Why is music (sorta) frowned upon in Buddhism? Or it isn't? For people like me, music really helped me get into spirituality. What I'm really trying to understand here is, is there any specific format or type of music that we're not supposed to listen to, or is it just music in general? -Noob here. All help appreciated :)

> “Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love; this is the eternal rule.” This quote by the Buddha makes no sense to me. Firstly and perhaps tangentially, it speaks of an "eternal" rule, but anything related to humans and other living beings including transcendent (who are the only entities that can experience hatred - inanimate rocks can't) are not permanent according to the Buddha. But okay, leaving that aside, two questions arise: 1. Why is hatred something that one should strive to cease? Clearly it involves important psychological functions, and had an evolutionary benefit. 2. How can hatred cease by love? If I love someone from another group, and that group hates me and wants me dead including any particular person from what group, they will be stronger and more motivated to destroy me, and so there will actually be less love. Moreover, there are many cases in history where two tribes hated each other, and one exterminated the other one, and the result was no more hatred. So hatred ended up ceasing through hatred. If someone could help me on these two points, I'd appreciate it.

Fire ceremonies are likely categorized as ‘rites and rituals’, but is/was the basic usage of fire for warmth prohibited by monastic rules?

are there any policies for bringing very young kids (14 month) to a temple/pagoda (stroller, clothes etc)? We

If someone hires a person to kill another and the plot is discovered, both the hired killer and the one who hired him will be arrested and imprisoned. Yet, somehow, if a monk eats food given by others, no negative kamma is created, even though the monk is aware of and complicit in the process of killing, i.e. he knows someone else had to do the killing of the plant or animal for his ultimate benefit, even if it wasn't explicitly killed for him. Even worse, someone whose profession involves the daily killing of animals as is the case in a slaughterhouse, has to bear the mental consequences of this daily ritual as well as its kammic consequences. Yet a monk can avoid all this simply by waiting for someone to put the dead animal in his bowl. The morality of this doesn't make sense. I would think the only morally harmless situation would be for a monk to only eat an animal or plant that had already died naturally, either by scavenging for it or waiting for another to do so on his behalf. Question: Can a monk choose to eat only an animal or plant that had died naturally? This either by scavenging on his own or by waiting for others to offer this to him?

Some laws coincide with Buddhist precepts for e.g. penalizing murder and theft. But there are other laws like traffic rules or Covid-19 rules which have no direct equivalent in Buddhism. However, we tend to frown upon people who disobey traffic rules and sometimes see them as immoral if they keep deliberately breaking traffic rules repeatedly. Are breaking traffic rules deliberately and repeatedly a violation of Buddhist precepts and virtues? Is it a violation of Right Action? If it is not a violation of Buddhist precepts, virtues and Right Action, then is it a sign of a unwholesome or unskillful mindset from a Buddhist perspective? And why?

I sometimes see rules suggesting that monks (at least Theravadan) should not eat various animals. The lists vary, but includes to varying degree: elephants, horses, dogs, snakes, lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas, slugs, cows, and humans. When I try to find something authoritative about this, I've come up short. Can anyone shed light on: (1) is there a list of animals that monks are prohibited from eating, and if so, (2) where does this appear in the canon, and (3) how/why were the particular animals listed?

Are monks allowed to be in the same room as a nun alone (not a laywoman)? Are monks allowed to be in the same room as a nun (considering the rule applies) while others a present? Is there a specific rule in the Vinaya for this, if so please cite. What should one do if one sees a monk alone with a female nun and it is not allowed (if that's a rule)?

Is there any reference/citation saying that Buddhism or Buddha's teachings will last only 5,000 years after Buddha's Mahaparinirvana? How can this be possible if more people like to learn more about Buddha's teachings and Buddhism? Is there any weak point in Buddhism or Buddha's teachings that it is going to cease to accept and learn any more by people because that particular point is no longer adaptable by current/future generation? It could be related to moral principles, rules, disciplines, as well as concepts and ideas.

I have on occasion seen commenters here and elsewhere who declare their achievements, such as being a sotāpanna. These comments are downvoted, so they do not appear to be appreciated. If comments like these show up on public forums then casual visitors may themselves see that the path can be followed, that people living today have found that the teachings work, and may themselves be inspired to study the Dhamma. That would be a good possible outcome from such comments. So is it considered wrong to write such declarations publically (at least if one is not a monk) and when would be the appropriate time and place to make declarations of achievements?

According to this comment : > I think that monks and laypeople are meant to depend on each other > (e.g. as described in Iti 107 ) however monks must not sell their > dhamma talks for food. **So there are monastic rules about food and > dhamma talks: they're separate transactions ... a *quid pro quo* is > forbidden** -- having given a dhamma talk (i.e. after his speaking) the > Buddha was no longer willing to receive food, because that would > appear as if he were receiving food in exchange for or as payment for > talking. Please provide references from the Vinaya and/or Patimokkha for "there are monastic rules about food and dhamma talks: they're separate transactions ... a *quid pro quo* is forbidden".

Is there a holy book for buddhists as the Bible is for Jews and Christians and Quran for Muslims? Is that the Tipitaka? A book where you can find all the teachings of Buddhism, and how to behave, rules, etc. Where can I read it translated to English or Spanish? In the same way I can read the Bible and the Quran online.

Is it (in a strict view) possible to go to inside a temple/pagoda sanctum with a wheelchair or should it be placed outside? and/or orthotics? Ihave spina bifida and sit mostly in a wheelchair. I can walk a few steps with help but need orthotics to support my ankles (without them its werry difficult to walk because i will stand on my toes.) I ask cause my friend is buddhist (i write from his account)

How can it be proper for a meditator who does not yet see reality as it is... ...to judge other people so easily? There is so much potential for subtle misuse of power, I mean I know I would be corrupted if it were me. Not grossly corrupted(hopefully) but subtly corrupted because I am unaware of my subtle transgressions. Even though I do say this out of ego I would hope that I am also saying it out of compassion for our admins. I am not trying to argue as I was hoping we might agree. If the admins think this causes too much fuss or arguing then the admins can react and censor this inquiry. My point is that we need admins, but a practicing admin, that seems like a contradiction but that is just my opinion. If it is appropriate for a practitioner to behave like some kind of police officer then please enlighten me on the reasons it is appropriate... ...or just take the easy way out and censor this question.

In Maha-parinibbana Sutta, Buddha said "if Sanga want, after I completed Parinibbana, you can remove small and/or light codes from Vinaya". Why Buddha said this approval to Sanga? Is it a kind of testing to future members of Sanga whether they can completely comply the Vinaya or not? This approval may lead to breakage of Sanga to Mahayana, Theravada, and more. This approval, is it being served as a reference to other parties of Sanga who cannot comply the vinaya completely not to be blamed by normal people? Or is it just a question to just Sanga at the time of been said and this was the way to be. Or any purpose of this approval? Or is it totally not approval, and just question?

How I can live longer and healthier as well as peaceful by following practices taught by Buddha, Buddhism and Sanga? I like to live long as a normal person (not being a monk). Live long here, I means if possible 100 years. If not, 90s. If not I like live longer than average of people at least. I like to live longer but I don't want to lose the opportunities of - 1. Having many things to see which make me cheerful and pleasing. 2. Listening music which make me pleasing. 3. Smelling good things and fragrances. 4. Savour what I like and people says the best things I can have in life. 5. Touch of aesthetically pleasing woman, touch of delicate fabrics I would like to follow the practices, rules, dos and don'ts said by Buddha or Buddha's teachings or from Sanga or from a Buddhist monk. The goal I like to achieve is to live longer and heathy (practically live much more longer than current generation like 100 years, 90-100 years). Is it possible instance that I can achieve if I am passing my teenage years? Or If I am not, is it possible for age of child or new born baby by applying teachings, guidance, practices and care by Buddhism, he/she can live longer and healthy for the rest of his/her life? Can you point me out any reference about **living longer and healthier** from Buddhism teachings, book of monk, audio/video recording, web link or Suttas?

If a Novice was ordained but was not ready to be ordained because of one little issue, like for example, the novice: - admitted to not having parental permission - admitted to an alchohol problem - admitted to still have 500 shares in Facebook - claims to not be human - ...and so on... Is it the preceptor that gets in trouble or both? Is the novice defeated even if s/he didn't do anything wrong except tell the truth that s/he is defiled like most people?

My cousin just had a baby two months ago, a beautiful baby boy. The father is a catholic and my cousin, the mother, is a Buddhist. They have taken this two month old baby to a very sacred Buddhist temple to receive blessing from the relics of Buddha and to give alms. One of the chief monks blasted them both, threatening them that they'll never be given permission to give alms or enter the premises: because the baby is only 2 months old and apparently should not have been brought to a sacred place. Hearing this story made me so upset. On their way home they have visited a church where the reverend Father had welcomed them both and blessed the child. **I really want to do something about it but I just don't know what to do?** This should be fixed. This is not the way monks should behave in sacred places in the presence of the relics of Buddha.

According to THIS , *"The bhikkhu should also not eat raw or undercooked meat..."* Should a bhikkhu, then, not eat sashimi (raw fish, such as it used frequently in sushi)?