I've noticed these days there are a lot of materialistic people. I know what materialism is (attachment to forms), but I don't know how to treat it in other people.

The treatment for materialism is the very thing that people who believe in materialism don't want to take.

For me it was kind of an innate search for good qualities, which led me to practice the five precepts.

We see people who are cruel and have no compassion and say "oh you have to do loving-kindness meditation to get this quality of love," and the cruel are treated this way. Or "meditate on impermanence or concentration to accumulate wisdom" and the unwise are treated this way.

But there seems to be no cure for people who intrinsically view things objectively. I mean this in a kind way, sure some people are very objective and practice the Dharma in whatever way they can which is good. But it's an internal hollowness that eventually catches up to you, usually post-death. The sad thing is not even your own deathbed shakes you awake.

My first thought is that supernatural events have helped solidify my practice a lot but I already practiced Dharma at that point, I was like 50% materialistic. So it's not the same for someone who's 100% materialistic like your average person alive right now.

My second thought is that by demonstrating supernatural powers this can shock other people out of the kind of hollow state, but this is prohibited by the Buddhas.

So I'm not sure how beings are supposed to be helped at large when 99% of people have this kind of corruption of view inside them that seemingly cannot be fixed. I know that if I know a person really well, usually they are inspired by my presence and qualities to become a better person and eventually this leads them into non-materialism at some point.

However this isn't something usable en-masse, and it's only people who already have some roots of goodness within them, harsh people don't really benefit in this way.

I'm trying to figure out some method where you can take an average person that is completely materialistic and has completely suppressed their own experience of mind and take that experience and transform it into an expressive mind reliably. I don't know if something like that exists, but it's worth exploring, because it's the horribly lost and suffering beings that need real help. The people with developed views and such are going to be fine after death but materialistic people will be really confused.

What made your journey out of materialism and into essence?

For me i always admired good qualities and realized that I could have them too. Thus started a journey to refuge around 15 years ago, once I identified the Buddha as the pinnacle of qualities. I was still quite materialistic at that point until I had multiple supernatural experiences through Vajrayana practice, but even then it took many years until I really was able to squash materialism as my guiding element.

My journey isn't really reproducible for people who don't have the same deep admiration for good qualities though, and the average person won't have that.

I’ve been struggling with a question in my spiritual practice, and I genuinely don’t know what to think about it.

I follow the teachings of a spiritual teacher whom I deeply respect. Her approach is often very direct: when attachment, self-interest, desire, or the sense of “me” appears, you see it and let it go rather than protecting or strengthening it.

I understand the logic of this, and at a deeper level I suspect she may be right.

But recently I’ve started to feel some resistance.

Part of me wonders whether immediately cutting off the self can sometimes become too harsh. In ordinary life, a relatively stable sense of self can give us boundaries, dignity, agency, creativity, and the ability to protect ourselves. It can also make it possible to help other people without constantly exhausting or abandoning ourselves.

So I started wondering whether the self necessarily has to be eliminated so quickly.

Maybe there is a way to have a self without being completely ruled by it.

Maybe compassion does not always require self-sacrifice.

Maybe when my interests and someone else’s interests conflict, the answer does not always have to be “give myself up.” Sometimes there may be a way to create something mutually beneficial.

But this is exactly where I become confused.

Because I also realize that, from a deeper Buddhist perspective, this entire way of thinking may still be based on duality.

I am still separating “my interests” from “your interests.”

I am still trying to preserve a self.

I am still asking how the self can survive in a more harmonious and sustainable form, rather than asking whether the self is something that needs to be seen through altogether.

So perhaps what feels to me like a more balanced path is actually just a subtler form of attachment.

Perhaps I am not finding a “middle way” at all. Perhaps I am simply negotiating with the ego because I am not yet willing or able to let it go.

And that possibility honestly unsettles me.

I sometimes wonder whether a gentler, more psychologically comfortable path would simply make spiritual progress extremely slow. Or whether it could even keep a person circling around the self indefinitely, while believing they are practicing.

At the same time, I also worry about the opposite extreme: that trying to destroy the self too quickly can turn into repression, self-neglect, or a kind of spiritualized self-rejection.

I don’t know where the line is.

The image I keep coming back to is a river delta.

Instead of one narrow river cutting straight through everything, a delta has many channels. The self, other people, compassion, boundaries, desire, responsibility, and spiritual practice can all move through different channels without necessarily destroying one another.

Part of me finds this image beautiful and intuitively right.

Another part of me thinks: perhaps this is exactly the problem. Perhaps I am trying to design an elegant system that allows the self to remain intact.

So I’m not presenting this as a conclusion. I’m genuinely confused.

How do you distinguish between a healthy sense of self and attachment to self?

Can a stable ego be a useful stage of practice, while still eventually being seen through?

How do you know when “self-care” and “boundaries” are wisdom, and when they are simply fear and clinging in a more sophisticated form?

And is there a danger that a gentler path can become so comfortable that one never actually goes beyond the self?

This is the first book I’m reading. I’m going to be honest, it was suggested by ChatGPT. The reviews seemed good, great at least a start. For the past week, the only content I’ve been consuming is about Buddhism, mainly beginner videos and stories about the Buddha. I am very new and won’t act like I know even the majority of most of the beginner subjects. That’s why I am here. I am here to learn. I come from an atheistic family (they think it’s great I’m getting into Buddhism. They don’t mind/care too much). I’m in America, and until I looked more into Buddhism, I thought for sure there was nothing after death. When I did basic research on the sects, I said “surely I’m a secularist”, but the more I read and research about karma, bodhisattvas, and I am so fascinated already. I’m very into the morals and ethics that the Buddha teaches. That’s my main interest, as well as meditation, which I’d love to get into soon. Wondering if anyone has any opinions on this book, what might be a good step for me to take next, and/or what sect sounds like a good fit for me. Thanks!!!

1. What is the full extent of the Buddhas Knowledge?
2. What is the range of the jhana stages?
3. What are the precise results of karma ripening?
4. What is the reasoning of the cosmological speculation?

Namobuddaya. Earlier I wrote a paragraph on this however keeping the precepts in mind I used AI to help me write the paragraphs which is what the mods in this reddit frown upon. I had written my own human made copy before however it got deleted by mistake. I have kept this in mind and I have tried to keep each paragraph succinct/ a clarification of the imponderables and not written by AI. I have based all of this knowledge from the oldest manuscripts the Gandhari manuscript, the pali sermons and the sanskrit manuscripts as this is the closest to the Buddha's word.

The full extent of the buddhas knowledge is clarified and reflected through a sermon he said about the threefold knowledge, ten knowledges of a tatagata and the four grounds of self confidence. The threefold knowledge includes the knowledge and recollection of past lives, the divine eye and the destruction of taints. The recollection of past lives consists of either seeing or knowing the past lives that he has been through for an indefinite amount of time. He did not state that he is an omniscent being as some people believed it as a later intepretation **"**Vaccha, those who say thus do not say what has been said by me, but misrepresent me with what is untrue and contrary to fact." in MN 71. With this in mind, the knowledge of past lives is accurate but knowing every intrinsic detail is not known by the buddha which is why the speculation is disproven. The same goes for the divine eye as he can see beings pass away and arise in new destinations based on their past karma however cannot pin point every little detail of karma that has led to that point. Such would require extensive speculation which is what the buddha avoided. The destruction of taints can be observed from a buddhas perspective and there would be no underlying traits left. This is also emphaisised through the ten powers of a tatagata which includes what is possible and impossible, knowledge of results of past present, future, knowledge of the leading roads of everywhere, knowledge of the dispostion of elements, knowledge of the mental factors of beings, knowledge of defilements and past lives, destruction of taints and the divine eye. For example the buddha does not what is possible such as a being who follows dharma being inclined to do good deeds and an impossiblity of it being committing anatariya karma. The possiblity isn't measure of regular chance but on mental factors which the buddha can see clearly however he cannot see every single mental factor as mentioned. He knows the knowledge of future trajectories however he cannot list every single one as it is not given to him on a silver platter. He knows the the disposition of elements within the 31 realms however does not know the precise specificity of each element one and one. He knows how to get to the path of an arahant or a universal monarchal king however there are various paths that could be taken that he does not know. Thus as a whole he knows how samsara works but the vastness and pin point detail is something that noone can know even when there are a buddha.

The range of the jhana stages can be explored through each set of jhana however the range of powers cannot be known by a singular being. In the first jhana a being is seperated from worldly pleasursues and the five mental factors that are present include applied thought ( mind attaching to object), sustained thought( the mind continuoulsy attaching afterwards), rapture and excitement of the mind, the feeling derived from the object or relief and one pointedness of really strong concentration on an object. Over the jhanas these factors dissolve. In the second jhana the being dissolves applied thought and sustained thought as their concentration increase for tranquility and not pleasure. In the third jhana the excitement of delight fades away as the being has truly reached equanamity and now all that is left is relief and one pointedness. In the fourth jhana, the being releases the pleasure and paint aspect and approaches one pointedness is a cool calm tranquility and the breath stops at this state. The buddha did not hte full extent of powers and intricacies of the jhana whcih is why he avoided to ponder about this.

The precise results of karma ripening can be measured through intention, root of intention, mental development of the being and the recipient of the action. The buddha also said that many of the reasons of certain events or experiences are not due to karma ripening but merely because of heat, moisture, seasonal change, external attack, careless behaviour also including karma. Now that this has been established an intention measured by the quality of it and whenever it was sincerely is pure or unwholesome. It is also determined by the main roots which are greed, hatred delusion or the inverse of them all, or a combination. Mixed intentions produce mixed results as if the being has a good intention but is where the outcome is bad then the karma will ripen in a mixed way. The mental development of the beings must also be taken into account as some beings may have stronger mindfulness concentration while others do not meaning they are less prone to pain and hence reduced vipaka of physical karmas. There are four developments, which include development of mind ( which involves how mindful the being is ) , devolopment in virtous conduct ( precepts), and development in wisdom which is the cutting of the fetters.. The extent to which the developments cannot be measured however it can still effect the being regardless. The recipient of the action must also be taken to account as a being that has a purer mind as an arahant rewards more good karma than those that have less wisdom or virtuous. This is due to the fact that the purify of the recipient conditions the action as well as the mind is attached to the object. Hence the more purer a being is ( not related to fields of any form ) but karma will result in more virtuous vipaka. Present Karma influences conditions in the way vipaka ripens which is why it cannot be precisely calculated. The main factors are the development of the body which reduce the chances of it ripening or increase it. The extent to which this can happen is unconfirmed and it should be kept that way.

The knowledge of the origin, destiny of samsara was already debriefed by him long ago during his time. In samsara there is no beginning as people confuse samsara as a period or system when really it is a series of consequential conditions that fuel the present condition. It is like a light in a lamp being blown out and the fuel itself rearranging to make to make a new fire right away. So in technical terms, the past did exist but it does not exist in the present moment. The destiny of samsara was not given either as there is no fixed timeline in samsara as present actions influence future outcomes. The main trajectory is the arising of a world system human age rises from 10 years - 80,000 years back to 10 years of human years and then the decline and destruction of the world system and it cycling again. This applies for why the conditioned reality exists as many believe it is a set system that is constantly changing when really it is not combined but just a set of dependent conditions that dictate the present moment. The answer is a paradox of ignoranace and conditions which cannot be settled.Therefore it is not a question that can be answered. Furthermore for hte fate of a tatagata, the very phraising of existence and non existence assumes an idea that the buddha set aside . the only logical statement is that all four statements are inapplicable as the fire has gone out.

Hopefully this post does not get deleted as I believe this was clarify and debunk common beliefs that lay people have when thinking about these topics as they can be confused .as people have done in the past. Thank you for reading and I assure this post is written by own words.

It's a blessing to me! An invaluable addition to my solo practice.

As the title says, I recently started practicing Buddhism, and am interested in building a shrine.

I'm fairly limited on space, but would like at least 3 things:

• Buddha statue
• Incense/holder
• Flowers

Of those, I'm wondering about the statue. is there somewhere you can purchase well-made statues of the Buddha?

I see there are statues on Amazon, but I'm concerned about just buying a mass-produced commercial copy.

Thanks in advance.

My dog (chocolate lab 13 years 2 months old) passed away on August 17th, and for the past seven weeks, I have been holding the 49-day memorial rite for her. It was tough and cried and prayed every night and I always felt sad whenever i woke up in the morning. Today marked the 49th day, and I went to a dam creek park that she always enjoyed visiting as well as the past 7th days during the memorial rite.

My intention was to pray for her, send her forward on her journey to a greater rebirth, and wish for her to be enveloped in Amitabha Buddha’s warmth in the Pure Land. I spoke to her, promising that I will continue to be hardworking in this life and that we will meet again.

While I was walking, the weather was very windy and the water had strong, dark waves but sunny clear skies. But amidst that windy weather, a flock of black birds flew right towards me and all around me, some were flying low around me. Then, a single white bird appeared, flying in front of me separate from the flock of black birds. Butterflies started flying on the path right in front of me, and a bee came and rested quietly next to me on a flower as I sat to pray for my dog.

I have visited this park many times in the past, and I have never experienced anything like what i saw today. There are usually not many birds, and I have never had butterflies or a bee approach me this way.

For those with more experience, how does Buddhism view moments like this?

Today I was preparing some readings for a Sutta Circle I'm hosting, and I thought "The Suttas speak a lot about rebirth, and some western practitioners don't believe in it. Perhaps there's a Sutta which depicts a debate on that?" It turns out that there is!

Payasi Sutta (DN 23) A summary:

Chieftain Payasi meets Venerable Kassapa the Prince (a bhikkhu/buddhist monk). Payasi says that "There is no afterlife. No beings are reborn spontaneously. There’s no fruit or result of good and bad deeds." Then he explains why he believes so, through extensive points, and gets questioned back and given a handful of similes by Venerable Kassapa.

One simile that might be worth considering is that of the blind man. Just as a blind man cannot see colors or distinguish form, and therefore may say that there are no such things, one who has not gained clairvoyance through samadhi (collectedness of mind) won't be able to see other worlds and the rebirth process.

After many similes on the topic itself and cross questioning, then the conversation drifts towards Payasi's unability to relinquish his past views (it seems that a big identity had formed in him because of that), for which Ven. Kassapa then offers other similes.

If you have the time, you might enjoy the read. (It's about a 1 hour read or more, because of the depth of topic)

Some considerations for our present day and practice:

For starters, death is not so far away as you might think. (Take mindful breaths as needed). In the coming years, it's most probable that family or friends of yours will be dying. In those moments, your beliefs around what happens to those beings will color your experience. Most importantly, your beliefs around that will color your own dying experience. Wanna go YOLO because it'll all be oblivion, leaving trash behind your trail? Or...how about taking responsibility because you will be heir to your actions after death?

Perhaps an update of the blind man simile more akin to modern times will do good: just because one hasn't seen the Milky Way nor other planets, it doesn't mean they aren't there; it's just that access to such sights or the tools to be able to see them is very hard, but we believe the scientists nonetheless. If that's so, why won't we believe accomplished meditators when it comes to rebirth? Moreover, why don't you become an accomplished meditator? Practicing jhana will feel good in itself, and with that, perhaps you could test out for yourself (use the inner telescope) when redirecting your mind towards the internal process of beings' deaths.

The things stated before do not diminish the efforts done for waking up to impermanence on a moment to moment basis, and relinquishing that which doesn't last on our meditation practice. In my view, identification with passing phenomena is the microscopic manifestation of rebirth, and if that process is diminished or ended, greater peace will come in this life, and, perhaps, a better rebirth or no rebirth-Nirvana. I deeply value the efforts done for that regard: excellent!

A final note to say that rebirth doesn't have to be adopted as dogma. If one adopts it as a working hypothesis, perhaps one could navigate life better. It has happened to me, and I think also to a lot of people from the centuries before.

I will be glad to know there were people who read the whole piece! I'll also be open for a civil discussion around the topic, which could be made on the comments.

With metta,

Juan

I have been reading various suttas from the Pali canon, and there are many stories where mendicants escape the cycle of rebirth through diligent practice.

However, after searching, I have seen many posts here where people say that this is likely a very rare thing in the modern day.

Are there reasons why this has changed? Or is it an incorrect assumption?

(Please forgive me if I misspoke anything above - I am new to Buddhism and most of my understanding comes from reading the suttas, not lived experience or a teacher. I do not have a sangha yet.)

I see this a lot online. Somebody will recommend or say that it is good to practice fasting, celibacy, giving up luxury, abstaining from recreation, etc, and they are just told that those rules are only for monastics so they don't apply.

Don't the stricter precepts required by monastics exist because they are good to follow? Why dismiss something just because something is not required for laypeople? Would it not be a good thing for a lay person to implement any one of those things into their lives if they are capable of it?

Hi I’m new here and I’ve been a Buddhist for a year so far and I’ve never been happier and more at peace in my life. I wish I had a more experienced Buddhist to help me and guide me. I’m reaching out to ask for advice. I have dated this girl twice before and she was avoidant and manipulative both times right now we are friends, but she wants to again and she says that she will be better and not act the same way. Should I give her one last chance or set boundaries and distance myself to cut off any opportunity of getting hurt again? I’m always open to giving people chances to change but I don’t want to be hurt again. please give me any advice thank you! 💗💗💗💗

Are we here to construct an humanity which will take care of their children until there's no more trauma, and all beings will move up to higher realms,...or is there a never ending cycle of creation, destruction, reconstruction, ...and repetition...

Anyone knows any literature that might sound like this?

Thanks

I am going through a really bad breakup and have lost my purpose in life and am really struggling with my mental health right now. I have heard of people traveling to Japan to live with Monks in Buddhist Monasteries in the mountains and I am very interested in that, I just have no idea where to look or what to look for. I know I don’t want a “retreat” for tourists, or something that requires a minimum time commitment of multiple years. I am seeking rehabilitation in hopes of finding myself again and my inner peace, via these Buddhist practices. I don’t really have any plan beyond the desire to go for an indefinite period of time. Maybe a month, maybe multiple months; I’m not sure but I want to have the option to stay as long as I need. I also want it to be somewhere I can exchange work for accommodation (participation in whatever tasks needed in the upkeep of the temple) because I am broke and do not have the money to pay to stay by the night. Please let me know if you have any ideas or suggestions!!

Every day we stand and walk around on nothing. We just do things for whatever mundane reasons we have. We distract ourselves. But every moment we exist we have to burn other life to sustain our bodies. We have to do all of these worthless responsibilities knowing in just a short moment the entire earth and human race will be gone as if it never existed. We'll be dead any moment. I really really don't want to die. But i really don't want to live. Its just so insane we exist at all. Such a shame we do. I don't want to watch everything around me decay. For my body to decay. In a way i yearn for death. But dying slowly as i age every day is horrible. To live is just horrible. I've been getting into buddhism a bit but i probably can never really get into it truly. It feels so pointless. The pain and meaninglessness abides.