Yesterday I was a guest at the home of my Buddhist friend, he cooked vegetables for me and some other drinks were there on table. I am fond of meat but there was no meat available. So, I asked him why he didn't cook meat, and he explained that he is Buddhist and that meat is prohibited in Buddhism. So, I want to know the reason behind this!

I don't want to consult any doctor about my obsession. I do not even want to speak about it to my family and friends. I wish to get an answer tailor-made for me about my obsession with getting dead-drunk and practicing self, the meditation. Please don't take it otherwise but a question to Buddha & his disciples. I am so fed up of the dependence of me on drugs. It happens, believe me (i have seen many others, too). Please provide/mark/show/point wordings of Buddha if he has said something near to this. If any modern Buddha is reading this than please share actual revert of you with example. I am standing at a dead-end (may be here's some way ahead but my thought isn't going beyond my confusion. My philosophy about buddhism says that it's a way of living that is worth living. I am practicing meditation in routine in early morning timings. The rest of the day i depend on drugs to stay connected to the will of mine to become a Buddha, it appears like a bridge that i can walk and i walk across it, everytime. *How is it possible to leave behind my obsession with drugs?* I want to quit my drugs. I wish to be free.

Will happen same with me the way I had build my bad Karma? e.g If I've stolen money then will I face same, will someone steal my money? Or do I've to pay more than that?

I'm very close to becoming a Buddhist, of some strand of Mahayana, but I am having some difficulties with the concept of Heaven(s) and Hell(s). I already know that some such as [Hakuin Ekaku](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/3503/25543) of the Rinzai Japanese Zen Buddhism viewed Heaven(s) and Hell(s) as a state of mind. I've heard the same about the Madhyamaka school of Buddhist philosophy (e.g. Nagarjuna's views). This is a view that I can accept, but I don't think its common in Mahayana sects. Nevertheless, from what I've seen though I wasn't able to confirm, it seems that for many, if not most sects and schools of Mahayana Buddhism view Heaven(s) and Hell(s) as real and literal places. Therefore, my question is whether they're actually literal about how do we know that they're real if we are genuinely unable to verify that they exist, either logically or empirically via experimentation. Also, if you know of any Mahayana sects which view Heaven(s) and Hell(s) as psychological states of mind, do let me know please.

Imagine following situation: A person who thinks of themself as a good person, meaning they are mostly nice to people and act and think almost always morally. Said person is diagnosed with an illness that has no cure and is inevitably going to kill them in, say, a year. How would a Buddhist explain this? I already know about the four noble truths as well as the noble eightfold path. Also I know that one could explain it with the concept of rebirth. But I'd like a more in-depth explanation and I'm interested if there are other ways of explaining it or if I am wrong with the information I already have.

In the **Kammapatha sutta** **AN 3.164(A i 297)** a note concerning the meaning of a passage (written by the author of the page dedicated to the sutta it seems) makes me question, the sutta and note are stated as follows : > Endowed with these three things, bhikkhus, as if one was carried off > and put down there, one is in hell. Which three? One destroys life > oneself, one incites others to destroy life, and one approves of > destroying life.**{1}** Endowed with these three things, bhikkhus, as if > one was carried off and put down there, one is in hell. > Note > > > 1. one approves of destroying life: purchasing dead animals' flesh, in a context where other reasonable harmless choices are available, > cannot be carried out without approving their killing. https://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/anguttara/03/an03-164.html It appears the author of the page establishes a link between approving the killing of an animal with the purchase of meat. I would appreciate understanding more about this link being established. (As a personal background I had been a vegetarian for around 5 years but due to digestive issues decided to revert to the consumption (and therefore purchase) of meat which seem to be helping a lot). With mettā.

As to Buddhism killing is wrong and planning such things is also wrong. So what is the difference between the Karma of a person who killed someone and a person who only planned but never killed.

There are various verses in the Pali suttas that give the impression arahants not experience aging & death, as follows: > *Then, monks, being subject myself to aging... death... seeking the aging-less, deathless... unexcelled rest from the yoke, Unbinding, I > reached the aging-less... deathless... unexcelled rest from the yoke: > Unbinding. MN 26* _______________________________ > *A sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die, is unagitated, and is free from longing. He has nothing whereby he would > be born. Not being born, will he age? Not aging, will he die? Not > dying, will he be agitated? Not being agitated, for what will he long? > It was in reference to this that it was said, 'He has been stilled > where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of > construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.' MN 140* _____________________________________________ > *21. Heedfulness is the path to the Deathless. Heedlessness is the path to death. The heedful die not. The heedless are as if dead > already. Dhammapada* How or why do arahants not experience aging & death?

Maybe i misread this but i read again now that in buddhist view life span will become shorter and shorter until 10 year life span did i misunderstand somehthing ? it seems that the lifespan is getting bigger and not shorter

We all know what happens if someone kill a parent but does the same apply to killing a foster parent

Ever since I have started following Buddhism, I have stopped killing any type of insects but during the course of time I have accidentally killed few insects when I had no intentions of harming them like
1) While using touchscreen a tiny insect of few millimeters in length came between my screen & finger.
2) Accidental killing mosquito in sleep as they bite us.
3) Ants come under my feet whenever I am busy going from A to B (Here I mean totally immersed in work mode where you don't have time to think of anything else.
So is Karma different for such types of incidents because I never intent to harm such beings, forget about killing them or will I get the same punishment for intentional killing?

Hi may I know what is the karma of killing a dog please? My neighbours dog starts barking from 5am daily and I don't get enough sleep. I am so tired at work and cannot focus. I've tried soundproofing my walls and using ear plugs but they don't work I can still hear the barking. I've spoken to the neighbour but he tells me that he is a human and he can't ask ask his dog to keep quiet (whatever that means). I am at my wits end, I am so tired, I never get enough rest. Can I kill the dog? May I know what is the karma for killing a dog?

I hear the Buddha rejected the cultural gods when he achieved enlightenment and made statements that seem to reject gods, is this true? If not, what kind of God did the Buddha believe in?

In a recent article titled "America’s New Religions " which is concerned with political fundamentalism, the respected American journalist Andrew Sullivan makes a passing remark that "Buddhism’s genius is that it is a religion without God". How appropriate is that statement? http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/andrew-sullivan-americas-new-religions.html

In religions with God, the believer or devotee can call on God for help during distress, pray to God to seek emotional relief, find a virtual shoulder to cry on and sing God's praises or glories for emotional upliftment (including the use of devotional music). They also establish a personal relationship with God. In Christianity, one has the relationship of being a child of God. In Islam, one has the relationship of being a servant of God, created by Him and therefore must submit to Him. In Hinduism (Hare Krsna), one can see God as a friend, son, teacher, master, lover etc. Whether God exists or not is not the point here for discussion. Certainly in the above cases, there may not be any tangible direct interaction with God, but the believer or devotee could often indirectly feel the presence of God or see good things that happen to them as miracles that come as a response to devotion and prayer. The above describes the emotional support that one could get from religions that have a God. I know this exists in certain parts of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism too with Kwan Yin (Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara) and other Buddhist deities fulfilling the emotional support role of God. Chinese Buddhists have long composed songs and prayers to sing the glories of Kwan Yin, and they also call on Her during distress. However, in Theravada Buddhism, there exists no such emotional support from any deity. So, what should the Theravada Buddhist do in these cases? For example, during sudden distress or grief or loneliness, how would the Theravada Buddhist seek emotional support or relief, without a deity? How does a Theravada Buddhist sooth his or her emotions without devotional music? With whom does the Theravada Buddhist seek a relationship when they find that their worldly relationships have failed them?

I'm new to this site. So I'd like to ask a question about God. Do Buddhists believe in the existence of a God? Does Lord Buddha mention anything about this?

I've encountered many ideas about the identity of God, ranging from the omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent as in Judeo-Christian cultures, to that of one who has reached enlightenment. Is it suggested that Buddha is God or that Buddha is one who has attained enlightenment, leaving breadcrumbs behind for others to follow and that another being is God. Or does Buddhism reject God? Or something else that I'm missing?

Recently I encounter a situation where one of my close people and I went see a patient. While we were about to leave the place, my close person said **May God Bless you**. Me and my close person are both Buddhist. I asked why didn't you say May the triple gem bless you. And close person replied saying since they Christians I said God bless you. But I also observed that the patients people said **May God bless you**. Does saying **May God bless you** comes under a wrong view or wrong speech or etc or is it okay to tell? I'm just curious to know since my close person is also a Buddhist"

Is the Buddha an historic person (did he really exist)? If yes, was he a human being or a God, or both, or a human that became a god or God? Do Buddhists regard him as an emanation of God (for example, as Christians regard Jesus of Nazareth), or a prophet of God (as Muslims regard Mahomet), or an angel? My question is honest and is asked with a friendship intend of peaceful dialogue to lower the tensions between religions, philosophies and esoterisms (rare private philosophies). My goal is to learn better and to show to others how to speak publicly about spirituality lowering the violence; not increasing it and not making money on it. I believe it is very important today to learn those skills.

**EXPLANATION :** - In many TV shows,sites I came to know that Buddha gave Different answers about God to Two Persons.
**Buddha To a Ram Bhakta :** - A Devotee of Lord Ram(Hindu God) was confused that God is there or Not, so he came to Buddha and asked him that "God is there or Not" . - Buddha answered **:** **There Is No God**. **AFTER SOME TIME** **Buddha to Atheist** - An atheist was confused that God is there or Not,so he came to Buddha and asked him that "God is there or Not" - Buddha answered **:** **There Is A God**.
**QUESTION :** - What was the Reason for Buddha to Give different answers to same question ?