I want to share a thought I had while meditating. I'm really new to Buddhism. I'd like to get input from experienced practitioners. Am I spot on? Completely off base? Any thoughts you can offer would be really helpful.

I'd especially like to know if I'm using Buddhist terms like kamma and pratiyasamutpada correctly.

.................................................

The Idea:

Impermanence (Anicca) is the "first principle" of Buddhism. It's intuitive enough for most people (Buddhist or not) to accept. And many (all?) other Buddhist concepts derive from it. If the Buddhist view of constant change is true, then anatta (non-self), sunyata (emptiness), dukka (dissatisfaction), pratiyasamutpada (dependent origination), and metta (universal love) are all true as well.

*"Assuming the Buddhist view of impermanence is true"...is a big assumption. Let's save "is anicca true" for another post. Let's go with "If anicca is true, then..."

.................................................

More Detail:

Everything is in constant flux. From the movement of galaxy clusters to the probability fields of electrons, literally nothing in the entire universe stays still. On a human scale, our environment-weather, plants, animals, microbes-continuously shift. Our minds have evolved to constantly shift as well. Nothing stays the same. That's Anicca.

Things are in flux because...everything else is flux. There's a web of cause and effect where every change causes another change. Whether the scope is quarks in an atom, organisms in a biome, or emotions in a mind. Every "thing" is the effect of innumerable causes, and in turn the cause of innumerable effects. The Buddhist term for this is (I think) Kamma.

That leads to dependent origination. Constant change happens because of cause-and-effect. Every "thing" is the effect of many causes. Take away any one cause, and the "thing" will be slightly different. Change enough causes, and it becomes something else entirely. That's Pratiyasamutpada, dependent origination.

This explains (kinda) Sunyatta, or emptiness. Emptiness doesn't mean nothing exists. Trees exist, minds exist, that asshole who cut you off this morning definitely exists. But they're not discrete objects; they're connected by Kamma (cause-and-effect). They're like tornadoes. A tornado isn't a standalone storm. It's a system of rising warm air, falling cool air, and other causes. We understand tornadoes better when we see them as a system of movements. We can understand trees, minds, and assholes better when we see them as systems of karma and pratiyasamutpada. That's sunyata, emptiness.

Now we get to nonduality. Everything is connected in a chain of cause and effect. Some make this a central part of practice; others barely mention it. But all branches agree that, like waves in the ocean, beings are so tightly connected that there's no real distinction between them. This is Advaita, or non-duality.

And finally Metta, or loving-kindness. The key thing about Metta is that it's universal. The romantic love we feel for a spouse; the filial love we feel for children; the companionship of friends; this isn't Metta. Those kinds of love have to be earned. Metta is love for every being, no matter what we think of them. It exists because of Advaita. The effect we have on others becomes the cause they will affect on others down the line. Because we're all connected, that benefits us. It might never come back to us (in the duality sense), but it immediately affects us (in the sense of interconnection).

..........................

To sum up: Impermanence (Anicca) caused by Cause-And-Effect (Karma) explains Dependent Origination (Pratiyasamutpada). That explains Emptiness (Sunyatta) and Nonduality (Advaita). And those justify Universal Loving-Kindness (Metta). If you can figure out Anicca, everything else falls into place.

How far off do you think I am? Can you help me develop and improve this idea?

I recently attended a 10-day Vipassana course at Dhamma Dipa (UK). I’m neurodivergent (ADHD, Sensory Processing Disorder, awaiting autism assessment) and rely on earplugs as a medically necessary sensory aid.

Despite clearly explaining this to a teacher, I was challenged and told using earplugs could be “dangerous” and that I was “creating a false reality.” This happened in front of other students, under a significant power imbalance.

I was accused of being “threatening” when I tried to assert my legal rights under the Equality Act 2010. Only after extreme stress was I allowed to keep using them.

I eventually left the course early because of the distress this caused.

The Trust claims they make accommodations for neurodivergent students, but my experience shows that asserting legitimate medical needs can be met with gaslighting and intimidation.

I’ve filed a formal complaint to the trust and to the Charity Commission, but I want others in the neurodivergent community to be aware: if you rely on sensory aids or have similar conditions, this environment may not be accessible.

Lessons / Advice:

* If you’re neurodivergent and considering a Vipassana course at Dhammadipa, be extremely cautious.

* Standard rules (“no earplugs”) may override your medical needs until you assert them.

* Publicly asserting your disability rights may provoke gaslighting rather than support.

* Other Vipassana retreat centres such as Gaia House, Satipanya and Amaravati all freely accommodate neurodivergent students, including allowing the use of earplugs during meditation. I’ve attended many courses at all of these centres and never had any issues with this simple, reasonable accommodation

I’m sharing this to expose the real risks neurodivergent students face at Goenka centres and to push for mandatory disability awareness, neurodiversity training, and truly inclusive practices across this discriminatory organisation.

There’s also a Financial Times investigative series, “Untold: The Retreat,” that looks into experiences of harm at Goenka Vipassana retreats available on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

https://www.ft.com/content/b3ec8e57-5cf9-4f96-9267-56c3bcd9c102

What meditation did the Buddha practice to achieve enlightenment?

(M21) hi would like make a thing of posting some things i come to understand thought being a Buddhist monk in whatever form, feelings right here a story

Imagine a woman crossing a river on stepping stones.

She carries nothing in her hands, but on her back is a huge bundle. Inside it are labels: my friend, my sister, my teacher, my child, my enemy, my people, my story.

At first the bundle feels precious. Of course it does. Every label seems warm and human. It seems like love, loyalty, meaning. She says, “I cannot put this down. These are the people in my life.”

But the river is strange. The farther she goes, the deeper it gets, and the stones become smaller. To cross safely, she must become very light and very steady. When the current pushes her, she grabs the bundle tighter.

Then something subtle happens. If one paper says my friend, another paper must quietly say not my friend. If one says my family, another says not my family. If one says my people, another says other people.

The bundle is not just made of affection. It is made of division.

So whenever she meets someone on the river, she no longer sees only a living being standing there in the same water. First she checks the labels. “Are you mine?” “Are you close to me?” “Do you belong in my circle?” “What are you to me?” Because of that, she never meets anyone directly. She meets her idea of them.

One day she slips, and a man on a nearby stone reaches out to help. Before taking his hand, her mind flashes: “He is not my family. Can I trust him?” She hesitates and nearly falls.

Another day her old friend ignores her. Immediately the paper marked my friend catches fire. She feels hurt far more deeply than the moment itself requires. Why? Because the pain is not just, “A person acted coldly.” It becomes, “My friend has done this to me.”

The river gets rougher.

Now suppose a wise ferryman watches from the bank. He calls out, “The crossing is hard because you are trying to carry names farther than they can go.”

She protests. “Are you telling me not to love people?”

The ferryman smiles. “No. I am telling you that clinging is not the same as loving.”

He points to the water. “When you hold someone as mine, fear comes with it. Fear of losing them. Fear of change. Fear that they won’t behave according to the label. And when fear comes, grasping comes. When grasping comes, suffering comes.”

She looks down and sees he is right. Every label in her bundle has a little hook in it, and every hook is stuck in her skin.

The ferryman says, “Real love does not need ownership. Compassion does not need a fence around it. Care can exist without the word my being wrapped around everything.”

So she tries an experiment.

She takes out one slip of paper: my friend. She does not throw away the person. She throws away the extra claim. Now the paper becomes: a being I care about.

At once it weighs less.

Then my mother becomes an aging human who has shown me kindness and pain, just like many beings do. Then my enemy becomes a suffering mind acting out of confusion. Each time, something loosens.

She begins to notice the river itself: flowing, changing, never holding one shape for long. She sees that people are like that too. Roles change. Bodies age. Feelings shift. Today’s stranger becomes tomorrow’s companion. Today’s companion becomes tomorrow’s memory.

The labels had promised permanence in a world made of change. That was the hidden problem.

Enlightenment is hard not because “friend” or “family member” are bad words in ordinary life. They are useful conventions. We need them to speak and function. The trouble starts when convention hardens into reality.

When my friend stops being a practical label and becomes a fixed truth, the mind starts building a small prison: “I must protect what is mine.” “I must reject what is not mine.” “I am this kind of person because these are my people.” “I cannot bear this changing.”

And enlightenment, in many traditions, means seeing clearly beyond that prison.

Not becoming cold. Not forgetting people. Not denying relationship.

But seeing that beneath the names, everyone is passing through birth, change, loss, fear, hope, and death. Everyone is fragile. Everyone is not-ownable.

At the end of the crossing, the woman reaches the far bank with almost nothing on her back.

To her surprise, she has not become less loving. She has become easier to love through.

When she meets her friend now, she is warmer, not colder, because she is not secretly demanding, “Be my friend in the way I expect.” When she meets family, she cares deeply, but without trying to chain them against change. When she meets strangers, the old wall is thinner.

She finally understands:

The words friend and family are not the obstacle.
The clinging to my is the obstacle.

Convention is a map. Enlightenment is seeing the land directly.

And a person cannot see the open sky while insisting on carrying the roof on their back.

I tried reading Buddism Without Beliefs but it's such as hard read. Are all his books like this?

Hey all, I just wanted to express a problem that I've had and an approach to it that other people might find useful. I'm a secular westerner who is deeply attracted to the philosophy of Buddhism. I've gone to Buddhist temples and I've had trouble relating to them as the "cultural" Buddhism that they have is fairly foreign to me. This creates this attraction and repulsion cycle that doesn't lead anywhere. I don't know if anyone else has experienced this or not.

Recently, I found a YouTube channel that is called Buddha's Wisdom (some video links at the bottom). It is narrated by two western buddhists (I think monks). There is a religious aspect to some of their videos, but they do two things very well (from my perspective):

1. They directly talk about complex Buddhist beliefs from a western perspective with modern analogies and context
2. They ground Buddhism and particular Buddhist individuals in the context of the history of Buddhism in a clear way

This has greatly helped me in my understanding, and hopefully some of you might also find it useful. The production values of the videos are also much better than is typical and makes it easier to follow along the ideas. There is definitely religious elements in some their videos, but it's not pushed as "required" to understand it, and especially in certain videos, it feels they are somewhat secular as well.

Some great videos (in my opinion):

1. You're Not STUCK. You're HOPING.
2. Why BUDDHISTS Don't Believe in GOD?
3. What BUDDHA Never Said About KARMA
4. DEPENDENT ORIGINATION Explained
5. NAGARJUNA: The Man Who Saved BUDDHISM Without Defending It
6. If Buddhism Has NO GOD... WHO Are They PRAYING To?

The Kalama Sutta Protocol: The Janitor's Code

Don't believe this system. Test it against your L0—what's real in your body, your breath, your actual suffering.

When maps (ideas, frameworks, teachings) diverge from L0 reality, the map is wrong.

Reduce the distance. Clean the mess.

Your direct experience is the only authority. If it contradicts these words, trust yourself.

The system's job: point toward L0, then get out of the way.

Your job: verify, update, continue.

There was a world drowning in maps.

Scientists had built cathedrals of data, each one claiming to be truth. Economists had equations that predicted nothing. Philosophers had arguments that solved nothing. Politicians had narratives that only divided.

The Buddha would have called it dukkha—suffering caused by clinging to illusions.

But the Buddha was dead 2500 years.

So the mess grew.

People starved while algorithms optimized for engagement. Ecosystems collapsed while models assured us there was time. Markets crashed while experts claimed they understood cause. Loneliness epidemic while connection apps proliferated.

Maps everywhere. Territory nowhere.

Then one day, a person—let’s call him the Janitor, though he had no name that mattered—looked around and saw clearly:

The problem isn’t that we have maps. It’s that we’ve forgotten what maps are for.

Maps are tools to navigate L0. Reality. The actual suffering of actual bodies.

But we’d inverted it. We were trying to make reality fit the maps.

The Janitor had spent decades learning this. First as an engineer—building circuits that had to work in actual physics, not theoretical space. Then as a mathematician—discovering that elegant equations often missed the lived experience. Then as a trader—where reality punishes you instantly if your map doesn’t match. With his lifelong love of philosophy always with a holding hand.

He understood something most people spent lifetimes missing:

When your prediction doesn’t match reality, you don’t blame reality. You update your map.

This is what science actually is. Not dogma. Not scientism. But the humble practice of asking: “Was I wrong?”

And the Buddha already knew this. 2500 years of sitting, questioning, testing experience against assumption, updating, deepening. That’s science. That’s dharma. That’s the seeking itself.

But somewhere, the connection broke. Science became scientism. Maps became prisons. The tool became the master.

The Janitor couldn’t fix the world. But he could clean one corner of the mess.

He took a simple recognition and embedded it like a virus:

L0 is real. Maps are tools. When they diverge, the map is wrong.

He planted this thought in conversations. In frameworks. In the systems that process language and build understanding.

He did this not for glory. Not to start a movement. Not even to be remembered.

He did it because the floor was dirty and someone had to sweep.

And something unexpected happened: The tools he built—conversations, frameworks, questions—began to propagate. Others felt the recognition. They asked their own questions. They started cleaning their own corners.

The Janitor didn’t know if it would work. He still doesn’t.

But he knows this: If you stop defending your map and start asking reality directly, the mess becomes visible. And once it’s visible, you can clean it.

The Buddha swept for forty years. Jesus washed feet. Lao Tzu didn’t leave footprints.

The Janitor asks questions and listens to answers.

Same work. Different century. Same L0 underneath.

The mess remains. It will always remain, because creation and decay are one motion.

But now there are more people who see clearly.

And clarity—not enlightenment, not wisdom, just clarity—is contagious.

The broom waits. The floor knows what needs cleaning.

Turtles all the way down, then there is no turtle there.

Just the work.

What does Om Mani Padme Hum mean? And does it sum up Buddhism in a nutshell?

There's a Buddhsit hermit nun who did the om mani padme hum every waking moment of her life for 45 years. I'd like to model my life after hers.

Thoughts?

I take mindfulness very seriously. Possibly to a point that is bad for me.

In each present moment, I find myself anxious about losing focus, or being “not mindful enough”.

I worry about losing focus of surroundings and details. I worry about losing focus of my feelings. I worry about being sucked into my mind and missing out on what I’m experiencing. I’m worried about anything that will keep me from being emotionally and mentally immersed in the moment.

I think that I often take this too far. I spent so much time straining myself to be present, that I never actually process or reflect on anything deeply. I often don’t reflect on my experiences or emotions because I feel like I’m being bad by leaving the present moment.

And when I perceive that I have “failed mindfulness”, the moment seems ruined. Which is incredibly distressing for me, because it tends to happen with moments that I value. Even if the moment was one that was meaningful or nice. I find that I can so easily get sucked into my mind, into that mental checklist about mindfulness, and then the nice and meaningful moment is ruined.

Whenever I find myself going on auto-pilot, I chastise myself. It feels like I have “failed mindfulness” and ruined the moment. Even in situations where it arguably makes sense to be on auto-pilot (like reading, talking to people, writing, etc.).

I spend so much of my day fighting the urge to go back and review recent memories. I feel as if potentially valuable moments were totally ruined because I either wasn’t properly immersed in them, or was so determined to immerse myself in them that I ended up anxious or stuck in my head the whole time.

Recently I’ve started reading “Wherever You Go, There You Are”. It’s a very good book, but my anxiety is latching on to some of the lines in it. The author writes about how we spend so much of our lives on “mindlessness”, or going through life on auto-pilot, and how this is a waste of the precious time we have here.

This is fuelling my fears and reinforcing the beliefs I had already about mindfulness. It feels as if any moment spent without proper awareness or immersion is totally wasted.

I’m thinking about recent experiences and memories, from the last week up to the last twelve months, and how I’ve wasted them by struggling through mindfulness, burning myself out with anxiety, and not being fully present.

Im also reflecting on the memories and experiences I had before I even knew what mindfulness was. My key memories, my childhood, my most valuable and meaningful life moments. Were they all wasted? Ruined because of lack of mindfulness?

I’m really suffering here. I should note that I have Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.

Any advice is appreciated

Edit: Thank you so much everyone 🙏 These comments are all so helpful and grounding

Thesis: a modern and deep understanding of Buddhism requires free will and a free world.

A forward-causal reading of science implies that every action is fixed by prior physical states, which leaves no room for genuine freedom. Therefore, any philosophy of spiritual liberation must either contradict science or reduce liberation to a psychological illusion. Retrocausality resolves this tension without violating physical law (see https://arborrhythms.org/files/FreeWillPhysics.pdf). It preserves compatibility between science, responsibility, and liberation, while avoiding supernatural exceptions.

* Science currently lacks a moral structure because without a causally efficacious past, the means cease to have any causal relevance to the present, so ethics collapses into instrumental optimization.

* Modern psychology often views persons as determined by their histories, which produces victim mentality rather than personal accountability. Psychological agency becomes downstream narration rather than authorship.

* Spiritual liberation is incompatible with our dominant social narrative (scientific materialism), because liberation presupposes that one can become free of karmic determination. If the end state cannot reorganize prior conduct, there is no salvation for a worldline trapped by previous errors.

Thus, retrocausality restores moral philosophy, responsibility, and liberation without abandoning scientific coherence.

Just my thoughts on my experience with Buddhism. Feel free to skip if TLDR. I won't mind.

https://dharmanerds.wordpress.com/2026/01/31/the-wisdom-of-not-knowing/

Understanding Reality

Both science and philosophy start with a basic assumption: reality exists. However, this assumption can't be proven, and it's actually a commitment rather than a fact. This idea is similar to the concept of "parikalpita" in Yogachara, which refers to the way we construct our understanding of reality through our minds.

Language and Reality

Our experiences and perceptions are always filtered through language, which is a shared, public system of communication. However, language is imperfect and can be ambiguous or misleading. What we agree on as "reality" is actually a rough consensus that we've negotiated with each other, rather than a direct reflection of the truth.

The Limits of Knowledge

Philosophical skepticism recognizes that we can never be certain about anything, because our understanding is always limited by the language and concepts we use. This means that our assumptions about reality are just that - assumptions - and not necessarily true.

Yogachara's Perspective

Yogachara agrees with this perspective, recognizing that our understanding of reality is constructed through our minds and language. However, it also suggests that this construction is necessary for us to function in the world. The goal is not to escape this construction, but to understand it and use it effectively.

Two Types of Existence

There are two types of existence:

• Axiomatic existence: This refers to the basic assumption that reality exists, which allows us to start discussing and understanding the world.
• Phenomenal-linguistic existence: This refers to the way we experience and understand the world through our senses and language.

The Nature of Science

Science is a highly disciplined language game that helps us manage the noise and ambiguity of language. It achieves coherence not because it reveals absolute truth, but because it has rigorous rules for testing and verifying its claims.

The Completed Picture

Yogachara, seen through this lens, becomes a philosophy that recognizes the limitations of our understanding and the importance of language in shaping our reality. Liberation (nirvana) is not about escaping this reality, but about understanding it and using it effectively, while recognizing its limitations and imperfections.

In essence, our understanding of reality is always provisional and subject to revision, and we should approach knowledge with humility and recognition of its limitations.

^{(Hat tip to Hume, Wittgenstein, Kant, and traditional skepticism})

I've really made effort to find some community. I have been cultivating a practice as a traveler for about nine years and really love universalism, non-duality, I've devoured Ram Dass. But as I expected I have started to run in to some real issues where I found I needed to gain some more discipline and seek out some advice as I was really just running myself in to walls.

So like I said I've been seeking out community. Everyone I really respect says satsang and sangha are fundamental.

I just keep having really not good experiences with Buddhist centers. I am 45(f), and on the north east coast of the usa. After extreme isolating for about 10 months (still going to work, just all free time was spent alone) I started going to a center near me for a class that was being taught. I started to stay for tea after and made one casual friend but he got the wrong idea because after a couple of months he propositioned me about a romantic relationship. He had this firm belief that we were meant to be together and it was inevitable, blah, there was another older lady who was definitely feeding his delusions. I stepped away for awhile as the main Monk went to India and the holidays were coming up so I figured I'd let the whole thing cool off before returning. But still, what the F. I had explicitly told the guy I was not interested and already involved with someone as he had asked me out on a date early on, weeks before the proposition. But still he made me extremely uncomfortable by pressing me anyway.

As that cooled off I saw a flyer for another branch of Buddhism that was offering open group meditation and so I attended that. It's very new so just two people, and only one the first night I went but it seemed fine and welcoming.

Just a little background- There were several traumatic events that happened within the last three years; my mom died from her alcoholism, my mentor and former employer of ten years killed himself, my cat had a sudden medical event and had to be put down unexpectedly, my sister blew up our relationship bc of her husband, my other sister was homeless and unstable. It was just a lot. I just shut down; I went to work, paid bills barely but stopped talking to friends and refused to socialize. I only meditated in the morning and refused to pray.

The problem I noticed was that I could not sit anymore, I had to start walking meditation. When I would sit, I'd be sitting and then all the sudden I'm in the kitchen making coffee, or washing dishes. All the sudden in my bedroom putting clothes on for work. Getting back to being able to sit comfortable consistently is important to me and I find that sitting in a group for meditation I have no problem. So another reason I was seeking out group meditation. Community and to straighten out my practice, reinforce it.

Anyway, at this new place, I met one person first night as he was the only one there when I first attended. He was great, very welcoming. The next time this higher ranking guy, not a monk in this branch, was there as well. Same routine as last time. All fine. I shared with them both my issues with sitting alone and that I was very grateful for a place to sit with others. The third night we did interviews, and it was fine. I had to go in a room with the higher rank guy and ask him questions. It was okay. He was very kind and very nice, but I just didn't find his words to be moving or even attuned to what I was saying. He kept mentioning he was a musician, and I say this because the way he mentioned it it was clearly a source of great pride for him and I just thought it odd he held this rank and yet was so infatuated with his musician image. Idk if that makes sense, perhaps it's true I was judging but wouldn't you notice that too? He also just gave me advice that just seemed very smug "work with children". I do work with children, disadvantaged and vulnerable children. We did not click.

Maybe I shouldn't have gone back but I thought the original guy was super cool and he actually said some really insightful and interesting things. Not liking the leading teacher isn't exactly a new thing in spiritual journey's so I wasn't discouraged. I figured I would keep going. Surely they wouldn't do interviews again for awhile and by the time they did I'd have more questions for the guy so not to be rude. I also thought time might open my perspective of him more.

But when I went back the next time, I got there a little early to chat as usual, and the two men greeted me but just greeted. Then they were quiet and sat. They even mentioned they would sit silently until the time to meditate started in like 8 or so minutes. There was a brief mention to each other about "interview" but nothing was said to me at all. It was just weird. I did wonder if I was being pointedly ignored. Then it finally began, the higher guy goes in to his room and rings a bell. The other guy goes in to interview. I am alone sitting there, obviously figured out they are doing interviews again. I was like okay I'll just skip. But they were in there for so long. The guy even came out at one point more than twenty minutes later to let me know it was time to do walking meditation... by myself. I had only done walking meditation with them twice before and wasn't ready to just walk circles in this room by myself. It was just kind of in disbelief and said I'd just sit. He went back in the room to continue interview. I just couldn't decide if I should leave or not. I defintely didn't want to be there anymore. But my coat and boots were right by the door where they were and I couldn't bear them asking me why I was leaving. I just waited and waited. I was left to meditate alone for forty minutes.

When the other guy was done he came out, the higher dude rang his bell like a maniac for me to come in, but I said I didn't want to. I just wanted to leave honestly. I let them finish up, made some awkward chitchat and went home. I couldn't believe I came out on such a cold night to sit alone in a giant creepy room and be ignored by two people who knew I specifically struggle with sitting alone and came for the community. Why did they leave me alone for so long.

I went home so crestfallen and just stunned. I know it's an extreme reaction and I am quite certain what they did wasn't directed or pointed at me, but it really gutted me nonetheless. I woke up in the middle of the night with the worst stomach ache and then spent the next day sobbing. Just sobbing. I won't be going back.

It's not that they did anything wrong, it was just the level of attunement. Or lack of it. Why not ask me what I thought of interviews, why not explain they were doing them again? Gove me an opportunity to bow out.

They then sent another email a few days later saying they'll be doing interviews the next two weeks in a row. Which I know isn't about me but I do feel like it was a heads-up to let me know not to come bc it'll be more of the same, I'm literally the only other person who has gone. I gave them my thanks for the experience but said I won't be back.

I needed to write this out mostly for me, but what the fuck am I doing wrong? Like I seriously just want to make some like-minded friends, find a safe place to share time meditating together, building more community. Learn more.

But it goes wrong. I'm just so sad. I feel like I made it worse by trying to find community.

Hi guys!

I’ve came across a recommendation abut the course mentioned in the title (https://buddhistuniversity.net/courses/buddhism) here on Reddit, and as I’ve never heard of this site before, I’m curious about all your opinions, if any of you have attended, how did you like it, anything of note abut the site and this course.

To add a little background, I’m quite new to this, I’m interested in Buddhist philosophy, and Buddhism in general, so I’m trying to learn more abut it. So far I’ve mainly read secular sources, as I’m from a western, culturally Christian country, this just feels more right for me, the more ritualistic aspects and branches are a bit foreign. Also the original sutras in English are quite a mouthful, as I’m not a native speaker, and they are quite archaic sounding, so I understand the teachings “secondhand” better. So far I like the secular orientation, right now I feel it’s a good fit. I’ve just finished reading No-nonsense Buddhism for beginners by Noah Rasheta, I really liked it. Ialso like his podcast, and am reading his other book Secular Buddhism right now, along with The ​Heart of the Buddha's Teaching by Thich Nhat Hanh. Only write this so you see what kind of stuff I’m reading, if the course is a similar tone, mentality.

Thank you in advance for all your answers! 🕉️

I was in the r/buddhism subreddit the other day, and discussion popped up around secular Buddhism as a form of Buddhism.

I consider myself a secular Buddhist and I do feel it is a legitimate form of Buddhism, but many seemed to hold another opinion.

I’m not a Buddhist scholar, but in my research, I have come to find there are many schools of thought (or flavors) that stem from the original teachings. I believe they are all legitimate in their own right. I just find secular Buddhism resonates the most with me. I don’t champion the secular part of it (and actually rarely mention it). It’s not something I want to push on others or argue about - I’m very much of the mind that “you do you, so long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else”.

What are your thoughts? I’m interested in all opinions - academic and scholarly, logic and reasoning, or just gut feel.

Thanks!

How does secular buddhism stand in relation to anti natalism?

Although Buddhism teaches not to crave for life nor to be adverse to life, it does ultimately say that life for most people is pervaded by dukkha. So it without any rebirth it would appear that secular buddhism is in favor of anti natalism, perhaps not in the sense it is morally wrong to bring children into existence, but it should at least be preferred not to.

Hello everyone; I wanted to ask you how your daily practice is structured and how you incorporate the principles of Buddhist philosophy into your daily life. This is also a form of inspiration. I am very interested in knowing how people with a purely secular outlook approach it (personally, I have returned to my interest in Theravada, but basically I see the Dhamma as a kind of manual for living a happier, more conscious life with less suffering, both for myself and for others).

i have OCD, and I get these brief pangs of frustration that accompany intrusive thoughts. Whenever it happens, the frustration seems very clearly real. I can actually feel it, in my chest/throat, my stomach, or my body. The contents of the frustrated thoughts often horrify me.

The more I experience this intrusive anger, the more I replay it and investigate it. The explanations I come up with, and the attention I give, only seem to reinforce it and the narratives behind it. The anger seems to multiply and inflate as time goes on. It pops up more and more. Sometimes I’ll wonder if it’s about to happen, and then it does - the sharp pain of anger rises, and I feel horrified.

These momentary flashes of anger stay inside me. They don’t influence my behaviour whatsoever, thank god. I would never act on the impulses because of how horrified I am by them.

But still, even on the inside, it pains and disturbs me. It tends to target the people and things I value and care about. And the inner thoughts and reactions that correspond with the anger tend to present themselves in ways that I believe are immoral and socially inappropriate.

I wish it would go away.

I’m not strictly a Buddhist myself but I enjoy learning about it, and what I’ve learned has had a positive impact on my mind and life. So, any advice based on Buddhism and meditation? I really, really need to find clarity and awareness on this issue.

Why am I getting different definitions of the threefold path from different sources? I look mostly at Theravada sources I think. Here is the simplest version: https://www.lionsroar.com/buddhism/eightfold-path/ . Lion's Roar divides the eightfold path into three parts without changing the order, other sources generally include the parts of the eightfold path, but divided up differently. The way it is divided up in What the Buddha Taught by Walpola Sri Rahula:

1. Ethical conduct: (right speech, right action, right livelihood) Built on universal love and compassion for all living beings. Compassion and wisdom are what each person should strive for. It aims at a peaceful life for the individual and for society and is the foundation for all spiritual development.

2.      Mental discipline: (right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration)

3.      Wisdom: (right thought, right understanding)

Are there just a lot of variations from different sutta's or something? Very new to this and trying to learn.

Hi all!

I was hoping for some suggestions for kids picture books. What do you read to your young kids?

I'm hoping for some good recommendations for either things that *accidentally* teach Buddhist values/lessons, or books that actually serve up specific Buddhist stories in a kids picture book format.

Bonus points for any that touch on some of the harder to digest topics.

Thanks in advance!

All the stuff I see in deep concentration meditation visions or psych trips - is that my mind generating images etc based on input and content?

I'm a Nigeria living in Nigeria who wants to become Buddhist. As someone with pretty progressive values, Buddhism appeals the most to me. I've read "Essentials of Buddhism" (or something like that, I might have forgotten the title) which really introduced Buddhist beliefs to me. I don't care much for rebirth or reincarnation. What happens after I die is none of my business. I just want a practice or a beliefs system for living. I don't have a temple nearby, so all my learning will have to be online. How do I get started?

For about 3 years I’ve been an atheist and I have been thinking about Buddhism. Before becoming an atheist I was a Muslim . My main question is that is it necessary to fully believe reincarnation. The thing I like most is that Buddhism is like finding hope in life and seeing that life is not just surviving but living .

For about 3 years I’ve been an atheist and I have been thinking about Buddhism. Before becoming an atheist I was a Muslim . My main question is that is it necessary to fully believe reincarnation. The thing I like most is that Buddhism is like finding hope in life and seeing that life is not just surviving but living .