance and craving are prerequisites for rebecoming. But why would the universe and its underlying mechanisms and laws care about our ignorance, intentions and desires? Isn't this a kind of anthopocentric view? Why does uprooting ignorance and craving stop the rebirth process?

According to the Pali Canon, how are intentions and habits passed on from one existence to another without any material support? What do the texts tell us about rebirth and the transference of these material phenomena into inmaterial phenomena, and the back to material ones? More specifically, how is kamma transmitted from one life to the next. If we consider 'kamma' as intention and habits, how are these transfered from a brain which, as you observed, is destroyed and dissolved after the breakup of the body? Aren't intention and habits a function emerging form the conjuncted activity of brain cells? Thanks in beforehand.

Did buddha comment anything about the origin of universe and about origin of life? And if no WHY?? So far whatever texts i have read, i haven't come across any such statement. Though it is not very important for man to know about it and rather he must concentrate on the present time on his actions and thoughts but atleast for the sake of satisfying curiosity of man he must have told .

I constantly hear from buddhists that "happiness is inside of you" and that thinking you can get away from suffering by wanting to be somewhere else, or wanting to be with someone else or stuff like that, stuff that comes from the outside, is only misleading and will generate more suffering because once you satisfy some particular need, since you are a human being, other needs will arrive and with that new forms of suffering, but then I wonder, how is it possible to end suffering if we will always desire for certain things, as long as we exist in this material world? Can someone clarify this to me? I'm really naive into buddhism

From this site, I found the following saying of Buddha: > "You, monks, should not thus cultivate the  notion (samjna) of impermanence, suffering and non-Self, the notion of impurity and so forth, deeming them to be the true meaning [of the Dharma], as those people [searching in a pool for a radiant gem but foolishly grabbing hold of useless pebbles, mistaken for priceless treasure] did, each thinking that bits of brick, stones, grass and gravel were the jewel. You should train yourselves well in efficacious means. **In every situation, constantly meditate upon [bhavana] the idea [samjna] of the Self, the idea of the Eternal, Bliss, and the Pure** ... Those who, desirous of attaining Reality [tattva], meditatatively cultivate these ideas, namely, the ideas of **the Self [atman], the Eternal, Bliss, and the Pure**, will skilfully bring forth the jewel, just like that wise person [who obtained the genuine, priceless gem, rather than worthless detritus misperceived as the real thing.] > - The Buddha, Chapter Three, "Grief",The Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra Now, as I know this saying is exactly monistic & found in some hindu philosophies like Advait Vedanta & Kashmiri Shaivism. This practice in Advait Vedanta is called *manana*; and in KS, *Shuddha Bhāvna/Vikalpa* under Sāktopāye - Herein you practice not to identify yourself with something (body, mind etc) **which you are not**. In other words I think it seems to teach the same as, > It is not with the body identification that you should sit for meditation. It is the knowledge "I am" that is meditating on itself. > - Nisargadatta Maharaj My question is why Gautam Buddha talked about "self" (that it is eternal, blissful, etc.)? I may not be getting context, so what's the context and explanation?

I am meditating for the last three months, about 30 mins a day (or a little longer than that). I followed Ajahn Brahm's "[Basic Method of Meditation](https://bswa.org/teaching/basic-method-meditation-ajahn-brahm/) " to bring the mind to be in the present relatively steadily (still it wanders, but not like when I started the practice). I started with trying to quiet the mind (too much internal thought etc.) by keeping my attention sometimes on the breath, sometimes on a sound without strictly sticking to a single meditation object. My understanding of Ajahn Brahm's description of the first stage was to bring the mind to the present and then make it quiet. Now I am kind of there, I am trying to figure out how to proceed. Meditation books recommend keeping your attention at the tip of the nose, but my mind is naturally drawn towards knowing the breathing as a whole (through most parts of the body, chest area, belly and sometimes the face also). I tried to go back to paying attention to the nose, but it made the meditation really hard. When I came back to the whole body experience, it was easier. Just wondering whether I am doing this wrong. If so, how should I proceed? I am particularly interested in knowing whether this way of meditation is what Buddha mentioned in the Satipatthana Sutta when he says: "'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe out,' thinking thus, he trains himself.

>"And what are the six kinds of renunciation joy? The joy that arises when — experiencing the inconstancy of those very forms, their change, fading, & cessation — one sees with right discernment as it actually is that all forms, past or present, are inconstant, stressful, subject to change: That is called renunciation joy. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.) Is this achieved by intellectual pondering about the six senses (and meditative insight into the three characteristics) or just pondering alone? I'd say the former, but then this Sutta is primarily directed towards Stream Entrants, no?

Like subtle "conceit"? I can't think of any others. I think there is a Sutta that is something like, "10 misperceptions of a somewhat achieved insight meditator". Bhante Yuttadhammo explained it somewhere. I thought I already asked this but I couldn't find it, maybe it was another forum.

In Buddhism we classically have four stages of enlightenment : 1. Stream-enterer (Sotapanna); 2. Once-returner (Sakadagami); 3. Non-returner (Anāgāmi); 4. Arahant. My question, as stated in the title, is: can a person attain to any one of the four stages mentioned above without clearly recognizing it?

What are the names of the (semi)secret societies — any and/or all of them — that have influenced, are influencing (and, via common consent, may influence in the future) Buddhism?

There are lot of wrong views in other religions but there are even some Buddhist who have wrong views. They don’t believe in rebirth and karma. And they say that they are metaphors. They seems to be clinging to the annihilationist view. According to MN 117 and other suttas, right view is believing that there is the fruits of good and bad karma and this is this world and the next world. The next world is where you will go according to your karma after death. >"Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view. And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view. > >"And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path. > >"And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are brahmans & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions. How do we help them abandon wrong views? If the Buddha was still alive then he could perform some miracles to show that there are more than just what we see with the eye.

Mum is regularly woken in the night by panic attacks which bring on uncomfortable physical sensations that she takes so seriously she has been known to ring the paramedics (always unnecessarily). After many months I am still unable to get her to even entertain the notion of 'staying with the discomfort, just as it is'. Does a Buddhist have any tools (metta/prayer/mantras - sorry I don't know the words) to manifest/stir-up a change in someone else’s approach? Or do I have to work on cultivating my own acceptance of the situation - however resigned that might make me feel?

With the Buddha teaching for 45 years before he passed into parinibbana, what is known about the methods and practices used to keep his teachings alive until they were written down? Do we know how many people were involved in this effort? How was such an extensive collection of teachings categorized?