Temporarily cut off of sexual excitement , do they sothapana? Or at least they free from apaya realm?whether their taint are destroyed?

Buddha has taught that Sabbe Dhamma Anatta. I agree, however being an ignorant fellow, I believe I am body, I am eyes, I am intelligence, I am consciousness, my wife is mine, my son is mine. What do you find as you, yours, or yourself, honestly? (This question attempts to find out depths of our ignorance)

I’ve been reading quite a bit about both Pyrrhonism (from ancient Greek philosophy, particularly Sextus Empiricus) and Madhyamaka Buddhism (especially Nāgārjuna’s teachings), and I’m curious about how deeply their approaches to knowledge, doubt, and emptiness might align. Here are some specific points I’d like clarification on: - Both traditions seem to question the possibility of arriving at certain knowledge. Do Madhyamaka philosophers use skeptical methods purely as a strategy, or do they endorse a form of suspension of belief like Pyrrhonists? - In Pyrrhonism, the goal is ataraxia (tranquility) that arises from suspending judgment. Is this comparable to the nirvana that results from realizing śūnyatā (emptiness)? - Do Madhyamakas arrive at any “ultimate” view, or is even that view deconstructed like any other? - Are there any Buddhist responses to skepticism that help clarify the boundaries between constructive doubt and nihilism? ----------

As we would all know, the Buddha found/explained that self mortification like extreme fasting is not the correct way to liberation. So is dealing with extreme suffering also not an extreme? If one was in extreme poverty and/or extreme illness would it not be wiser to take the knife? Is there any precedent the Buddha explained in regards to dealing with extreme suffering and/or illness? a level of how much suffering we can or are able to endure? I know there is the story of the monk who took the knife because of extreme illness and the Buddha said he was blameless but he was already a high level attainer (not sure what stage of liberation he was) **EDIT:** wanted to bounty this as the question has not been answered and people seem to misunderstand the question and think it is related to suicide, and tag it as such just because I mentioned about taking the Knife. **The question is about what limits, if any, of suffering we should endure. Is there any precedent about when we should no longer endure suffering because it is too great.** Hypothetically imagining one is homeless, destitute in extreme poverty, starving, no limbs or illnesses akin that cause ones life to be extreme suffering or even extreme mental illness, all family and friends have died of illness or murder. Essentially one has serious negative karma where ones life is full of painful memories and painful present experiences. Is one still supposed to continue to endure such suffering forever. Well until natural death.

> Burning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hatred, with the fire > of delusion; burning with birth, aging, and death; with sorrow, > lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair, I say. > > Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiences > revulsion... Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through > dispassion his mind is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the > knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ He understands: ‘**Destroyed is birth**, the > holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is > no more for this state of being.’ What does "destroyed is birth" refer to here, especially regarding a supposed person that manages to overcome, let's say, hatred. The person has a Eureka moment and proclaims "destroyed is birth". What do they mean with that, or rather, **what are they trying to express about their life**?

Kundalini yoga, as described in certain Hindu tantric lineages, describes the process of awakening a dormant spiritual energy located at the base of the spine. This energy is said to rise through a central channel, activating chakras along the way, and facilitating transformative shifts in consciousness leading to liberation. I am curious whether similar concepts or practices are found in Mahayana or Vajrayana Buddhism. Specifically, do these schools recognize a comparable energy system involving chakras or subtle body channels? Are there practices aimed at awakening and directing this energy in a way that parallels Kundalini yoga? References to authoritative texts, tantric commentaries, or the instructions of qualified teachers within these lineages would be especially welcome.

So, could attainments 'rot' / be forgotten, and is this a commonly observed thing? Does the Buddha warn about taking 'breaks', or does he talk about people leaving spiritual practice and as a result losing things? Is there a sort of 'wagging the finger' attitude from high attainers/authorities toward people sidelining spiritual practice for a while?

Throughout the journey toward enlightenment and letting go of attachments, we cling to various tools given to us by the Buddha. So 'clinging to something' in general might not be bad, as long as it helps liberate from suffering. Would it be fair to say that the idea of reincarnation is then something that high attaining people cling to, in order to be liberated from fear of death? Or does the teaching primarily come from direct perception of reincarnation itself, not of it's value in liberation from suffering.

I just completed my first 10 vipassana retreat. I'm wondering if anyone has had this experience and how long it took for it to subside- I've seen the question posted by other users experienckng it, but no follow ups. Around day 5 of the retreat i started to experience a floating, swaying sensation after the meditations, during the evening discourse i couldn't look at the tv as it felt like it was moving. By day 9 i had some intense experiences during the meditations, like I was no longer in my body but merely a witnessing the body and everything around me seemed fragmented, and i was also having a hard time narrowing my focus on my body, like my awareness of my body expanded way beyond my body and i couldn't actually feel sensations in 'my' body. Also i would feel an energetic force move through me, sometimes moving my body (head would raise, arms would move) it wasn't intentional, and felt natural, and resisting it (to maintain determination) felt like it was creating stress or tension. I'm home now and this energetic force feeling continues to pulasate in my body and gives me a swaying /rocking feeling, it makes me dizzy nauseas, unable to fcous. I try to remain objective and merely observe. But it has made day to day life impossible, i can't drive or walk, and I'm not sure if I should continue to meditate, or take a break, or not go as deep into meditation. When we started vipassana in the retreat I was very able to narrow my focus precisely and feel every subtle sensation, now it feels like if I try i don't feel much, eveeything seems very light and airy. Trying to give as much info as possible. But also very dizzy writing this and having difficulty.

A while ago I noticed that dispassion (viraga) toward arising thoughts can give great peace. It wasn't really a artificial dispassion, rather, it came naturally after contemplation. Now I'm wondering if it makes sense to actively nurture such dispassion toward not just thoughts but also emotions - like anxiety due to worries of personal outcome. Is this something that actually exists in buddhism? I only know of advice to just observe and be with emotion as they come and go, and never heard of the idea of having a certain view or stance or attitude toward emotion.

I-laden Mantras that seek to 'influence' or 'implant' thoughts, like - i am peaceful - i am silent - i am loving especially in the face of unskillful thought, are supposed to purify the mind, but are adding thoughts and a sense of self. Nibbana is defined in part as the absence of unskillful thought, but Anatta is also part of it. Also, there is much advice not to fight thoughts. If we create an I-ness around one side of the aisle (love), and thoughts arise that stand in it's shadow (hate), have we not set ourselves up for suffering, or an identity crisis? Are such mantras and chanting therefore unhelpful, or at least, promoting an infight, perhaps even an I-ness? How does buddhism reconcile this?

In this answer , a user writes: > The Buddhist scriptures attributed to the Buddha contain > contradictions, obvious frauds, obvious later-day insertions, etc., > therefore there can be no scriptural authority in Buddhism; apart from > what can be verified for oneself as being true & real that leads to > the ending of suffering. This raises the question:- How can one objectively determine which parts of the Buddhist scriptures, particularly the suttas are likely to be original teachings of the Buddha, and which may be later interpolations or corruptions? What criteria are used in this process? Are there scholarly or traditional methods that help identify interpolations, such as historical analysis, linguistic patterns, consistency with core teachings, or comparisons across early textual traditions? Additionally, how can we be sure that what some modern practitioners or scholars label as later additions were not already part of the original oral tradition? Why could some of these elements not be understood through reinterpretation rather than being dismissed outright? Are there critical editions of the suttas or major academic resources that address this issue? I am interested in perspectives based on traditional commentaries, scriptural analysis, and modern scholarship.

Even though the Pali Suttas appear devoid of the idea masculinity & femininity are results of past kamma, such ideas appear to remain fertile in worldly Buddhism. I read the following on the internet: > I think this is pretty obvious. Karma functions as a universal law and > our situation, the form we are born in is decided by karma. One of the > sexes is naturally more advantageous than the other, despite women > having an easier time in modern society, even just anatomically they > are less fortunate. **Then of course like the Buddha explained, women > are unable to shake their desire for sex, reproduction** and no Buddha > will be born in the form of a woman. Indicated males are more > advantageous. Also hence why there are more vinaya rules for women If the above is true and if desire for sex and reproduction is the cause of rebirth as a woman, what is the cause of rebirth as a man (including as men with multiple wives, as mentioned in SN 55.7)?

I read the following on the internet: > So beings are born into a sex due to their past actions and results. Which Pali suttas explain the above?

Is there such a chant, that deals with thinking in this manner? I have come to recognize that I can cease adding unskillful thinking, but right now, I feel like I need to remind myself that I have this conviction. Only through remembering, can I disidentify with unskillful thought patterns when they arise, "this is not me". So I was wondering if any such chant exists.

Over the years, I’ve lost friends and family connections, and I often find that people distance themselves from me for reasons I can’t understand. I try to build friendships, but others rarely accept my invitations or respond. Even those I’m on good terms with tend to keep their distance. I've stopped inviting people out to do things because of so much rejection. Even when they do accept, I can't seem to make connection with them. Sometimes, people that I know for long start turning against me, as in they actually become like enemies. Meanwhile I don't recall doing anything bad to them intentionally. This repeated pattern makes me feel that the world is against me, and since human connection is such a large part of life, I feel doomed. I’ve reflected deeply but haven’t found clarity. How can one overcome such a state? I'd like concrete things that I can do to measurably improve in this. (I know of metta, but I doubt it is much helpful in my case?). Thanks!

Vietnamese sentences: Thánh tăng, Thánh ni và Thánh cư sĩ còn ăn thịt chúng sinh thì Thánh đó là Thánh gì? Câu hỏi này để tự quý vị suy ngẫm trả lời. English sentences: If Noble Monks, Noble Nuns, and Noble Lay Disciples still consume the flesh of sentient beings, then what kind of Noble person is that? This question is for you yourselves to reflect on and answer. Do you think this is a good translation for our international Buddhists.

What are the actual suttas in which the Buddha described how to meditate? A list of all such suttas would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

I usually focus on breath at the stomach but recently decided to try at the nostrils as I read it's better and also that's what the Buddha taught. I have no problem feeling the breath going in as it feels cooler but 99% of the time I feel nothing breathing out. So I just try to focus my mind in that area even though there's no sensation bring felt. Is this OK or should I just stick to stomach?

I just get started three days ago. When meditating, I felt hard to breathe and even the lack of oxygen to the brain. I felt my bell and chess were stiff and this intervene me in getting enough oxygen. My posture is right (I so sure about that). How do I overcome it? Should I keep going or find some changes?