In [MN.98](https://suttacentral.net/mn98/en/sujato) , the Buddha seems to deny the ethnic/racial/genetic differences between humans. He seems to indicate that differences in physical traits between individuals are not determined by birth as in the rest of the animal world. This seems totally contrary to genetics: I. Humans are genetically part of the animal world and follow the same [laws of heritability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability) . II. Whether we speak of race or ethnicity, there are many [identifiable genetic clusters within humanity](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/9_Cluster_Tree.png) . III. Even without going that far it is obvious that between two individuals there will be physical differences according to their genetics (height, eye colors, features, hair, etc). The Buddha seems to deny this completely. He says for example that the differences in eyes/nose/shoulders, etc., between two individuals are not defined by birth but by convention... this is totally false: children inherit the traits of their parents and two parents with the Asian phenotype do not give birth to an African child by pure chance or convention. I thought it was because he wanted to say that all these genetic differences were conventional and I would have agreed, but it can't be that since he's only saying that for humans and recognizes the validity of these differences for animals and plants... I don't understand this sutta? > While the differences between these species are defined by their birth, the differences between humans are not defined by their birth. Not by hair nor by head, not by ear nor by eye, not by mouth nor by nose, not by lips nor by eyebrow, not by shoulder nor by neck, not by belly nor by back, not by buttocks nor by breast, not by genitals nor by groin, not by hands nor by feet, not by fingers nor by nails, not by knees nor by thighs, not by color nor by voice: none of these are defined by birth as it is for other species. In individual human bodies you can’t find such distinctions. The distinctions among humans are spoken of by convention. > > - The Buddha

As seen in the title of this question, I'm not sure whether everyone is able to attain enlightenment. As far as my study and introspective analysis have shown to me, it seems that in order to uproot ignorance permanently, one has to be able to correct the distortions of the mind (perceptions, thoughts and views). And the only way to do that effectively is through right understanding about reality (dukkha, the illusion of the self, impermanence, and the Dhamma in general). But what happens when one is factually limited to exert that right understanding? What happens when one cannot exert self-control, or when one is handicapped to use logic, language, cognition or the capacity for thinking abstract thoughts properly? (I'm really sorry if I'm using some words in a rude fashion; english is not my first language) I'm talking about biological or physical limitations that may impede a normal use of mental abilities (lack of cerebral structures, disease or anatomical abnormalities, lack of development of faculties, etc.). What do the suttas tell us about this? What is your personal experience in with this topic? What does scientific research tell us about this? I'd appreciate any kind of answer. Thanks in advance for your time and patience.

Thích Quảng Đức was a monk who immolated himself to protest against the repression by the Vietnamese government in 1963. It was filmed how he adopted the full-lotus posture an fire was set on him. The picture which was awarded the Pulitzer was known worldwide. In that video he does not show any signs of pain at all and he doesn't seem to be under the effect of any drug. It is said this is some sort of deep meditation or self-hypnosis technique nevertheless Hypnosurgery lacks of scientific evidence. Plenty of other monks even younger have committed self-immolation in Tibet to protest against the Chinese occupation. A lack of fiscal pain is a common trait. Is there more information on how this technique is done, it's difficulties and knowing that some Buddhist organizations are collaborating with modern neuro-science is there a scientific explanation for this and its possibilities or medical potential to treat chronic pain diseases? Video here watcher discretion advised

Are Buddhist monks allowed to have prescriptions, or would that be considered an attachment? Did the Buddha say anything of medicine?

In this TEDx Talk Youtube video at timestamp 12m 36s, Dr. Daniel Amen told the story of a nine year old boy named Andrew, who attacked a girl on a field for no particular reason and he had other behavioral problems. It turns out that he had a cyst in the left temporal lobe of his brain the size of a golf ball. Once it was removed, he returned to being a normal boy with normal behavior. Questions: 1. If his cyst was caused by past kamma, and if his bad behavior is caused by the presence of the cyst, then this implies that his present behavior is caused by his past kamma and he has no control of it. Is that true? 2. If his bad behavior was caused by the presence of the cyst, then would Andrew be creating bad kamma (by attacking the girl) due to bad intention, or would he not be creating bad kamma (by attacking the girl), because it was due to the cyst and not due to his own intention? 3. What did the Buddha teach about the physical body (including brain) and its ailments or conditions, affecting the mind and kamma? 4. How do we avoid bad kamma, due to mind-influencing effects caused by physical conditioning? 5. How could Buddhist teachings help a person like Andrew (before his cyst was removed)?

According to Buddhism, is the Mind (known by Citta, Manas, Vinnana or any other name that corresponds to Mind/Consciousness) connected with the organ called Brain? Is the brain (or loosely speaking, head) referred to in Buddhist writings as the seat of mind, consciousness or the cause of human behaviour?

Before Siddhartha Gautama attained Enlightenment, did he have a normal human body with normal human attributes? Or was his body anatomically different or superior to yours and mine in its physical attributes? If different, in what ways was it different? Before Enlightenment, did Siddhartha Gautama have a **mind** (or mental/spiritual capabilities) that was different from a normal human mind? If his mind differed from yours and mine, in what ways did it differ? What do scriptural writings and recent gurus say about this? What are your own thoughts about this?