Judgement, Non-Judgement, and Discernment in Buddhism: A Practical Guide for Modern Life

Key Takeaways

Buddhism distinguishes between reactive judgement, which is often rooted in aversion and ego, and discernment, which is the clear assessment of what is beneficial and what is harmful.
The Buddha himself used deliberate evaluation as a tool for awakening, as shown in the Two Kinds of Thought discourse (MN 19), where he categorised thoughts into wholesome and unwholesome before abandoning the harmful ones.
Non-judgement in Buddhist practice does not mean moral blindness or passivity. It means refraining from hasty, arbitrary, and ego-driven evaluations, especially of other people.
Discernment [paññā] is one of the three trainings in Buddhism, alongside ethical conduct [sīla] and mental cultivation [samādhi]. It is usually translated as wisdom, understanding, or insight.
Both Theravāda and Mahāyāna traditions value discernment, though they place different emphases on analytical investigation and non-conceptual insight. These are differences of emphasis, not exclusivity.
The Potaliya discourse (AN 4.100) shows that criticising or praising others can be appropriate when it is accurate, factual, and timely, by a person who has a sense of the right time.
Wise attention [yoniso manasikāra] is the mental quality that directs examination toward causes, conditions, and consequences rather than reinforcing craving, aversion, and delusion.
Practical application involves a contemporary three-step process, pause, investigate, and respond, which helps interrupt reactive judgement and create space for wise discernment.
The distinction between judging a behaviour as harmful and judging a person as inherently bad is central to Buddhist ethics and supports both accountability and compassion.
Discernment without compassion becomes cold and legalistic. Compassion without discernment becomes sentimental and ineffective. The Buddhist path holds both together.

1. Introduction

Few topics in Buddhist practice generate as much confusion as the relationship between judgement, non-judgement, and discernment. A practitioner may hear a teacher say to observe thoughts without judgement, then open a sutta to find the Buddha clearly evaluating some thoughts as wholesome and others as unwholesome. A meditator may be told to let go of judgement, then encounter a tradition with hundreds of monastic rules governing conduct. The apparent contradiction is real, and it deserves careful examination.

The confusion arises partly because the word judgement carries different meanings in different contexts. In ordinary English, judgement often implies criticism, condemnation, or the formation of an opinion about someone’s character or worth. In Buddhist psychology, however, the capacity to evaluate, distinguish, and decide is not only accepted but essential. The question is not whether we judge, but how we judge, from what mental state, and with what consequences.

English creates part of the problem. Judgement can mean anything from simple evaluation to harsh condemnation. Buddhist texts do not use one single technical term corresponding to all of these meanings. This article therefore uses judgement primarily for reactive or condemnatory evaluation, while using discernment for the clearer evaluation of what is wholesome, harmful, beneficial, or unbeneficial. This is a working distinction for the purposes of this article, not a claim that Buddhist texts contain a single category called judgement that maps neatly onto modern English usage.

This article explores judgement, non-judgement, and discernment from a Buddhist perspective. It draws on teachings from both the Theravāda and Mahāyāna traditions, examines relevant discourses, and offers practical guidance for applying these distinctions in daily life. The aim is not to resolve every tension but to provide a clear framework for understanding what the Buddha taught about making moral and practical assessments.

Buddhism is a path of practice and inquiry grounded in the recognition of suffering [dukkha], its causes, and its cessation. The Buddha taught a method, not a system of belief requiring blind faith. Within that method, the capacity to discern what leads to harm and what leads to peace is not optional. It is central. But that discernment is meant to be exercised with honesty, humility, and compassion, not with the harsh, reactive judgement that so often characterises ordinary human thinking.

2. What Judgement Means in Buddhism

2.1 The Problem with Ordinary Judgement

When people say they are trying to be less judgemental, they usually mean something specific. They mean they want to stop the habit of mentally labelling other people as good or bad, worthy or unworthy, superior or inferior. They want to stop the quick, often unconscious evaluations that arise when we see someone’s appearance, behaviour, or background. This kind of judgement is what the Buddha identified as a source of suffering.

In the Buddhist analysis, this reactive judgement is closely tied to the three unwholesome roots: greed [lobha], hatred [dosa], and delusion [moha]. When we judge someone harshly, we are often feeding aversion. When we judge someone favourably because they benefit us, we are feeding attachment. When we judge without understanding the full context of someone’s life, we are feeding delusion.

The Buddha’s teaching on the four sublime abodes [brahmavihāras] offers an antidote to this kind of judgement. Loving-kindness [mettā], compassion [karuṇā], sympathetic joy [muditā], and equanimity [upekkhā] are all incompatible with the harsh, reactive judgement that seeks to diminish others. The practice of these qualities does not mean abandoning the ability to discern; it means training the heart to meet others without the reflex to condemn.

2.2 Judgement as a Tool for Awakening

Yet the Buddha did not abandon the capacity to evaluate. Before his awakening, he engaged in a deliberate process of self-examination that required making distinctions. In the Two Kinds of Thought discourse (MN 19), he describes how he divided his thoughts into two categories: those that were sensual, malicious, and cruel, and those that were renunciate, benevolent, and compassionate. He then examined the consequences of each, saw that the first kind led to harm and the second to benefit, and deliberately abandoned the unwholesome thoughts while cultivating the wholesome ones.

This is an important point. The path to awakening involved discernment and deliberate evaluation. The Buddha did not simply observe his thoughts without evaluation; he evaluated them, saw their consequences, and made choices based on what he saw. If we take this discourse seriously, the idea that Buddhist practice requires the complete suspension of judgement is simply incorrect.

The Pali term for this kind of wise evaluation is not the same as the reactive judgement that causes harm. It is closer to discrimination or discernment, the ability to distinguish between what is beneficial [kusala] and what is harmful [akusala]. This distinction is fundamental to Buddhist ethics and practice.

3. Discernment: The Buddhist Alternative

3.1 Paññā: Wisdom and Understanding

The Pali term [paññā] (Sanskrit: prajñā) is translated variously as wisdom, understanding, discernment, insight, or cognitive acuity. It is usually rendered as wisdom in English translations. In this article, discernment is used as a practical English term for the faculty of clear evaluation that paññā encompasses. Paññā is one of the three trainings, alongside ethical conduct [sīla] and mental cultivation or concentration [samādhi].

Paññā is more than the accumulation of intellectual information. In the Buddhist path, it develops into a penetrating understanding of phenomena and their causes and conditions. It is not cold or analytical in the way that word might suggest in English; it is warm, clear, and intimately connected with compassion.

The Paññā Sutta (AN 9.25) describes a mendicant whose mind is well consolidated with wisdom as one who knows: my mind is without greed, without hate, without delusion, and knows it is not liable to return to those states. Such wisdom makes possible the declaration that the spiritual journey is complete. This discernment is closely connected with liberation, not merely with intellectual understanding.

3.2 Wise Attention and Investigation of Phenomena

Buddhist discernment is not simply about thinking harder. It also depends on how attention is directed. Early Buddhist texts distinguish wise attention [yoniso manasikāra] from unwise attention. Wise attention examines experience in ways that reveal its causes, conditions, and consequences rather than reinforcing craving, aversion, and delusion.

This is an important distinction because a person can be extremely analytical and still be confused. Buddhist discernment is not merely intellectual sophistication; it is a way of attending to experience that supports the abandonment of suffering. The Sabbāsava Sutta (MN 2) identifies wise attention as a condition for the arising of right view and the abandoning of unwholesome mental states.

Closely related is the quality known as investigation of phenomena [dhamma-vicaya], which is one of the seven factors of awakening. This is the active, inquiring examination of mental and physical experience, discerning what is wholesome and what is unwholesome, what leads to suffering and what leads to its cessation. It is not a passive state but an engaged, curious investigation that supports the entire path.

Together, wise attention and investigation of phenomena provide the canonical foundation for what this article calls discernment. They show that clear evaluation is not a departure from Buddhist practice; it is woven into the structure of the path itself.

3.3 Discernment in Theravāda and Mahāyāna

Both major Buddhist schools value discernment, but they place different emphases on how it is developed.

In Theravāda Buddhism, paññā is closely associated with understanding phenomena in terms of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and not-self, and with seeing the conditions through which suffering arises and ceases. Different Theravāda traditions and teachers place different emphases on analytical investigation, meditative insight, and other dimensions of practice.

In Mahāyāna Buddhism, prajñā is especially associated with insight into emptiness and dependent arising. In many Mahāyāna traditions, wisdom and compassion are developed together, particularly within the bodhisattva path. Within the bodhisattva ideal, wisdom is cultivated together with compassion and directed toward the liberation and welfare of all beings. Some Mahāyāna traditions also emphasise non-duality and the limitations of conceptual thinking, but Mahāyāna Buddhism is diverse and should not be reduced to a single approach.

This is a difference of emphasis, not exclusivity. Both traditions include analytical investigation and non-conceptual insight. Theravāda has its own forms of non-conceptual realisation, and Mahāyāna has highly developed analytical traditions, such as the Madhyamaka use of reasoned analysis to undermine conceptual clinging.

4. Non-Judgement: What It Means and What It Does Not

4.1 The Instruction to Observe Without Judgement

The phrase observe without judgement is common in modern mindfulness and meditation instruction. It typically means that when a thought, emotion, or sensation arises, we simply notice it without adding a layer of evaluation such as this is good or this is bad, I like this or I hate this. The practice is to observe what is present with bare attention, allowing it to arise and pass without interference.

This instruction has value. Many people carry a habit of constant, harsh self-evaluation that amplifies suffering. They judge themselves for being angry, for being distracted, for being sad. The instruction to observe without judgement can interrupt this cycle and create space for a gentler, more curious relationship with one’s own mind.

However, this instruction is often misunderstood. It is a training method, not a description of the goal. And it does not mean that discernment is abandoned.

4.2 Non-Judgement as a Training Method

A contemporary way to articulate this, used by several modern teachers, is to distinguish method language from goal language. This distinction is a pedagogical tool, not a canonical Buddhist formula, but it helps clarify the relationship between non-judgement and discernment.

Goal language describes the destination. It includes concepts like ethical conduct, precepts, right and wrong, wholesome and unwholesome. These are real distinctions that matter. The Buddha did not say that killing, stealing, and lying are merely different preferences; he said they are harmful actions that lead to suffering.

Method language describes the training. It includes instructions like no judgement, just notice, or let it be. These are tools to be used during practice to develop a particular quality of awareness. They are not statements about the nature of reality or the ultimate ethical framework.

When a teacher says to observe without judgement, they are speaking method language. They are guiding the practitioner to temporarily suspend the habit of reactive evaluation so that a clearer, more spacious awareness can develop. Once that awareness is established, discernment naturally functions. The practitioner can then see clearly what is beneficial and what is harmful without the distortion of reactivity.

The confusion arises when method language is taken as goal language. If someone concludes that Buddhism teaches that all judgement is wrong, they may become morally confused or even morally paralysed. But if they understand that non-judgement is a training tool, they can use it appropriately without abandoning ethical clarity.

4.3 The Limits of Non-Judgement

It is also important to recognise that non-judgement has limits. If a thought of harming oneself or another arises, the appropriate response is not to observe it neutrally and do nothing. The appropriate response is to recognise it as unwholesome, understand its dangers, and abandon it. This is exactly what the Buddha did in the Two Kinds of Thought discourse.

Non-judgement, as a practice, is about suspending reactive evaluation, not about suspending discernment. It is about creating enough space to see clearly, so that when we do make judgements, they are wise rather than reactive.

The modern instruction to observe without judgement can be useful when understood as a practical method for reducing reactive evaluation. Early Buddhist teachings, however, also explicitly require the practitioner to distinguish wholesome from unwholesome mental states. The two are not in conflict when method and goal are kept distinct.

5. How to Assess Moral Questions

5.1 The Role of Intention

Intention is central to Buddhist ethics. In the Nibbedhika Sutta (AN 6.63), the Buddha says that it is intention that he calls kamma. Intentional actions of body, speech, and mind have consequences, and Buddhist ethical reflection therefore examines both the intentions behind an action and the effects to which actions lead.

This does not mean that the consequences of actions are irrelevant. The Buddha repeatedly identifies actions such as killing, stealing, and false speech as harmful forms of conduct. But the emphasis on intention means that moral assessment is not simply a matter of applying rules mechanically. It requires looking into the mind and understanding the motivations that drive behaviour.

This is where discernment becomes essential. To assess a moral question, we need to be able to see our own intentions clearly. Are we acting from a desire to help, or from a desire to control? Are we speaking the truth because it is beneficial, or because we want to hurt someone? These are questions that require honest self-examination.

5.2 The Potaliya Discourse: When to Criticise and When to Praise

The Potaliya Sutta (AN 4.100) offers a nuanced teaching on the ethics of judgement. In this discourse, the Buddha describes four kinds of people:

One who criticises only those deserving of criticism, at the right time, accurately, and factually.
One who praises only those deserving of praise, at the right time, accurately, and factually.
One who neither criticises the blameworthy nor praises the praiseworthy.
One who both criticises the blameworthy and praises the praiseworthy, at the right time, accurately, and factually.

The Buddha asks the wanderer Potaliya which of these four is the most admirable. Potaliya initially chooses the person who neither criticises nor praises, perhaps assuming that neutrality is the highest virtue. But the Buddha corrects him. The most admirable, the Buddha says, is the one who both criticises when criticism is warranted and praises when praise is warranted, provided that it is accurate, factual, and timely, by a person who has a sense of the right time [kālaññutā].

This teaching is significant. It shows that judgement is not inherently wrong. What matters is whether it is accurate, factual, and timely. The discourse challenges the idea that silence or neutrality is always the most virtuous response. Sometimes truthful criticism is appropriate, provided it is accurate and timely. The person who praises indiscriminately may be reinforcing harmful behaviour.

It is worth noting that the criterion of beneficial speech belongs to a different discourse, the Abhayarājakumāra Sutta (MN 58), which discusses the Buddha’s own care in deciding whether to speak. In the Potaliya discourse, the emphasis is specifically on accuracy, factuality, and timing.

5.3 The Kālāma Discourse: Testing Teachings for Yourself

The Kālāma Sutta (AN 3.65) is often cited in modern discussions of Buddhism and free inquiry. In this discourse, the Buddha advises the Kālāmas not to accept teachings merely on the basis of reports, tradition, scripture, logical conjecture, or the authority of a teacher. Instead, he says, when you know for yourselves that certain qualities are unwholesome and lead to harm, you should abandon them. When you know for yourselves that certain qualities are wholesome and lead to benefit, you should cultivate them.

This teaching is directly relevant to moral assessment. The discourse places significant emphasis on examining teachings and qualities for oneself rather than accepting them merely because they are traditional, authoritative, or widely repeated. It is not a blanket endorsement of relativism; the standard is still whether something leads to harm or benefit, not whether it feels good or bad in the moment. But it places responsibility for discernment on the individual practitioner to examine and understand, within the framework of the Buddha’s broader ethical and contemplative teachings.

It is worth being careful not to turn this discourse into a modern manifesto of individual truth -seeking. The Kālāma Sutta asks the listeners to abandon qualities known to be harmful and cultivate qualities known to be beneficial, and the discourse proceeds into a specific ethical and contemplative framework. It is not simply saying that each person should determine their own truth without reference to anything else.

5.4 The Four Great References: Evaluating Authenticity

The Mahāpadesa Sutta (AN 4.180), known as the Four Great References, provides a framework for evaluating whether a teaching is authentic. The four references are: teachings attributed to the Buddha, to a community of monks, to a group of learned elders, and to a single learned elder. In each case, the Buddha advises that the teaching should not be accepted or rejected immediately but should be compared with the existing body of teachings, specifically the Sutta and Vinaya, and examined carefully.

This framework shows that Buddhism has always valued critical evaluation. The Buddha did not ask for blind acceptance. He asked for careful examination and comparison with the established teachings. The capacity to assess moral questions is not a departure from Buddhist practice; it is an expression of it.

6. Practical Applications for Daily Life

6.1 Working with the Judgemental Mind

The first step in working with judgement is to notice it. Most of us have a running commentary of evaluations that we barely notice. We judge people we see on the street, colleagues at work, family members, and ourselves. Much of this judgement is automatic and unconscious.

A practical exercise is to set aside a few minutes each day to simply notice the judgements that arise. Without trying to stop them, simply observe: there is a judgement. What is its tone? Is it harsh or gentle? Is it based on evidence or assumption? Is it motivated by a desire to understand or a desire to elevate oneself?

This practice is not about suppressing judgement. It is about becoming aware of it. As awareness grows, the grip of reactive judgement begins to loosen. We may still have judgemental thoughts, but we are less likely to act on them or to take them as truth.

6.2 A Three-Step Process: Pause, Investigate, Respond

A useful framework for applying discernment in daily life involves three steps: pause, investigate, and respond. This three-step process is a contemporary pedagogical tool, not a canonical Buddhist formula, but it is consistent with the early Buddhist emphasis on wise attention and investigation of phenomena.

Pause. When you notice a strong judgement arising, whether toward yourself or someone else, pause. Take a breath. Create a moment of space between the stimulus and your response. This pause is itself an act of mindfulness.

Investigate. Ask yourself: What is the mental state behind this judgement? Is it fear, anger, jealousy, or a genuine desire to help? Is my interpretation accurate? What evidence supports it? What might I be missing? Am I judging the person or the behaviour? What important context might I be missing?

Respond. Based on your investigation, choose a response that is wise and compassionate. This may mean speaking up, or it may mean remaining silent. It may mean offering criticism, or it may mean offering support. The response is not predetermined by a rule; it arises from the clarity of your discernment.

6.3 Judging Behaviour Without Judging the Person

One of the most important distinctions in Buddhist ethics is between judging a behaviour and judging a person. A behaviour can be accurately assessed as harmful without concluding that the person who performed it is inherently bad. This distinction is central to the practice of discernment and supports both accountability and compassion.

In practical terms, this means being able to say, this behaviour is harmful, without concluding, this person is bad. It means being able to set boundaries without contempt. It means being able to hold someone accountable without dehumanising them.

This distinction also aligns with the teaching on not-self [anattā]. The Buddha taught that phenomena should not be regarded as a permanent, independent, or controlling self. When we judge a person as inherently bad, we are reifying them, freezing them into a fixed identity that ignores their capacity for change and the complex conditions that shaped their behaviour. Discernment sees the behaviour clearly without creating a fixed identity around it.

6.4 Judgement in Relationships

One of the most common places where judgement causes suffering is in close relationships. Partners, family members, and friends often become the targets of habitual criticism and evaluation. Over time, this erodes trust and connection.

Discernment in relationships means being able to see clearly what is happening without immediately casting the other person as villain or victim. It means being able to say, this behaviour is harmful, without concluding, this person is bad. It means being able to set boundaries without contempt.

The practice of loving-kindness [mettā] is a powerful support for this. By cultivating a basic attitude of goodwill toward others, we create a foundation from which discernment can operate without tipping into aversion. We can see clearly and still wish the other person well.

Compassion does not require approving of harmful behaviour. A person can recognise that an action is harmful, set a firm boundary, and still wish that the person be free from the causes of suffering. This is not sentimental indulgence; it is the union of discernment and compassion in action.

6.5 Self-Judgement and Self-Compassion

The harshest judgements are often directed at ourselves. Many people carry a relentless inner critic that evaluates every action, every thought, every mistake. This self-judgement is a form of suffering, and it is often reinforced by meditation practice if the practitioner approaches the mind with an attitude of striving and criticism.

The Buddha’s teaching on non-judgement has particular relevance here, understood as a practical method for reducing reactive self-evaluation. When we sit in meditation and notice that the mind has wandered, the instruction is not to berate ourselves but to gently return to the object of attention. The same principle applies in daily life. When we make a mistake, we can acknowledge it, learn from it, and move on without the added layer of self-condemnation.

A modern term such as self-compassion can be useful here, provided it does not mean indulgence or avoidance of responsibility. In Buddhist terms, the relevant qualities include non-hatred, mindfulness, patience, compassion, and honest recognition of harmful conduct. This does not mean abandoning standards or excusing harmful behaviour. It means holding ourselves accountable without hatred. It means being honest about our faults without concluding that we are fundamentally flawed.

6.6 Discernment in Decision-Making

Discernment is not only about moral questions; it is also about the practical decisions of daily life. What should I say yes to and what should I decline? Which job should I take? Should I continue this relationship or end it? These questions require the ability to evaluate options and choose wisely.

Buddhist discernment in decision-making involves several factors. First, it involves clarity about one’s own values and intentions. What matters most? What kind of person do I want to be? Second, it involves considering the likely consequences of each option. What might this choice lead to? Will it tend toward harm or benefit, for oneself and others? Third, it involves examining whether desire, aversion, fear, conceit, or confusion are influencing the decision.

The Buddha’s advice in the Kālāma Sutta is relevant here: when you know for yourselves that something leads to harm, abandon it. When you know for yourselves that something leads to benefit, cultivate it. This is not a recipe for always knowing the right answer, but it is a framework for honest inquiry.

7. Balancing Discernment and Compassion

7.1 The Risk of Cold Discernment

Discernment without compassion can become cold and judgemental. It can turn into a kind of spiritual scorekeeping, where we evaluate ourselves and others against a standard and find everyone wanting. This is not the Buddha’s teaching.

Buddhist wisdom is not cultivated merely to become better at evaluating people or situations. It is directed toward overcoming suffering and ignorance. In the Buddhist path, wisdom and qualities such as compassion support one another. The Buddha saw clearly what caused suffering and taught the path to its cessation because he cared about the welfare of all beings.

In the Mahāyāna tradition, this unity of wisdom and compassion is emphasised. The Bodhisattva is one who has developed profound discernment into the nature of reality but remains in the world to help others. The Prajñāpāramitā literature describes wisdom and compassion as inseparable aspects of the path.

7.2 The Risk of Sentimental Compassion

Compassion without discernment can become sentimental and ineffective. It can lead to enabling harmful behaviour, avoiding difficult conversations, or making choices based on short-term comfort rather than long-term benefit. True compassion sometimes requires saying no, setting boundaries, or offering criticism that the other person does not want to hear.

The Potaliya Sutta shows that the Buddha valued the person who could criticise appropriately. Praise without discernment is not a virtue; it is a failure of courage. The person who can see clearly and speak truthfully, even when it is difficult, is the one who is truly committed to the welfare of others.

7.3 A Middle Position

In this particular context, a useful middle position is to avoid both reactive condemnation and moral indifference. This is consistent with the broader Buddhist concern with avoiding extremes, although the Middle Way has more specific meanings in different Buddhist contexts. The Buddha’s initial teaching of the Middle Way in the first sermon concerns avoiding sensual indulgence and self-mortification, and later Buddhist traditions expand the concept in different directions.

In the context of judgement, the middle position is one of clear seeing, honest assessment, and compassionate response. It requires the courage to see clearly, the humility to acknowledge what we do not know, and the compassion to respond with kindness even when we must criticise. But it is the path that leads to freedom, for ourselves and for others.

8. Conclusion

Judgement, non-judgement, and discernment are not as contradictory as they may first appear. Buddhism distinguishes between reactive judgement, which arises from greed, hatred, and delusion, and discernment, which is the clear ability to distinguish between what is beneficial and what is harmful. The former is a source of suffering; the latter is a tool for liberation.

The instruction to observe without judgement is a training method, not a moral absolute. It is designed to loosen the grip of habitual reactivity so that discernment can function more clearly. It does not mean abandoning ethical clarity or moral responsibility. The Buddha himself used deliberate evaluation as a tool for awakening, categorising thoughts as wholesome and unwholesome and abandoning the harmful ones.

Assessing moral questions in Buddhism involves attending to intention, examining consequences, and testing teachings against one’s own experience. The Potaliya Sutta shows that criticising and praising can both be appropriate when they are accurate, factual, and timely. The Kālāma Sutta encourages practitioners to examine teachings for themselves rather than accepting them merely on authority.

In daily life, these teachings can be applied through the practice of wise attention [yoniso manasikāra], which examines experience in ways that reveal its causes, conditions, and consequences. The distinction between judging a behaviour as harmful and judging a person as inherently bad is central to this practice. It supports both accountability and compassion, allowing us to see clearly without closing our hearts.

The Buddhist path holds discernment and compassion together. Wisdom without compassion becomes cold; compassion without wisdom becomes ineffective. The practitioner is called to develop both, to see clearly and to care deeply. This is not an easy path, but it is a path that leads to genuine freedom and peace.

Glossary

Anattā (Pali; Sanskrit: anātman) – Not-self; the teaching that phenomena should not be regarded as a permanent, independent, or controlling self. In early Buddhist teachings, the five aggregates and other phenomena are examined in this way.

Anicca (Pali; Sanskrit: anitya) – Impermanence; the changing and unstable nature of conditioned phenomena.

Brahmavihāras (Pali) – The four sublime abodes: loving-kindness [mettā], compassion [karuṇā], sympathetic joy [muditā], and equanimity [upekkhā].

Cetanā (Pali; Sanskrit: cetanā) – Intention; the mental factor that initiates action and is central to the Buddhist understanding of kamma.

Dhamma-vicaya (Pali; Sanskrit: dharma-vicaya) – Investigation of phenomena; the active, inquiring examination of mental and physical experience, one of the seven factors of awakening.

Dosa (Pali; Sanskrit: dveṣa) – Hatred, aversion, or ill will; one of the three unwholesome roots.

Dukkha (Pali; Sanskrit: duḥkha) – Suffering, unsatisfactoriness, or unease; the first of the Four Noble Truths. It refers not only to obvious suffering but to the subtle unsatisfactoriness of conditioned experience when clung to.

Kālaññutā (Pali) – Having a sense of the right time; the quality of knowing when to speak and when to remain silent, praised by the Buddha in the Potaliya Sutta.

Kamma (Pali; Sanskrit: karma) – Intentional action, particularly action of body, speech, and mind. In the early Buddhist teachings, intentional actions have consequences, including consequences that may extend beyond the present life.

Karuṇā (Pali; Sanskrit: karuṇā) – Compassion; the wish that beings be free from suffering.

Kusala (Pali; Sanskrit: kuśala) – Wholesome, skilful, or beneficial; actions and mental states that lead to happiness and liberation.

Lobha (Pali; Sanskrit: lobha) – Greed, attachment, or desire; one of the three unwholesome roots. The related Sanskrit term rāga is often translated as lust, passion, or attachment.

Mettā (Pali; Sanskrit: maitrī) – Loving-kindness; the wish that beings be happy and well.

Moha (Pali; Sanskrit: moha) – Delusion, ignorance, or confusion; one of the three unwholesome roots.

Muditā (Pali; Sanskrit: muditā) – Sympathetic joy; rejoicing in the happiness and success of others.

Paññā (Pali; Sanskrit: prajñā) – Wisdom, understanding, discernment, or insight. Usually translated as wisdom; discernment is used in this article as a practical English term for the faculty of clear evaluation that paññā encompasses.

Prajñāpāramitā (Sanskrit) – The perfection of wisdom; the Mahāyāna teachings on the realisation of emptiness.

Samādhi (Pali; Sanskrit: samādhi) – Concentration, collectedness, or mental unification. It refers to the cultivation of a stable and unified mind and should not simply be equated with meditative absorption [jhāna].

Sīla (Pali; Sanskrit: śīla) – Ethical conduct or virtue; one of the three trainings.

Śūnyatā (Sanskrit; Pali: suññatā) – Emptiness. In different Buddhist traditions the term has different interpretations. In Mahāyāna Buddhism it is especially associated with the absence of inherent existence in phenomena; early Buddhist texts also use suññatā in contexts concerning emptiness and the absence of self.

Upekkhā (Pali; Sanskrit: upekṣā) – Equanimity; a balanced, steady mind that is neither attached nor averse.

Yoniso manasikāra (Pali) – Wise attention or appropriate attention; the mental quality that examines experience in ways that reveal its causes, conditions, and consequences rather than reinforcing craving, aversion, and delusion.

Buddhist Learning For All