Many religions have period or specific practice including fasting. I'm aware of the eating prescriptions of monks, but are there traditions or practices involving fasting for Lay-people? If not in scripture, are there in culturally Buddhist countries?

That is to say that wisdom must come first before compassion.

I get the idea of recognizing mind states .Knowing their existence separates them from self but sometimes .I get this addictive Music like a recording in my mind that constantly restarts diverting my concretion from work .I recognize that it may come from states but dealing with it isn't as easy . - I tried 1. Knowing that its just music 2. knowing the reason why it came (maybe when I was listening I wasn't mindful. 3. diverting my attention ardently away from it All this didn't work maybe helps in understanding but it still doesn't stop it sometimes it gets even more energy.

I have been practicing samatha, vipassana and metta meditations for over a year. I came frequently across articles (and questions on this site, primarly this one ) describing other types of meditation, which can be rather confusing, because it is not often very clear what differenciate one from another, nor what is their purpose. Should I worry about all the other meditation techniques out there ? How far should one expect to go by practicing only a combination of samatha, vipassana and metta ?

Now separating self from perceptions for me is understandable. That Ego is just an illusion there is no self. But a question arises... Who is the watcher? Can't I say that I am the watcher or is awareness the watcher and what I perceive as self is just awareness ? Or I can just recognize "there is a watcher".

Are they the same person? Or a previous incarnation before the Buddha was a human? Is there any Sutras that mentions/reference about this? (Pali Canon)

I have noticed in my meditation / mindfulness practice the following: as the idea of self dissolves, the ideas of compassion, happiness, sorrow, and basically everything that a "person" might experience also dissolve. This is disconcerting for a few reasons: 1. I stop caring about the suffering of others. After all, "no one" is really suffering, so there is no "person" to receive compassion. The "person" that I direct compassion to right now, is simply a volatile "soup of phenomenon" that won't even exist a few moments later. 2. I lose motivation to do things because I don't feel fear the way I used to. Because of my upbringing, fear of consequences was the primary motivation for doing anything. Example: in relationships, fear of letting people down would motivate me to pursue resolution to problems, resolve conflicts, etc. 3. I don't enjoy things in life the way I used to. As negative emotions have dissipated, so have positive ones. I no longer enjoy eating a meal with good friends, or a sunset or a dozen other things I used to. No moment is particularly better or worse than any other moment. When I live life one moment at a time, there is nothing to "look forward to" because I am not doing anything I dislike that I am trying to "get done as quickly as possible." Bottom line: the more I meditate and live moment by moment, the more dull and uninteresting the world becomes. Consequently, I don't know how to get from here to having compassion or even interest towards other living beings. Can anyone offer some guidance?

I once was at a (theravada) mini-retreat where the teacher insisted that if one really watched carefully, one would recognize that it is not possible for the mind to pay attention to more than one thing at a time. I commented that in my experience it is possible to experience a lot of stimuli simultaneously. to see "whole picture" in one glimpse, just like listening to many instruments at the same time, but he kept insisting that this was due to the fact that attention shifted at a very fast pace between objects. And that if I kept practicing I would realize this. Is what he said in accordance with buddhist teaching? I have never heard it mentioned from any teacher other than him (but I remember it from some old perception psychology which I don't know if is out dated), and it really interferes with my mindfulness when I come to think of what he said.

The founder of the Triratna Buddhist Community, Sangharaskshita, stated that he thinks stream entry is realistic after twenty or thirty years > In fact, it would be surprising if, after 20 or 30 years of life in > the Order, you were not a Stream Entrant. It would seem to be very > surprising, if you have done all the other things - maybe you have > founded Centres and written books and given so many lectures and gone > on so many retreats, that you were not a Stream Entrant: why not? It's obviously a very bold statement. Does anyone else give that kind of timescale for stream entry or do any modern traditions give any kind of timescale at all. Or is Sangharaskshita a complete outlier with this kind of estimation. **Note**: Tiratna is my Sangha which I think is right to acknowledge in the question. That said it doesn't stop me finding some of Sangharaskshita's statements bold or even controversial and I'm always interested on outside perspectives on his statements.

For what reason did Dharmakirti argue that absences are conceptual constructions? I wondered if it was because real absences would have svabhava, would be essences, because they do not change in time? I can't find anything to cite now, but I believe he argued this. I mean everyday absences, such as a cow from a field, rather than anything technical about apoha, which I am not that familiar with.

Simple question, but I would like to know- what are the defilements, according to Theravada Buddhism? I keep hearing this term and would like to find out what it means, according to the original teachings of the Buddha. Thank you

In the Theravada tradition: 1. There is no self in all phenomena (including the five aggregates). 2. The five aggregates and the rest of nature and the world is always changing and not permanent (anicca). 3. Emptiness is only about the emptiness of self in all phenomena (including the five aggregates). The aggregates and the world definitely exist. These are not empty. 4. Suffering definitely exists (first noble truth). 5. The Theravada practitioner has to strive to become free from suffering. Nibbana exists, and is permanent and unchanging. Whereas, in the Mahayana tradition: 1. There is no self in all phenomena (including the five aggregates). 2. The five aggregates and the rest of nature and the world is always changing and not permanent (anicca). 3. Emptiness refers to the emptiness of everything (including Nirvana ) - the self, the five aggregates, the world, nature etc. 4. According to the Heart Sutra , "There is No Truth of Suffering, Of the Cause of Suffering,Of the Cessation of Suffering, Nor of the Path." 5. According to the Heart Sutra , "There is No Wisdom, and There is No Attainment Whatsoever." So, why should the Mahayana practitioner strive for anything at all, if everything is emptiness (nothing really exists), and there is no suffering at all, and there is no wisdom to be gained, and there is nothing at all to attain?

I'm looking for two suttas: (1) a sutta in which the Buddha says, I believe, that one is able to perceive the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, along with other pairs that one can perceive in the way opposite to what is natural. (2) A sutta in which the Buddha says that you shouldn't judge others since only he or one like him knows the full extent of people's kamma. I believe it is from the long discourses.

What has buddha told about dreams? Do dreams have any link with truths or realities? If a person understands something from his dream which he is asking in this world, than should such things considered as real? How is this world also one of the dream worlds among other infinite dream worlds/parallel universe? Is dream a type of meditation state?

A common teaching in Mahayana is that of the two extremes it is better to fall into eternalism rather than nihilism. This advice is given by many Mahayana or Middle Way teachers. I'm looking for Sutra references for this teaching or earliest known exposition of this teaching. I'm tagging this Mahayana as I know this is a Mahayana teaching, but if anyone could find references in the Pali Canon I would be very happy for you to share it :) Please don't use the question as a means to argue with the teaching... just looking for references.

Practice Ven . Mahasi Sayadaw tradition --------------------------------------- I spend most of my unproductive time (traveling , when nothing special to do ) on reading Dhamma books using my iPhone. These moments are not appropriate for sitting or walking meditation , so I follow "daily life" instructions can be found here http://www.sirimangalo.org/teachings/how-to-meditate/chapter-six-daily-life **But when I try to make a clear thought "reading" while reading I find it interfere with reading . How should I use clear thoughts to be mindful when reading ?**

Jarāmaranam, Jāti, Bhava, Upādāna, Tanhā, Vedanā, Phassa, Salāyatana, Nāma-rūpa, Viññāna, Sankhārā, Avidya. I believe they operate inversely and wanted to see further how this inversion is illustrated in the Pali canon.

Let us suppose there is something (i.e. nirvana) unarisen and eternal. How can we conclude and trust that it is indeed unarisen and eternal ? Because in order to find out whether it is unarisen, we will have to go into its infinite past; and to find out whether it is eternal, we will have to go into its infinite future. Nirvana is said to unarisen and eternal. So my question is : How do we know something is unarisen and eternal ?

I noticed recently that for some odd reason, none of my resolutions and efforts have come to fruition. My attempts to diminish junk food, social media, and other such negative behaviours have remained similar, and my attempts to meditate and exercise have lacked success. **Q1. What could be responsible for such a lethargic and demotivated approach to training oneself? Is there a mental factor simply lacking from my practice?** I suspect effort may be a mental concomitant necessary for improvement regardless of the insight I may have otherwise. **Q2. Is effort, as resulting from sitting formal and consistent practice, a prerequisite for growth? Is *truly* effortless practice a myth?** (I ask question two because I know that some Dzogchen and Mahamudra techniques are described as effortless.)

For two years there has been daily meditation. For 10 months there has been the addition of satipathanna practice and present moment awareness. 4 months ago the self was seen as a creation of imagination. There followed two hours of laughter and joy. Later that day there were demon images in the mind. Inwardly smiling they disappeared then the body became electrified and there was a sense of being in the precise moment. One week later occured a formless jhana in the shopping centre. It appears three awakenings or major shifts happened in the space of one week. It seems like an unknown force is guiding things now. Troublesome thoughts can be dismissed very easily. Suffering has reduced by about 60 percent. There has been strong desire for women and feeling bad towards family members. This is where the sense of self seems strongest. After the unfolding of Sotapanna which is massively transformational, does the Buddha suggest a change in practice?