1. Was Pali the language spoken during the time of the Buddha, and would he have spoken this language? 2. Are the suttas contained in the Pali Canon verbatim what the Buddha said, or would things have been changed due to centuries of oral transmission?

Some part of my mind always watches/is aware of breath whether I am studying, playing, eating, watching movies, etc. Is it ok? Any long detailed answer?

Here is another non-essential question born from a dead thing. Is Pali the native language of Buddha's birth town? Apparently the Shakyas are bilingual (according to wiki), and they derived from a **Munda** people (according to wiki). Was Pali spoken by Munda people? It makes me wonder if Buddha uttered, muttered the Pali b/c he was unfamiliar with it, or b/c maybe the language was a spontaneous birth? Instead, was Pali native to Magadha - according to wiki Buddha was born north of Magadha - where Buddha enlightened? wiki (unreliable source) says : > Gautama Buddha, the founder of Buddhism, lived much of his life in the > kingdom of Magadha. He attained enlightenment in Bodh Gaya,

In the Jewish tradition of Hassidut Chabad, there's a well-known story about the need to be ready to abandon practice towards enlightenment in favor of compassionate action which is the manifestation of enlightenment itself. Here's the story ([source](https://www.chabad.org/therebbe/letters/default_cdo/aid/1973508/jewish/Heeding-the-Cry-of-a-Child.htm)) : >The Alter Rebbe shared his house with his oldest married son, Rabbi Dov Ber (who later succeeded him as the Mitteler Rebbe). Rabbi Dov Ber was known for his unusual power of concentration. Once, when Rabbi Dov Ber was engrossed in learning, his baby, sleeping in its cradle nearby, fell out and began to cry. The infant’s father did not hear the baby’s cries. But the infant’s grandfather, the Alter Rebbe, also engrossed in his studies in his room on the upper floor at the time, most certainly did. He interrupted his studies, went downstairs, picked the baby up, soothed it and replaced it in its cradle. Through all this Rabbi Dov Ber remained quite oblivious. > >Subsequently, the Alter Rebbe admonished his son: “No matter how engrossed one may be in the loftiest occupation, one must never remain insensitive to the cry of a child.” Is there a similar story in the Buddhism tradition, with a similar message?

This may be an unusual question but I'm wondering if any monk or scholar has written work or made lectures about the spiritual obstacles of Capitalism. Namely the atomization, alienation, crippling entertainments, omnipresent advertising, the uncertainty of holding jobs and fluctuating markets, the need to wage wars to reduce the overall wealth of the society and obtain resources. We are not living in the time of Shakyamuni, Padmasambhava or Athisha. This is a spiritually confused, decadent world. Our spiritual obstacles are more complicated and strange than the obstacles of previous times. Any ideas? Sadhu.

The concept of cuti patisandhi cittas- i.e. generation of patisandhi citta conditioned by cuti citta in a minute fraction of a second- is a very important concept mentioned in Abhidhammaththa Sangaha. This is so important that only by describing the mechanism of cuti-patisandhi in this way the main teaching of Buddhism that there is no soul or ego (anatta) can be justified. Can I find any reference in Abhidhamma Pitaka.

Does a sotapanna still experience afflictive thoughts and or engage in unwholesome activities etc or have they transcended such things?

I formerly practiced with the local Shambhala group. I took my Refuge Vows there, received some random Buddhist name that had nothing to do with my studies or who I am; and was told I was now a member of Chogyam Trungpa's lineage. Since then I found out about the disgusting sexual and physical abuse perpetrated by Chogyam Trungpa and his son, the current Sakyong, and have not been able to continue with the Shambhala teachings. My question (and I apologize for its being so very basic) is: can a refugee somehow change lineages? I asked this of an older woman there whom I respected,and she said no without any explanation. I now am studying the teachings of H.H. the Dalai Lama, and do not really know what tradition I am in. I have practiced on my own -- with the exception of my few Shambhala years -- for about 20 years, but am not very knowledgeable about the scriptures. Any link to a good beginner's guide would be much appreciated. I hope I have not violated any rules. And thanks in advance for any answers. I really don't want to be associated with Shambhala in any way. If there is a way to change my lineage, I'd really like to know.

The following story comes in Udana 1.8 . It is about a monk by the name of Sanghamaji, who, when seated under a tree, was visited by his former wife, carrying their infant son. She tried several times to get his attention, and having failed, left the son at his feet and went a short distance away, to observe his reaction. The monk neither reacted, nor said anything to the woman or her child. She then took back the child and left the scene, while lamenting about her former husband's lack of feelings for them, saying "the monk doesn't even care about his son." The Buddha, who witnessed this supernaturally, praised the monk, saying (I paraphrase here) that he showed equanimity and is free from attachment, and is therefore a brahman. We can say that the monk displayed equanimity (upekkha), but then seemed to lack compassion (karuna). In the essay entitled "Toward a Threshold of Understanding ", Bhikkhu Bodhi discusses this: > The Pali word that the Pope interprets as "indifference" is presumably > upekkha. **The real meaning of this word is equanimity, not indifference > in the sense of unconcern for others.** As a spiritual virtue, upekkha > means equanimity in the face of the fluctuations of worldly fortune. > It is evenness of mind, unshakeable freedom of mind, a state of inner > equipoise that cannot be upset by gain and loss, honor and dishonor, > praise and blame, pleasure and pain. **Upekkha is freedom from all > points of self-reference; it is indifference only to the demands of > the ego-self with its craving for pleasure and position, not to the > well-being of one's fellow human beings.** True equanimity is the > pinnacle of the four social attitudes that the Buddhist texts call the > "divine abodes": boundless loving-kindness, compassion, altruistic > joy, and equanimity. The last does not override and negate the > preceding three, but perfects and consummates them. How do we interpret the actions (or non-actions) of Sanghamaji? Did he lack compassion? Should he not have addressed his former wife compassionately, and given her an explanation of the Dhamma, and the path to the end of suffering? The sutta does not say if he ensured that the welfare of his wife and son is taken care of, before leaving the lay life of a householder.

How are goals used in Theravada Buddhism and Buddhist practice in general in a positive way. --- How do goals relate to the early teachings, and one's own practice in a positive way. ------ *Prior discussions on Buddhism Stack Exchange:* - Difference between Attachment and Goals - Does suffering motivate us to achieve our goals? - Is it possible to set goals for the future and be present at the same time? - Is Nirvana the goal, for Zen and Theravada? - Why does Buddhism seem to have more than one goal? - Should meditation be practiced without a goal? - Is Nirvana the goal for all Buddhist? - Is mindfulness the path or the goal? - How can someone integrate the Buddhist philosophy on life's purpose into daily life? - Ambitions - Are they Real or just an Illusion - Stopping Tanha or craving - Attachment to practice itself

I was part of a religious group that claimed to be everything that the Buddha teaches. But, when you listen to their teachings, you can tell discrepancies between their teachings and Buddhist teachings. I just saw many people being misguided, but I do not know what to do. (Just to clarify, the religious group I'm referring to is neither Mahayana nor Theravada. But, the question can be generalized further if necessary.) On one end, I do not wish to create any conflict among anyone. On the other end, I feel sad that many people are misguided into the teaching. So, the question is: What should I do? Any answers based on experience would be AWESOME, and experience + Scripture references (said by famous teachers or based on Pali Canon) would be an Awesome+++infinity. :) Once again, I hope to find a method that does not create animosity. Thanks Buddhist Community! Praises to the Dharma. ******As for an explanation on how this question is different from the forum titled "How to address wrong view", it's pretty much the same, except this is more scenario-based. I just wanted a different perspective/insight to this specific scenario. My ultimate goal is to avoid conflict!!!

I'm referring to Mantras listed [here](https://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/docs/support/world_religions/buddhism/practices.pdf) such as the **Shakyamuni Mantra**: > *Om Muni Muni Mahamuni Shakyamuniye Svaha* In Buddhist practice throughout the world, what is the predominant practice: are those mantras translated into the local language or do adherents recite them in the original Sanskrit? If one can choose, is there any spiritual benefit from reciting them in Sanskrit during meditation?

Humans are sure they're the peak of evolution, even though we evolved as top predators and still en mass treat the planet as if we're top predators even if we're not directly officially involved in the destruction. Out thoughts are are our main blockages to enlightenment and being connected with something higher. So why are we so sure we're higher than the smart vegetarian animals like whale and elephants? Is it possible whales are floating around the ocean, not caught up in all the negative mindset we suffer, and actually already connected to higher planes of consciousness?

I know what Buddhism teaches about 6 realms,and devas in particular.But what is the Buddhist take on,say,pagan gods-to what kind of entity people turn when they say they work with Thor for example,or any other pagan/heathen god?What are they according to Buddhism?

I read the following on the internet: > Primary mistake is thinking that anattā means no soul or that "there > is no self". In Sabbāsavā Sutta the Buddha explicitly says that "there > is no self" is a wrong view born of inappropriate attention. "**I am** > nothing" or "**I** **do** not exist" is a wrong view born of asking the wrong > questions. Did the Buddha explicitly say in Sabbāsavā Sutta "there is no self" is a wrong view?

I have a friend who is a Christian. It is a truism that most people can't tolerate sitting and doing nothing because of catastrophic dukkha. Most people, including people I know, have to DO something all the time. But my old friend would spend hours sitting on his porch, a smile on his face, by himself, just enjoying the present moment. Is this a form of jhana? Is it possible that there are many run of the mill, non-buddhist people who actually understand and practice a kind of jhana unintentionally?

I often experience hallucinogenic images during meditation. I don't believe they are caused by lack of sleep as they occur irrespective of my state of tiredness. Typically the sequence goes 1. Meditating with a lot of discursive thoughts 2. Discursive thoughts settling down 3. Commencement of strange dream like images 4. If i go through this then thought drops away and it the start of a calmer more focused meditation I don't always get the images but if I do then they are very difficult to work with. They are more dominating than the discursive thoughts and more difficult to see them for what they are. However I know that if I can go through this stage then meditation really becomes a lot easier and more pleasurable afterwards (fourth stage above). Has anyone got any advice about working with these kind of hallucinogenic images? Is there any advice either from traditional texts or contemporary teachers about them? Is it just me?

What is the historical and scriptural basis for the modern Theravada Buddhist View "Life is one and indivisible", "everything is one"? --- Is this a view that has been added later? Is it a misrepresentation of right understanding? *This question was supred from the discussion with @ChrisW here *

Does a person cultivating bodhicitta qualify as a bodhisattva? Or to qualify as a bodhisattva, does one need to have levelled-up to some degree in the perfection of the great perfections. I have seen/heard this discussed before, but it was a while ago and I can't remember where I would find the references. I'm not sure any answers to this question would have a major impact on the actual application of cultivating bodhicitta, but I would enjoy exploring the concepts around it. This is my first question on Stack Exchange, so I am open to feedback about whether the format and content of my question is suitable for this forum.

Greetings to all respected forum participants! Throughout many years, starting from school, I've noticed that compared to my peers, colleagues, classmates, etc., I often ended up being the least productive. I could spend a lot of time and effort on a task (especially creative ones - simple calculation or rewriting tasks were easy and quick, where I didn't need to concentrate heavily), which others completed faster and more easily. Meanwhile, my peers would manage to do something else in their free time or simply feel less exhausted, whereas I would spend extensive time and energy. Recently, I've realized that I'm a perfectionist. I spend a lot of time and effort to prepare and present a perfect result that I will achieve on the first try. Moreover, I have a deep-rooted fear of failure that originated in childhood. So if I need to do something responsible and present it to others, I'll spend a lot of time alone to be 100% confident in my abilities. From all of this stems my primary problem, which people have pointed out since childhood - distraction. For three months, I've tried to incorporate meditation into my daily life as a habit. I managed to create daily training routines at work and home when they're tied to a schedule, time, or place, but meditation is consistently avoided by me. I even set myself a limit of 5 minutes of meditation. Even the prospect of 5 minutes of meditation often feels like torture, especially after a hard workday. So with mild fatigue, I always found excuses for why I shouldn't meditate today. Procrastinating meditation is just the tip of the iceberg. Unfortunately, because of this, I'm low-productivity at work, do little in my hobby and personal development, and very often try to avoid concentration. At the same time, I don't have a strong phone addiction. I don't watch TikTok for hours, can sit at home in silence for hours and calmly read a book. But the moment I want to read a book, I'll postpone it because I'll be afraid to concentrate and spend time reading just one book. Friends, have any of you encountered this? What solutions do you see from a Buddhist perspective?