The question 'What is the purpose of life? ' has been asked before. What I understood is that if I were to set a purpose to life, once I achieve my goal, life becomes meaning less. There is no single thought great enough to spend an entire lifetime. So, life has no intrinsic meaning. In everyday life, we try to plan things. Setting goals provide clarity about what exactly to do, what's important and what's not. Reaching goals help building self-confidence and motivates to move forward. It also helps to work efficiently while dealing with big tasks (Makes big tasks into smaller, more manageable units, Helps good decision making that are inline with the final goal). Both sound reasonable to me but they also seem contradictory. Then how should a lay man approach his life to be productive and at the same time seek liberation from the sufferings of samsara?

Which pali sutta is this? I think it's in MN somewhere. The Buddha says monks missing out on pleasures of lay life and the pleasures of holy life. The idea being that their practice is such that they're not getting jhana (pleasures of holy life), and they're deprived of the pleasures of the lay life (food, sex, etc), so they're just suffering.

Receiving alms is definitely part of the monastic life. Is begging for alms acceptable for lay persons? Is begging for alms considered Right Livelihood for lay persons? Is begging for alms considered skillful for lay persons, compared to earning their livelihood in accordance with the five precepts, principles of Right Livelihood and teachings of the Pali Canon (or other scriptures)? Or is it considered laziness?

I often read about monks have little free time in their schedules but aside from teaching other monks I am not sure what they do with all their time. I have seen monks in Tibet working in an orphanage and monks in Thailand giving public talks. Aside from this what involvement with the community do monks have (excluding dana)?

This question springs forth as I haven't found yet any sutta showing this premise, has the Buddha ever taught anapanasati to lay followers ? And if not, what could be the reason ? May you be well.

During the time of Buddha, it is said many people at one gathering attained enlightenment by listening to only one one of his sermons. How can a mind develop such a achieving within matter of hours. There are millions of devoted Buddhist in the world now but I have not heard a single person achieving higher mental status. Are there any other explanation this other than karma?

When it is come to **"dana"** I heard many times **"First do something for loved ones".** I don't have any confusion regarding "dana" generosity. But lately I'm thinking indulge partner is means worthless (being emotional or emotionally doing something for partner) or just fragile thing. >If I'm buying something or even giving rose to partner, is it worthless? Is being emotional means cheap, am I thinking wrong? **🌺 Happy Vesak to all of you 🌺**

I'm hearing of lay people becoming enlightened by the Buddha but did any of them become Lay Dhamma Teachers? When where the first lay teacher(s) of the eightfold path?

One thing that seems fascinating about the rules of the monastic life, the rules of poverty and celibacy, and so forth, is that as strict as the rules are, it seems that compliance is voluntary. A monk could, at any moment, choose to disrobe and leave the order, and he would still be welcome to hear the Buddha and practice as a lay believer. It seems almost as if he is lauded for acknowledging his limitations rather than continuing to struggle without making progress, and continuing to eat the alms food in vain. I haven't yet read any sutras where a lapsed monk is told that he earned himself a rebirth in a bad destination. Am I mistaken? Does a lapsed monk earn bad karma from leaving the order, or from having mistakenly joined the monastic order? On the other hand, is it possible that he earns good karma and a good rebirth for having been in the Sangha? Suppose that his time in the Sangha makes him more wise, compassionate, forbearing as a lay person than he was previously. Suppose a recently divorced banker or stock broker resolves to join an established Therevadin order for exactly seven years. He will memorize the teaching and meticulously follow the rules during that time, after which he will return to his profession (and find a new wife). Is this permissible and beneficial, according to the Dhamma?

Does the Piti Sutta imply that it is better for lay people to start with cultivation of jhana through samatha meditation, instead of starting with vipassana meditation? Also, the use of the term "piti" (rapture) seems to encourage lay people to enter and master the first jhana. From the Piti Sutta (AN 5.176) : > Then Anathapindika the householder, surrounded by about 500 lay > followers, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down > to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there the Blessed One said > to him, “Householder, you have provided the community of monks with > robes, alms food, lodgings, & medicinal requisites for the sick, but > you shouldn’t rest content with the thought, ‘We have provided the > community of monks with robes, alms food, lodgings, & medicinal > requisites for the sick.’ So you should train yourself, ‘Let’s > periodically enter & remain in seclusion & rapture.’ That’s how you > should train yourself.”

I remember reading a sutta some time ago in which a lay disciple of the Buddha held a conversation with a non-Buddhist ascetic. I don't remember the topic of their conversation, but at one point the lay buddhist talked about having experienced jhana. Does anyone know which sutta this is? Thanks in advance for your answers!

Would you say that it is appropriate for a monk to give advice to the laity in how to live life/dealing with obstacles? Now don't get me wrong, but monks certainly have "safer" environments. They are much less exposed to stimulating sensory input as well as life problems. I am by nature quite skeptical and cannot really take a monk serious if he gives tips and at the same time does not follow these tips (or rather that lifestyle). How can a monk give relationship advice? Sure, the Dhamma gives such, but then it's just intellectual knowledge given by a monk, but that advice has not been practised by him. I think the whole "problem" starts with titles like "venerable" or the admiration of monks/nuns. Again, don't get me wrong, seeing in them a role model and paying homage to them because they delivered proper dhamma is appropriate, but one should always keep in mind that they are UNIQUE, COMPLEX (in that they think, feel and do good, bad and neutral things) and FALLIBLE. Anyone made same experiences? Advice? Opinions?

I have followed the Dharma for the last ten+ years, and have been married for thirty. l have reached a stage where my progression is noticeably obstructed by the Layman's world. I've talked to my spouse(non Buddhist), but she is upset and doesn't want her world to change. What advice would you give to both of them?

I am currently reading *The Art of Communication* by Thich Nhat Hanh and going through some rough spots in a relationship. From a Buddhist perspective, what is the most loving way to communicate, in a relationship when both people are suffering and have opposite needs? One believes they need space to heal and find themselves, and the other needs understanding that comes through meaningful communication before that time apart will seem restorative.

Most discourses that I've read have been given to monks or nuns (and not laypeople), so I'm wondering **what the practical application is of these many discourses for a layperson like myself**. Are the practices presented in these discourses something to strive for? Is it better (as laypeople) to focus our effort on deepening our understanding and practice of for example the five precepts? Grateful for help and with kind regards, Tord

We've cling to nothing, no attachments and no bond to not to being suffered. But as a layman it's going through all and face sorrow and like mind is lost. It's same I loose my mind. I don't feel nothing for what things hurt me, feel barren. Don't feels normal. How can I become normal again and feel happy?

I'm right now working on [an application](https://sunyatazero.github.io/buddhist-well-being-pyqt5/) for increasing happiness in everyday life, inspired by practical teachings in Buddhism about happiness for laypeople. My question is: What did the Buddha say about happiness for laypeople? I have found these Sutras helpful: * [Sigalovada Sutta](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigalovada_Sutta) * [Dighajanu Sutta](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dighajanu_Sutta) What else did the Buddha say about happiness for laypeople?. (Is there a compilation of teachings regarding this?) Grateful for help and with kind regards, Tord

The Dhamma says that not helping parents is evil and preaches to take care of the elderly parents. What can be some positive outcomes the children will get by helping the parents?

The term "non-duality" oft appears in Buddhist English language literature, both contemporary and in translation. e.g. it is sometimes claimed to be the cornerstone of Yogacara philosophy, and its assertion of "mind only", that no part of us exists independently of consciousness, but nevertheless it does tend to have some existence. Obviously the term nirvana means buddhist liberation, that point at which the sage or saint (both words appear in the English language literature) has put out the suffering of samsaric existence, be that its elimination or a realisation that it is, in someway, already so extinct. Mara is the personification of skillessness, a character that deceives e.g. the aspirant away from the holy life, and as such represents (in a sentient being) let's suppose something *like* the opposite of skillful means. I thought that nonduality *often* (if not always) means that opposing terms (good and evil, or illusion and reality) depend upon each other, by convention at least. So, whether or not the last paragraph is correct, does the above not suggest that nirvana is mara?

Is it OK to be a monastery monk (eating community gruel, etc.) but using your laptop to study for your career during half the day (instead of meditation with all of it)? Would the administrator be OK with freeloaders like that? I would help maintain the monastery, especially if it is related to my line of work (website development, etc.). Heck, I'd work full-time for free out of compassion. I'm thinking of asking this at a local monastery, especially since I don't care to be stuck in the cycle of apartment paying and being stuck at low-ranked IT job and being crushed by loans. I would rather take time to master certain subjects while cultivating and then come back to the city when I can achieve a higher salary to match the high cost of living as a city-dweller these days... and pay off my weighty student loans. My question pertains to monastery in California or the rest of the US. Especially those good with wifi connections. :-D