What enters the mind of a Buddha when left idle? Suppose a Buddha were confined to a hospital bed or prison cell. One cannot remain within the conditioned states of jhana indefinitely. If one is unconditionally content, even in states of pain, it would seem there is no need to reflect or contemplate anything. Can you cite specific examples from the Buddha's life?

I read on some online page that the time before going to bed and immediately after waking up is benificial to meditation. I searched over internet but there aren't any specific instructions about any such Buddhist practise. Is this true? Is there any special meditation we can do in this time?

**Does anyone know if the Buddha said anything about social anxiety and how to deal with it?** I believe social anxiety is common in our day and age because people are more isolated now, but may not have been as common in the time of the Buddha. So if there is nothing specifically about social anxiety, can you provide info on what the Buddha said about dealing with anxiety (in general) (Also as a related question: Is anxiety considered a mild form of fear or are they separate in the Buddhist teachings?) Please provide sources if you can, thanks!

A lot of suttas mention the case of sudden enlightenment, during the time of the Buddha. Do these cases speak only of stream-enterers, or can they even be full arahants? For me it's unbelievable, that either others or I must simply (!!) understand impermanence, in order to become an arahant. Thanks

The question is: How does Kamma associate with "provocation"? Example 1: A says to B "Hit/kill me if you dare." Example 2: A tells B that killing is justified if the cause is right. In the above examples, and if B did the hitting/killing after the provocation, who's kamma is worse? A or B? And Why?

During his lifetime, did the Buddha teach meditation to lay people, or did he teach meditation **only** to monks? Are there any references to this in the Pali Canon or commentaries? It's clear that all Buddhists, including lay people, should gain the Right View by learning the Dhamma , for that is the first step on the Noble Eightfold Path . There are also references in the Pali Canon for lay people to live a virtuous life, for example in the Sigalovada Sutta . However, most of the meditation teachings appear to target monks.

Further to [these comments](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3545/if-theres-nobody-to-get-enlightened-why-bother/3550?noredirect=1#comment29427_3550) , why do the Noble Truths talk about 'craving', specifically, instead of about 'attachment'? Wouldn't they make as much sense, or even make more sense, if they identified attachment rather than craving as a condition for the types of suffering which are mentioned in the first noble truth?

Conscience is described as being the moral sense in which an individual makes decisions. Do Buddhists believe there is a conscience? If so how is it defined

I'm energetically trying to uproot the view of self, meaning, the sense that there is a subject of experience. I have read/heard authors such as Sam Harris and Joseph Goldstein say that the self as a subject of experience "cannot be found" or "is not there in the first place." > Sam Harris, Page 92 > > The self that does not survive scrutiny is the subject of > experience in each present moment— the feeling of being a thinker of > thoughts inside one’s head, the sense of being an owner or inhabitant > of a physical body, which this false self seems to appropriate as a > kind of vehicle. > > And yet, however one looks for it, this self is nowhere to be found. It cannot be seen amid the particulars of experience, and it cannot be seen when experience itself is viewed as a totality. However, its absence can be found— and when it is, the feeling of being a self disappears. > > Josteph Goldstein, No-Self (17:00) > > Losing the self is not necessary, you don’t have to get rid of the > self because it is not there in the first place. Is it be more accurate to say that the self as a *feeling* that there is a subject of experience "cannot be found" or "is not there in the first place."? Since, when an object is known, how do you deny there being someone who has done the knowing of the object?

I am trying to understand how somebody following the dhamma is supposed to verify what the Buddha said about rebirth. In the past I've been told that once somebody has developed samadhi/calmed the mind to a great extent then they will be able to see that rebirth occurs after death. Usually samadhi helps along the path by making it easier to observe thing and see the world as it is. It's clear how this helps to see anatta/anicca/dukkha, but I do not understand how samadhi helps with seeing anything related to rebirth. I don't know what anyone would begin to observe to see rebirth. This question has a very similar title to my previous question but it is not a duplicate. In the previous question I had one idea on how someone could verify rebirth occurs after death but the answers said that my idea was incorrect. This new question is asking for other ideas on how someone can verify rebirth through experience.

It seems to be a big deal that we see things as they are. If we are merely assuming when things begin and end or change then how do we ever really see things as they are?

I always wonder how all this started... How did we arrive here? What are we doing in this place? So are there teachings in Buddhism that are clear on this point? How did the world start? and How is it gonna end?

I have read once you have reached the bliss stage you should take your focus off the object and on the blissful sensations and hold it. Then in time you will be in Jhana. But i also read in other sources you should just stay with the object and one pointed focus will rise that way. Which is it? This confuse me. I've reached bliss i kept focusing on my earth kasina but before i could fully enter the first jhana i felt my breath fading and it scared me out of my mediation. So i don't know if focusing on my object would have allowed me to reach jhana.

How to get to know mind has reached sakadagami state or still in sotapanna?During meditation experience no thoughts and Feel like clear emptiness. Reached clear darkness with peace of mind and there is a light with dark in sometime. And sexual craving disappears when meditation feel free after that. At which state of mind dependent origin will break?whether it is just a jhana state .

The three poisons are greed or sensual attachment (lobha or raga), aversion or ill-will (dosa or dvesha) and delusion or confusion (moha). These are said to the unwholesome roots, or the roots to all other unwholesome mental states. I'm trying to analyze the mild, severe and opposite examples of the three poisons, in order to get a deeper understanding what the three poisons are. Greed (lobha) ============ The opposite of greed (lobha or raga) is apparently generosity (dana). Is this right? The severe examples of greed include the desire to take what does not belong to you (to steal), covet another's spouse. Can I say that the mild version of greed include the desire to buy certain types of clothes and dress better to make a good impression on others? How about the enjoyment of nice pleasant weather or tasty food, and the desire that it should continue further? What about looking at a good-looking person and desiring to go and talk to them? What about feeling happy when being praised by others? Aversion (dosa or dvesha) ================= The opposite of aversion (dosa or dvesha) is apparently loving-kindness (metta or maitri). Is this right? The severe example of aversion include anger that results in the act of killing or injuring others. Can I say that the mild version of aversion include the dislike of unpleasant weather (too hot and humid, or too cold), or the dislike of minor physical pain (like a mosquito bite) and wishing that it goes away? What about judging others in your mind for their perceived flaws? What about being impatient because your friend is late to meet you for dinner? What about feeling displeased because you were criticized by others? Delusion (moha) =============== The opposite of delusion (moha) is apparently wisdom (panna or prajna). Is this right? What are severe forms of delusion? Could depression, anxiety, rage, terror, remorse be considered severe forms of delusion? What would be mild forms of delusion? What if I fear catching a disease from mosquito bites? What if I feel unhappy due to others' criticism because I care too much about what they think? Or having regret that I did not purchase something when there was a discount which has now expired? Or is this often linked to the greed (lobha) and hatred (dosa), and seldom exists standalone? For example, I judge someone negatively in my mind, but it's actually because I did not understand the reason why they are in that situation? Or I do things like dressing up better for getting recognition from others, but it's actually because I have the wrong notion of putting too much importance into that recognition? Other types of negative mental states =================================== How do other types of negative mental states like envy, sloth, conceit, miserliness, restlessness, lack of shame etc. (list of other unwholesome mental states here ) connect to the three unwholesome roots?

Are Buddhist monks allowed to have prescriptions, or would that be considered an attachment? Did the Buddha say anything of medicine?

As a Buddhist, is it right to say that anything about Buddhism is right? If it is not right to *say* so, how right or wrong is it to *assume* that? Myself as a "traditional Buddhist" from Myanmar, I find it pretty disturbing to see Buddhists here having blindfolded faith in Buddhism and every act of monks and religious leaders. Above question might also relate to this question: as a self-aware Buddhist, how can you analyse if your thoughts or actions are right, without having much knowledge about Dhamma (Dharma)?

The new Sutta Central translations have translated the Pali word "sattā" as "sentient beings", 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 **sattā**naṃ tamhi tamhi **satta**nikāye jāti sañjāti okkanti **abhinibbatti** khandhānaṃ pātubhāvo āyatanānaṃ paṭilābho.* > >*SN 12.2* What evidence is there in the Pali suttas that the word "sattā" means "sentient beings"?

The translations of SN 26.9 sounds unusual to me; which are as follows: > Yo kho, bhikkhave, pathavīdhātuyā uppādo ṭhiti > abhinibbatti pātubhāvo … pe … jarāmaraṇassa pātubhāvo; yo āpodhātuyā > … yo tejodhātuyā … yo vāyodhātuyā … yo ākāsadhātuyā … yo > viññāṇadhātuyā uppādo ṭhiti abhinibbatti pātubhāvo, dukkhasseso > uppādo, rogānaṃ ṭhiti, jarāmaraṇassa pātubhāvo. Yo ca kho, bhikkhave, > pathavīdhātuyā nirodho … pe … jarāmaraṇassa atthaṅgamo; yo āpodhātuyā > nirodho … yo tejodhātuyā nirodho … yo vāyodhātuyā nirodho … yo > ākāsadhātuyā nirodho … yo viññāṇadhātuyā nirodho vūpasamo atthaṅgamo, > dukkhasseso nirodho, rogānaṃ vūpasamo, jarāmaraṇassa atthaṅgamo”ti. > > Mendicants, the arising, continuation, rebirth, and manifestation of the earth element, the water element, the fire element, the air element, the space element, and the consciousness element is the arising of suffering, the continuation of diseases, and the manifestation of old age and death. The cessation of the earth element, the water element, the fire element, the air element, the space element, and the consciousness element is the cessation of suffering, the settling of diseases, and the ending of old age and death. > >SN 26.9 Since the 2nd Noble Truth and Dependent Origination explain suffering arises due to craving, attachment & becoming, how does the "manifestation" of the mere physical elements, per the above translations, manifest as the arising of "suffering"?

It seems that the more successful your meditation is, the more lavish the surroundings of your next life (e.g. rebirth in a heavenly realm following the attainment of certain meditative states). However, this seems contrary to the goal of non-attachment, and a more logical karmic result of meditative attainment would be rebirth in some setting that would most easily propel you into a monastery. So, why does progress in meditation cause rebirth in a more worldly setting?