I didn't use to have much boys as friends but with time I made several boy friends from which some were really close. I want to know what has Lord Buddha chanted about a girl & a boy being friends? Will it be something bad when I get married?

If the mind experiences more and more happiness, calmness and all the other positive emotions due to virtue and meditation, does the mind then by itself slowly (!) withdraw from sensual pleasures? Answers with sutta reference are preferred

We experience birth , death , cravings , feelings, contact etc.. We also 'experience' ignorance(like self). We also experience choices. We can experience the whole existence as a human or a dog or as a insect. But we do not find origination of experience in dependent origination. My question is : Is experience dependently originated ? If yes then at what stage in dependent origination ?

I wonder what critique other self-identified Secular Buddhists on this forum would have of this new interview with self-proclaimed Secular Buddhist author Robert Wright. 1. What are the specific doctrines that are discarded as "supernatural?" Now, for some questions for non self-identified Secular Buddhists: 2. Any sutra references or teachings for the "cognitive bias that fascinates me" part where he talks about the "fundamental attribution error?" 3. Towards the end of the interview the interlocutors discuss what Buddhism has to say about Tribalism/Racism. Is Buddhism a prescription for overcoming Tribalism/Racism as they say? Cheers!

I am looking for the suttas where the Buddha has preached about the 5 precepts. Also how it can lead you to Samadhi, Niravana and etc. -Metta

I don't want to harbor ill-will anymore and I want to forgive others for what they did to me and also forgive myself for my past actions. So I remain aware and mindful of the thoughts of ill-will that pop up and mindful of corresponding feelings. But this does not seem to alleviate the stream of thoughts and feelings all day. How can mindfulness be employed effectively for forgiveness?

In this question , the OP asked: > In the context of the four stages of enlightenment would it be right > to say that, without identity-view, there's no such thing as an > "enlightened person": instead there are maybe "enlightened moments" or > moments of enlightenment? The Buddha in the MN 26 quote below, declared "*I, the unexcelled teacher. I, alone, am rightly self-awakened ... I am a conqueror (of evil qualities).*" However, as the enlightened one, we can be sure that the Buddha did not have identity view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) and also did not have conceit (māna). So, how could a declaration like "*I am the unexcelled teacher*" or "*ahaṃ satthā anuttaro*" be made without identity view and without conceit? Could it be possible that it is OK to use personal pronouns and also stating truthful facts relating to one's person, without identity view and without conceit? How? In MN 26 : > "Then, having stayed at Uruvela as long as I liked, I set out to > wander by stages to Varanasi. Upaka the Ajivaka saw me on the road > between Gaya and the (place of) Awakening, and on seeing me said to > me, 'Clear, my friend, are your faculties. Pure your complexion, and > bright. On whose account have you gone forth? Who is your teacher? In > whose Dhamma do you delight?' > > "When this was said, I replied to Upaka the Ajivaka in verses: > > > All-vanquishing, > > all-knowing am I, > > with regard to all things, unadhering. > > All-abandoning, > > released in the ending of craving: > > having fully known on my own, > > to whom should I point as my teacher? > > > > I have no teacher, > > and one like me can't be found. > > In the world with its devas, > > I have no counterpart. > > > > For I am an arahant in the world; > > I, the unexcelled teacher. > > I, alone, am rightly self-awakened. > > Cooled am I, unbound. > > > > To set rolling the wheel of Dhamma > > I go to the city of Kasi. > > In a world become blind, > > I beat the drum of the Deathless.' > > "'From your claims, my friend, you must be an infinite conqueror.' > > > Conquerors are those like me > > who have reached fermentations' end. > > I've conquered evil qualities, > > and so, Upaka, I'm a conqueror.' > > "When this was said, Upaka said, 'May it be so, my friend,' and — > shaking his head, taking a side-road — he left.

I was thinking about [this comment](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/28545/as-a-buddhist-how-shall-we-make-sense-of-the-notion-that-there-is-no-such-thing#comment47970_28548) ... > Yes, my target is to abandon the three fetters completely. I can make sense of 'Doubt' and 'grasping at precepts+practices', getting rid of the identity view is the hardest. ... and wondering about what "completely" means. I thought [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/9424/254) implies that identity view (abandoned at first stage) and conceit (abandoned at last stage) are somewhat on a continuum. In the context of the four stages of enlightenment would it be right to say that, without identity-view, there's no such thing as an "enlightened person": instead there are maybe "enlightened moments" or moments of enlightenment? I think that the Abhidhamma talks of "moments" (thought-moments), but that the suttas don't, so ... (knowing little of the Abhidhamma) I'm not sure whether this ("enlightened moments") is a good description. There was [also this](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/28506/254) ... > The definition of a path is: A virtuous mind conjoined with renunciation. ... which, put me in mind of different moments (places, instants) along a path. If "enlightened moments" *is* a good metaphor e.g. for a sotapanna, I was wondering what the difference is between that and the "higher" stages of enlightenment -- and how to achieve or progress towards those, what (what practice and/or realization) is required? Is it right to say that the difference is more a matter of degree than a matter of kind? Something [like](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_enlightenment#Path_and_Fruit) ... > - A Once-returner (Sakadagami) has greatly attenuated: 4. Sensual desire 5. Ill will - A Non-returner (Anāgāmi) is free from: 4. Sensual desire 5. Ill will ... suggests this may be gradual, progressive? Does the "dhamma-eye" being associated with stream entry imply that "the Dhamma" is already seen at that stage, and thence can only become more ever-present (more of the same)? Is it 'only' that 'enlightened moments' become more continual, regular, longer, normal, without intervals? If that's so then is that related to so-called "mindfulness" -- which I imagine might mean "the ability to (more or less continually) remember the dhamma" and also "guarding the senses (to avoid getting carried away)". So, lastly, why does [Right Concentration (*samma samadhi*)](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-samadhi/index.html) talk exclusively about [jhanas](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-samadhi/jhana.html) ? Are they, how and/or why are they, at what point or stage are they, relevant and necessary for any (further) progress? Can you outline any connection between practising jhanas and living/acting/thinking in the world? Or are they unrelated, is a "seclusion" the only path and the ultimate goal (or at least through, i.e. up to and including, non-returner)?

It was intense suffering which bought me to the path of Dhamma. But now as I practise I see that I have started defining my life through the lens of suffering. Even if I practise non-attachment and remind myself of ancicca which destroys craving and clinging I feel bad about my life. 1. Should we feel good about our lives? 2. What are the reasons to feel good about it? 3. Can we be both happy about our life and pursue Nibbana? 4. If we only look at life as suffering and unsatisfactory does this not make us masochist?

I cry, I don't know why. I just feel things so deeply and want to solve everyone’s problems I don’t know but I can’t help it, it’s just in me, I can’t distance myself from their suffering, because we all suffer. It makes living life really hard. If I get too carried away I desire to deny being compassionate and having connections with people because they hurt. Then I picture my life as always worrying about sad things and the problems of others and then there’s no more me. How can I live life knowing other people work so hard for so little and people and animals suffer?

I'm just starting the study of Buddhism and I'm really interested in the whole philosophy of Buddhism. Can someone please suggest some books for beginners ? Thank you.

The three marks of existence is: Impermanence, Suffering, and No-Self. If there is no-self, then there is no Soul. Our cognitive abilities is the result of the physical (Brain organ) and the non-physical (five Skandhas) In meditation, we are taught to observe the changes of our thoughts, which I presume is the result of the five Skandhas as well. The question is, if there is no-self and no soul, then who is observing my thoughts? Am I wrong to say they are my thoughts? Who am I? And who is answering my question in this forum?

I think this question is distinct from those asking what is reincarnated . I understand the distinction between the mindstream and a soul, and the *simile* of passing on a flame. I also understand that an association is made between a mindstream and human form, most often in the womb. What is it that makes and maintains this mental-physical association endure throughout a human lifetime? Why is there a tendency for the association to result in a first-person perspective/sense of self?

After focusing on my breath during my meditationsessions a couple of years I desided to start practisiing Vipassana. I will like to add that I have never been on a Vipassana-retreat (yet). Im still very interested of practising it, but after some months of doing it I have some questions about my practise: I tend to struggle to be aware of my tougths as they ocour and when I become aware of that Im following a train of thougths later I "Choke" them or supress them(?). They will stop instantly. This will go on and on during my sessions and it leaves me confused if I am practising this in a productive way. I guess I still have alot to learn about this way of meditation, but Im still interested to see what you think about this and if you got some advise. Thanks!

Is there a sutta which answers where a nirvanaised consciousnesses is after death and comapres it to a fire going out? I thought there was, but can't find it. Sounds like Vacchagota mashed up with the fire sermon . I'm asking because I like the image, and it almost appears in some modernist poetry. Failing a sutta, any zen discourses. Failing that, anywhere in the canon. Failing that, any important Buddhist, living or dead. Failing that an academic.

I am looking for connection between lust, hatred, and delusion, and craving. Craving is more fundamental than lust, hatred and delusion: it is the craving which leads to lust, hatred and delusion. But how ? My question is -- how does the craving lead to lust, hatred and delusion? --- - "craving" -- *taṇhā* - "lust, hatred and delusion" -- *lobha*, *dosa*, *moha*

I am young, today I turn 23, and my life is fast. I am a research student where my work is enjoyable, changing constantly and so invoking that I lose myself in it. My friends are family are fairly supportive, money is not a huge issue and I am in good health. Even though things appear good, a life-situation that I would think is ideal, does not feel ideal, in fact it feels as empty and unforgiving as a bad life-situation. Commonly I feel as though I am not living. When I am consumed by my research projects I am defiantly not self aware. When I am not doing research, I feel a dread that I am currently not *awake*, and that I am almost never *awake*. The only times I feel truly awake is in deep sadness; sometimes the sadness has no cause it is just weltschmerz . Do other people feel this? Is this what being young feels like; if so, does it go away? Would Buddhism or meditation make me feel wholesome rather than empty in moments of reflection? Is this okay to feel?

Lets keep the rebirth concepts aside for a moment. Is there a way we can die consciously? (i.e.) Being aware of our death. And can we still meditate after death without a human body? If yes, then in what thing we concentrate on. Let's say we are on concentrating on breath while we are alive. But after death we don't have breath and also we don't have any bodily sensations too... What happens to the awareness after death, Does it still exist? Is the awareness eternal? Is the after life awareness is called soul? Do we need a human body to meditate?? I suddenly feel weird getting this idea? So is there any concepts based on this???

If a person **B** does an intentional harmful action on person **A**, and so **B** does a bad karma. As a result of that karma, it happens that a person **C** ends up hurting person **B**, intentionally or unintentionally. So what is the result of the action of person **C**? Does her action account for Karma? Does she even have any choice to hurt B or not hurt B? If **C** hurts **B** intentionally does that account for bad karma, but **C** did in because she had to as it was **B**'s karma? If this continues, this whole sequence will never ever end.

What is the definition of "Sathpurisa/Sathpurusha" according to the Buddha? Please provide sutta references. Metta.