Those yoga sutras of Patanjali and have come across called vritti . It's like a whirlpool in the mind not ocean. But what is the equivalent of *vritti* in Buddhism?

Is the samadhi nagi or also called Mushin a state were the mind gets blank and you expirience actions while your mind is blank or unconsciousness? From Suzukis book description your mind gets a known from the non-mind what during that time happend.

Is it more important to develop one's own meditation skills or follow a prescribed method of a teacher? After all I think the Buddha worked it out for himself. And I have noticed in my own practice that following someone else's method can be confusing, if I don't understand properly what they teach. Is discovering it for yourself, such as meditation, the best way? N.B. I don't have any technique, I just sit there and try not to hang onto my thoughts. I think if we make out meditation to be difficult we set up obstacles to it in our minds. When I think its easy I find easy to do.

As a beginning meditator, the techniques I typically use are: - Counting breaths, restarting at 10 (learned in Japan). - Envisioning, with warm feelings, all of my friends and family around me in a large circle (learned in Florida). - Attempting to feel the minute sensations from each different part of my body (learned in Florida). - Focusing on identifying as many distinct sounds as possible, particularly when in nature (my own). Are there any other techniques recommended for beginning meditators?

Why do Buddhists seem to take such a strong anti-thought bias? All I could find regarding this issue is this blog post: Thought is Bad? Enlightenment Means Not Thinking? He provides great examples of this anti-thought bias, and has an attitude that is similar to my own towards it. This is something that has disturbed me for a while, and is leading me away from Buddhism. Although direct/pure awareness allows freedom from compulsive thought, why should I not choose to conceptualize? Is there no place for abstraction nor ideas? What about language and cultivation of the intellect? Creativity?

travellers - I was struck by the term maññassavā in the Dhatuvibhanga Sutta. > They have four foundations, standing on which the streams of > identification don’t flow. And when the streams of identification > don’t flow, they’re called a sage at peace. yattha ṭhitaṃ maññassavā > nappavattanti, maññassave kho pana nappavattamāne muni santoti > vuccati. It is translated as "the currents of construing," by Ven. Thanissaro and as "the streams of identification," on suttacentral.net (Ven. Sujato?). There is an elaboration of maññassavā later in the sutta as, "These are all forms of identifying: ‘I am’, ‘I am this’, ‘I will be’" etc. > ‘Asmī’ti, bhikkhu, maññitametaṃ, ‘ayamahamasmī’ti maññitametaṃ, > ‘bhavissan’ti maññitametaṃ... a) First - I assume the term is made up of "(a form of) maññ/maññati + assavā"? [PTS PED] Maññita (nt.) [pp. of maññati] illusion, imagination M i.486. Nine maññitāni (the same list is applied to the phanditāni, the papañcitāni & sankhatāni) at Vbh 390: asmi, ayam aham asmi, bhavissaŋ, na bhavissaŋ, rūpī bhavissaŋ, arūpī bh., saññī bh., asaññī bh., nevasaññī -- nâsaññī -- bh. Assava (adj.) [ā + sunāti, śru] loyal D i.137; Sn 22, 23, 32; J iv.98; vi.49; Miln 254; an˚ inattentive, not docile DhA i.7. I only sort-of get how the compound is then understood as "streams of identification" (**does the 'streams' derive from 'asava'[ā + sru]? Flow?**)... b) Where is this term "coming from," doctrinally, that is? Is it commonly used in the texts, esp. in the suttas, as a form of "I-consciouness/construction?" Are there any commentarial and/or scholarly discussions on this process of "flow of construing/identification?" Thanks much in advance! ~ananda

Practing meditation I would like to know if i have attained jhana samadhi state. For now i have a feelable state of chi flowing throught air and things and and making movements. But there is a downsite that my anja shows mindless impressions and chi aswell. Maybe someone has same expriencenwith that. What is that all about?

When I meditate I use the breath as my anchor. When I recognise that the mind has wandered it's always in past tense like Im remembering that I was thinking. Its just something I notice a lot. Its like the mind has already gone back to the breath automatically and then I suddenly remember what happened. Should I note this as remembering or thinking? Or does it not matter?

I've been applying Buddhist teachings to my life for the past 6+ years now. I don't meditate often, but I've noticed some extreme and what seem permanent changes in my mindset after constantly challenging and embracing Buddhist concepts. One of the traits my mind currently has, is not seeing people as fixed beings, but rather just playing out factors. I don't believe in good/evil anymore, and think anyone, no matter the disgusting or terrible things they do, deserve empathy. The drawback right now, is that it feels hard to connect to people, because I feel like I'm not on their level in a way... not in an egoistical way, but it just feels like I have a different approach to everything, at the fundamental level. It feels like I'm not real, they are not real, but they have not realised that, so I'm just watching their actions play-out whilst observing both my reactions and theirs, which I know are the result of conditions, and therefore have no real essence? It's really hard to put into words, but my question is basically: How do I reconnect with people at a human level. Is it possible at this level of understanding? Am I being deluded and potentially taking the practices too far?

When considering AN 9.5 says Dhamma is a "gift", is earning a secular living from Buddhism, such as teaching at a secular worldly university, immoral according to Buddhist Sutta & Vinaya principles?

I recently came across the following statement in a book I'm reading: "If consciousness in a sentient being disappears, there is no cognizer; if there is no cognizing, there is no manifestation; indeed, there is nothing but voidness, and true apperception is the negation of this voidness." I have encountered this "negation of voidness" before but never really grasped it. I hope someone else can throw some light on it. Thank you.

I wonder if Mahayanabhikkhus can perform a Theravadin ordination and have the ordination be recognized as valid by the Theravadin bhikkhusangha without doing dalhikamma? What if the theravadins do a dalhikamma for a monk who took theravadin ordination performed by mahayana monks? Can he get full acceptance in the Theravada then? If not, can a dalhikamma be performed for the Mahayana monks as to make them eligible to perform Theravadin ordinations or must they re-ordain as Theravadins? Finally, can a monk be considered to have full ordination in both mahayana and theravada?

In some Traditions - possibly Mahayana and/or Tibetan - Achala is translated as the immovable, which is sometimes depicted as a diety. This seems quite similar to, or the same as, equanimity (Upekkha), which is a term found in generous amounts throughout the Pali Cannon. In my personal understanding, a mind imbued with equanimity is a mind free from conditionality. Although karmic imprints still appear, one sees very quickly the nature of their deceptions. When they surface, they cannot get a foothold on anything. In Theravada, there are some references that indicate this: the Buddha and his chief disciples would sometimes call out, 'I see you Mara'. They were simply recognizing their own karmic imprints, (desires to think, say or do things that were unwholesome). Equanimity is when you are not moved by these inner sensations. They don't become actions (karmas). So, does Achala mean the same thing as equanimity (Upekkha)? If not, how are the two terms different?

In his book Breath by Breath Larry Rosenberg writes about meditating on the three kleshas directly i.e. meditating on craving, aversion and delusion. He is talking in the context of the Anapanasati Sutta . I can understand how one could recognise aspects their own hatred or craving. But how could someone recognise their own delusion in that moment of meditation? Specifically, I can see that anger would be very obvious and one would become very familiar with the burning, energetic, dominating quality of this. In the same way, one's own craving and desire could become recognisable - we are familiar with what wanting actually feels like. However what does delusion actually feel like. What bodily sensations are associated with it. What does the mental quality actually feel like. I can imagine looking back and with hindsight been able to see that at that point in time I was very deluded and thinking some very strange things. But how can the deluded mind see itself as deluded in that moment? How can we meditate on this? What does delusion feel like and how can we learn to recognise it?

Clearly Asperger's/Autism is not something that exists independently on its own as an entity, but it is made up of component simple experiential phenomena. What is such a view on Asperger's? What are its building components? What is it at the most fundamental level, as seen from Buddhist persepective?\ Thanks

This question is inspired by this online video : A lady asked a Rinpoche 3 questions, that translate to (a bit complicated logics here): > 1. Is Tulku's (Living Buddha)'s reincarnation process predetermined by his/her Karma(Karmaphala) or by Willpower(Praṇidhāna) ? > > Some explanations: Here she was actually asking, that by Buddhism doctrines, the *fact* that (bodhisattva) reincarnation will *happen* is result of Praṇidhāna, but is the *process* or *outcome* also determined by Praṇidhāna? Or like all other Sentients, that it is determined by Karmaphala? > > 2. If reincarnation is mainly determined by Karma, does a Tulku still have Karma? Why can bodhisattva still be affected and get life determined by > Karmaphala? Shouldn't a Tulku be already liberated from (Karma-driven) Saṃsāra or at least have already purified his/her Karma in his first life? > > 3. If reincarnation is mainly determined by Praṇidhāna, why would next-generation Tulku still need to be selected, to study his/her > knowledge before, to suffer from real-life setbacks? Why does his/her > Praṇidhāna determine his/her life to be so? In the video this Rinpoche said: > 1. He believes he is mainly affected by Karma, but many other greater Tulkus believe reincarnation is determined by Praṇidhāna. But he didn't explain why he or the others think so. > 2. Either by Karma or by Praṇidhāna, the setbacks that real-life Tulkus meet (*e.g. forgetting many knowledge after > reincarnation*) makes a Tulku more human-like, and that make people > believe in him/her because people think Tulku and theirselves are equal. I am confused on this too - shouldn't people believe in him/her more firmly if Tulku is more god-like? Like Jesus Christ revived and ascended, everyone saw this will believe in him. I also asked Deepseek R1, it says something similar like the Rinpoche said in the video, plus > Tulku can purify the Karma in their every new life in order to help achieve the Praṇidhāna will. I think here Deepseek indicates, every reincarnation brings new karma. after reincarnation and before Karma is fully purified, a Tulku is still predetermined by Karmaphala. Also I find a video from a much respected Taiwan Mahayana monk's view, Bodhisattva's reincarnation relies on both Praṇidhāna and Karmaphala . A Tulku is a Vajrayana Buddhist Lama who has taken the *bodhisattva vow*, but still different from Mahayana bodhisattva. I believe this is an open, speculatve, theoretical question. I want to listen what more others think about this question, and think about the above Rinpoche's explanation. Any view is welcomed.

As far as I know, many practitioners in the mahayana tradition have claimed to reach buddhahood and nirvana, since Sakyamuni. Is this non-abiding in nirvana? It would explain how prominent Buddhists have in the past been identified with celestial bodhisattvas. If so, would they nevertheless have reached final nirvana, on death?

First, I'm new to this forum so I don't know how to title my post or even write content. Sorry if I confuse you. Also, I'm a Vietnamese person living in Vietnam, male 27. I'm currently living in a hired room in Ho Chi Minh City and my parents are living in my hometown that's 3 hours away. I really need help or suggestions. I'll tell you about my journey but it is very long. My journey will include both psychological and spiritual problems. I'll divide it into different parts. ***Disclaimer: I think my journey is pretty hard-core in terms of existential philosophies and I'm pretty ruined at this point. If you're sensitive to such topics, please consider skipping this post.*** -------- **Part 1: DPDR-like symptoms** Around the end of 2021, I started experiencing symptoms similar to DPDR. Everything felt dreamlike or like a video game. My parents and familiar people seemed like strangers, and I often went into autopilot mode, as if watching myself from the outside. Despite feeling weird all the time, I convinced myself I was just sick and tried to live normally - having good times, bad times, and even crushes to keep myself engaged in life. In July 2023, I saw a psychiatrist and was diagnosed with severe depression and anxiety. I also went to see a therapist but that didn’t help. No one seemed to recognize my symptoms, which may not be common in Vietnam. Eventually, at the end of 2023, I decided to tackle my symptoms rationally, which led me to existential questions. **Part 2: Existential crisis** I started questioning everything: Why am I here? What is this world? I struggled with solipsism, the idea that only my mind is certain to exist. I also resented being born without consent and found it absurd that people live without questioning their existence. I explored existentialism and absurdism, but the crisis was more than just thoughts - it was an overwhelming, unsettling feeling. I grew up in a culturally influenced Mahayana Buddhist environment, visiting pagodas and praying for salvation. Seeking answers in Buddhism, I found its doctrines contradictory and eventually gave up. **Part 3: A new approach to Buddhism** I kept living, but new questions emerged: Why do I prefer one thing over another? Why do I think certain thoughts? This led me to the Buddhist concept of non-self—the idea that we don’t have a fixed, controlling self; rather, our thoughts and decisions arise from interdependent conditions. I came to see humans as ever-changing combinations of matter and energy. The autopilot mode I felt before is indeed how I function - thoughts and actions in me arise interdependently on the current environment and internal information like memories. Realizing this brought me a deep sense of relief. My existential questions are no longer valid because existential questions usually evolve around the sense of self. For almost a year, I felt liberated and enthusiastically explored Buddhism. However, I struggled with how to perceive my parents. Understanding non-self dismantled their identities as my parents. Every interaction felt like I was just acting the role of a good son. Conventional and ultimate truths seemed irreconcilable. Love, relationships, and social constructs felt meaningless. I ultimately decided to care for my parents - not out of love for parents, but compassion for special people. **Part 4: Denial of existence** On New Year’s Day, I attended a 10-day Vipassana retreat led by Mr. Goenka, which involved complete silence. The meditation was difficult, but the discourses troubled me more - especially those about reincarnation. From my research and the book No Death, No Fear: Comforting Wisdom for Life by Thich Nhat Hanh, I thought that we would dissolve into different dimensions and reincarnation would not only happen after death, it's happening right now. However, he said that consciousness right before you die will decide how you will be reborn. At the retreat, I was still struggling with reconciling the two truths. One night, I broke down thinking about my mother - born into poverty, the only motivation of her life is me and my brother. I couldn't reduce her to mere energy and matter. She was through a lot not to be treated like that from her son - even though she's fine and having a decent life right now with my dad and us. She - just like a lot of other people - wouldn't feel so bad about herself, only I feel that way. By the third night, I began losing my sense of external reality. The lack of social interaction and strict schedule made me forget what the world outside looked like, especially at night. So that problem triggered thoughts in me: I thought about my mom, I thought about how I couldn't reconcile the two truths, and I had fears of my dying grandfather - mostly how haunting the scene of a funeral will look like and especially the haunting imagery of human decay. When you feel love for somebody, it hurts to see them die. I didn't see him as a self, the love died and the fear arose. I remember crying in the 3rd night really hard thinking I would return home with my parents, living with them as if they a fixed selves, diminishing the value of the ultimate truth, and apologizing to them for being a sick child with all the mentioned fears and vulnerabilities. I was feeling so haunted at night that I asked to leave on the 4th day. The teacher - not Mr. Goenka ofc - insisted on me staying for the Vipassana session (because the first three days were introduction, if you know). I stayed but couldn’t make it and left on the 6th day. **Part 5: Returning home** Back to my room, I was still haunted by all the old thoughts and even existential thoughts somehow: how do I view this life, non-self or self - because I still can't reconcile them, life is weird, everything is weird, mom still doesn't feel like mom but she is mom. Nights were the worst - daytime distractions kept thoughts at bay, but at night, everything resurfaced. During that time, life felt like a dream, nothing was clear, the world is real but it's not real at the same time, so are people and all their material and non-material products. Two weeks later, the Lunar New Year came, and I had to go back to my hometown for more than 1 week with my family and my dying grandfather. I was so confused that most of my mind was filled with haunting thoughts and fears. Two days before New Year's Eve, my grandfather died. Surprisingly, his death didn’t haunt me as much as I expected - his body was hidden in a closed coffin. But also, to my surprise, I was having a sense of self so strongly that I started to have existential questions. A lot of times, I woke up in confusion and a strong sense of overwhelming frustration: why I was born just to die, why everyone was born just to die, and how everyone doesn't ask these questions and just live on. Why was I born and now I'm forced to live a life of suffering - or dukkha? Why was I born and now I'm forced to do this, to take care of my grandparents or my parents when they're old, to make a funeral for them? It's even worse when I think of non-self: I'm not me but I can't resist this strong feeling of frustration and suppression, and how everyone doesn't see that they're non-self and just live like they have a self. Life started to feel so strange, so absurd, everything felt weird. **Part 6: Trying to move on** Returning to Ho Chi Minh City, I struggled to function. I tried going out for spaces and to see how life goes on. Some days I woke up feeling absurd about life, and some days I just rushed to work because I couldn't sleep the previous night. The scariest moment wasn’t falling asleep - it was waking up, not knowing what feelings I’d wake up to. Life still feels vague and nightmare-like. Especially, sometimes when I caught myself wanting to do something, even when it was just dinner, I was like: that's not me, I don't actively want to eat, so why would I eat? Even when I caught myself in autopilot mode, instead of understanding it like when I just discovered non-self, now I hated it, like I wanted full control over what I do. Even when I said something, I felt like what I spoke just slipped out of my mouth without my permission. From observing my mind, I started to have moments of denying everything that arose in my mind. Maybe because I feared that just observing phenomena in me, I wouldn't take life seriously and would hurt people: like when I say something to follow Right Speech, who speaks now that we know about non-self, or do we just observe any words slip out of mouth as well? It all felt really frustrating because nothing seemed to solve the absurdity of my existence and this whole universe. I was even looking for answers if non-self implied determinism. Like I was looking for an answer that when I knew it, everything would just be logical and no-one really suffers. **Part 7: Slowing reconnecting with life** Just yesterday, I had a very strong moment of frustration when I just woke up from a short nap, like "Why do I wake up again, in this life, in this body, especially with all these questions and crisis"? Right at that moment, I started to get myself together, thinking I'd fight all the fears of meditation I'd had since the Vipassana course and sit down to face my thoughts. After a short while, I realized that even if life is deterministic and the feeling of control I'm having is an illusion, life still goes on. I’d have to start to live despite them all. I started to slowly pick myself up, cleaning my room that had been left messy since these thoughts got intense, taking a good bath, and listening to a famous Vietnamese monk’s discourse as I found his voice was really calming and his speeches were advocating living life to the fullest. I didn’t always agree with everything he said, but he was a big help. Life was still feeling really vague, but now dream-like, not nightmare-like. I told myself I'm here anyway so the best thing to do now is to live, I should not care so much about the vagueness of the world and live with love and compassion, and I should take advantage of my feet, my hands, my eyes and my consciousness to enjoy life and love people. I also found that the deliberation of non-self to emptiness and the two truths is just interpretations of Mahayana Buddhism, the Buddha actually wanted us to focus how to live and even discouraged useless discussion on the concepts. I also learn a Mahayana interpretation of emptiness that helped reconcile the two truths: Form is emptiness, emptiness is form. Both truths are one and because I tried to eliminate the conventional truth, I was stuck. Slowing myself down really helped slow the racing thoughts I've had for a long time. **Part 7: Today’s feelings** This morning I woke up to the feeling of absurdity again, but I soon got myself together, started listening to the monk again, and went back to my hometown. I told myself that I shouldn't hope to view my parents properly, that I may still feel confused but I should fight that and live with love. Just like I thought, the moment I saw them, I had a feeling like "Who is this? Who is this combo of energies and matter? Why do I have to take care of them? I don't feel the connection between us". They still feel very vague and strange to me. I really don't know how to describe it to you, but it still feels like a dream. Maybe I know about non-self so I keep breaking them down till nothing is meaningful anymore. And the worst part is, I feel like the denial of existence is still strong in me: both mine and others'. I occasionally see my thoughts and think: this is not me, it's weird that I have them and I shouldn't be enslaved to them, I see me speaking and think: this is not me speaking. I keep doing that until nothing is left, but the sense of self is still so strong that I have a feeling of conflict in me. Or sometimes, I don’t deny, I freak out. I understand that my reactions are caused by a lot of past actions and my own nature: the human memories, the human senses, the human brain, and all the human conditional and genetic reactions. And I freak out because I am a human. And with other people or the world, I keep being confused about how my understanding of non-self breaks them down into emptiness of self while they’re still interacting with me. It's like sometimes I when I want to have a drink, I realize my body just automatically moves to the exact place of the water. When I just had DPDR, I just thought that I was sick and in autopilot mode. After knowing non-self, I know it's because of a lot of things in me that create the movement. However, it freaks me out. Or when I'm talking with my mom, my mouth just automatically replies with relevant things. I used to think it's just DPDR, but now I think it's because I'm non-self. However, the fact that I'm not in control of my words freaks me out because if I just let the words slip out of my mouth without control, life both feels really weird and vague and I don't know what this body will do anymore. -------- I understand that everything arises dependently, even the way I act, even the language I speak. But it still feels a lot like I don't know what life is. Life still feels very vague and I still find myself questioning a lot of things in life - or actually everything in life, like why I am here as a human, who are these people that I subliminally call parents, why a practice of culture is created and if it's just created out of ignorance. I can tell myself to just accept that they are there, but it still feels like I'm method-acting in life, especially to my parents, who it feels wrong to method-act to. Every time I live life vaguely, it feels like I might hurt myself and people by not being present. But every time I try to connect with life, the lack of control freaks me out. If you reach here, I’m really grateful that you spent time. I’m in deep confusion and hope to find help. Thank you so much.

In [this comment](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/51562/was-the-buddha-neutral-on-self-centredness-or-selfishness#comment84938_51575) it was pointed out as per [AN 4:95](https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN4_95.html) that one who practises solely for one’s benefits is better than one who practises solely for others’ benefits. While the best of the 4 types of individuals is those who practise for theirs and others’ benefits. It seems strange that a selfless and altruistic intention is seen as lower and less refined than a selfish one by the Buddha. This [answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/28527/if-you-cannot-can-save-others-then-why-is-your-practice-more-worthy-than-anythin/28658#28658) proposed possible reasons why type 3 (solely for oneself) is better than type 2 (solely for others). In short, by practising for oneself, the individual indirectly confer protection to others as well as to oneself. But won’t the same effect be achieved with type 2? Is this right or is there something else? By logical extension from the above, if one is practising for oneself and others there should be additional benefits as this type is the best of all according to the Buddha. Are there additional advantages and what are they? The last question is somewhat related to [an earlier post](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/51562/was-the-buddha-neutral-on-self-centredness-or-selfishness) . If intentions are not to be judged on the basis of selfishness versus selflessness, what is the proper Buddhist criteria for deciding if an intention is noble/refine versus ignoble/base? Any insight is much appreciated.

I believe that a soul exists due to my religious background, and my religious scriptures say that those who shall not have faith(in existence of soul and few other things) will face extreme sadness in the afterlife. I have many sufferings in life, including emotional, physical, etc., and I have been facing this by constantly telling myself that I will enjoy the afterlife, but now I am doubtful of any kind of afterlife at all. So, I decided to follow the teachings of Buddha, as they do not require faith in something that is not knowable to stop suffering. I do not want to convert to Buddhism, as I am a little sure but doubtful about what my scripture says about the afterlife is somewhat true, and it will create a problem in my family. ***Main question: If one believes in atman/self and also believes that the teaching of Buddha will end suffering (except for the teaching of no self). Will Buddhist teachings to end suffering be good for this type of person? Are there sets of Buddhist practices to end suffering that I can follow even after believing in a soul/self, or do I require to abandon my belief in the existence of a soul? Also, what are the Buddhist practices to end suffering in which one cannot do till he does not believe in the absence of self?*** Request :Answer in simple terms as I have very basic knowledge about Buddhism and please avoid commenting on my faith.