Whenever I have read any book or article on Buddhism, one of the biggest takeaways of Buddhism seems to be its indifference to pursuit of 'Metaphysical' questions like origin of the Universe (which in those times belonged to the realm of Philosophy) and the fundamental nature of reality, etc. Buddha was non-theistic, that is, he kept mum on the existence and nature of God. Buddhism seems to teach us not to bother with these questions and focus on ethical living. But Science and Engineering IS the reason why we have everything we have now. Many of the sufferings like death from polio or tetanus has been eradicated thanks to Science, famine has become a thing of the past due to Science, and so on. And all this has happened because of metaphysical questions which later evolved into the subject of Science (and still guides Scientific progress). For example, NASA's missions like James Webb help us unravel the mysteries of the Universe but at the same time, it also helps us push the boundaries of technology and reduce our sufferings. It seems to me that Buddhism seems to discourage us asking questions like these that has lead to Humanity's progress and sideline Science and Philosophy. Is my thinking correct? Would Buddha, if he would have lived today, discouraged us from pursuing Science and Philosophy and try to make us go to monasteries and live ethical life of meditation? By this rule, does it mean that physicists should abandon Physics and Cosmology?

“liberated both ways” can you tell me what does it mean? I will find the discourse later

I was born a layman. I tried to have a loving life, but my partner wanted me to convert to her religion (Islam) to marry. I was ready to do so. When she left me, I realised how silly I was. Now I'm completely distracted from life. I don't feel having family and I don't think a girl who knew about my past would accept my love. She would know I was ready to leave Buddhism. She did ask me, "Don't you think this is wrong ?" I want to apologize her and promise "I'll spent my whole life as a Buddhist". How do I get rid of my state of mind?

I feel like going on retreat has in a way allowed me to see outside "the matrix" and now I cant unsee it. This makes normal life dealing with completely unawakened people quite insufferable sometimes. Yes sure everyone suffers so on one level I empathise but most the time I just don't want to be around people at all. It feels quite lonely. Also I have lost interest in most things I used to be interested in because I don't see the point of them anymore. Is this disenchantment normal as far as Buddhism goes or is it wrong view?

I am a beginner in meditation practice (have been meditating for about a week now). Sometimes when I meditate the following occurs: once I am able to keep focus on my breath for some time (some minutes perhaps), I notice that sometimes I slowly begin to go into this state where I am aware that I am breathing but I am not aware of being aware of my breath (if that makes sense). It is as if my mind slows down and calms down, and I begin to be aware of not only my breath but of many other things such as my body, my environment, etc. Is this ok? Or is this some kind of "daydreaming" that should be noted and then I should bring my attention back to only focus on the breath.

When I'm practising I've noticed that a thought arises but I am noticing this after the fact. With a sensation or sound I can notice it in that moment but thought seems to always be in the past. What is the correct way to be mindful of this? Do I label the thought for what it was such as imagining, planning, worrying etc or do I notice that I'm remembering a past event and label what is happening as remembering?

A couple years back I was successfully working in my company (which at that point was the 12th successive year in my career), when I started to all of a sudden get symptoms of delusional and paranoid disorder, where I thought the police were out to get me and that there were people/ cameras monitoring me everywhere. I ended up quitting my job voluntarily and pretty much stayed locked up in my parents house for the next 2 years due to fear and the continuing delusions. (I ended up being hospitalized during this time in which the doctors diagnosed me with this disorder otherwise by myself I was refusing to go to the doctor and was denying my disease). I was lucky enough to recover from the disease and am back to a completely normal mental state, but now I need to get a job again in my same field to support myself and my family (after such an extensive gap of 2 years). I tried saying the truth on my resume that I had to take a break due to a severe illness - that didn’t work with any employer- reality is no one wants to hire anybody who was out of work whatever their personal reason must be. Theres probably too much competition, no one wants to risk this, and there’s just a negative viewpoint that employers in general carry about people who are out of work (especially due to mental illness), which I think is unfair. Since I didn’t want to lie on my actual resume/experience, I tried a bunch of other alternatives – 1) I took some time out to take care of a sick family member, 2) said I had to take over family business, 3) took a sabbatical, 4) took some time out for learning and development, 5) did some advisory/consulting work in between- all these didn’t work with employers either (I know, not good, these are still all lies). There is no possibility of me returning to my old company also. So now I’m left with a tough decision - I don’t see any other way except to lie on my actual resume and experience to save my career. If I don’t lie, I have to start a new career which would cost lots of money (for college/certifications/training) which I don’t have (or that my family doesn’t have). Or I’ll have to work an odd job, which would mean trouble for me and my family surviving financially and I couldn’t properly support everyone. I also thought of other options like starting a business with low or zero cost or even another career field where they would provide the training for free but, there is nothing that sticks out to me and nothing near the level of financial support/stability I need for my family. Asking for opinions and help here: Would lying in this situation be acceptable as per dharma because : 1) I internally regret it constantly , 2) because my intention is not to hurt anyone, 3) because I am in a desperate situation to survive financially, and 4) because of the stigma people have of people who have had mental illnesses? Elsewhere in life, I strictly follow the precept of never telling a lie and living a life based on truth. Due to this, I am being torn apart inside right now because I really don’t want to lie.

I've read a fair bit about the 7 factors of awakening but I'm really struggling with how I actually cultivate them. In particular dhamma vicaya or investigation of dhammas. Can somebody give me a practical real world example of this? Nothing I have read is really sinking in. I need it explained to me like a 5 year old. Thank you 🙏

I have read some books and web resources that deal with reaching access concentration and from there the first Jhana. They all used *mindfulness of breathing* and mentioned but never described 'other methods'.
Methods I have found mentioned were *body scanning* and *metta/loving-kindness meditation*. Now for the question: What other methods are there? And even more important: How to practice them?

How is one supposed to develop rapture? It doesn't seem like something you can just decide to attain. Any states that or may not have been rapture that Ive ever experienced happened during retreat when meditating all day everyday and even then it seemed to have happened by itself not because I was trying to make it happen.

Originally thought it was among some of the list of downfalls but couldn't find it there. I remember hearing somewhere in the suttas perhaps the unskillfulness of believing there are no sages who can see beyond the physical world. Ring any bells? (Oops on the vagueness)

I know you must abandoned applied & sustain thought. Getting rid of applied is easy it's gone once the first Jhana is established. But how to you get rid of sustain thought? I have ready many books & articles but i don't understand them to well. They say once you reach the 1st Jhana review them and see how gross the first really is. But wouldn't that break concentration & push me back to square one?

I’m the only Buddhist in my family and there are very few Buddhists in my community. To make matters worse, the closest Buddhist temple to me is a New Kadampa Tradition meditation center. Because of this, I’m starting to wonder if I’d be better off leaving my family behind because I think I’d have more exposure to the dharma with other people. Answers from any school of Buddhism are welcome. Edit: The reason why I asked this question is that I thought I’d be held back from understanding the dharma if I was a Westerner with no other Buddhists in my life. In addition, I suspect my parents of being narcissists and that they’re using me as their golden child. I joined Buddhism at the age of nine because I lost interest in Christianity and saw Buddhism as much less dogmatic and more reasonable. However, now that I left NKT, I don’t have a master to rely on nor am I part of a sect, although other forms of Mahayana peak my interest with their focus on the collective whole.

I am asking this because now, after three years of daily samatha, I sit between forty-five minutes to an hour. Should I be sitting longer? I stopped timing myself about two years into practice, and generally speaking I sit until I emerge spontaneously from a state of concentration. Unless I am having a particularly difficult session I am rarely aware of the passage of time anyway, but more often than not I eventually just stop chanting and rest for a while in the stillness, and at that point it's like -- I could just sit there indefinitely. There is no reason to keep sitting, let alone a reason to stop.

The Wikipedia article entitled "Buddhist influences on Advaita Vedanta " states: > A few Buddhist scholars made the opposite criticism in the medieval > era toward their Buddhist opponents. In the sixth century AD, for > example, the Mahayana Buddhist scholar Bhaviveka redefined Vedantic > concepts to show how they fit into Madhyamaka concepts, and "equate[d] > the Buddha's Dharma body with Brahman, the ultimate reality of the > Upanishads. My question is this an accurate description of the teachings of Bhaviveka? Did he redefine Vedantic concepts to fit a Buddhist view? I want people knowledgeable on this subject to answer.

The dialectics between Buddhism and the philosophy of Sāṅkhya are profoundly recorded especially in Chinese and Tibetan Vāda Grantha-s — this is to the point that most major Sāṅkhya texts extant today are reconstructed from their Chinese and Tibetan translations. Other Buddhist texts are also vast sources about the school of thought and its preceptors; the information regarding the early preceptors on the other hand is scarce in Sāṅkhya texts themselves (the outlier being Yuktidīpikā) or in other Hindu works. One example of this is K'uei Chi's commentary on Vasubandhu's Vijnaptimātratasiddhi where he elucidates about Kapilā, his school of Sāṅkhya, and his successors. He also states about debates between the schools and about Vasubandhu's refutation of Sāṅkhya philosophy. He records this as his master Hiuen-Tsang narrates to him. The *debatable* thing though is he mentions Sāṅkhyakārikābhāṣya on the Sāṅkhya text of Sāṅkhyakārikā as a work of Vasubandhu. As far as I know, he is not alone here - Yuen Ts'eh in his commentary on Nyāyānusāraśāstra, Tsing Liang (Ching Kuan) in his discourse on the Avataṃsaka and Ju Li too in his commentary on Vasubandhu's Vijnaptimātratasiddhi mentions the same. The point to note here is that though debatable, traditional Indology doesn't hold any connection between Vasubandu and Sāṅkhyakārikābhāṣya. J. Takakusu mentioning the same states "There is, however, no reason whatever why a Buddhist should write a commentary on the work of his opponent...", he continues to posit that the mention of Sāṅkhyakārikābhāṣya in the aforementioned texts is due to confusion - "...and this point too, I think, must be dismissed as a confusion arising from a resemblance of the names, Sāṅkhya saptati, and Paramārthasaptati." Personally, I don't think these two points hold much merit — (i) We have a plethora of instances against the reasoning. Thousands of works and commentaries are written on rival texts including major works of opposing schools of thought. (ii) There is an intelligible difference between the titles even if the saptati is common. To have confusion between these by multiple people doesn't hold any practical value of reasoning. Also in my opinion the text of Sāṅkhya saptati was pretty well known in the Chinese-Buddhist realm of philosophy, evident from Yuktidīpikā's mention of multiple discussions and debates between the Buddhists and the followers of Sāṅkhya. I am curious to know anything against this. Supplementing my limited research, **I'd like to know** if Vasubandhu really wrote Sāṅkhyakārikābhāṣya and if you know any other resources (*primary sources like texts of preceptors or scholarship of modern scholars*) that either sustain the link of Vasubandhu and Sāṅkhyakārikābhāṣya or go against it. And please let me know if I'm misunderstanding something or am in ignorance of some critical information here.

I think it translates as e.g. "one who has thus gone". My question is whether any historical being has ever really and in entirety "thus gone". Perhaps in spirit, or in expression, but if e.g. Gautama really did - wouldn't we all be likewise "thus come"?

Recently had an interview in which I didn't gave my 100 percent, it was failure but I am not new to it. But this time something different happened I was shaking from inside, and negative thoughts about myself were coming spontaneously even if I didn't want them. It seems like I am not able to live upto my full potential. Something is dragging me from inside, what is it? Is this explained in Buddhism? Is there any name to this condition?

I was on a project to read bhagvat geeta and understand it's true meaning by myself (since I was baffled by plenty of commentaries done by others). It's 4th *adhyaya* and I am convinced that this text is written with intention to cover failures of orthodox religion under god's name. The indirect attack on teachings of Buddha(little of which I know) is also evident in some verses. Nonetheless, I want to look for pure knowledge about myself and troubles I am going through and this time it's through Buddha. I am not new to Buddhism but I want to start from scratch,From where should I start? Which is the best book/resource to get authentic information about core of Buddha's teachings?

Did the Buddha have unpleasant or negative emotions after his enlightenment? For some time I believed the Buddha only had what you would call pleasant or peaceful emotions. But as I learned that Buddha was still visited by Mara after enlightenment, I began to question this notion. Furthermore, I read an Ajah Chah book in which he said the Buddha did have defilements, it is just that he was ‘far’ from them. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Opening_Dhamma_Eye1.php What are your thoughts on this? I think if we cling too tightly to some ideal in which we never experience any sort of emotional discomfort, then this can actually be the cause of suffering as it causes aversion in us. Because if we wish to be free from these feelings we can prolong them by giving them too much attention instead of letting them simply pass. May all beings be well.