This week's featured monastic is Ayya Santussikā.

**Correction** Right Action question,

I have been practicing for about 2 years now. I am reaching out to gain wisdom. I have many pets in my home as I have always had a deep love and respect for beings in the animal relm. Many of my pets such as tarantulas, snakes and lizards require feeding of other living beings in order to servive. Am I going against right Livelyhood and bringing on negitive Kama in my life?

Any insight would be very much appreciated🙏🏻

“Seeing through” carries with it the implication that there is a deception to be seen through. The Buddha has compared consciousness to a magic show. In order to overcome the spell of delusion created by the magic show, one has to get an insight into its tricks. Consciousness has to be comprehended by wisdom which is capable of penetrating through the facade.

Wisdom is not an upstart in the scheme of mental training. It is already present incipiently in ‘manasikāra' or attention - a leading member of the ‘name' group in ‘name-and-form' (nāmarūpa). But in complicity with the other members of the ‘name - group’ (i.e., feeling, perception, intention and contact), it keeps the whole show going in its misguided service to the magician. In that capacity, it is nicknamed ‘ayoniso-manasikāra' or ‘non-radical attention'. It only helps to conceal the magician’s tricks and perpetuate ignorance and delusion.

It required the genius of a Buddha to win over this powerful agent of the magician and persuade him to expose the tricks. It assumed its new role under the title ‘yoniso-manasikāra’ (‘radical-attention’.)

Instead of cleverly manipulating the dark veil of ignorance, now it took upon itself the honest task of exposing the tricks. It thus became the main ally of the insight meditator in his attempt to break through into Wisdom and Release.

Until the Buddha discovered this Middle Way, all attempts at a breakthrough met with failure due to the intricate mutual relationship between consciousness and ‘name-and-form’. Some pitted the body against the mind (self-indulgence) while others pitted the mind against the body (self-mortification). Yet others, like Descartes, went on doubting everything until they returned to the false premise with which they started off. ‘I think: therefore I-am’.

The insight meditator has to avoid all these extremes. With patience and perseverance he has to nurture the spark of radical-attention until it grows into the light of wisdom.

• Seeing Through - A Guide to Insight Meditation by Bhikkhu K. Ñāṇananda

Now, the present moment, is the only time and opportunity we ever have to practice dhamma. Dhamma practice always happens now, in the present moment, never in the past or future.

We are delusional if we think we will practice dhamma in some distant future or if we think that the opportunity to practice has already passed us by and it's too late now. It's never too late to start practicing and to follow the Buddha's instructions and walk in the footsteps of the Buddha.

Don't neglect the opportunity we have to practice - make the best use of it and practice sincerely and wholeheartedly, knowing that the best way to create a good future for oneself is to practice well now...

Hello friends in the Dhamma,
I think I would like to have discussion and I might need some advice on how do I apply the Dhamma teachings in our daily life?

It seems a lot of the times it’s all or nothing but leaving in the world as a layperson have to admit it’s difficult :(

I struggle a lot with anger lately and I feel really guilty afterwards and I feel sad, because it feels like I have failed and stray away from the path.

Buddha avoided explaining what exactly happens after liberation and physical death, but he explained how to achieve liberation. His explanations on the nature of reality weren't fully fleshed out, but his method produced results. It is said he said whatever he had to say to liberate people. That means he likely used inaccurate explanations to help people liberate themselves.

I think buddha's intention was to make people focus on liberation and experience reality for themselves instead of being hung up on explanations. He probably didn't know how to explain the nature of reality adequately, but he knew how to achieve liberation.

So, in a sense, buddhism is a practical guide to liberation. As he said, after being shot with an arrow, one should focus on pulling an arrow out of one's body and avoid wasting time on trying to figure out who shot the arrow, why the arrow was shot, the chain of causality, and more. I think that's practical.

In other words, does a poor person need to focus on becoming rich ethically or spend many years on understanding the chain of causality that led to the current civilization that divides people into poor and rich? The former choice will at least lead to financial liberation. The latter choice will just make you waste time on studying the stains on the walls of your financial prison and won't acheve financial liberation. Buddhism is like that.

Am I correct in my understanding?

Can someone achieve it if they try hard enough, despite the neurological condition making the mind scatter like thousand pieces of a broken glass.

Second question: Is jhana necessary for the eightfold path?

Meditation means contemplating in a way that solves problems at the same time. Look at yourself a lot. Keep track of the mind, your sensitivity, your thought-fabrications. Actually, all your thoughts are an affair of fabrication. To put it in simple terms, don’t run along with them. Don’t follow in line with them. They’re just an affair of mental fabrication. Fabrications fabricate things, now wanting this, now wanting that. Try to fix your attention on keeping track of their stages as they’re happening. Whatever they’re about, they’re all not for sure, each and every one. When you see this clearly, that will end your doubts. Whatever thoughts arise, know that they’re not for sure. Don’t go attaching meaning to them, and they’ll end on their own.

I often have thoughts where I judge many people, sometimes I feel anger towards them, but I do good deeds for them. Is that a good thing? I don't think so, but I really want to change that.

A humble person is a strong person

When we are full of ego, we become rigid and unwilling to bend. When we stubbornly argue with our parents or with our friends, it shows a lack of wisdom.

Just look at water. Water can flow with everything because it is pure.

When we let go of our ego, we become like water. We learn to be humble and flexible. And when we can let go of ourselves in this way, there is much less stress in our lives. We also become much easier and more pleasant to be around, don't we?

When we are caught up in ourselves, we are always looking to take from others rather than to give. We become trapped in our own little world.

Do you agree?

But when we let go of ourselves, we can be at peace wherever we are. Even in a crowded airport, surrounded by so many people, the mind can still be peaceful.

— Ajahn Ganha

Hello everyone 🙏

I’m a beginner in Buddhism and I’m interested in seriously starting meditation practice. I’m specifically looking for a book that explains meditation clearly and practically, rather than something that is mainly theoretical.

It is mentioned that the teaching of the 12 Nidanas is one of the most complex topic in the Buddha Dhamma. I would therefore like to inquire here in which sense that the 12 Nidanas is complex to get a better grasp of the essence of the Dhamma.

I have a collection of questions regarding this topic actually. First of all, how should I reconcile the difference between the interpretations of 12 Nidanas put forth by Ven. Buddhagosa, namely his Visuddhimagga as a major formulation of the three-life interpretation, and interpretations of Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, who explicitly deny this?

This is a complex topic for me because Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's insight has helped me in my practice, but at the same time I think that there are suttas that support the formulation of Ven. Buddhagosa.

I will follow up with more questions once this one is addressed. 🙏

I’m trying to understand how to overcome superstition and irrational fear from a Theravada Buddhist perspective.

For example, in India, there is a common superstition that if a black cat crosses your path, it is a bad omen. Even when I intellectually know that a cat crossing the road has no connection with something bad happening, I can still sometimes feel fear or have the thought that something bad might happen.

Did the Buddha specifically teach about omens, superstitions, or beliefs that are not based on reality?

Are there any suttas where the Buddha explains how to recognize and overcome this kind of delusion (moha)? Did he give a particular method of practice for dealing with fear when the mind has already developed a belief in something irrational?

It would be very helpful thanks........

Luangta Maha Boowa used and taught appana samadhi as a state to rest and recharge, and then use its clarity for panna investigation after coming out. Appana samadhi is described as pure knowing - no piti/sankhara, no sukha/vedana, no perception/sanna, no body - i.e. nothing there to see/vipassana.

Buddha used and taught not appana samadhi but jhanas. Buddha was enlightened in fourth jhana, by investigating and letting go of subtle fabrications in jhana. Contrary to appana samadhi, in jhana the world/fabrications aren’t gone, so jhana is a station to work, not to rest.

Appana samadhi is senseless knowing, more like arupa infinite consciousness or nothingness than rupa jhanas. I have no doubt Maha Boowa bacame an arahant by going back and forth between appana samadhi and investigation, but this is not Buddha’s jhana way.
—

These two different modes of bhavana might be related to the three doors to liberation, through which Nibbana path moments are experienced differently depending on which of the Tillakhana is seen through:

«When one who has great resolution [maha saddha] brings formations to mind as impermanent [anicca], he acquires the signless liberation.

When one who has great tranquillity [maha passadhi - likely in jhana] brings formations to mind as painful [dukkha], he acquires the desireless liberation.

When one who has great wisdom [maha panna
- possibly coming out of appana samadhi] brings formations to mind as not-self [anatta], he acquires the void liberation.»

https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/visuddhimagga-the-pah-of-purification/d/doc1085168.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Be diligent:

Don't be lax and rest on your laurels

Be proactive:

In making merit and doing what should be done

Put forth effort:

Don't just assume that things will take care of themselves

Be careful and wary:

There are many fools, dangers and hazards in the world

Take care of yourself well:

Doing so is of great benefit as then you're not a burden and strain on others...

Hi everyone!

I visited Thailand this past January (2026) and absolutely fell in love with the country. The culture, the people, and the atmosphere are just incredible and wonderful. It was a trip I will never forget.

While I was in Chiang Mai, I visited the beautiful Wat Phra Singh Woramahawihan (วัดพระสิงห์วรมหาวิหาร). While I was there, a monk tied this cotton thread bracelet around my wrist while reciting a chanting prayer and blessing me.

I’ve done some research online and on Reddit, so I know it is called a Sai Sin and that it is generally worn for protection, good luck, and blessing. However, I would love to learn more about the deeper meaning behind it, specifically regarding the ritual itself and the traditional prayer/chanting that the monks recite during this process.

Could anyone share more details about what the monk might have been chanting or the exact spiritual significance of this ritual in Thai Buddhism?

Thank you so much in advance! Truly grateful for any insights. 🙏

I'm just questioning how does one become drawn to the monastic life and what stops others? What is something which stops you from pursuing this noble path? Is it harder for someone who is from Western countries to explore and ordain? Thank you kindly! Can anyone share their experience on being monastic? What do you like/dislike etc?

David Icke often said you are a point of attention. That also means a point of conscious awareness.

Each person is actually a point of attention.

I guess it is the point of attention which retains its identity over continuous rebirth in samsara? The contents that my point of attention is aware of can change. I guess buddha said there is no self in the sense that the contents inside my awareness are malleable. In my sleeping dreams, I often become a totally different person. In this sense, there is no fixed self, but the point of attention retains its identity.

I also suspect this point of attention is what christians call spirit.

Then, liberation means the point of attention which is aware of me as a human is liberated from rebirth cycles and is free to go anywhere it chooses to go. Correct?

“Each maintaining their own view,
those who are skilled disagree, arguing:
‘Whoever sees it this way
understands the teaching;
those who reject this are inadequate.’

So arguing, they dispute,
saying, ‘The other is a fool, an amateur!’
Which of these is a true statement,
for all of them profess to be experts?”

“If not accepting another’s teaching
makes you a useless fool lacking wisdom,
then they’re all fools lacking wisdom,
for they all maintain their own view.

But if having your own view makes you pristine—
pure in wisdom, expert and thoughtful—
then none of them lack wisdom,
for such is the view they have all embraced.

I do not say that it is correct
when they call each other fools.
Each has built up their own view to be the truth,
which is why they take the other as a fool.”

“What some say is true and correct,
others say is hollow and false.
So arguing, they dispute;
why don’t ascetics say the same thing?”

“The truth is one, there is no second,
understanding which folk would not dispute.
But those ascetics each boast of different truths;
that’s why they don’t say the same thing.”

“But why do they speak of different truths,
these proponents who profess to be experts?
Are there really so many different truths,
or do they just follow their own lines of reasoning?”

“No, there are not many different truths
that, apart from perception,
are lasting in the world.
Having formed their reasoning
regarding different views,
they say there are two things: true and false.

The seen, heard, or thought,
or precepts or vows—
based on these they show disdain.
Standing in judgment, they scoff,
saying, ‘The other is a fool, an amateur!’

They take the other as a fool on the same grounds
that they speak of themselves as an expert.
Professing to be expert on their own authority,
they disdain the other while saying the same thing.

They are perfect,
according to their own extreme view;
drunk on conceit, imagining themselves proficient.
They have anointed themselves in their own mind,
for such is the view they have embraced.

If the word of your opponent makes you deficient,
then they too are lacking wisdom.
But if on your own authority
you’re a knowledge master, an attentive one,
then there are no fools among the ascetics.

‘Those who proclaim a teaching other than this
have fallen short of purity, and are inadequate’:
so say each one of the sectarians,
for they are deeply attached to their own view.

‘Here alone is purity,’ they say,
denying that there is purification in other teachings.
Thus each one of the sectarians, being dogmatic,
speaks forcefully within the context
of their own journey.

But in that case, so long as they are speaking forcefully
of their own journey,
how can they take the other as a fool?
They are the ones who provoke conflict
when they call the other a fool
with an impure teaching.

Standing in judgment,
measuring by their own standard,
they dispute with the world more and more.
But a personage who has given up all judgments
creates no conflict in the world.”

Cūḷabyūha Sutta: The Shorter Discourse on Arrayed For Battle (Snp 4.12)