I can devote 7 hours to ( meditation + sleep ) per day . Should I do 5 hour sleep and 2 hour mediation(1 hour twice) **or** 6 hours of sleep and 1 hour of meditation ?please give reason . will 2 hours increase my productivity (please tell from your own experience, not any bookish knowledge ) Will meditating twice will give me **twice** more benefit than meditating once ?

The previous years of my life feels like a dream. I was happily living, consumed with studies, learning things, watching youtube and stuff, enjoying a lot, mind was busy in various entertaining stuffs. But, I don't know how it started, but all those passions are waning. Its almost as if I've forgotten how to live. Live as in the previous ways of my living. I am now trying to find a way to live as I've lived in the past but can't seem to go back to the old ways. I mean I want to find something fun for my mind as I had in the past but I just cant bring up enough passion. What is happening to me ?

In the [Lokavipatti Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.006.than.html) the 8 worldly dharmas are pleasure, pain, fame, disgrace, blame, praise, and gain, and loss. The Buddha also says the noble ones experience all of those but don't rebel against the loss etc. and don't welcome the praise etc. In the [Sallatha Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.than.html) , the Buddha says that noble ones experience physical pain but don't follow it with mental pain. This leads me to wonder: if noble ones don't have mental pain following physical pain, it would seem they don't experience loss, blame, and disgrace as mental pain either. But how do they experience it? Is it a physical pain? In psychology they say that a broken heart over a loss literally hurts the heart, i.e. those freakish cases where a person dies of grief when their wife dies. Does a noble one then feel physical pain when they are blamed, disgraced, hurt, or at a loss? Or perhaps everyone does but often run-of-the-mill people only notice the subsequent mental pain, whereas a noble one only feels the first half with no mental pain at all.

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?

This is a practice-related question. In Buddhism the goal is to not suffer, but empathy seems to mean suffering because someone else is suffering. In several places in the Pali Canon and elsewhere, compassion, loving-kindness, and sympathetic joy are mentioned, but so is equanimity. [Here](Https://suttacentral.net/vb13/en/thittila) is an instance. I assume this means one should feel free from malice towards someone while also being unpained by this, but how does one deal with the wrong empathy that emerges, which is an energetic pull towards even codependency (If I were to say it in psychological terms)? In the moment, empathy seems very blinding, so how does one extricate from it without losing the non-violence, happiness, and positive feelings? It seems from the fetter view that empathy is at least one of the 3 forms of craving, or perhaps it is some form of restlessness. I wonder if there is an antidote for this particular complex.

I have been ruminating about some existential questions...."what is purpose of life"...."is there a creator"..."what is the best work for a mortal to undertake in their lifetime"...."is suffering from unnecessary burden of study or job justified if they are not bringing satisfaction but are necessary for social survival"... etc, etc. In what sutta(s) has Blessed One talked about this matters? what solution Master gave to get out of this vicious cycle (referring to the vicious cycle of "ruminating about some existential questions.")which drains the energy?

A very famous, so famous it may be apocryphal, zen quote says: > Before Enlightenment chop wood carry water, after Enlightenment, chop > wood carry water. What does this mean? Specifically, is the discourse saying that time without effort is wasted time?

I’m 23 years. I don’t have a partner. But I’ve agreed to them to look for a partner but I want to marry if I like the person only. My parents brought about 6 proposals but I didn’t connect with any. They are forcing me with a final one. They say they don’t want to look for more because it is a humiliation for them. But I don’t like the person. I spoke to him but I feel like we’re very different. And I am not physically attracted to him at all. My dad says he’s supposed to marry me off before 25. Now they are fixated on this person. But I don’t like him. My dad said he will force me into it despite my preference. I offered the option that I would like to become a Buddhist nun. They are not willing to comply with that either.

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.*

I am beginner in journey of way to truth, and life in general, through Buddhism. It's not long since I discovered Buddhism, and it really gives me insight in life. My question is that I'm having really hard time, and I'm in confusion about what to do, in that my family is tearing apart because my mother is cheating on father with another married man, and I don't know what to do about it.

How do I know whether I am attached to certain things or not? Examples: 1. When we are attached to a taste, we will try to find more & more tasty foods. We can reduce that by getting a simple meal, cutting the extra meals or only taking 2 meals per day like monks. 2. When we are attached to clothes, we are trying to buy the latest/expensive clothes. We can reduce that desire by wearing simple and charming clothes. The questions are, **How do I know** whether I am attached to my career, exam results or not? (Now I am in university. I have to work for exams. Sometimes I feel, I am attached to exam results) If I am, how do I **work without attaching** to it? I read this answer already: [Should I do what I don't want to do?](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/25669/17744)

Very often when I meditate, or in everyday life, there are times when I get bored. I don't have to do anything. And often I go on YouTube to get busy. It is the same in meditation, very quickly I get bored, I feel the time passing and it becomes heavy. How do you manage all this?

Carpe Diem or Memento Mori? Which of these two approaches did the Buddha recommend for your benefit?

Dhammapada Verse 61: ***If a person seeking a companion cannot find one who is better than or equal to him, let him resolutely go on alone; there can be no companionship with a fool.*** This is obviously self preserving pragmatism of the Aesop's Fables variety, it doesn't require a Buddha to say this, so perhaps there is a deeper meaning I don't spot. Besides, I spot a couple of problems. **One**: For me to associate with someone better, that person would have to accept me, his/her inferior. Ergo, one of us must break this rule and accept an inferior (not necessarily a fool) as partner or companion. **Two**: This doesn't sound very loving and compassionate. Fools will remain fools without the company of intelligent partners or teachers, is it not? Plus, the Buddha himself tolerated Devadutta and others who were often comically stupid in his order. The accompanying story of the Thera who blindly trusts his disciples is a little too simplistic, how is it that a senior teacher (Thera) needed to be schooled on such a trivial principle of common sense? If someone is obviously lazy and scheming, even treacherous, he or she should not be trusted. Did the Thera get undermined by a false sense of duty or compassion?

When reading Zen Master Dogen's Shobogenzo it attracted my attention that one of the fascicle postscripts said "Presented to the assembly at the hour of the Rat (midnight)". Given that this was happening during Dogen's time in the 13th century, this late dharma talk would have necessitated the burning of lamp oil and the whole monastic assembly being awake to hear the dharma being expounded. I have also heard from other sangha members that some Zen monasteries have a dinner in the early evening (16-17) which would contrast with the Theravada and Tibetan approaches of not having any meals after noon. Are those aspects of the time schedule considered traditional in Zen monastic life? Is there more material on the subject of the practical everyday aspects of Zen monastic conduct that I could read? Both Soto and Rinzai historical as well as contemporary accounts welcome.

What are the 7 Purifications in laymans terms and how is this practiced in daily life?

Is trying to find causes of everything not a good practise? Isn't having rational mind a good thing? I know that the Lord Buddha advised us to not to think about beginning of life. Because it make us crazy. There may be some other things like this. I realize that this thinking causes me to loose sati. Why that thing happen? How long does it exists? etc. Most of these thinking causes to stuck at a loop. It feels like it wastes lot of energy for nonsense. But I have fear of stopping this. Do I have to just stop thinking and let it go? Do I have to forget things without knowing causes of it? How do I select what to think and what not to think? How this affects sati? What Lord Buddha said about this? How should I handle this rationality?

I have a question. I like to draw, and recently think of selling my art (commisssion). But I mainly draw fanart (fanart of celebrities, movie characters, etc). My question is, in Buddhism, is selling our drawing of real life people (celebrities, famous people) considered wrong? As in 'using' their popularity for us to gain profit?

At work, I try to be mindful, deliberate, and calm. I found with the help of meditation and being mindful makes me less distracted and less stressed at my work or whatever I do. But I also feel being mindful, deliberate and calm makes me slow, feels less involved at my work(though I feel focused) and less energetic. I used to be very active and fast at certain stuffs I do but now I dont feel like that if try to be mindful. How to overcome this? I want to be mindful and calm but I also want to be fast and involved at my work(or in other words highly active)?

Whenever I'm confronted with behaviours I find potentially harmful, I get angry. One example of this is when I witness motorists speeding or otherwise making risky maneuvers (going after the light has turned red, cutting in traffic, etc.) I may be enjoying a nice calm walk in my neighbourhood and be otherwise feeling quite serene, but then a single passing car happens to accelerate too much (sometimes noisily), and then I start feeling all sorts of feelings of disapproval, powerlessness and contempt. I feel like I should change my attitude, but I'm not quite sure what I should strive for. Clearly, getting worked up over passing cars accomplishes little. It even hurts me, since I lose focus on what better thoughts I was enjoying before. Afterwards, I'm in an unhappy, vindictive mood for a while. People I love that see me having these types of reactions often look concerned and a bit disturbed. Pretty clearly, getting angry is not the right reaction. On the other hand, even on a rational level, I'm not sure I want to *not* get angry, because it seems obvious to me that these drivers are taking unnecessary risks that will invariably lead to more kids getting hit by cars, more car crashes, more noise, environments that feel less safe - harmful things. If I *don't* react, am I not placing myself and others in harm's way by taking part in an enabling apathy? Please note - reckless driving here is just an example. I'm hoping to find some insight on how to deal with things that are more or less tolerated by many, either by apathy, ignorance or differences in personal values, but that are for some reason important to me. Other examples that come to mind : - Marketing - Political propaganda - Erosion of private life - The environment - Social justice. How do Buddhists see disagreements where the opposing party might harm others if they continue in their ways? A *"Live and let live"* attitude seems problematic, since it contributes to the problem.