(This is part observation, part suggestion/question and is triggered by a response to my own question here.)

Because a "religious" topic like Buddhism lends itself both to questions looking for (more or less) factual information and questions looking for advice on personal practice, I wonder if it's worth flagging somewhere that when answering a question, the responder should take care to respect the difference. On other Buddhist forums I've seen problems arise fairly often when the two things get mixed up. Guidelines could look something like this:

  1. The best answers deal directly and solely with the question(s) specifically asked in the first place. Take care when "reading into" a question and answering some "deeper" question (that perhaps you think the questioner should have asked). Sometimes such pre-emption (i.e. avoiding first asking "Did you really mean ...?" and having the person reply "Ah, yes! That's a better way of putting it. So what's the answer?") is perfectly acceptable, but care is needed.
  2. Avoid inadvertently invalidating the question, e.g. with answers of the form "That's the wrong question...". Use comments (and down-voting or flagging, where appropriate) to reflect a concern over a question's quality.
  3. Take care when allowing assumptions about the personal intent of the questioner to influence your answer. Internet-based text correspondence is notoriously bad at conveying intent and emotion, so if you think you know, based solely on the text, why someone asked a question -- other than simply wanting to know the answer -- you're probably wrong.
  4. In general, unless you actually are the questioner's teacher, don't assume a teacher's mantle.


See also Sectarian shout downs should be dealt with

  • Can you add examples of the problems that arise from offering advice vs answering a question.
    – user70
    Commented Jun 24, 2014 at 0:14
  • 3
    1. If the advice invalidates or undermines the question itself, it can be off-putting, especially to newbies -- in that respect it can act like a mild form of "RTFM". 2. It can cause thread hijacking wherein the OP's question gets ignored in favor of the topic of the advice 3. In a subject area with both an intellectual and practice aspect, unsolicited advice from strangers may simply dilute the quality of an answer. For example, if I was now to advise you that you had made a grammatical error in your request, and that perhaps you should read Strunk & White, it would be inappropriate.
    – tkp
    Commented Jun 24, 2014 at 0:55
  • 2
    If you guys are looking for examples of this discussion one of my own answers generated comments and discussion about this very topic. buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/1315/… Commented Jun 24, 2014 at 23:18
  • @Jayantha, Yeah, I know ;-)
    – tkp
    Commented Jun 24, 2014 at 23:23
  • 1
    This is good, but it seems to be in the 'wrong' place. Is there a proper place for such guidelines? Commented Jun 8, 2020 at 1:47
  • I tend to agree, and I did hesitate to post the thing in the first place. I think I ended up deciding just to go ahead for two reasons. A) I didn't know where the "proper" place was. And B) Stackexchange forums differ widely in terms of culture and rules of posting etc, and fortunately we Buddhist and Buddhism-interested types appear to reside very much at the laid back and friendly end of the spectrum; so even if I was posting to the wrong place, I reckoned no one would mind much provided I was clearly well-intentioned and not egregiously out of scope. :-)
    – tkp
    Commented Jul 30, 2020 at 1:48
  • That said, I just noticed we're in buddhism.meta.se, not buddhism.se proper. I don't recall my post being to here, but if I was forced to choose a "proper" place for my post, then meta would probably be it. So if I actually did post it to meta in the first place, yay me! Or, if I posted it to buddhism.se itself but some helpful person then moved it to meta, yay said helpful person! Either way, yay!
    – tkp
    Commented Jul 30, 2020 at 1:52

4 Answers 4


I agree. I do think Buddhist discussions online have a tendency to attract "there is no spoon"* answers. For example, a better way to say "that is the wrong question" could be "before I answer your question, I must correct this or that premise" or something in this spirit. Some people may like answers in a style of the former ("that is the wrong question") because it creates a sense of "mystery", but personally I find it arrogant, disingenuous, and not encouraging to the person who asked (I'm speaking generally, not about any particular user).

*A reference to the movie "The Matrix", current popular usage can sometimes refer to an "answer" that is an intellectually dishonest "non-answer".

  • What are "there is no spoon" answers? Commented Jul 1, 2014 at 2:37
  • 1
    @yuttadhammo A question of yours I can answer! It is from the move "The Matrix". It has a loose Buddhist undertone. Scene. Sophie is most likely using it to refer to enigmatic answers.
    – user70
    Commented Jul 1, 2014 at 7:24
  • @user70 - Thank you, that's exactly what I meant. I have edited my post for clarity.
    – Sophie C
    Commented Jul 1, 2014 at 13:35

In general, unless you actually are the questioner's teacher, don't assume a teacher's mantle. - I think that was a great line.


Your example questions have the same theme: the askers asks about applying perspective A onto perspective B (e.g. 'Comparative religion' questions). They try to understand B from the point of view A. This is good, but it can be seen as comparing apples with oranges.

So by being off-topic (and perhaps highly upvoted), the answers convey an important message: that the askers need to learn more about B by its own view in its own words. Ideally the answerers should know both A and B, but those who only know about B may also give valuable information, and thus should be allowed to present it. (And by definition, the only answers they can provide are about B, which, by definition, is off-topic.)

As the off-topic answers can be seen as reminders the askers to respect B, I think the best approach should be asking the answerers to put a disclaimer in their answers. The mods may want to educate the users about this, so that both the askers and the answerers don't feel that the other side missing and passing their points.

Although the askers want to understand B from perspective A, it is much better if they ask about A from perspective B.

See also: Moderating answers which don't answer the question?


This is somewhat tricky. If a person ask a question he needs precise answer for that questions. If a person knowing the answer and asked questions expecting to check others knowledge is something else. Or else people asked questions and expect the answer what they want from others that also something else.
If a person really wanted to have the real answer then it is our responsibility for giving the exact answer because otherwise people whom reading those answers may take wrong path and deserted.

I had the similar issue with the question what is New Age Buddhism. People have the right to create something like that and spread instead of what lord buddha preached. But that is not a Buddhism. So I explained exactly what we should do with metta and lovingkindness. Because if a person who do not know head or tail of the buddhism and read this new aged buddhism and they start following that it may direct that person to somewhere else instead of Nibbana or Eightfold path.

unfortunately moderator deleted my answer. I personally feel respect all the answers and keep them to readers to decide the correct one is more fair than the moderator deleting the answers given by others. Because we are discussing here Lord Buddha's word. Not our thoughts and improvised buddhism which may leads people to wrong paths.

May Triple Gem Bless You All!!!!

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .