i have a question.

most of these Buddhist chants in chinese, are replication of sounds of actual text in Pali and Sanskrit.
it always occur to me, what is the reason that these chinese Buddhist chants were not translated to Chinese in terms of literal meaning from Pali instead?

Mantras contain Buddhas’ n Bodhisatvas’ sacred words, great vows, wisdoms n so on. These 真言 were made into symbolic sentences n sounds to make it easier for people to feel, follow n spread. It resonates deep down internally for the chanters n connects intimately w the Buddhas n Bodhisatvas; have psychological, biological n mystical effects on life forms.

So ‘Om’ in Om Mane Padme Hom isnt just saying the word Om. ‘Ommm’ in its correct form elicits deeps feelings n vibrations inside the chanter. A chanter can enter a trance state leading to higher level of feelings, awareness, wisdom, enlightenment... etc.

The Great Compassion Mantra Da Bei Zhou (大悲咒）is Avalokitesvara’s mantra. We connect w the Bodhisatvabthis way. And learn, feel its wisdoms this way. We become the Bodhisatva.

The Heart Sutra (心经）is translated brilliantly by Tang Sanzamg; for example AvalokiTESvara mean guanzhizai not guanshiyin which would b AvalokiTASvara. Its the short version. Even so, many of the original meaning, wisdom n intention r difficult b correctly represented in Hanzi. For example ‘sunya’ is represented as ‘kong’ in Chinese but it’s not emptiness but ‘constant change’

Ironically, Buddhism can be considered a way of life and not a religion.   

So technically a way of life thread can exist in /k/.

Now there is never ploughing there,
Nor any cattle-herding found,
Nor merchandizing just the same,
Nor bartering for coin of gold:
The ghosts of the departed kin
Live there on giving given here.

my friend forward me this link ask me to join him... is this meditation same as buddhist meditation?

https://forms.gle/qiMSFRifkvXEv52d8

It was based on teaching by Deepak Chopra. Meditation concept mostly came from Hindus n Yogis. U can find many similarities between Buddhist meditation n Yoga/Hindu meditation. Almost the same thing.

Buddhists usually learn this from monks in monastery or Buddhist centres. Especially Chaan Sect (Can Zong). This is better

while they share similarities in terms of origins/objects of meditations, they are fundamentally different because Buddhism teaches anatta which runs contrary to Hinduism's concept of soul whose goal is moksha. i.e. reunification with the Godhead. Buddhism's goal is cessation of the endless rounds of suffering without a reunification of sorts.

Moksha means to b free, liberated, released from the samsara of death n rebirth cycle. Same in Buddhism.

Buddha taught us to detach from ‘self’ n b selfless (unselfish) when performing dana (giving), indiscriminate compassion... all Hearer, Self-Realizer n Bodhisattva have to abide by this in order to reach full awakening. Buddhism also taught that the mind n body is not u. From self to no self (无我) one has to recognise that one’s identity n sense of self r all perceived n constructed. Break free from self one sees the true self. Then break from the perception of phenomena n emptiness one attains full awakening. True self is not without soul. You r still ther. Just in different state.

A common method used in practising the way of specific Buddha or Bodhisattva is chant (念), pray(求), learn (学) n do (做). The last word ‘do’ is literally ‘become’ as any practicing Buddhist would naturally know. That’s union. Some monks visualise they went to ‘unite’ w Amitabha through his toes during their sleep. When they wakes up their soul exits Amitabha’s toes n return to the saha world to continue the mission to ‘awaken’ human beings

union in its many forms including your last paragraph is attachment i.e. attachment to a Buddha or a concept of it, which is to be abandoned altogether for true liberation. apart from "void of self", anatta is also "void of soul". in its subliminal sense, when the 4 foundations are well established together with noble 8 fold path, it leads one on the path to see reality as Buddha has seen: anicca, dukkha, anatta. this is why buddhism sets itself apart from hinduism

Being obsessed w emptiness is also attachment or obsession. One cannot say emptiness is nothingness. In Buddhism, emptiness is not existence n not nothingness; not having existence n no nothingness, n also not no existence n no nothingness. This is what Chan is imparting for generations. Some ppl understand this immediately, some gradually. But knowing is one thing. Practising it is another. Becoming it is final liberation

actually 'emptiness' is unspeakable and cannot be perceived....

We can describe around it but never able to say what it is. In Daoism, 道可道非常道 . Yogis say ‘dissolve’ into it.

In Buddhism, being able to break emptiness is Buddha. Breaking the attachment to phenomena is Bodhisattva. Break the notion of self or me or I, is Arhat. Most ppl seeks to achieve the first level of enlightenment. Thats good enough. Only special individuals w several lifetime of accumulated wisdom able to see through that. If ur adherents of Pure Lands, one seeks to reach ther to practise/cultivate until one reaches Bodhisattva n may choose to return to the saha world to find back the ppl once related to us n guide them to the right path