I'm aware that Buddhist monastic communities often wear robes that distinguish them and visibly mark them out as Buddhists. Do lay Buddhist ever do the same thing? Is there any jewellery or clothing that lay Buddhists wear to mark them out as Buddhists - a visible marker of their religion. This is obviously common in other religions e.g. crucifixes for Christians - but do Buddhists of any tradition have an equivalent?

Should a lay Buddhist teach the Dhamma in a dhamma centre? Can a lay person teach just as a monk does? If so, are there any differences (e.g., should they sit on a different level, should the audience pay respect in a different way, etc.)?

I'm well aware that there are many different types of Buddhism, so I'm looking for the fortune-cookie sized description of the various kinds of induction/process/rituals/ceremony involved for the lay follower.

I had questions regarding the laity, monastic relationship. > 1) How exactly (the step by step or explained) does the process work > in which the monastics rely solely on the laity? > > 2) How do monks publish works (such as books) and not deal with the > money involved in their lives? Metta!

I once attended a puja at a Sri Lankan temple where a string was passed around during chanting. Afterwards the monks tied string around our wrists and poured water over our heads. What is the string called? Any explanation on the significance. I notice some people kept the string on for months, others said to cut it off at the end of the day.

How does one let go of something the other person involved won't acknowledge? I don't mean the niceties of the other person's behaviour, the ins and outs and whys. Merely, that the other person - I think - nihilistically won't finish up. So e.g. your lover leaves you without even leaving a note. Or your friend pretends not to know you, with no explanation. Or your family changes the locks and won't answer the door when you visit.

Growing up in the Roman Catholic tradition, we were encouraged to go to confession (penance) on a regular basis for reconciliation and to be absolved of sins. In Buddhism, the only mention of confession I've seen is in regard to a practice for monks prior to the reciting of the patimokkha. I understand there is no idea of absolving sins in Buddhism, but why is it considered benefical or useful for monks to confess but not for lay people to do the same? I'm assuming there is some sense of unburdening in the confession process and wondering what serves that function for lay people? Thank you.

In SN 56.11 we find a famous passage: > “Bhikkhus, these **two extremes** should not be followed by one who has gone forth into homelessness. What two? The pursuit of **sensual happiness** in sensual pleasures, which is low, vulgar, the way of worldlings, ignoble, unbeneficial; and the pursuit of **self-mortification**, which is painful, ignoble, unbeneficial. Without veering towards either of these extremes, the Tathagata has awakened to the middle way, which gives rise to vision, which gives rise to knowledge, which leads to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna. Laity frequently interprets the above as *moderation of sensual pleasures*, even though the above passage seems to refer to monks (those "gone forth into homelessness"). **Are there suttas where the Buddha or his disciples teach specifically laity on the subject of sensual pleasures (e.g. to be in anyway cautious about them)?** Also, a minor curiosity: how the above passage is interpreted by the Theravada tradition, since the suttas clearly teach the abandonment of sensual pleasures for those who become monks/nuns.

I have a person I know who, as far as I can say, has been intermittently long interested in Buddhism, but never made a big leap in her practice to achieve and cultivate bigger achievements. She is sufficiently versed in basic buddhist teachings but, as this person told me more than once, is afraid of reaching a "point of no-return" - that is, to not be able to enjoy and do all the things she was used to once she crosses a certain stage of the path. I tried to dispense some advices by offering details about my own experience and telling that, in reality, now I'm even *more* able to appreciate the same things I had before. This and a few other attempts never convinced that person (I never tried to *persuade* her, since I prefer that any person makes the choice that they most prefer) and my being aware that, to a certain extent, the progress in the path can be highly subjective, can only make things more difficult. Not being able to offer a more satisfactory answer to *Will I be able to enjoy life as much as I did before?*, what convincing reply would you offer based on your personal experience and, if relevant, buddhist scriptures? Please finally note that I do not demand that this, like many other persons, should follow the path to the fullest and most hardcore level. She may acquire a taste of what it is like practicing meditation, mindfulness and insight practices for a while and then settle at a level that she finds comfortable.

What is the "ease" of the "dharma gate of ease and joy"? Can an unelightened person achieve it outside seated meditation? Ought I ***imagine*** everything is difficult, or everything is easy? How can we be effortful in our everyday lay tasks?

What advice (or techniques e.g. of meditation) does Buddhism (of any tradition) have for people who experience physical pain (caused by an illness and treated by a doctor)? Or for the people (friends, family, even nurses) of such people? That (physical pain) is what the word "suffering" implies or means to most people. Is "see the doctor, get better analgesics" the best or only real answer? What if analgesics have an effect on the mind -- e.g. opioids -- is that 'bad'? What if analgesics don't work, e.g. neuropathic pain, or if the medicines are not available? Sorry for asking. This isn't a "real problem" for me at the moment, so it may be an example of unnecessary worry -- but I'm able to ask now, and in case this problem happens to me or someone else in the future, I want to have prepared/studied some appropriate advice in advance. And/or what advice do you have for people now, *before* they experience pain, to prepare. --- I agree that 'pain' is meant to send some kind of warning message, so temporary/new pain and a trip to the doctor might be the first thing. For the sake of this question, please assume that the underlying problem has already been medically diagnosed: that it is chronic pain, from an illness like diabetic neuropathy or terminal cancer, or something like that.

There is no Theravada monastery in the country I live in. I just read a short brief about lay people going together and forming a forest monastery in Norway , and was wondering about how a monastery is established? Who initiates the process and who makes the decision (lay people, monastics, both in combination, or either)? Thinking in terms of whether it's just monastics moving back to their home country to spread the Dhamma, or if lay people gather support and invite monks. *Not so much about the religious or practical considerations, just looking for a helicopter view.*

I have already seen different answers to that question, but I don't know which one is based on the suttas. I would appreciate the source of the answer for this specific topic. If you think the answer is "No", could you please write about how far a lay person can get? Just a higher rebirth?

When you are laity and given a Buddhist name does it change with different masters and temples or do you carry it with you for life? While mostly pertaining to the Vietnamese tradition I'm very curious about all. Thank you.

Lots of questions on stream entry here. I have practiced Mahayana Buddhism without a huge success - for sure. But still, I was of the opinion that such attainment as stream entry was rare in the extreme. Perhaps 1/1000 monks, and much less even in the devout laity. How common is it? I have a somewhat devout Theravadin friend, is he a saint :o !

I have been practicing Buddhism since a child, about twenty years. Throughout my adult life I have been trying to combine my practical life with my Buddhist beliefs. In some situations, however, I am not seeing how Buddhist principles apply to decision making. For example, how do I apply Buddhist ideals in deciding which college to go to, what profession to do, and what job opportunity to pursue? These are the mundane but unavoidable decisions for the layman. Of course, I'd not pursue a career in military or defense industry due to my beliefs, but there's not always a clear choice between other professions, jobs, etc based on Buddhist beliefs.

Was there an incident in the Buddhist scripture where the Buddha said of the indebtedness of the unenlightened monks to the laity that they should at least generate metta?

Leading on from this answer - is it true that ultimately most or even all non-monastic lifestyles are wrong livelihood. Not being a monk I find this point of view quite challenging but just because I don't like it doesn't stop it from being true. Also I suspect that this might differ between traditions so if the school that the answer comes from can be highlighted in the answer that would be really helpful.

This article on money and happiness prompted my asking myself: 1. Are the wealthy experiencing dukkha in a different way to the poor? 2. If so, in what way? Are they experiencing it in a more / less refined way? 3. What did the "Buddha" say about money and suffering?

Are there any traditions without an associated monastic community or even where the monastic element is significantly minimised. I practice with the Triratna Buddhist community and the blurring of the monastic and lay elements is a particular feature. I was wondering if we are very peculiar in that or if there are other traditions, modern or historic, where that also would be the case.