I have asked this question earlier but still not clear...so asking this again... This time be specific on mansikaro and vitaka.. people says vitaka is directed attention and mansikaro is always termed as attention.. can we say vitaka is directed mansikaro.? Santa100 given good pointer to abhidhmma in his answer. following questions are related to his answer. After searching for vitaka in abhidhamma.. I found two major difference. mansikaro is universal.. where vitaka is not.. can someone explain whats that means. vitaka is also sankappa . Can someone explain how.?

It is traditionally believed that the Buddha was born, enlightened and passed away on the date(*tithi*) of Vesak. Now it does not seem to be very probable that all three major incidents of one's life would occur on the same date. What is the earliest source of this information about Vesak in the scripture?

Refer to about the Cyber Bully, it causes a huge spike of cyber bully over a recent decade due to social media. It's seem getting more and more serious. source about cyberbully What does Buddhism teach regarding Cyber Bullying?

Did the Buddha say anything about bullying, turning others against you out of boredom, malice, unconcern for their well being, stuff like that? How does it differ from e.g, "harsh speech": is it still karmically bad, if it's all cloak and daggers? I mean for me, you really have to treat the well being of others as an end in itself, if you want to be "ethical". I don't think I just mean intrinsically valuable, a moral good, but intrinsically valuable independent of any other goals you have. In which case you can't sacrifice the wellness of someone for something else.

The question is just the title. Moreover, AFAIK, currently there are 2 editions of the 14th Dalai Lama Guru Yoga. (1) "The Source of All Attainments: The Yoga of the Inseparability of the Guru and Avalokiteshvara ". (2) "A Stairway to Potala: Guru Yoga of Avalokiteshvara ".

I am not sure this post is appropriate. Pindacāra, the practice of collecting alms-food, is observed by Theravada Buddhist monks who have gone forth from ‘home-life’ to ‘homelessness’. A Buddhist monk is known in Pāli Language as a ‘bhikkhu’ – meaning ‘one who lives on alms’. In Buddhist countries such as Thailand and Myanmar, it is a daily ritual for monks to go on Pindacāra, where they walk through a village from one household to another, allowing devotees to make food offerings. Q) Why it mentions all are welcome except Muslim? I understand some non halal food served in between of the activities. What would be the right wording so it's sound better but deliver the same message?

or uncertain, subject of change, a burden and not own- or control-able, not worthy to fall for? Time to answer and give it up?

I've been reading up on cosmology and am curious if Lord Suyama of Yama heaven and Lord Yama as judge of the recently deceased are the same figure. The latter is often said to reside in either the hell or preta realms, but since he is also a vaimanikapreta, I can't help but wonder if his time in the higher planes equates to this third level of heaven. Or are the same names simply coincidence? Any thoughts/sources are much appreciated.

Firstly, this question is related to this stack because during the mindfulness meditation we are told to be aware of our passing thoughts and emotions. I was going through a video that said that 'thoughts create emotions' but I disagree to this, Many times I am engulfed by emotions first, like fear, anxiety, worry, and insecurity and I scan through my mind and I have not had any particular thought, the emotion is right there without any reason. Then I do some mindfulness meditation to deal with that pure emotion. So, am I right that there can be pure emotions to deal with in meditation without thoughts? Broadening the question I would really like to ask, what's the relation between thoughts and emotions? How, where, and when do they get related to each other and influence each other?

According to the Buddhist teachings all beings are subject to Samsara and one can escape Samsara as he finds enlightenment. But if all beings were ultimately to be reborn, with exception of those that reached enlightenment, wouldn't that mean that there is a finite number of beings, which only decrements?

Is there any mention of the fundamental building blocks of reality in Buddhism? Science tells us that we are made of atoms, which in turn are made of protons, neutrons and electrons, which in turn are made of quarks and so on. Does Buddhism reveal to us the absolute fundamental building blocks of reality and the Universe? If so, then what is the nature of those building blocks? I am 100% certain that the Buddha would have known the deepest nature of physical reality and answers to all the mysteries, humans have spent pondering since millenium. I know this question falls under the imponderable and thus doesn't aid me in relieving suffering in samsara, but still curious to know :) Peace.

Is a Buddha omniscient? If so, is there some agreement on what omniscience more specifically means? (All traditions are of interest. But particularly Mahayana)

Is the following anyhow related to 'Papañca' in the apparent 'proliferation' as you understand it? > And which are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is internal? There being 'I am,' there comes to be 'I am here,' there comes to be 'I am like this' ... 'I am otherwise' ... 'I am bad' ... 'I am good' ... 'I might be' ... 'I might be here' ... 'I might be like this' ... 'I might be otherwise' ... 'May I be' ... 'May I be here' ... 'May I be like this' ... 'May I be otherwise' ... 'I will be' ... 'I will be here' ... 'I will be like this' ... 'I will be otherwise.' These are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is internal. Could you otherwise point out what is Papañca as you think of it?

There are a few questions I have about this Sutta ([SN 42.12 Rasiya Sutta](https://suttacentral.net/sn42.12/en/sujato)) based on the following passages: >They make themselves happy and pleased. This is the second ground for praise. > They don’t make themselves happy and pleased. This is the second ground for criticism. Is the Buddha advocating delighting in sensuality here? If so is that not in line with the majority of what he teaches? >They enjoy that wealth untied, uninfatuated, unattached, seeing the drawbacks, and understanding the escape. This is the fourth ground for praise. This pleasure seeker may be praised on these four grounds. How does someone enjoy sensual pleasures and yet be unattached to them? >In this case, the third self-mortifier may be criticized on one ground, and praised on two. What is the one ground for criticism? They mortify and torment themselves. This is the one ground for criticism. What are the two grounds for praise? They achieve a skillful quality. This is the first ground for praise. They realize a superhuman distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. This is the second ground for praise. This self-mortifier may be criticized on this one ground, and praised on two. How does self mortification lead to a superhuman state and if so why is it praiseworthy?

I'm looking to collect all the major sutta references on the 3rd hindrance. Help me complete the collection: http://lucid24.org/sted/5niv/5niv3/index.html What I have so far: AN 5.78 5 future dangers AN 5.193 saṅgārava: similes of looking at reflection in bowl of water, 3. Sloth-torpor like water with moss and aquatic plants AN 7.46 seeing suffering in impermanence AN 7.61 Pacalāyana: Buddha advises Moggallana with 7 ways to cope: You should have 7 memorized and recite daily. MN 62 mudita to counter listlessness MN 70 let only my skin and bones remain... : using vigor to counteract sloth MN 131 today the effort must be made...: using maraṇa-s-sati 💀 SN 46.51 Nourishment and starving of Sloth and Torpor SN 46.53 balancing 7sb☀️ factors SN 46.55 simile of water covered with moss Let's restrict the discussion to EBT (early buddhist text, pali, chinese agama, sanskrit, etc.) for now. I'll open up a thread later for Non EBT strategies to deal with sloth later. Suttas with similes of the 5 hindrances AN 3.101 simile of 3 levels of gold impurities preventing samadhi and 6ab ⚡☸. 5niv are the 2nd level moderate impurities. AN 5.23 simile of gold impurities (instead of 'nivarana' calls 5niv 'cittassa upakkilesā') preventing samadhi and 6ab ⚡☸. Also uses keywords from j4🌕 āneñja⚡. AN 5.51 simile of river split into 5. DN 2 similes 1. in debt, 2. ill, 3. imprisoned, 4. slave, 5. crossing desert MN 140 references goldsmith removing impurities, similar to AN 3.101 and AN 3.102, but doesn't call out 5 elements of 5niv by names. SN 46.33 5 impurities of gold (copper, tin, silver...) make gold (samadhi mind) brittle and unworkable. SN 46.55 similes for not seeing one's reflection in bowl of water: 1. water is colored with dyes, 2. heated by fire, boiling and bubbling, 3. overgrown with moss, 4. stirred by the wind, 5. murky, muddy

As early as Mahasamghika schools of Buddhism there was a view that there are countless Buddhas in the ten directions, that all Buddha's have one body (dharmakaya), and that they are just manifestations (nirmanakaya). The last part says how Buddhas, including Gautama, didnt and dont actually ever get hungry, or eat, or got dirty, or defecate, or struggle to achieve enlightenment, or grow old and die, but that all that is for show, a part of teaching people. Are all Buddhas like this, just like some 'holograms' that Dharmakaya projects in various world to teach people? If that is the case, that seems to imply that we cant actually become Buddhas, because the Buddhas are just manifestations. I know the stories in some Sutras about how some humans aeons ago made vows to become a Buddha and now they are a Bodhisattva (such as Avalokitesvara) or a Buddha (such Amitabha), but if that is also all just for show, skillful means to teach people, it seems there are no examples of actual people becoming a Bodhisattva or Buddha..? Whats going on there?

I quoted below, the words of Ven. Dhammavuddho, who stated that, according to SN 55.5, to attain stream entry, one must have focused attention (yoniso manasikara) when listening to the true Dhamma from true men (ariyans) and contemplating on it. After that, they must practise the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma. They can have focused attention, only if the five hindrances stop habitually obsessing their minds. Two types of persons pass this criteria - one who has attained the first jhana and one who is highly intelligent (has high IQ). Both can concentrate their minds effectively. My questions are: - Is the role of IQ as stated above, found in the suttas? (reference request) - How could not-so-intelligent persons compensate for their lack of IQ, if they want to understand the Dhamma and attain stream entry? In the YouTube video entitled "Characteristics of a Sotapanna ", Ven. Dhammavuddho Mahathera stated (with some paraphrasing): > Now we look at another Sutta - SN 55.5 . ... It is mentioned that there are > four factors or conditions for stream entry - sotapattiyangani. First, > association with true men - sappurisa. Second, hearing the true > Dhamma (Saddhamma). Third, focused attention or proper attention (yoniso manasikara). And fourth, > practice of the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma - > Dhammanudhammapatipatti. > > The first one is association with true men. The word sappurisa also > means ariyans - those who understand the true Dhamma. Because they > understand the true Dhamma, you can hear the true Dhamma from them. > > The second condition - What is the true Dhamma? ... if it agrees with > the Buddha's words in the Suttas, then it is the true Dhamma. .... > > The third condition, this word - yoniso manasikara, which I translate > as focused attention. Sometimes they say careful attention. This word > means that when you listen to the Dhamma, you are focused on listening > to the Dhamma. In other words, at that time, you don't have the five > hindrances. If that is so, then you can understand the Dhamma and > attain stream entry. > > So who are the people who do not have the five hindrances? In the > suttas, it is stated by the Buddha that as long as a person has not > attained piti and sukha which are secluded from unwholesome states, > which are secluded from sensual pleasures, the five hindrances will > obsess him and obsess him habitually. > > So, there are two types of persons who do not have the five > hindrances. The first is the one who has attained the first jhana > (i.e. he who has attained piti and sukha). When a person has attained > the first jhana, he has eliminated the five hindrances and the Buddha > says that the five hindrances no longer obsess that person habitually. > > So there are two conditions if a person has the hindrances. Firstly, > it obsesses your mind, it enslaves your mind. Secondly, it is > habitual, it is very often there. ... When a person attains the first > jhana, these hindrances reduce to a very low level. ... > > **The other type of person who does not have the five hindrances habitually obsessing his mind is an intelligent person - the person > with a high IQ. Normally, a person born with a high IQ, he has good > concentration and that was obtained from previous lives.** A very good > example is Albert Einstein. ... (some example of Albert Einstein) ... > It shows that he had great concentration. So, people who are > intelligent, they are able to focus their mind. That is very > important. A scatter-brained person cannot be an intelligent person - > the mind is so scattered. > > These are the two types of persons. One, because of previous lives, > he's born very intelligent - he can focus his mind. The second person > is one who has attained the jhanas. > > The fourth condition - practice of the Dhamma in accordance with the > Dhamma. So he keeps practising the Dhamma and he will attain stream > entry. Now this fourth condition may not be necessary for some people. > We find in the suttas - many people when they listen to the Buddha, > speaking the Dhamma, even for the first time, they attain stream > entry. The Buddha confirms this. But some people after they have > listened, it doesn't click immediately. They go back and they think > about it and then it clicks. And then they understand the Dhamma and > attain stream entry. > > So this practice of the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma is after > he has listened, he starts to recall the Dhamma or investigate more of > the Dhamma. And then after some time, then the pieces fall into place > like a jigsaw puzzle. And then he sees the Dhamma.

Say some (silver, non-governmental) Buddhist themed coinage wanted to be made, what would be some signs/symbols (other than the Buddha in human(like) form) to include, as well as some concise and fundamental teachings? Links, especially to images, are appreciated. I was thinking: he who sees the Dhamma sees me, he who sees me sees the Dhamma; do good, don't do evil, purify the mind; and the Ashoka pillar edicts. (Also, please modify or correct any of the aforementioned as they are from memory and may be faulty and/or improved upon)

I am not very experienced with Buddhism, but I do think I have read several suttas teaching that it is not good to hold on to views, and that the Buddha doesn't teach what the universe is like, but rather about the mind. I think this makes sense, since I experience that any clinging, even the mildest one to a view, causes discomfort. Still, I see so many Buddhists cling on to views like rebirth or karma: Many Buddhists that I know make it an important part of their lives, and I see many analyses about Buddhism describing it as central to the belief. Is this just the natural human desire for certainty putting forward these views, or are there any teachings that actually promote it? If so, what arguments do they use? (I am not precisely asking for the psychological factors behind this clinging, but rather the ground; the teachings, that are behind it) I am asking for teachings that imply that these views (rebirth, karma etc.) are important and that it therefore is skillful to hold on to these views.

MN 137 discusses the six sense fields. How can we understand lay equanimity with respect to the six sense fields? For sights, lay equanimity arises for an uneducated ordinary layperson but such equanimity does not transcend the sight, and that's why it's called lay equanimity - says the sutta. What does that mean? What is an example of lay equanimity? > And in this context what are the six kinds of lay equanimity? When > seeing a sight with the eye, equanimity arises for the uneducated > ordinary person—a foolish ordinary person who has not overcome their > limitations and the results of deeds, and is blind to the drawbacks. > Such equanimity does not transcend the sight. That’s why it’s called > lay equanimity. When hearing a sound with the ear … When smelling an > odor with the nose … When tasting a flavor with the tongue … When > feeling a touch with the body … When knowing a thought with the mind, > equanimity arises for the uneducated ordinary person—a foolish > ordinary person who has not overcome their limitations and the results > of deeds, and is blind to the drawbacks. Such equanimity does not > transcend the thought. That’s why it’s called lay equanimity. These > are the six kinds of lay equanimity. > MN 137