text:
Relationships with fools: Interpreting the Dhammapada
Dhammapada Verse 61: If a person seeking a companion cannot find one who is better than or equal to him, let him resolutely go on alone; there can be no companionship with a fool.
This is obviously self preserving pragmatism of the Aesop's Fables variety, it doesn't require a Buddha to say this, so perhaps there is a deeper meaning I don't spot.
Besides, I spot a couple of problems.
One: For me to associate with someone better, that person would have to accept me, his/her inferior. Ergo, one of us must break this rule and accept an inferior (not necessarily a fool) as partner or companion.
Two: This doesn't sound very loving and compassionate. Fools will remain fools without the company of intelligent partners or teachers, is it not? Plus, the Buddha himself tolerated Devadutta and others who were often comically stupid in his order.
The accompanying story of the Thera who blindly trusts his disciples is a little too simplistic, how is it that a senior teacher (Thera) needed to be schooled on such a trivial principle of common sense?
If someone is obviously lazy and scheming, even treacherous, he or she should not be trusted. Did the Thera get undermined by a false sense of duty or compassion?

Buddhism is full of common sense, that's not so common among people :). Also, the translation seems to be harsh, it should be unwise not fool. Another point is you maybe inferior to a person in knowledge but equal or superior in intelligence.

About the translation, the chapter is called balavagga or chapter on fools, in which this verse is the first. I could be wrong, but I think in Pali the meaning is harsher, the English equivalent would be retarded or idiot, the translations are soft. Unwise is an acceptable synonym for fool - "fool fuːl/ noun " a person who acts unwisely or imprudently; a silly person."

@Buddho I think this verse may be specifically for the stage where a person's practice has not yet stabilized and they still have doubts about the validity of the four noble truths. Perhaps the fools refer to people of the world who might tempt the person away from the path. I think every practitioner is susceptible to being pulled back into the corporate/dualistic/achievement-oriented, etc mindset for a long amount of time even after beginning practice. Maybe the verse refers to the importance of keeping company of people higher ahead on the path so we don't fall back...

When someone who has not progressed as much as another seeks his company as a kalyana-mitra, the more advanced practitioner should certainly offer it, but if the former seeks company for fun and games, then the latter may be correct in declining. I think these verses are very terse because they were meant to be memorized - so very often they are easy prey for misunderstandings without a practitioner's commentary. Just my 2 cents though.

The verse speaks from the point of view of the bhikku. The verse should be understood properly:
The bad and good bhikkhus were searching for companionship.
They found companionship with Thera.
The bad bhikkhu did not respect Thera, was not obedient and dutiful and was offended and extremely angry when Thera said something to him. Why? Because he thought that Thera was not better or equal to him. Thus, the bad bhikkhu choose a wrong companion. He should have let Thera go on alone and find a companion who is equal or better than him. There can be no companionship with a fool.
The good bhikku was respectful, obedient and dutiful. Why? Because he thought that Thera was equal or better than him. Thus, the good bhikku choose the right companion. He was not in a companionship with a fool.

One: For me to associate with someone better, that person would have to accept me, his/her inferior. Ergo, one of us must break this rule and accept an inferior (not necessarily a fool) as partner or companion.

This rule can apply and not be broken. If a man and a woman are seeking a relationship and they both think about each other as being equal or superior to the other, the relationship/companionship will work. Otherwise it will not work, as one will think about the other being a fool, or both will think about each other being a fool.
If a bhikku is seeking a companionship with a teacher and the bhikku thinks about the teacher being equal or superior to him, the companionship will work. Otherwise it will not work, as the bhikku will think about the teacher being a fool.

Two: This doesn't sound very loving and compassionate. Fools will remain fools without the company of intelligent partners or teachers, is it not? Plus, the Buddha himself tolerated Devadutta and others who were often comically stupid in his order.

The verse speaks from the point of view of the bhikku, not from the point of view of Thera/teacher.
If we were to apply this verse as you’re suggesting, then the Buddha would never have taught the Dhamma to people obviously inferior to him, or less developed than him.
Or if we were to apply this verse as you’re suggesting, then the Buddha is contradicting himself. But he is not, which can be clearly seen by his actions - he thought the Dhamma, even to fools.

I love your answer and have upvoted it, but I don't think it's right. The sutta says specifically it was admonishing the Thera.  When a bhikkhu from Rajagaha told the Buddha about this, the Buddha said that it would have been much better for Thera Mahakassapa to live alone than to live with a foolish companion.

@Buddho you yourself said someone could be an inferior and not necessarily a fool.

This is obviously self preserving pragmatism

No. It's a Sila, Samadhi, Panna preserving and improving principle. It is very conducive to the practice of the noble eightfold path.
ex:
The right effort
(1) to prevent the arising of unarisen unwholesome states;
(2) to abandon unwholesome states that have already arisen;
(3) to arouse wholesome states that have not yet arisen;
(4) to maintain and perfect wholesome states already arisen.
A person who is your equal will help you maintain your wholesome qualities and alert you when you start to let your standards slip.
A person who is higher than you will help you abandon your unwholesome states  and help you develop new wholesome qualities as well as perfect your current standards.
So such persons are worthy of being considered as friends. But a fool is not worthy of being considered as a friend as he would only hinder your right effort and drag you down.

For me to associate with someone better, that person would have to
  accept me, his/her inferior. Ergo, one of us must break this rule...

Not necessarily. You can help someone to get better by giving him good advice. That doesn't make him your friend. That makes him your student or someone you practice compassion on. The other might consider you as a teacher or just a friend. But you don't follow him or participate in unworthy activities he might engage in.  A monk might advise many lay people on a daily basis. That doesn't make them his friends.

This doesn't sound very loving and compassionate. Fools will remain
  fools...

Someone need not be your friend for you to practice compassion towards him or her. The Buddha did not seek companionship with those whom he helped to become liberated. It was always an act of compassion. Kesi Sutta explains how the Buddha dealt with those who are too haughty to give up their unwholesome ways:
"But if a tamable person doesn't submit either to a mild training or to a harsh training or to a mild & harsh training, then the Tathagata doesn't regard him as being worth speaking to or admonishing. His knowledgeable fellows in the holy life don't regard him as being worth speaking to or admonishing."

Buddha himself tolerated Devadatta and others

Tolerating is not the same as making friends with someone. You can tolerate a dog barking while you try to listen to something. That doesn't make the dog your friend.

The accompanying story of the Thera who blindly trusts his disciples
  is a little too simplistic

Venerable Maha Kassapa is not trusting the disciple. He's simply trying to make him better. But only the Buddha could definitely know if someone cannot be helped. Who would've thought that Angulimala and the demon Alavaka could be helped?

Did the Thera get undermined by a false sense of duty or compassion

No. Venerable Mahakassapa was an Arahanth. So his association with the student did not undermine him as he can never fall back. Lord Buddha probably used this as a pretext to give this sermon to the other good student. As you can see, he attained the state of Sotapatti after listening to it.

I love your answer, and have up voted it, but I have a few observations. Even Arahats can make mistakes, they are still human, they're incapable of breaking the five precepts. There are suttas where the Buddha admonishes arhats on their behavior. Ex., SS 1:132. Seeing the bright illumined pure mind in everyone it is possible for the Bodhisattva to treat everyone as a friend says Shantideva, in his teachings.

Arahanths can have behavioral patterns which may not be exemplary to others. That is when the Buddha would advice them to change. But they are not mistakes that lead to one's spiritual degradation. Surangama sutra is Mahayana.

I think part of the problem is the translation as fools. Eknath Easwaran translates this as spiritually immature. In the introduction to chapter six of the Dhammapada in his translation he says

The title of chapter 5 is normally translated as "The Fool". [...].
  However bala means not only "fool" but "child"

For me the term fool is ladened with harsh feeling and judgement. If I call someone "a fool" the chances are that I'm not speaking kindly. However if I think of a child then my heart goes out to that being. I might not want to spend time with the child playing childish games (well not all the time) but I want the best for them and I think kindly of them.
I am no Pali language expert so I can't speak to the accuracy of this translation. But when I'm reading this chapter the term fool doesn't seem helpful. Spiritual immature (or even child) helps me connect with the verses much better.

I agree, it does seem rather odd language for the Buddha - but he was also no fan of idiotic compassion.

In the original language, the word used is 'bala' or child, closer to immature than to fool, or better understood as in a phrase such as "the foolishness of youth."  There is a kindness to it; we have all played the fool at some point or another, and can be fooled by honest misperceptions and misunderstandings as well as by malice.
The seeker in this case is one seeking wisdom. The point is that if you are a seeker of wisdom, find someone wise/ mature.
The seeker is not inferior; merely we are at an earlier stage of development in this moment. In a later verse, you might find the comparison between how a spoon experiences soup vs. how one's tongue experiences soup. The seeker is one who is not wise, but wishes to be wise, just as the tongue wishes to appreciate the soup.  The very immature are not seeking wisdom.  They can memorize fables of either Aesop or the Buddha without gaining any wisdom at all, just as a wooden spoon can only hold soup, not appreciate it.  They are fooled by the simple story of a fable, not appreciating its hidden moral.
A wise person can learn from a fool and their errors, certainly, as we can learn from children and their innocence, but this is not in a full partnership, as I think the verses are implying that one should seek in a companion.
I hope you find this helpful.

Nice answer, welcome.

You are not taking the whole of Buddhist teaching at this point.
On the journey from unwiseness to being wise, each new insight obtained is good, but does not mean there is not more to learn.
This very verse, as much of the dhammapada is, teaches from the view of an unwise beginner. The course involves all teachings, even beginner ones.
Firstly, this teaching is one you already know, and find silly as a teaching. My experience is also that the teachings I understand, once learned with wisdom, are obvious. Such reasons are why when someone acts like they do not understand an insight but really do, they are wasting not only their time, but mine as well. Especially when their deception is very hard to discern, like in an online forum. But since not lying is a principle foundation of Buddhism, one would be highly unlikely to encounter such an instance of someone acting with such gross neglect of foundational principles and expect to be taken seriously as a sincere practitioner.
Secondly, the basis of this teaching involves something that later on in the practice, you actually escape from in terms of your relationship to worldview. It involves a comparison from one person to another, which is useful at the point in progress of this verse, which teaches one's awareness of others as well as self in terms of their wisdom, morals and insights. But ultimately this fetter gets abandoned. That another being is another being never gets abandoned, but holding a view does.
They will not advance with you, they will not support your practice, they will not allow you to grow.
Other verses clearly go into self-growth as not only important, but necessary. The end of suffering is not a group activity. It is self-realized. People devoted to the practice, practice alone even when in a group.
One can act with compassion many ways. One might be able to feed someone starving, but not teach them dhamma. This verse does not defy compassion. I don't have the accompanying story, just going by other's words.
It is possible to create causes and conditions wherein the escape of suffering is not possible. Like when you kill another being. Or if you imprison another being. Or maim someone, eg: someone in a coma is not freed from suffering. Lies can also create such rampant bad karma.


text:
The process of reintegration back into society after a retreat
I'm in a period of my practice where i feel ready for a retreat. I have been looking into different types of retreats and have found the Goenka 10-day retreat the most suitable one for me as a first-timer. I do however not now when i will be able to attend one due to long waiting time in the area close to me and my current job do not allow me to travel.
I was wondering about the reintegration-process back into society after 10 days with silence and minimal contact with people and no contact with the outside world. I have done small "retreats" by myself where i would buy food for 1-2 days and then stay inside and meditate. When i went outside after a couple of days and talked to other people i found that i had some aversion towards people and felt uncomfortable in their presence. I would rather stay for myself. I do not know how a 10-day retreat will affect me or if it will.
Personal experiences and methods for dealing with people when comming out of a retreat is what i'm looking for. A side note - i will be doing the 10-day retreat in another country than where i live. I dont know if that has something to say but now the information is there.
Thank you very much.

I attended a meditation course taught by Venerable Yuttadhammo which was, in total, a 21 day course. Due to inability to take 21 days off from work all at once, I had to split the course into two parts, 7 days & 14 days, giving me two periods of going from the busyness of daily life to the quiet of a monastery and back to busy daily life again in a 6 month period.
I also wondered about how it would feel, after the course, to resume daily activities and to deal with people. I tried to provide a buffer period of quiet time for myself (for when I returned home) by making arrangements ahead of time to take off an extra day from work, stock up on frozen and non perishable groceries to avoid having to go to the store right away, running errands ahead of time when possible. It was helpful just to not have too much piled up needing to be done when I returned home.
I was surprised actually at how challenging it was to adjust to the quiet at the monastery. Being away from internet, music, and most noise in general proved quite challenging to me and it took me a few days to adjust. For future retreats, I plan to build in a buffer period of being offline and quiet for a bit before I go to the retreat too. After a few days though, the quiet felt normal and continued to feel normal until it was time to go home.
I didn't find myself with any strong aversion to people after the course. People seemed loud perhaps, laughing too much, crude sometimes, but nothing that I hadn't noticed or felt even before the retreat. On my way home I had a one hour layover at the Port Authority in New York City. Going from a quiet monastery to the New York Port Authority bus station is about as different as you can get. But it was fine. I was standing, smiling, noting things, while everyone else was running around, yelling, getting stressed out because the bus was late. I was so happy to have had the opportunity to practice mediation and feel so calm in the midst of such busyness.
My best suggestion would be to try to build in buffer zones both before the retreat and after where you are not especially busy, social, (or spending lots of time online or listening to music before) to ease the transition both to the retreat and back to society afterwards. Best wishes for your retreat! :)

Thank you for sharing this. It was this kind of answer i was hoping to get. Very useful. Especially about the pre- and post-retreat management and buffer periods. I certainly need to prepare something like that. Can i ask what happend to your practice after the retreat? I mean did it become deeper and more focussed.

It deepened my commitment to daily mediation no matter what. Tough days, sleepy days, busy days, no matter what just keep meditating. Also very lucky to have an affiliated open online mediation community for support. http://meditation.sirimangalo.org/

Hi Robin. I got into the 10-day retreat in Sweden and it's this october. I'm very happy about it and now i will use the advices you gave me. I wanted to ask you about 2 things. They write that one should wear loose fitting and non-striking clothes. I was thinking about wearing adidas training pants and a black hoodie. Do you think that is acceptable? The problem is that the hoodie i have has a tag on the back, i.e. the place where i work (it says Aalborg Martial Arts) and it's a big tag with white letters.

Second thing is that one is not allowed to use strong scents. So what about deodorant for the armpits. Do people just go and stink in these 10 days? I would like to keep some level of personal hygiene, not just for myself but also to not disturb other meditators.

Congratulations! I'm happy for you. :)  I don't really know for sure what the expectations are on either question. But when I had read the rules for the S.N. Goenka retreat; my impression was they don't want you to do anything that would distract others. So strong scented toiletries might be better replaced by unscented ones? And maybe a plain shirt might be better that one reminding others about martial arts? Again, I'm not really sure; but plain might be better. Best wishes for a fruitful practice. With metta. _/_

Thank you Robin:) I think you're right about this. I will try to keep it plain and simple. Wish you a fruitful practice too.

Hello Robin. Would you have time for a chat? Hope you are doing fine. Take care.

I used to run a charitable retreat center that hosted scheduled Silent Retreats and also provided a retreat anytime someone requested. We always would explain the dynamics of going on retreat as it started, were available for questions that arose, and provided a closing talk to give suggestions on how to avoid unnecessary stress to one's being after. (And we would answer questions any time afterward.)
Suggestions were: to not do anything loud or disruptive for a while after (check that your car stereo was switched OFF before starting the car, lest it startle you), let people you live with know that you are assimilating your experience and not avoiding them, avoid news programs and TV that tends to bring up a lot of emotion or buzziness (a technical term), caffeine, alcohol and anything else that would send you for a spin. Heat, hot baths and showers can be depleting, heavy food might not digest well, etc. All common-sense, but nice to have a list.
If you have gone still and quiet for a while, anything jarring or energizing (inappropriately) will be especially disruptive. That said, I agree with Robin111 that the insight and calmness gained is immediately applicable and very empowering. Best Wishes on your retreat!

Given the good hint of Dhammadathu: "psychiatric hospital", if using a retreat, the Buddhas teaching, just to funcion for the world, e.g. as a compensation, not really up to go beyoung, it's nothing but missuse of gifts.
It's not good, not adviced, to get torward a an unexcelled gift with the inspiration of function for the world.
As Psychiatrist Lanka might know how the matter of reintegration and earnings with such works.
Having this basic fear possible change to a better, it would be nothing but hindrence to gain right view but as often a door to develop strange wrong views, willing to use high Dhamma for the world. This often "schizophrenic" way of live that is further leaded, a broad visible phenomena of so called Vipassana doer, is for the most not of benefit and those people are usually very unvirtuose, not ashamed to perform even grave missconduct, often continue wrong livelihood, having developed such as householder equanimity, a equanimity not based on penetrating the world, e.g. sensuality, matter.
So my person advice is to simply lead a proper lay-persons life, focusing much on generosity, service for worthy and Sila and when the day comes that actually seeing the danger in the world, taking on the going forth if the conditions outwardly, previous cased, are avaliable.
Todau even monks make retreats in same way... look at them. Today a very open remark of a, to that extend, very wise nun. Accidentally from the same lineage (if my person is not wrong) as it seems: A silly Nun, she calls her self, sadly.
Here a share of the (hidden) comments on the "luck" of reintegration, her resume:

Sure? A silly person, even meeting, having Nissaya, but not taking on it, just “how lucky amI, how lucky am I”, seeing form as constant, feeling as constant, fabrications as constant, memories as constant, knowing as constant, will return again and again. How is it, that a wanderering returner is blessed?
It’s not possible to uproot bhava-tanha if kama-tanha is not uprooted. For best possible support, sticking firm to vinaya is most conductive and taking on the Buddhas and Savaka-Sanghas invitation before following the many Maras in- and outwardly. Meaning, not taking what is not given and reject that with strings to the world, even if given.
And what is the cause of gaining right view? To do not associate with the common beloved fools, those who make a livelihood on talk.
Best wishes. It’s not easy if not letting go of unsupportive bounds. Why does one not? Because of this cravings, longing for it, not seeing the backwards, after the joy of becoming giving by sensuality.
Btw., it’s seldom that one is honest to one self and as the Buddha told “seeing ones foolishness, is to that extend, be called wise” so to that extend the silly isn’t silly at at in this case.
Mudita for that is actually really a matter of “lucky” and reason to rejoice benefical with it.
But now, how to get ride of being attached to fakes and cheater and find the Noble ones?
Not sure if known Upasika Kee Nanayon, but as it came to mind as possible supportive, here a share (with string to Nibbana attached):
Stop, Look, and Let Go

Assuming that this retreat might be done already, maybe give also a own answer.
Assuming that not, may Lanka do the best to be soon able to go forth.
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial use or other lower wordily gains by ways of exchange or trade]

Thank you Bhante. Two things; a) I'm a physiotherapist, not psychiatrist and b) the retreat is done now. I attended it in december 2015. It is my plan to go forth into homelessness when the time is right.

Nyom @Lanka , Is there realy a different? And mudita with you aspiration, sadhu!

Conventially, yes there is a difference. Ultimately, no there is not. Thank you Bhante.

It's good to know the difference betweens those help to stay bound and those giving release. Mudita.

Yes, I agree. Its easy to loose oneself in conventions and concepts if one is not mindful, heedful and guarding the sense doors.

Off-topic: what is @Lanka s normal first name?

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
What are the Eighteen Buddha Attributes?
There are Eighteen Buddha Attributes, that belong only to a perfectly enlightened Buddha. What are they?

The Eighteen Unshared Features of a Buddha:

The eighteen features of a Buddha that are not shared with those of lesser attainment – specifically, with shravaka or pratyekabuddha arhats – concern four general aspects of a Buddha: his behavior, realization, enlightening influence (‘ phrin-las, Skt. samudacara, Buddha-activity), and deep awareness.

The Six Unshared Features Grouped under a Buddha’s Behavior

(1) A Buddha’s physical composure can never be ruffled. Wherever he goes and whatever he meets, he is never fooled by appearances. He is always calm and clear.
(2) A Buddha’s enlightening speech never cries out or makes meaningless sounds. No matter what happens, he is never shocked or surprised, and never exclaims anything in anger, pain, or pleasure. Furthermore, a Buddha does not have any melodies, songs, or meaningless phrases compulsively going through his head, and he never mindlessly hums or mutters to himself.
(3) An omniscient Buddha’s enlightening mind never forgets anything or anyone.
(4) There is never a time when his mind is not totally absorbed on voidness.
(5) He never has even the slightest recognition or feeling of anything existing in a way other than the way in which it actually exists. Having rid himself of his cognitive obscurations concerning all knowables, he never experiences his mind giving rise to discordant, deceptive appearances of true existence.
(6) A Buddha is never so indifferent as not to check on others. He always cares about everyone equally and keeps a constant watch to see who is ready to make spiritual progress so as to help him or her accordingly. When someone is ripe, he never forgets to show him or her the way.

The Six Unshared Features Grouped under a Buddha’s Realizations

(7) His intention to help everyone never declines. This is due to the force of his great compassion, as he cares for everyone as a mother would for her only child.
(8) His joyful perseverance to help everyone never declines. He is never reluctant to go anywhere or do anything, even for the sake of one wandering being.
(9) His mindfulness of everyone’s situation never declines. It requires no effort for an omniscient one to be aware of all beings. His awareness is like an enormous clear mirror reflecting the total extent of what exists.
(10) His absorbed concentration never declines. He is always totally focused on voidness, no matter what he does.
In the list of these unshared features given in The Furthest Everlasting Continuum, this feature is omitted and replaced by the fact that the sight of his deep awareness, which is utterly freed from all mental obscuration, never declines.
(11) His discriminating awareness of voidness never declines.
(12) His state of being utterly freed from the two types of mental obscuration never declines.

The Three Unshared Features Grouped under a Buddha’s Enlightening Influence

All the actions of a Buddha’s enlightening (13) physical, (14) verbal, and (15) mental faculties are preceded upon and carried through with deep awareness.
Because he has deep awareness simultaneously of both appearances and their voidness of true existence, he can exert an enlightening influence on everything around him while always maintaining his omniscient awareness.

The Three Unshared Features Grouped under a Buddha’s Deep Awareness

A Buddha’s deep awareness permeates everything, in seeing (16) the time already-passed (‘ das-pa’i dus), (17) the time not-yet-come (ma-‘ongs-pa’i dus), and (18) the time presently-happening (da-lta-ba’i dus), all without any attachment or impediment.
Time is an amount or length of duration measured in the continuum of the occurrence of a karmic causal action and its result, and is a nonconcomitant affecting variable (ldan-min ‘ du-byed) – a nonstatic (impermanent) factor that is neither a form of physical phenomenon nor a way of being aware of something and which is imputable on the mental continuum of a being.
A Buddha has no attachment to what he can see because he has rid himself of all emotional obscuration, and no impediment because he has no cognitive obscuration.

Would you happen to know if non-Buddhas like arahats, bodhisattvas or other noble ones can at least temporarily attain them? Should be possible since the key feature of most in the list is the part about "never declines" and "always".

As far as i know these 18 attributes only appear in a Samma Sambuddha and not in arahants or silent buddhas. I do not know if they can temporarily attain them though. You can also read about it here in "The Fourteen Buddha Knowledges", p. 1166 in "The Great Chronicles of The Buddhas".

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Do enlighted people cry? Did the Buddha ever cry?
What is the Buddhist view on crying? I don't remember hearing or reading about the Buddha ever crying. Is crying a consequence of "lack of understanding" of the ultimate reality?

Crying can be caused due to both physical and mental reasons.
Physical reasons:

Irritation in the eyes.
Sickness affecting the eyes.
Side effects of strong medication or extremely spicy food.

Mental reasons:

Sadness(obvious sadness and the sadness disguised as compassion), depression, aversion to pain, fear
Clinging to happy/pleasant/joyful states of the mind.

Assuming that this question is aimed at the 2nd category, it is highly unlikely that a fully enlightened being would cry as they no longer become sad or cling to pleasant states of the mind.
Arhanths only have Kiriya Cittas. Those are of 3 types.
i. Consciousness turning to impressions at the five doors
(panca dvara-avajjana) accompanied by feeling of indifference(Upekkhā).
ii. Consciousness turning to impressions at the mind-door
(mana dvara-avajjana) accompanied by feeling of indifference(Upekkhā).
iii. Consciousness of the genesis of smile (hasitoppada
citta) accompanied by joy(Pīti).
Hasita(a smile which slightly reveals the tips of the teeth) is their reaction to joy. If they ever cried, there should be another called the Assuppada citta. But there isn't! :)

Yes, an enlightened being would have perfected the Upekkhā pāramī. Would that too make crying unlikely?

Actually, Arahaths have only Kiriya citta AFAIK. 2 of them are Uppekka and 1 of them has Joy. But that joy is not followed by clinging. Updated the answer.

The reference doesn't contain the word "Kiriya". Which page of that PDF were you recommending as relevant?

Updated reference

What is the Buddhist view on crying?

We must not pretend to be the Buddha, if tears come, we must respect that while investigating causes and conditions, using the moment as a teacher, to gather fresh insight. When true understanding is born, the tears will naturally dry up. New tears of compassion may form as one walks the path of the Bodhisattva.
Bodhisattvas have cried at seeing the fate of those in pain, and enlightened people like Jesus have shed compassionate tears.

I don't remember hearing or reading about the Buddha ever crying.

I can't recall any suttas that talk about the Buddha crying or not, but I am not a Tipitaka master. It is not explicitly one of the 18 Buddha attributes. One can surmise therefore that this is not considered a very important distinction.
The key aspect of a Buddha is volition. If he cried at all, it would not be meaningless.

Is crying a consequence of "lack of understanding" of the ultimate
  reality?

Yes and no - Involuntary crying of the nature humans often perform - where we try to hold back our tears, yet the circumstance overpowers us should not be the case for the Buddha. He has no remaining sankharas, no hidden traumas in the mind, no lack of control over his actions and perfect understanding of cause and effect.
If his crying served a purpose, then he may cry because it is Upaya.
Caveat: I am no Buddha, so I can't know for sure. It makes me a little uncomfortable to deal in the hypothetical.

An enlightened person who has achieved arahantship has put an end to mental fermentations, so how would they cry?
Fermentations which would cause one to cry, experience grief and sorrow wouldn't be there.
This means they could only pretend to cry or have the appearance of crying but not actually experience grief or sorrow.

"From craving springs grief, from craving springs fear. For one who is wholly free from craving there is no grief; whence then fear?" (Dhammapada, 216)

"Whoever is overcome by this wretched and sticky craving, his sorrows grow like grass after the rains."
"But whoever overcomes this wretched craving, so difficult to
  overcome, from him sorrows fall away like water from a lotus leaf."
  (Dhammapada, 335-336)

Nibbana is the highest bliss, highest enjoyment, with fermentations (asavas) put to an end how can someone cry, be fearful, sorrowful, angry? Experiencing such an extreme form of enjoyment why would anyone cry?
Doubtless, fearless, sorrowless, angerless, calm, and happy walks the arahant.

Here is one theoretical answer.
The Buddha said that at the root of all virtue is gratitude.
Many believe people cry when they are sad. This could be true.
Have you noticed when people cry as they tell their story?
It is uncommon for tears as they say they lost their job, they lost their house, they lost their wife....but then they say..."...this person came..."...and they choke up..."...this person came and helped us when we needed it most..."...then the tears begin to flow.
Gratitude is the source of many tears.
If Buddha believed that gratitude was the source of all virtue - then certainly the Buddha had moments of profound gratitude...and thus tears.

Crying can happen because of many reasons but there has never been a record of an enlightened one crying because of sadness or any other mental discomfort.Because once you are enlightened you understand that there is no reason for sadness.sadness is purely a product of not being able to understand things according to Buddhas teachings.

from "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism":

[Enlightened master] Marpa was very upset when his son was killed, and one of his disciples said, "You used to tell us that everything is illusion. How about the death of your son? Isn't it illusion?" And Marpa replied, "True, but my son's death is a super-illusion."

from Sakka's Questions Sutta:

Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of grief, ‘As I pursue this grief, unskilful mental qualities increase, and skilful mental qualities decline,’ that sort of grief is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of grief, ‘As I pursue this grief, unskilful mental qualities decline, and skilful mental qualities increase,’ that sort of grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. ‘Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

What do you mean by super illusion?

I believe Marpa was referring to the unity of the ultimate and the relative truths (realities).

Buddhas are people so yeah they probably cried sometimes during their life. Who knows after enlightenment, perhaps they are in emotional states where tears no longer come, or if they do have sadness, grief, gratitude, and other powerful emotions they reacted differently due to their wisdom and compassion. Or maybe they just cried and didn't worry about it so much. No offense, but the entire "deification" of Buddha(s) through pure scriptual reference is a bit absurd. My two cents are just cry, feel and don't be ashamed or think you have to get enlightened. Enlightenment doesn't mean you snuff out into bliss land, you still have a body, you still have to eat, sleep, and so on. As far as I know the Tathagatha never said he was a God, or Divine, just awake to truth. Argue all you want about mind streams and rebirth, etc. For me too much fancy thinking and dreaming of transformative experiences did not necessarily improve my daily practice. Quite the opposite, I found it a road block. During my study or mediation I have cried, walking meditation in the mountains, I have cried. Sitting at my desk and hearing Stevie Wonder singing and reminding me of my finite time with my daughter, I cried. What the heck is wrong with crying anyway. I feel better afterwards and I know why I cry so I'm glad I can have that normal and natural experience rather than fight it and stuff my emotions to be a mindful practitioner. Also, if by crying I am better able to handle my life and have understanding and compassion for others, than that seems healthy and productive as part of my practice. For me it's like learning to have feelings but not be blown about in the storm by them meaninglessly. Emotions are good teachers. Best of luck to you.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Looking for a book that covers the biography of the Buddha's life
Which biography of the Buddha is written in (or translated into) English, and is the most widely read (from a Theravada perspective)?

Old Path White Clouds by Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh is a very beautiful book. Adding this in comments because you explicitly requested Theravada. Hanh, a Vietnamese Buddhist monk, has drawn from 24 Pali, Sanskrit, and Chinese sources to create this highly acessible retelling of the story of the Buddha. This is not a scholarly study but rather a heartfelt interpretation that draws on important sources.

A concise history of Buddhism by Andrew Skilton is a good overview of the history of Buddhism, not limited to Theravada. Again adding in comments because it is not directly Theravada.

I think you'll find that "biography of the Buddha" and "history of Theravada" are probably two different books. I have edited this question, so that now it only asks for a book about the "biography of the Buddha". If you'd also like to ask about the "history of Theravada" I recommend you post a new question on that topic.

You may see these two books:

Buddha by Karen Armstrong,
The Life of Buddha according to the Pali Canon by Bhikkhu Nanamoli.

A book titled In the Buddha's words is "An Anthology of Discourses from the Pali Canon" by
Bhikkhu Bodhi.
You can find it online as a PDF.
Its second chapter (only 25 pages) is titled "The Bringer of Light" and is a biography: it has section titles like, "The Buddha's Conception and Birth", "The Decision to Teach", and "The First Discourse".
Its advantage is that it's quoting suttas, so I guess that's "widely read" and reportedly autobiography.

There are many books on this topic, my favorite one is "Gotama Buddha: A Biography Based on the Most Reliable Texts" by Hajime Nakamura. It is based on a very thorough, I would even say fanatical, research into the primary sources (mostly Pali Canon) - and I found it by far the most detailed (two volumes!) and very well specified with references.

If you can read old book with very details, you want might to consider 'The Great Chronicle Of Buddha' by Mingun Sayadaw. The biography of Gautama Buddha starts at volume two, part one.

You can read AccessToInsight's "A Sketch of The Buddha's Life: Readings from the Pali Canon".
The same website also has another shorter biography of the Buddha entitled "The Buddha and His Dhamma" by Bhikkhu Bodhi.

I can't agree more with Andrei Volkov. Gotama Buddha: A Biography Based on the Most Reliable Texts" by Hajime Nakamura is one of the best.
Nakamura culled the information from Pali Canon, Chinese Agamas, Faxian &  Xuanzang India Travel records, Archeological Resources and Buddhist Art.
For those who are disheartened seeing the unavailability and atrocious prices online for used ones, here is the way to get them for a decent price.
Send an email to the original publisher in Japan "pub@kosei-kai.or.jp" and check if they have stock. I am able to get both the books shipped to USA west coast for 64$.

From a Theravada perspective, the life of the Buddha is given in the Vinaya and Sutta Pitaka. These texts are in an unknown language. The name that corresponds to 'the Buddha' in the canon is Sammasambuddho. A Bodhisatto becomes a Sammasambuddho as a consequence of achieving Sammasambodhi. The texts cover the life of Bodhisatto from birth to Sammasambodhi. Every single moment from Sammasambodhi to Parinibbana is accounted for in the texts.

The most comprehensive I have come across in English is:

Maha Buddhavamsa The Great Chronicle of The Buddhas by Tipitakadhara Mingun Sayadaw

Also comprehensive but shorter books:

Buddha and this Teaching by Venerable Nārada Mahāthera
Thus We Heard:Recollections of the Life of the Buddha by Bhante Walpola Piyananda and Stephen Long


text:
Which are considered to be the oldest suttas?
Though I've seen dating of mahayana suttas here and there in passing with some analysis, I understand the pali canon has suttas of many ages. For example, one collection I've often heard to contain many old suttas is the Itivuttaka.
However, I've don't recall seeing any information about dating of specific suttas, or what criteria for estimating the age are used. Is there a set of suttas which has been identified as the possibly oldest texts?

On criteria for dating, I've recently read that certain pali styles are criteria for determining age. Also, cultural and geopolitical references may determine the age of a text (e.g. mention and description of certain cities and kings, mention of writing [in Buddha's time, it's believed writing was not widespread], etc). For an interesting read, see The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts

I was told that the Sutta Nipata is a one of the oldest collections. I'm no Buddhist scholar so I can't help with any great textual analysis of the sutta. However Thanissaro Bhikkhu says here that the The Parayana Vagga is quoted in other (more recent) parts of the Pali Canon so this makes it a good candidate to be considered one of the oldest. To quote the relevant part of the passage

There is evidence that these sixteen dialogues were highly regarded
  right from the very early centuries of the Buddhist tradition. [...]
  Most of the Cula Niddesa, a late addition to the Pali canon, is
  devoted to explaining them in detail. Five discourses — one in the
  Samyutta Nikaya, four in the Anguttara — discuss specific verses in
  the set

Indeed, i made a confusion; it was the Sn that i heard was the oldest. Thanks for the references!

The first Sutta preached by Lord Buddha was Dhamma Chakka Pawaththana Sutta, the sutta which is about the Four Noble Truths. You can read it in detail here. The sutta was preached to the Five Ascetics. Konadanna Ascetic could become Sotapanna after listening to the Sutta. Other four Ascetics became Sotapanna after Lord Buddha guided each ascetic with "Kamatahan". And the second Sutta preached was Anantha Lakkhana sutta which was about Not-Self. The second Sutta was also preached for the Five Ascetics(Or now the Five Sotapanna) who became Arahat after listening to the sutta. Adittapariyaya Sutta is also one of the oldest suttas which was preached for 1000 monks.

There are several collections of texts in the Khuddaka Nikaya that are very old. The Sutta Nipata and the Itivuttaka have already been mentioned, but possibly the Udana is very old as well. Also some of the short fragmentary material in the Samyutta Nikaya and the Anguttara Nikaya are hypothesized to be from the oldest stratum of the Canon.

According to Pande, T.W. Rhys Davids places the chronology of the nikayas midway between the parnibbana and Ashoka, which accepting the modern date for the parinibbana of circa 400 BCE would place the composition of the nikayas about 325 BCE, merely 75 years after the death of the Buddha, but after the Parayana Vagga, Octades (Atthakka Vagga), and Patimokkha. The Atthakavadda and Parayanavagga may be found in the Khuddaka Pitaka, as the fourth and fifth sections of the Suttanipata. The pattimokkha is of course a summation of the Vinaya. Thus, these appear to be the oldest parts of the Pali Canon. (G.C. Pande, Studies in the Origins of Buddhism, 5th ed., Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 2006, p. 20.)
Gombrich suggests that the nikayas are mid-4th century BCE. Rupert Gethin criticizes this view and suggests that they are somewhat later, "a few generations" after the parinibbana. ("Gethin on Gombrich: What the Buddha Thought")
According to noted University of Toronto Buddhologist A.K. Warder "the order of the five 'traditions' [referring to the agamas, a.k.a. nikayas] happens also to be the order of their authenticity." The first of these is the Digha Nikaya (Skt. Dirgha Agama). Warder claims that this is proved by "comparing the various available recensions." B.C. Law divides the Digha in half, placing the first part earlier than the second and third parts, which postdate the Four Great Nikayas, and distinguishes between an earlier pattimokkha of 152 rules and a later pattimokkha of 227 rules. Warder also considers the Ksudraka or Minor Tradition to be the least authentic portion of the Canon. At the same time he recognizes the Khadgavisanaghata, Munigatha, Sailagatha, Arthavargiyani Sutrani, Parayana, Sthaviragatha, Sthavirigatha, and Ityukta to constitute the "original nucleus of the Ksudraka common to all the schools," whereas the Udanas, Jatakas, and Avadanas "seem at least in origin to have been nothing but anthologies from the Tripitaka." (Warder, Indian Buddhism, 3rd rev. ed., Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2000, pp. 196ff.).

many Buddhist scholars agree that the oldest collection must be Samyutta Nikaya/Samyukta Agama, which however doesn't mean that all its contents are the oldest because the process of modification and addition was ongoing

This is why the Atthaka and Parayana vaggas are so interesting because, being written in verse, they are probably closer to the original than the nikayas. Warder suggests that it was also harder to edit the longer suttas than the shorter suttas.

authors: Баян Купи-ка


text:
Combining yoga (asanas); qigong meditation and raw vegan diet with Buddhism
Fellow travellers,
As I have experienced myself major benefits from the practicing of asanas the past two years; plus from my raw vegan diet the past three years and qigong meditation the past year; I was wondering if these concepts/ways of life could be combined with Buddhism in the context of a monastic life.
The past year I was living like an 'urban monk' or something; meaning that I am spending most of my free time on my daily routine disciplines (lengthy meditation both sitting and walking; asanas; qigong meditation). As I also have to work to make a living, I have come to realize that this is an unequal struggle for me; walking some steps forward and then going backward. Which keeps me away from the development of my spiritual Self; and that is what I am interested about the most in my life.
Concerning the raw vegan diet I have found amazing benefits in both mind and body. Alive food provides higher levels of energy and a lightweight sensation, both bodily and mentally (as what we eat affects both mind, body and spirit). We consume the alive consciousness of other forms of life such as fruits; greens; sprouts and that has an instant effect in our "own" consciousness as well. That led me to realize that.. in fact in fact, it is not our consciousness in action, but instead, its the outcome of what we put into our system; and that is raw; alive; which changes us from within. It's not something dead, consuming food from the same kingdom (meat/flesh) as ourselves. Dark leafy greens have a higher alkaline pH, which aids to radiant health and elimination of all diseases. All these three years I was never sick. All diseases arise in a highly acidic environment. All processed foods and especially meat create a high acidic pH in our body. Therefore, the effects of a raw vegan diet are instant and they work deeply, in a psychosomatic level, affecting all that consists of what/who we are.
Combined with the asanas from yoga and the qigong meditation, where I learn to sense the pranic/chi bioenergy field around me, and how to work with it and use it in order to heal my body, all these disciplines are essential to me. The body is the temple of the mind. «Νούς υγιής εν σώματι υγιεί» were saying the ancient Greeks. Which means "Healthy mind in a healthy body". As the body is the temple of the mind, both affect one another; a normally fit body will not suffer when we will be old. We are training our body as we are training our mind; these two go hand in hand for me (and for millions of others as well).
I won't go much into personal details, to not make this a lengthy post.
As about Buddhism, I am new, but as it seems from my research, it's the only system that offers this freedom of both spiritual; psychological and philosophical expansion and betterment in one system, which is what I need (not want), in order to develop myself from within (the only true development).
I would heartily appreciate your advice on this very important path in my life. I am glad that I have found you.
Peace and harmony to each one of you ~
Grigoris

Hello and welcome to Buddhism.SE! We've put together some information here to help you get started.

In asking about combining a particular diet (raw vegan) with being a monastic in Buddhism, it would be important to understand which type of Buddhism you are interested in potentially  ordaining into. In Theravada Buddhism, monastics eat food offered by lay supporters and therefore aren't able to specify such a diet, for example. Are you able to tell us more about which type of monastic practice you are considering?

It's rather early to choose a tradition/school but my inclination is rather towards the Theravada Buddhism.

There are a few things which come to mind that Buddhism may say about your current spiritual path;
Surely, the practices you have described will bring you some beneficial results. But without proper insight, guided by the Noble Eightfold path, they will not lead you to liberation from old age, suffering, and death. And this is evident by the way in which you describe the body. The body is in fact a prison, not a temple. This body is not ours, and by its very nature seeks out death. Pursuing health is a useless endeaver, as the Buddha said :

"'I am subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging.' This is the first fact that one should reflect on often, whether one is a woman or a man, lay or ordained.
"'I am subject to illness, have not gone beyond illness.' ...
"'I am subject to death, have not gone beyond death.' ...
Upajjhatthana Sutta AN:5.57

And in fact, the mind has far more affect over the body than the body does over the mind, insofar as the mind is developed. An undeveloped mind can and will suffer in even the most healthy of bodies, but a well developed mind needs not suffer in even an ill and dying body. In this way, the two do not mutually affect each other, and therefore pursuing healthy things for the sake of health is of no benefit. Such clinging to your health and well being will only lead to suffering, as sooner or later it will come to an end.
As for asanas, or qigong meditation, I do not know. But unless their teachings ascribe the application of the Noble Eightfold path, they are not in line with the teaching of the Buddha, and will not lead one to final liberation.
I hope this helps clarify some things with your current practice in regards to the teachings of the Buddha.

Concerning the issue of death, I regard death as part of life, it's just in a different frequency. What we are is condensed energy. From what we know, energy cannot be created or ended, it's just recycled endlessly. Therefore what we are can never cease to exist, the only thing that ceases to exist is our short view on the subject of Life (which includes that which we call death).

In fact, after some intense psychic experiences that I had, almost a year ago, there was a small period in my life that I was thinking how it would be like to deliberately leave/depart from this life. I was so much in awe from the experiences that I had (which were in fact supernatural ones), so seeing "death" in a broader concept, made me want to do everything and reach that state. But, for some reasons I didn't. :-)

Either way, I do not have any sense of fear about the issue of death. I have experienced mySelf as who I really am, and Who I AM can never cease to exist. In that context, of course this body is the prison, but as long as we are in this life, it is better if we treat the body with respect and maintain a basic level of physical exercise in order physical pain to not divert us from our mental and spiritual disciplines and practices, on our Path.

I agree as well that the mind is superior than the body, and that they are not truly mutually affecting each-other. Though, in this life we are functioning with both.

You say you experienced yourself, by the verb experienced in past tense, which means this experience arose and ceased, which means it no longer is, which is directly opposed to your claim that who you are can never cease to exist. So what is it that you experienced, which arose and then ceased, that can never cease to exist?

With capital letters (mySelf/I AM) I am referring to my true essence, my higher self. That essence can never cease to exist; whilst every earthly experience/sensation/notion are coming and going in this life.

Where is this essence and how do you know it is yours, it is higher, and that it can never cease to exist? You're making the distinction as if the experience of such wasn't made on earth, and wasn't in and of itself an experience/sensation/notion. For you to have had such an experience and remember it, and its qualities, you must have perceived it with some faculty or another. So then, what could be said of this experience beyond there was seeing, there was smelling, tasting, hearing, touching, or cognizing?

All conditioned phenomenon, that is, things that arise due to conditions, also cease, and as such are impermanent, unfit to call self, and a cause of stress. Attributing anything to such experience beyond "this is this", "this is seeing...touching...etc", is false attribution, and in Buddhism, wrong view, and will not lead to the cessation of suffering.

It is a beautiful thing what you are doing. Respecting your body, the environment and all beings is the first path of the Bodhisattva.
Respect is not necessarily attachment. Buddhism recommends we have a healthy belief in impermanence, but not so much that we ignore caring for everything.
The Buddha warns his followers to practice hard while they still can. Because sickness, injuries and death can occur at any moment, and interrupt their  practice, they must not put off practice for later. Buddhism is not found in sutras and big and ancient words, it is found in the practice of seeing the truth in every moment.
We obviously can't practice if we are losing consciousness due to an injury, or delirious with fever. We must take medicines at this moment and respect that our practice is dependent on causes and conditions, such as our good health.
We likewise cannot practice if we are lost in luxuries and delusions of reality, mistaking our comfortable conditions for permanent bliss.

The legend of the Buddha shows that Siddhartha, before he became the Buddha viewed his body as a defilement, hunger as a prison sentence that kept him trapped in this world, and practiced severe starvation penance. He couldn't sadly make meaningful spiritual progress towards Buddhahood with this belief system. When he learned to respect his human condition and eat food, his spiritual progress rapidly advanced.
By observing the beauty of nature interacting with our body, in a vegan diet, in asanas, in wild natural situations where our body helps us survive, we can practice a form of Vipassana or deep insight. We see that there is no independent existence, that all beings are interdependent.
We must see that the idea of "I" is a compounded reality. The "I" who is well rested, eating healthy and exercising is very different from the "I" who is sleep deprived, intoxicated and eating junk food. Thus we are our good or bad habits, we are nothing more than our thoughts, actions and speech in this present moment. By observing our body in sickness and health, in youth and old age we see the impermanence of reality.
Thus, respecting the body can lead to insight, but there is a danger that it can also lead to hubris and pride. If we spend a lot of time in front of the mirror basking in narcissism, that's dangerous :-)
We must learn not to fear the environment. We cannot control all aspects of our life. Eating healthy vegan food is good, but if we can't find good food one day, and we must eat something, we must learn to make do with whatever is available with no regret or sadness.
The Buddha was often offered fancy meals in palaces when Kings and rich men invited him and his followers for lunch. No matter how good the hospitality, he didn't linger on in the palaces even though he could have. He kept wandering into forests and little villages, making no allowance for comfort. So one day he would eat in the palace, the next day he would be in the forest and drinking muddy water and eating grass to survive, but he wouldn't make a face or miss for one moment yesterday's lunch in the palace.
He never recommends poisoning the body by eating poisonous mushrooms or berries, so some care must be taken, but not so much that we fall prey to comforts and luxuries.
On his last meal, he knew the food he was being offered was dangerous (traditions do not agree on whether it was rotten pork or mushrooms or something else). In any case he knew it was toxic, so he asked his followers to not eat the food, and have the rest of the food buried. However, he ate the meal with the same beatific smile, and passed away with no regret about losing his body.
That is the kind of wisdom and detachment we must follow.
Update: This health update from Plum Village, about the recovery of Buddhist teacher, Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh or Thây from a life threatening stroke is a good teaching on enjoying the wonderful joy of being, whatever one's condition.

some clarification first
With asanas, let me clarify that I am at the beginner level and I would like to stay in that level. What I need is a fit and strong body at the basic level; just to remain physically healthy. I prefer devoting my time meditating and not practicing in order to reach the higher asana levels. Thus, there is no emotional attachment with my asana practice, I see it as a way to maintain a healthy body and to not let any physical discomfort keep me away from my spiritual practices.

I understand now, that the monks are accepting the food that is being offered to them. In that concept, if I will become a buddhist monk in the Theravada tradition; I would be grateful then if someone can offer me a meal/day. In a better controlled environment I would surely prefer to eat the raw vegan diet that I am having now. But with one meal/day, I can concentrate as well on the other types of "food" in the broader term of the word, such as lengthy meditation and spending time in the healing embrace of nature.


text:
Attainment of enlightenment without desire
The Noble Truths make us aware that the cause of suffering is desire. Isn't it a desire to become enlightened and attain Nirvana; thus, causes suffering? If you drop the desire, will it be possible to attain Nirvana, or for that matter, do anything at all?

"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming." -The Buddha (Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta)

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have some guidelines for new users which you might find useful.

Desire is used to fabricate all the needed conditions to abandon desire once and for all.
Desire should be dropped at the right time, after all the conditions for attaining Nibbana are generated. But it is used until that point.
So desire is used to abandon desire.
Brahmana Sutta: To Unnabha the Brahman
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn51/sn51.015.than.html

"Brahman, the holy life is lived under the Blessed One with the aim of abandoning desire."
"Is there a path, is there a practice, for the abandoning of that desire?"
"Yes, there is a path, there is a practice, for the abandoning of that desire."
"What is the path, the practice, for the abandoning of that desire?"
"Brahman, there is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. This, Brahman, is the path, this is the practice for the abandoning of that desire."
"If that's so, Master Ananda, then it's an endless path, and not one with an end, for it's impossible that one could abandon desire by means of desire."
"In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular desire allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have persistence, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular persistence allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have the intent, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular intent allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have [an act of] discrimination, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular act of discrimination allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"So it is with an arahant whose mental effluents are ended, who has reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who is released through right gnosis. Whatever desire he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular desire is allayed. Whatever persistence he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular persistence is allayed. Whatever intent he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular intent is allayed. Whatever discrimination he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular discrimination is allayed. So what do you think, brahman? Is this an endless path, or one with an end?"
"You're right, Master Ananda. This is a path with an end, and not an endless one. Magnificent, Master Ananda! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Ananda — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May Master Ananda remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge, from this day forward, for life."

Desire puts you on the path leading to attainment of Nirvana. When you walk down the path towards Nirvana, you gain knowledge on cessation of desires. When all your desires cease, including the desire that put you on the path leading to Nirvana, Nirvana is attained.
When Nirvana is attained, right action and wrong action is fully known. Thus, after attaining Nirvana, one still has to do right action until death in order to attain Nibbana.
To do right action until death, right desire is needed. Right desire is the way towards Nibbana. Just as desire lead you to Nirvana, right desire will lead you to Nibbana. When your time comes, all desires, including the right desires that put you on the path leading to Nibbana, will cease and Nibbana will come to fruition.

Good Question :)
I'm only speaking from my own experience but I think that it is important to first properly define 'desire'. The term 'desire' in Buddhism, refers to one's state of being that wishes for satisfaction that is out of their "current" state of being. For example, a person wishes for pizza when they are given a hamburger. Interestingly, this also applies to one who wishes for tranquility during meditation. The key here however, is that one is 'unsatisfied' with what they currently have. So your question is definitely correct saying that the desire for nirvana causes suffering. Ironically though, I doubt you would even be practicing if it weren't for the shinny appeal of enlightenment or nirvana. Not to stress though, it is fine to want to be peaceful and tranquil :). You just have to change your view so that it correctly corresponds to this wish. Try improving your natural environment and supporting your family and loved ones.
Hope this helps :)


text:
Buddhism and thought crime
Having read multiple sources about karma, there appear to be different interpretations. Some suggest that physical volitional acts bear the seeds of karma while others such as this one, suggest that karma is borne by thoughts.
This is extremely confusing especially for someone new to the concepts since there doesn't appear to be an authoritative answer or reply.
If there are "unwholesome" (since i don't know what are wholesome or unwholesome aside from causing direct harm with no ill intentions) thoughts, is this considered thought crime in Buddhism?

It is the intention that has the karmic effect in this life or future ones. This is made clear in the Abhidhamma, and by the Buddha
There are three unwholesome roots. Which three?

Greed
Hatred
Delusion

There are three wholesome roots. Which three?

Non greed
Non hatred
Non delusion

For example:
A blind monk, without intentions of any of the six intentions listed above, killed a bug when he was walking. And he was a thera. The fellow monks noted he squashed a bug, and were displeased with it because it is against the first precept to kill and to harm another living being. That is one of the ten unwholesome actions:

"Here someone is a killer of living beings: he is murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, and merciless to all living beings." -The Buddha (Saleyyaka Sutta)

Later the Buddha became aware of what has happened. He told the monks that Cakkhupala's actions of squashing the bug will bear no karmic potency since he had no intention to kill it.
Here is an excerpt of the story:

"One day, Venerable Cakkhupala who was blind came to pay homage to the Buddha at the Jetavana monastery. While he was pacing up and down in meditation, he accidentally stepped on some insects. In the morning, some bhikkhus visiting him found the dead insects. They thought ill of him and reported the matter to the Buddha. When questioned by the Buddha whether they had seen Cakkhupala killing the insects, they answered in the negative. The Buddha then admonished them, 'Just as you had not seen him killing, so also he had not seen those living insects. Besides, being an Arahant he had no intention of killing, and was not guilty of committing an unwholesome act.' On being asked why Cakkhupala was blind, the Buddha revealed the following story to explain the nature of kammic effects."

This is the Dhammapada Story that gives an explanation to the first verse of the Dhammapada:

"All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with an evil mind, 'dukkha' follows him just as the wheel follows the hoofprint of the ox that draws the cart." The Buddha, Dhammapada verse 1

The Dhammapada Stories for the explanation of the Dhp. verses

There seems to be a major gray area there. What about negligence? Reckless endangerment?

@Davor Negligence would come under delusion. It is an unwholesome action.

OK...what about ignorance? The cases where a being truly did not know that his actions were causing harm to other beings. For example I didn't used to know that eating eggs (which I was always told were unfertilized, and hence could not involve taking another life) fed into the egg industry's mass killing of hundreds of millions of male baby chicks each year. Now I do know that.

@JeffWright you will not be getting bad karmic potency for eating the eggs. You will, however, be recieve bad karma if uou had greed, hatred, Delusion. An example of having greed while eating would be if you wanted more eggs for yourself, hoarding all the eggs, without at least offering to share first. If could have been out of hate if you had a sibling who really liked eggs, and you ate a lot of them since you knew it would cause suffering to he/she, and you did it because you were trying to get back at them for something they have done to you.

@JeffWright delusion would be feeling restless agitation accompanied by indifference; which, includes anxiety and nervousness. And then the other type of delusion consciousness would be associated with doubt and uncertainty, accompanied by indifference. All this is according to the Abhidhamma's classifications of consciousness. There are 8 greed consciousness, 2 hatred consciousness, and 2 delusion consciousness.

Karma means action and refers to actions of your body, speech, and mind. The effects of karma are related to your intentions in these actions of body, speech and mind. Regarding your question:
"If there are "unwholesome" (since i don't know what are wholesome or unwholesome aside from causing direct harm with no ill intentions) thoughts, is this considered thought crime in Buddhism?"
We don't have control over what thoughts arise in our minds. We only have control over what we do with a thought once it's arisen. Do we act on that thought? Or discard it as unwholesome if we recognize it as being connected to greed/desire, hate/anger, or ignorance/delusion? Do we dwell on it? Or move on?
Here is how the Buddha explained it in Dvedhavitakka Sutta: Two Sorts of Thinking:

The Blessed One said, "Monks, before my self-awakening, when I was still just an unawakened Bodhisatta, the thought occurred to me: 'Why don't I keep dividing my thinking into two sorts?' So I made thinking imbued with sensuality, thinking imbued with ill will, & thinking imbued with harmfulness one sort, and thinking imbued with renunciation, thinking imbued with non-ill will, & thinking imbued with harmlessness another sort.
"And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with sensuality arose in me. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with sensuality has arisen in me; and that leads to my own affliction or to the affliction of others or to the affliction of both. It obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding.'
"As I noticed that it leads to my own affliction, it subsided. As I noticed that it leads to the affliction of others... to the affliction of both... it obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding, it subsided. Whenever thinking imbued with sensuality had arisen, I simply abandoned it, dispelled it, wiped it out of existence.

The sutta goes on to describe the process of similarly abandoning thoughts of ill will and harmfulness in the same way for the same reasons, that it "leads to my own affliction or to the affliction of others or to the affliction of both. It obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Unbinding.".

Thanks. If i am angry however with no ill intention, how is that viewed or understood?

Anger is part of hate. Thoughts of anger/hate should be abandoned asap to lessen the detrimental effects. Anger is not a separate thing from hate. Good article on anger here.

It is not physical actions that create seeds for karma. It is volition that creates seeds for karma.
When volition arises, thoughts arise.
When thoughts arise, physical actions can arise.
Thus, all physical actions are volitional. All thoughts are volitional.
Physical volitional acts arise because thoughts arise. Thus physical volitional acts can bear the seeds of karma.
Thoughts arise because of volition. Thus thoughts can bear the seeds of karma.
Unwholesome thoughts create bad karma, thus it can be said that unwholesome thoughts are considered thought crime.
Nonetheless, an aspirant striving to attain liberation, should not see unwholesome thoughts as "thought crime" and neither unwholesome actions as "crime". Unwholesome thoughts should remain "unwholesome thoughts", without touching our hearts and giving rise to aversion or negative emotions. Unwholesome actions should remain "unwholesome actions", without touching our hearts and giving rise to aversion or negative emotions.

Although I haven't read the Buddha's writings. I find you reasoning speculative, since there is not a one-to-one mapping between thought and (voluntary) action. (particularly the first part of your answer)... (following not a comment on your post) Pure intentions -> pure karma. Don't act on emotion, but act on reason.

You are correct in saying there is no one-to-one mapping between thought and action. In simplistic terms, we can assume volition->thought->action but this is not correct. Correct is volition->thought and volition->action. It's the volition that is the cause of the physical action. The volition which is the cause of the physical action can arise because of a thought or it can arise just from contact with a sense organ.

@beginner - Thanks. What do you mean exactly by volition? Do you have examples?

By volition I mean will or desire or intent. If you want to move your hand, your desire to move your hand arises before you move your hand. If you want to think about something, your desire to think about something arises before you think. The desires that come to fruition leave an imprint on your karma and form a "mass of karmic potential". It is because of this "mass of karmic potential" that your consciousness, your birth and your suffering arise. You should meditate and experience this yourself.

authors: Владимир Дымов

authors: Руслан Темирханов


text:
Cause, condition and effect in Buddhism
If the result of one's karma is the combination of cause and condition, how does one account for all variables in the culmination of an effect?
If one is unable to include all variables, isn't that simply a limited view of the effect?

As others have mentioned it's not recommended to attempt to account for all the variables in karmic effects. Here is the basis for this. It's the third on a short list of what is called the Four Imponderables or Unconjecturables:

"There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four?
"The Buddha-range of the Buddhas1 is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.
"The jhana-range of a person in jhana...2
"The [precise working out of the] results of kamma...
"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.
"These are the four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them."

From Acintita Sutta: Unconjecturable
But while pondering the precise effects of karma is not something a person working toward Nirvana should do, as it's a distraction; a fully enlightened Buddha would know such effects.

"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of the passing away & reappearance of beings. I saw — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled the Noble Ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings — who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, & mind, who did not revile the Noble Ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma.

From Dvedhavitakka Sutta: Two Sorts of Thinking

One does not account for all variables in the culmination of an effect. Only a fully enlightened Buddha can know this. For the rest of us, the pursuit of full understanding of Karma will only impede our practice towards liberation, and should not be pursued.

Pondering the precise nature of karma is specifically taught against, so be careful in that regard, but contemplating karma in a general sense is actually recommended by many schools, and I'd say that applies here. It's often said that both present (conditions) and past (actions) are effects that cause the present.
This is supported by quantum entanglement, if that interests you.

What do you mean by taught against?

It is one of the four imponderables in the Acintita Sutta.

You don't need to account all variables in the culmination of an effect.
If the culmination of an effect arises because of a chained reactions of previous effects, you don't need to take into account all the variables in the chain of effects leading to the culmination of the final effect. By taking into account just a few variables, all the other variables in the chain of effects leading to the final effect will be taken into account.
This means that you don't need to know all the combinations of causes and conditions resulting in one's karma in order to account for all variables in the culmination of an effect. By taking into account just a few combinations of causes and conditions, all the variables in the culmination of an effect will be taken into account.
What are the causes and conditions to be taken into account in order for all the variables in the culmination of an effect to be taken into account?
The variables are: what is suffering, what is the cause of suffering, what is the end of suffering and what is the way leading to the end of suffering. Just by knowing these variables, you account for all the variables in the culmination of all effects.
By knowing what is suffering, what is the cause of suffering, what is the end of suffering and what is the way leading to the end of suffering, karma stops having its effects on you. This does not mean you will be completely free of karma in this very same life. You could still suffer misfortune, pain, etc. due to bad karma, but if you know what is suffering, what is the cause of suffering, what is the end of suffering and what is the way leading to the end of suffering, karma will have no effect on your state of mind and karma will not be after your death, thus future births will not follow after your death.


text:
What is the nature of impermanence, desire and anatman?
If everything in unstable, unsatisfying and out of control then what is the point in living? Isn't the 'point of life' meant to be a journey to stability, satisfaction and self control? Thanks :).

You can't stop the waves but you can learn how to surf!

ahhh yes Jon Kabat Zinn is a great teacher :D

Actually it was said by a Hindu swami touring America in the sixties, but JKZ had made it popular for this generation.

oh I didn't know that, thanks :)

Isn't the 'point of life' meant to be a journey to stability,
  satisfaction and self control?

There's no "meant to be" in life. It's not written in the stars that you must do this or that. But you can follow the noble 8 fold path and attain stability and satisfaction while you live.

If everything in unstable, unsatisfying and out of control

Everything is uncontrollable, but not unstable and unsatisfying. Only conditioned things are unstable and unsatisfying.

Living is a consequence of birth. Everything is unstable, unsatisfying and out of control because of birth.
Birth is a consequence of not knowing what is suffering, what is the cause of suffering, what is the end of suffering and what is the way leading to the end of suffering.

If everything in unstable, unsatisfying and out of control then what is the point in living?

The point in living is to learn what is suffering, what is the cause of suffering, what is the end of suffering and what is the way leading to the end of suffering.

Isn't the 'point of life' meant to be a journey to stability, satisfaction and self control?

Thus, you are right in saying: that the 'point of life' is meant to be a journey to stability, satisfaction and self control.
Once you realize what is suffering, what is the cause of suffering, what is the end of suffering and what is the way leading to the end of suffering, you will enjoy the fruits of your realizations in this very same life - you will live a stable and satisfactory life, with no ill will, anger, sadness, fears, greed, hatred, envy, any kind of emotional negativity, etc.
Once you realize what is suffering, what is the cause of suffering, what is the end of suffering and what is the way leading to the end of suffering, you will live a life completely devoid of any kind of suffering and your death will be completely devoid of any kind of suffering. After death, you'll not be born again - you will be what you truly are.


text:
Vipassana meditation comes naturally; Samatha meditation incredibly hard.
Let me start off by saying that I can do Vipassana meditation for about 20 minutes at present. Accepting thoughts as they arise, noticing sensations without judging is relatively easy, compared to doing Samatha meditation. However, even though my body may feel relaxed and calm after doing Vipassana, my mind is still cloudy and obscured (I suffer from brain-fog and Depersonalization Disorder). Depersonalization Disorder is a sense that you don't really exist, almost as if you are outside your body, lost in a cloud. I feel calm, but my mind still feels foggy.
If I focus on the breath (Samatha), I find that I only manage to sit still for about 3-4 minutes before becoming physically agitated (to the point where my body will curl up in tension). I feel as if I need to go for a run; my mind kind of shouts at me, saying "Go, go go! Get up. Go do something". There is no anxiety, just physical and mental agitation.
My mind feels fine doing Vipassana, jumping from moment to moment, letting things be. But when I tell the mind to focus single-pointedly, all hell breaks lose.
Should I carry on with the breath, even though I can only do it minutes at a time, or should I do something entirely different?

Hello and welcome to Buddhism.SE. We've put together some information to help you get started here.

Given your mental condition, have you looked for medical assistance? Perhaps they could be more effective in guiding you through an adequate meditation technique for these kinds of disorders

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. May i ask what you hope to get out of your practice. I mean do you want to achieve insights about reality (vipassana) or do you want to achieve strong states of concentration (samatha)? In vipassana you will have some degree of concentration just not as strong and deep as in samatha where the jhanas can be achieved. In vipassana one gains insights into how reality functions i.e. the 3 signs of existence, thereby slowly eradicating the hindrances. In samatha meditation the hindrances are not eradicated, only temporarily suspended.

The reason I came to Buddhism is that psychology, psychiatry and Western Philosophy never had a coherent model of reality and well-being for me. Buddhism offers a sense that insight into reality and personal well-being should coexist in a holistic sense -- I believe this to be true. So in this sense, I'd like to cultivate both insight and concentration (metta meditation is also a form of meditation i'd like to cultivate).

I have also found this to be the case when practicing samatha meditation. Here is my understanding of why that is, and how to deal with it:
In vipassana meditation, you do not need to "tune" sensations out. In fact, noticing them is part and parcel of the practice itself. Restlessness and agitation are thus sensations to be noticed and analyzed, and their presence won't really pose a problem.
By contrast, samatha meditation is about concentration on one thing -- in the case of anapanasatti, the breath. One thus becomes far more sensitive to the hindrances that obscure the goal of single-pointed focus, and they actually become an obstacle. The agitation you describe is literally the fourth hindrance, which is described as an inability to calm the mind. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_hindrances#Restlessness-worry_.28uddhacca-kukkucca.29.
On a deeper level, agitation / restlessness are manifestations of a mistaken belief that changing to some new state will end an unpleasant feeling. You thus experience the unpleasantness  of the sensation and react by attempting to change the situation.
How to deal with it:
Whenever I practice samatha meditation, I invariably experience what you've described above. To overcome it, I walk through a counting exercise I learned in Bhante Gunaranta's book "Beyond Mindfulness in Plain English". He recommends counting each in-out breath up to ten, then back down to one, then up to nine, then back down to one, then up to eight, etc. etc. until you reach one. Oh, and if you mess up, you need to re-establish your mindfulness, and start over :D
From personal experience, I've found that this method works very, very well. I am an inexperienced, impatient meditator, but this method -- when applied with mindfulness and self-honesty -- completely subdues the grosser manifestation of the hindrances for me.
Additional suggestions: Here is where your vipassana practice can and should bolster your samatha practice. Recognize the sensation objectively; recognize its impermanent nature, recognize that moving / shifting / getting up / etc won't truly eliminate the suffering within the experience, and recognize that there is not really a self behind the unpleasant experience -- it is merely an aggregation of perception resulting in you experiencing a hindrance to meditation. Through this process, you will calm the unpleasantness of the experience, and the hindrance will become subdued. Then you gently re-focus and proceed with the breath.

Thanks for the information. Raw focus on an object makes me feel overwhelmed -- almost as if there is cognitive and sensory overload. The counting with the breath really helped me along. Depersonalization Disorder I've come to realize is really just a fear to connect with raw sensory states and emotional spaces within. It developed as as a result of sustained trauma and existential angst in my early teens. As another poster commented "It appears your nervous system may need some help." -- my gut always told me this, and I'm glad people on this board feel similarly.Again, thanks for the info.

@user2200032 i've added a little more info about how your vipassana practice can help you bolster your samatha practice. see "additional suggestions" above. best!

@Ian Taylor That's a great insight, thanks.

It appears your nervous system may need some help. You need to spend time in nature, also try walking meditation barefoot. Avoid caffeine, sugar, nicotine, excitable entertainment and other stimulants. If you can exercise, or perform yoga, that will help. Meditation needs a healthy body, brain and nerves for best functioning. However, this is hardly the end of the road - you can develop khanika samadhi or momentary / moment-to-moment concentration with vipassana. This kind of meditation is ideal for insight and for progress on the path, so there's no need to worry.

This is a very precise and helpful answer with lots of advices +1.

Good info. I really do need to exercise and get into my body more -- I am a very cerebral person by nature and I realize this is a hindrance. Khanika samadhi seems very interesting -- I'll definitely try it out. Thanks.

@Steve cerebral people have greater difficulty meditating because they are used to using their intellect to relate with everything. Meditation requires letting go of thinking about things too much. Thoughts too can be a form of attachment, a form of possession. Good luck

have you tried counting your in and out breaths? this may be a good middle ground for you, as it will give your mind something to do.
Here is instruction for anapana meditation


text:
Punishments for breaking vinaya rules
Are there any punishments if a monk breaks vinaya rule on purpose..? ,if there is punishment ,then who would administer that punishment..?.How does buddhism deal with vinaya rule breakers..?

In theory the Pāṭimokkha Rules: Intro | Bhikkhus' | Bhikkhunis' is the basic code of monastic discipline, consisting of 227 rules for monks (bhikkhus) and 311 for nuns. It lays down offences and punishments leading to a maximum of expulsion from the order. The punishment is typically decided by the Sangha, but the presiding abbot may decide on occasion when it is not feasible to assemble the sangha.
http://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/buddhist-monastic-discipline/d/doc4046.html

The code of the Pātimokkha itself, in its details of disciplinary
  procedure, recommends certain forms of penalties for the categories of
  major offences. The Pārājika, being the gravest of the monastic
  offences, admits of no remedies or atonements. The penalty for
  Pārājika offences being complete ex-communication and loss of monastic
  status, it is spontaneously brought about by the commission of the
  crime.
All offences other than the Prājika are remediable in that every
  offender, barring one who is guilty of a Pārājika offence, who submits
  himself to the specified penalties and punishments and behaves himself
  in accordance with the law is considered as being purged of his guilt.
  The Saṇghādisesas include a host of offences for which specified
  penalties are to be imposed by the Saṇgha, taking into consideration
  the circumstances attendant on the commission of the crime.

In practice, it appears to vary depending on the monastery/monastic order, the country and the culture - barring the grave offences, there appears to be a lot of leeway in how the offences are viewed.
Some countries like Thailand have in the past got involved in the disciplining of monks because the monastic order itself wasn't doing enough, or because the state was outraged by certain infamous incidents.
While it appears that punishments are generally very rare in most Buddhist countries, Japanese Zen monasteries are famous for offering very tough disciplinary punishments for the smallest of offences, often decided solely by the abbot. So obviously culture has a large role to play in all this.
A strict reading of the Pāṭimokkha would make cooking an offence worthy of confession. However, monks have to adapt to new cultures and times - for example the monks and nuns of the Plum Village order in France under the tradition of Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh do their own cooking and even cook for lay people  because it is nearly impossible to go on alms rounds in the countryside where they live.
The Buddha was rather pragmatic about the rules it would appear,

AN 3.83: Vajjiputta Sutta — The Vajjian Monk {A i 230; Thai 3.85} [Thanissaro]. A monk who is having difficulty following all the Pāṭimokkha training rules can boil them all down to these three: the training in heightened virtue, the training in heightened mind, the training in heightened discernment.

There are a lot and the topic is very complex:  The Buddhist Monastic Code I The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained
The heavier punishments are found in BMC2 CHAPTER 20: Disciplinary Transactions

"Punishments for breaking vinaya rules"
The Dhamma Shown to the world by Lord Buddha and the Vinaya promulgated by Lord Buddha do not prescribe punishments. The sub-questions related to the question do not arise.
A person becomes a Pabbajita by makes a solemn promise by uttering:Buddham Saranam Gacchami, Dhammam Saranam Gacchami, Sangham Saranam Gacchami,three times after his teacher, according to a formal procedure. The procedure is same for Upasampada also.[See Vinaya Mahavagga]
The responsibility for observing the Patimokkha rules rests with the Bhikkhu. If he breaks any of the rules he must purify himself before attending the next Uposatha.
If a dispute between two bhikkhus arise, then there is a procedure called Adhikarana to settle the matter. [Adhikaranasamathasutta AN].
Sukha Sanghassa Samaggi (Lord Buddha)

What about Tassapāpiyyasikā? Aren't there "punishments" (not physical punshments) including "confession" (even being "expelled" from the Sangha, disrobed)?

Tassapāpiyyasikā is the name of one of the Adhikaranasamathas. There is no "confession" in the Dhamma-vinaya. It is the bhikku's acceptance that he has failed to observe the rules. If he does so only he can progress. 'Being expelled' or disrobed is not correct. If a bhikkhu transgresses one of the Parajikas, then he automatically loses his Bhikkhuship. After the First Schism there are no bhikkhus in the world. The 'bhikkhus' today are 'bhikkhus' of Buddhism.None of them understand a word of the Dhamma of the Lord Buddha--four Ariyasaccas.


text:
What does it mean to "see the Dhamma"
In a number of the books I'm reading on Buddhism, and in a number of talks I've heard on the subject, I repeatedly encounter the idea that the Buddha "saw the Dhamma" or that he "witnessed Dhamma" or the like. Other times, I've heard/read that the Buddha "saw" beings dying and taking rebirth, or that he "saw" the reality of anicca, dukkha, anatta, and the Four Noble Truths, etc.
I'm having difficulty understanding what this all means. Is this metaphorical sight? Is it literal sight, in the sense of a vision or dream?
In terms of our own meditation practices, when we are told that we should "see" certain things, e.g. seeing a nimitta, should we expect something similar? Metaphorical "sight"? Literal sight? Something else entirely?
Thanks!

In "seeing the Dhamma", it's figuratively said, that is he witnessed for him self experientially the nature of reality, as opposed to intellectually understanding it.

"[A] monk who cultivates the Noble Eightfold Path, who assiduously practices the Noble Eightfold Path, comprehends with higher knowledge those states that are to be so comprehended, abandons with higher knowledge those states that are to be so abandoned, comes to experience with higher knowledge those states that are to be so experienced, and cultivates with higher knowledge those states that are to be so cultivated.
What, monks, are the states to be comprehended with higher knowledge?
  They are the five groups of clinging. Which five? The body-group, the feeling-group, the perception-group, the mental-formation group, the consciousness-group...
What, monks, are the states to be abandoned with higher knowledge?
  They are ignorance and the desire for [further] becoming. And what, monks, are the states to be experienced with higher knowledge?
  They are knowledge and liberation. And what, monk, are the states to be cultivated with higher knowledge?
  They are calm and insight."
  SN 45.159

As far as seeing other beings taking birth and dying, I don't have magical powers, but I understand this as being something like the eye of the mind expanding to actually witness this happening. With nimitas, they are lights that appear in the minds eye so are "seen" by the eye within as well.
Ajahn Brahm talks a lot about Nimitas

I waited for someone to answer Canonically, since I am not really a Buddhist. This is a good answer. What is unfortunate is that things like nimitta which would normally be taught about in person by your meditation teacher or Guru are now described in books which are freely available and thus widely misunderstood. Not everything can be self-taught from a book, some things have to be imparted from a person with more experience. People vary, and so students should have someone to go to for answers, not a book. This is when you realize that you need a teacher.