Just wondering, did the Shakyamuni Buddha say anything about Rama or Krishna especially, because he and only he was deemed to be fully awakened by Hindus. He was awakened (may not be fully) is kinda evident from his teachings from Bhagavata Geeta too.

Are there specific causes for a specific disease or illness or cause of death that can be attributed to kamma earned in one of previous lives for a given person? For instance, if a person is suffering from cancer or heart attack, is there a cause in the kammic history that he/she might have earned? And what about causes of unnatural death in an unintentional manner? The question that I am posing is, I know that not all causes of disease/death are caused by past kamma, But are there kammic causes for the rest of the events that cause disease/ailment/death in the present life?

Does self-sabotaging instincts come from the ego? Where does the urge to self-sabotage come from and how to break free from this cycle? Here is what I found from the internet >*The cause of our suffering is clinging to what we believe to be our “self” or “ego.” When we feel unsafe or uncertain, our habitual defenses arise, and we tend to cling even more defensively to our ego. Self-sabotage is a defense mechanism of the ego to protect us from some sort of pain or suffering – it's our own survival instinct working against us.*

Mara is not considered a positive entity in Buddhism. Is ‘Wasawaththi Mara’ a god or a demon? I heard he is one of the powerful gods. Is that true?

how to control the mind and create awareness of the present moment.

According to this answer, it seems like masturbation is not considered sexual misconduct or breaking the third precept. However, the whole point (in general) of keeping the precept is to make good kamma both in mind and body. Masturbation alters the mind state and creates bad mind-made kamma. So ideally, shouldn't it also be considered as sexual misconduct and breaking the third precept?

I was reading a book titled "Buddha Dhamma for Inquiring Minds" by Ven. Buddhadasa. In this book he says ordinary people are Buddhists in name only and "**To be a ‘true Buddhist’ is to be ariya**, those of noble practice who understand everything around them correctly to a far higher degree than ordinary people." He also says "The reward you will reap with nobility is to rise from the level of ordinary commoner to become a **true Buddhist in the ariyan discipline**." Does anyone know what he means here? I thought a true Buddhist was someone who took refuge and sincerely follows the Buddhist path. I know the ariya sangha, including stream enterers, are at a higher level and are more knowledgeable, but isn't it wrong to say only they are true Buddhists? If it was just some random person saying this I would simply ignore it, but Ven. Buddhadasa is renowned and highly respected, so I take what he says seriously.

I read in a Mahayana Buddhist book (insight into emptiness) 2 concepts that I find hard to reconcile: 1- Our minds used to be pure, only Buddha nature, and got contaminated with ignorance that led to attachment and it makes us cycle in this cyclic existence. 2- We all have and always had Buddha nature in our minds. My question is: how could a pure mind with Buddha nature get contaminated in the first place? I can't understand how "Buddha nature" could let itself be tricked by ignorance, sounds strange, sounds like a "Big Buddha failure"! Unless...Buddha nature means only a distant background on the mind, something weak, that has no power to act by itself, weaker than the aggregates, but it doesn't sound like that. (!?) Can anyone help?

I’m looking for a sutta wherein the Buddha talks about the aimless wandering in Samsara and gives several analogies, one of them being about taking all the skulls one has left behind and piled them on top of each other and the pile would become taller than the Himalayan mountains. I can for the life of me not find that anywhere. I know I read a while ago but now it can’t find it anywhere. Does anyone know about this sutta?

in the Digha Nikaya 16 The Buddhas Final Nibbhana , the Buddha blames Ananda for not requesting that the Buddha live for aeons, three times. he had only asked him twice. Why does the Buddha blame him ? And the Blessed One answered, saying: "Enough, Ananda. Do not entreat the Tathagata, for the time is past, Ananda, for such an entreaty." >50-51. But for a second and a third time, the Venerable Ananda said to the Blessed One: "May the Blessed One remain, O Lord! May the Happy One remain, O Lord, throughout the world-period, for the welfare and happiness of the multitude, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, well being, and happiness of gods and men!" > >52. Then the Blessed One said: "Do you have faith, Ananda, in the Enlightenment of the Tathagata?" And the Venerable Ananda replied: "Yes, O Lord, I do." > >"Then how, Ananda, can you persist against the Tathagata even up to the third time?" > >53. Then the Venerable Ananda said: "This, O Lord, I have heard and learned from the Blessed One himself when the Blessed One said to me: 'Whosoever, Ananda, has developed, practiced, employed, strengthened, maintained, scrutinized, and brought to perfection the four constituents of psychic power could, if he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the end of it. The Tathagata, Ananda, has done so. Therefore the Tathagata could, if he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the end of it.'" > >54. "And did you believe it, Ananda?" > >"Yes, O Lord, I did." > >"Then, Ananda, the fault is yours. Herein have you failed, inasmuch as you were unable to grasp the plain suggestion, the significant prompting given by the Tathagata, and you did not then entreat the Tathagata to remain. For if you had done so, Ananda, twice the Tathagata might have declined, but the third time he would have consented. Therefore, Ananda, the fault is yours; herein have you failed.

How does mindfulness lead to jhana? How does contemplating the four frames - body, mind, feelings, dhamma (phenomena) lead to jhana? Is mindfulness the first jhana (Vitarka-vicāra )?

A Wikipedia article about Sati uses the word "upassanā" > According to Grzegorz Polak, the four upassanā have been misunderstood by the developing Buddhist tradition, ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(Buddhism) However, I could not find the word in Pali dictionary and a Google search did not explain the term. The term 'nupassana' however is found on Google but neither in Pali dictionar . There is upasana in Sanskrit. What is this term upassana or nupassana and where is it used?

Over the years I observed in myself and others a tendency to get stuck (to be biased) in our views, thoughts and behaviour. This appears to be the result of [cognitive biases in the mind](https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-cognitive-bias-2794963) resulting in adverse effects to ourselves and others as the examples below illustrate: **Case 1:** Someone with end stage renal failure and had to undergo a graft placement in her arm to prepare her for haemodialysis. The first operation failed as there was non-stop bleeding and the surgeon re-do the surgery but that too failed with the same issue. A third attempt was scheduled but the surgeon warned if that fails too then the patient is considered unsuitable for haemodialysis. The patient’s daughter who was not medically trained, decided to check the daily medication the hospital was giving her mother and noticed that she was still on aspirin, a known anti-coagulant. Luckily, the discovery turned things around swiftly. **Case 2:** Years ago there was a shipping accident involving a ferry ship called [MV Sewol in South Korea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_MV_Sewol) . The tragedy would have been avoided if steps were taken to improve safety but those in charge assumed that it was business as usual. **Case 3:** Analysts believed the [current war between Ukraine and Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine) arose due an overconfident Russia miscalculating [its military capabilities](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2022/07/20/commentary/world-commentary/putin-ukraine-miscalculation/) and assuming it will be another “Crimea-like” walk in the park. My question are as follows: 1. What could be the cause(s) for such biases from the perspective of Buddhism? 2. From Buddhist teachings, what can be done to reduce or stop such biases? Please answer freely from any insights you may have. I believe this is a problem that has grave consequences to the world with its effects greatly magnified with modern technology. Therefore, any contribution or idea would be appreciated. **Appendix (I)** Some time back, I came across a study that linked [mindfulness practice and its positive effects on cognitive biases](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-021-00712-1) . As it is popularly known, [mindfulness practice has its roots in Buddhism](https://web.northeastern.edu/matthewnisbet/2017/05/24/the-mindfulness-movement-how-a-buddhist-practice-evolved-into-a-scientific-approach-to-life/) . Thus, I suspect Buddhism compared to other religions may be able to suggest cause(s) and solution(s) to this problem which is plaguing us and the world.

As the question states, is there a clear way to distinguish the pair? I understand that stopping one's meditation practice causes the affects of the dukka nana to end. Are there any other signs? Love and gratitude

I attended goenka course recently. When I got to day 5 in which we practiced vipassana body scan meditation. pretty soon i would get my brain really sensitive to sensations making them really strong. After a short time it will become painful and make my head dizzy and then would feel strong sickness, painful over sensitivity and confusion for the next 2 hours until the body sensitivity lowered. It even happened to me after going back to only focusing on my breath. This makes it no possible to meditate. 1) Have you ever experienced over sensitivity that made you feel physically bad? Why is that happening? 2) Can this be somehow overcome? Thank you!

How can a religion or school of thought justify or rationalise the proposal that potential suffering could be inflicted on a subsequent rebirth - to all intents and purposes, a new individual, according to the anatta theory - because of the actions of a previous individual? Why the threat of subjecting another to suffering, if that being cannot be held responsible for actions in a previous life? If no soul or persistence exists, how can one suggest that performing positive karmic actions will improve the quality of life of a subsequent rebirth, if there is no element retained of a previous iteration to reap the reward and receive the incentive to continue to perform good karmic actions and/or continue in Buddhist schooling?

In this following context, how should I take the concepts of 'identical being' and 'identity in process'? Can the concept 'identical being' have 'unchanging entity'? Would you give any idea about this bold and italic sentence? I'm confused about these usages. Context: > Every fresh consciousness consists of the potentialities of its > predecessors together with something more. There is, therefore, a > continuous flow of consciousness like a stream without any > interruption. The subsequent thought-moment is neither absolutely the > same as its predecessor since that which goes to make it up is not > identical—nor entirely another—being the same continuity of Kamma > energy. Here ***there is no identical being but there is an identity > in process.*** Source: P. 61 Buddhism in a Nutshell by Narada Thera

I have been looking into Buddhism and this is the question I found hard to answer. I do understand that lying in Buddhism is breaking the 4th precept. I also know that in case lying is required in order to save someone's life for example is something that should be done(unless there is a way to bend the truth) but it still would break the 4th precept. But now I found one example I have no idea if it breaks the 4th percept. Let's say I am playing a game where you are supposed to spot the odd one out(someone that is playing against everyone else). That person has to lie in order to hide the fact that they are the odd one out. The reason why I do not know if this breaks the 4th precept is because all players are aware that one of them is lying. So does playing this game as the odd one out break the 4th precept?

The fifth precept, in Pali, reads > Suramerayamajja pamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami I do not know Pali, but from what I understand, this is literally interpreted as a prohibition against *alcohol only.* (Avoiding fermented drinks that cause heedlessness). There are several levels of interpretation that I could see here: 1. The most literal would be to intepret the precept as being against alcohol only. This level is fermented drink + intoxicant + heedlessness. 2. The next level might be to intrepret it as prohibiting any substance which could cause heedlessness - although what counts as "heedless" might be open for debate. Does marijuana cause heedlessness, for example?* This level is intoxicant + heedlessness. 3. The next level would be against any type of substance that causes "intoxication" more broadly speaking. You might argue that marijuana does not cause heedlessness, for example, but it is certainly an intoxicant. Any type of drug which the government forbids you to operate heavy machinery on while under the influence would be an intoxicant. This level is intoxicant alone. 4. The next level would be against *any* substance which causes a shift in mental state. This would include things like caffeine, but it looks like most monks allow themselves to drink tea. (Tea also contains L-theanine). Mild over the counter sleep supplements would also count. (It should be noted that nicotine, viewed as a substance alone, seems to be more in category 4 than any other category). This level is a step below “intoxicant,” but still mind altering. There are other wrinkles as well. What about drugs prescribed by doctors with side effects? Or antidepressants? Psychedelic assisted therapy? My question here is if there is a consensus as to the correct level of interperation among academic/monks currently practicing. *I would say yes it does cause “heedlessness”. But the point here is not to debate this; the point is that there might reasonably exist a class of drugs which are intoxicating but do not cause heedlessness.

If there is no Self , then what Self is there to be affected by the karma which the non-Self now performs? EDIT: A similar question I guess was asked in Samyutta Nikaya and Buddha replied as follows : " With thy thoughts, which are under the dominion of desire, dost thou dream thou canst overhaul the teaching of the Master " However I not sure what that means. I would be really happy if someone can explain the meaning of that answer from Buddha.