text:
If I start doing Vipassana now, how long will it take me to achieve Nirvana?
Call me an over-enthusiast but presently, the highest priority in my life is to achieve the object of Nirvana or moksha. By performing Vipassana, I want to achieve Nirvana and in this lifetime only. I'm prepared to do anything for it, even leave my current profession and staying as a monk if required.
Trouble is, I just don't understand how exactly to go about meditation. I've read a few suttas but I just don't understand what to do while doing Vipassana meditation. In a 10-day Vipassana course I'd undergone, I'd done Anapana (breathfulness meditation) by keeping my mind on the entry and exit of breath at the nostrils. I've done this for several hours and I still do it sometimes.
I also do mindfulness meditation sittings (by observing my thoughts impartially) for at least an hour in one sitting daily.
Now, all these practices are great and take me into a calm and tranquil state of mind. But I don't seem to be getting anywhere towards my ultimate goal of Nirvana. Is there any way to know how long is it going to take me with this speed, or how do I increase the speed? Most importantly, Is joining the sangha and practicing full-time monkhood the only way to achieve Nirvana?

What kind of Vipassana are you trying to learn? What don't you understand?

@Uilium - I'm performing Vipassana meditation. Presenlty, all I do is breathing meditation ie. keeping mind on the breath entry/exit points.

So what do you do if your attention is on the breath and your mind wanders off of the breath? What if you hear a noise, have an itch or pain? What if you find yourself thinking or planning? How would you normally handle such distractions from the breath?

@Uilium I handle such situations by impartially observing them. Yeah, it happens sometimes I get carried away with those thoughts, even feel depressed if the thoughts are bitter. But each time, whenever I realize that I've lost, I bring myself back to Diagnostics mode and start observing again. Of late, I've felt that such incidents of mind getting carried away are becoming less and less and I'm now having a continuum of emptiness (for lack of a precise word).

@Uilium I treat the pains, itches and noises too in a similar manner - impartially observing without any craving/aversion.

That sounds like Vipassana. Often we don't even realize we are doing things correctly. How in any way might you be  experiencing impermanence, Dukkha and not-self? Does the Vipassana cause you suffering? Does the breath flow naturally or do you find yourself trying to control the breath? Can

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Shinu, have you read "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha" by Daniel Ingram? It provides very pragmatic instructions on this whole area, and while it may not give you a precise answer concerning timescales, it is very useful and realistic about attainments in general.

@tkp - I've just started reading it. I was confused between Ingram and the Visuddhimagga regarding what to read first. But Ingram seems concise and to the point, whereas Visuddhimagga is much advanced and needs a lot of theory understanding before I can practice any sitting.

It will take as long as needed for you to achieve Nirvana, but not any longer.

I am suspicious of Vipassana and feel it teaches mindfulness without wisdom, thus that is not sufficient for full realisation. The comment I heard from a retreat participant is that it is a technique for learning what we are not but not what we are, or as someone here puts it, mindfulness without wisdom. This may not be a correct impression, but be wary.  .

There is a lovely zen saying, a dialogue between new student and master:
"Master, if I put in great effort every day to attain awakening, how long will it take?"
The master replies, "20 years."
"What if I work really really hard?"
The master replies, "40 years."
Wanting enlightenment is paradoxical, because enlightenment is the absence of defilement, not the presence of need.
It would be of great benefit to study the six perfections.  You may find this reference useful: http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Six_paramitas
Often people assume enlightenment to be the result of something. If you are happy following causes and their results, then practice the six perfections as much as possible.  You must ultimately pair them with wisdom which transcends conceptuality in order to arrive into a state which is beyond.
It will greatly depend on your attitude and your motivation.  Thus, I encourage you to study the Buddha's words and keep a superior motivation.
No one can guarantee for you how long it will take, and when you "get there" so-to-speak, there will not be any conventional sense of time to speak of, so instead of asking "how long will it take" we should all ask "what can we do to accelerate the process?"
A skillful question is one which illuminates the how.
If you come with great faith in the teachings and practice with a single-pointed mind, freedom shall dawn.  Until the gravity of our imperiled situation in samsara is seen for what it is, benefit yourself and others with study and reflection.
One aspect of enlightenment is freedom from doubt.  Clear away all your doubts with the stainfree mirror of the teachings.  The Buddha proclaimed that "in the future" [in this era] to come face-to-face with the teachings is the same as coming face-to-face with the Buddha.
At any rate, even if someone told you that it will take 3 long aeons to come to awakening practicing diligently every day all day, what is that in comparison to an unending cycle of dying and being born?  What is 3 long aeons in comparison to the nonceasing spin of the wheel of life?

The Buddha himself gave the answer in the Maha Satipatthana Sutta—The Greater Discourse on Steadfast Mindfulness or the Great Discourse on the Establishing Awareness (DN22):

"Indeed, bhikkhus, whosoever practises these four satipatthanas in this manner for seven years, one of two results is to be expected in
    him: Arahatship in this very existence, or if there yet be any trace
    of clinging, the state of an Anagami.

Let alone seven years, bhikkhus, whosoever practises these four
  satipatthanas in this manner for six years, five years, four years,
  three years, two years, or one year.
Let alone one year, bhikkhus, whosoever practises these four
  satipatthanas in this manner for seven months, one of two results is
  to be expected in him: Arahatship in this very existence, or if there
  yet be any trace of clinging, the state of an Anagami.
Let alone seven months, bhikkhus, whosoever practises these four
  satipatthanas in this manner for six months, five months, four months,
  three months, two months, one month, or half a month.
Let alone half a month, bhikkhus, whosoever practises these four
  satipatthanas in this manner for seven days, one of two results is to
  be expected in him: Arahatship in this very existence or if there yet
  be any trace of clinging, the state of an Anagami.
This is what I meant when I said: "Bhikkhus, this is the one and the
  only way for the purification (of the minds) of beings, for overcoming
  sorrow and lamentation, for the cessation of physical and mental pain,
  for attainment of the Noble Paths, and for the realization of Nibbana.
  That only way is the four satipatthanas".

What does it mean when at one place, he says 5 years, 4 years, etc.. and at other, 3 months, 2 months, etc. Is the period different according to the existing mental progress?

@ShinuJacob I take this to mean that the length of time outlined is indeterminate.  It's not like levelling up where you just have to do X to get the level Y.  It will happen when you have no "trace of clinging" or it will not.

@ShinuJacob - proceed mindfully, breath by breath...

Paramahansa Yogananda said that if one could sit in unbroken meditation for 24 hours, that would be sufficient. Climb the Glass Mountain.

Call me an over-enthusiast but presently, the highest priority in my life is to achieve the object of Nirvana or moksha.
This is good! You need enthusiasm to stay motivated in your practice.You also have a sense of urgency which will help you progress.
By performing Vipassana, I want to achieve Nirvana and in this lifetime only. I'm prepared to do anything for it, even leave my current profession and staying as a monk if required.
You can not realise Nibbanna by willing it to happen,you have to create the necessary conditions.Take all the willing( will power,effort,urgency and determination) and apply it to the right spot which is creating the conditions.For example instead of exhausting all your energy on "I have to attain Nirvana in this lifetime",you can say "I have to sit and meditate for 10 minutes today".Because without the journey there is no goal.So make the journey your goal.
Also don't stop thinking/wishing/contemplating Nibbanna.Practicing the Dharma isn't like wandering aimlessly without a goal.Thinking everything is empty so there's no use doing anything.Or not having a goal.This is something you do after you've realised nibbanna not before.You might not know what Nibbanna is but you know it's not suffering like your experiencing now.So thats a good way to motivate yourself.It's also a good way to keep your mind fixed on the other shore Nibbanna.
Let the results arise on it's own.Don't place your effort on the result.Just like when you plant something.You put your effort on watering the plant.Not making it grow.It will grow on it's own.
Trouble is, I just don't understand how exactly to go about meditation. I've read a few suttas but I just don't understand what to do while doing Vipassana meditation. In a 10-day Vipassana course I'd undergone, I'd done Anapana (breathfulness meditation) by keeping my mind on the entry and exit of breath at the nostrils. I've done this for several hours and I still do it sometimes.
Keeping the mind on the entry and exit of breath at the nostril is Samatha Meditation.You do this to calm the mind.Achieve samadhi. It's a tranquility meditation.This should be done before practicing vipassanna.Your not observing anything.Your just staying with the breath.Anything that arises you ignore and return to the breath.Try doing this for a few years first.Whatever suits you.Samadhi is like a steady hand.It's aim is to develop concentration so that you can hold your mind steady on something as slippery,rapid and subtle as thoughts,intentions,feelings,etc(Vippassanna Practice).Samatha can also give the mind a good home or resting place.So something you should be practicing for the rest of your life.
I also do mindfulness meditation sittings (by observing my thoughts impartially) for at least an hour in one sitting daily.
Mindfulness Meditation is like when you sit and do Samatha Meditation.Except this time you don't ignore your thoughts,feelings,intention,sensation etc and return to the breath.You stay with it.Observing it.But when you feel like it's slipping or too painful,powerful, go back to the breath.The breath is your anchor.
Now, all these practices are great and take me into a calm and tranquil state of mind. But I don't seem to be getting anywhere towards my ultimate goal of Nirvana.
Realising Nibbanna is not all about meditation.That's why it's not called The One Noble Path.But the Eight Noble Path.It is holistic.It requires every aspect of your life.The Eight Noble Path.You must put the same amount of effort you put on your meditation on your sila.
Is there any way to know how long is it going to take me with this speed, or how do I increase the speed?
No.There's no sure way of knowing.It would depend on one's karma and paramis.But no effort you put in is wasted.
Most importantly, Is joining the sangha and practicing full-time monkhood the only way to achieve Nirvana?
No it's not the Only way. You can realise Nibbanna as a lay person.But monastics have a the advantage of living in an environment that's conducive to their practice.

A comprehensive, well-thought out and beautiful answer.

Becoming a monk is not necessary to attain Nirvana. In the time of the Buddha there were great numbers of laypeople who attained stream entry, a fair number of laypeople who became non-returners, and even a few laypeople who managed to be able to make it all the way to Arahatship, so you can see that monasticism isn't a prerequisite for enlightenment. Becoming a monk is a very helpful tool along the way however, as a Monk has much more time for meditation practice and lives a life that is free from a lot of the distractions that laypeople have.
I think a bigger issue at the moment is to look at your meditation practice. You said you attended a 10 day course on meditation. Was this a course at a Goenka center? Did they teach you how to do Vipassana meditation? If so, just practice that. If not, I think your main priority would be to find a meditation teacher who can help you.
I wouldn't worry about how long it will take. That's impossible to tell. If you start worrying about it, that itself will become a hindrance because it creates expectation. It is better to instead focus on what you are doing in the present.

Thanks. I attended it at Goenka center at Igatpuri, India. It was a good experience. The only reason I'm worried is because I'm not feeling any progress. Despite going through hours of meditation, I don't feel anything different or improvising - each session is similar to previous as far as mental state is concerned. Is that considered normal?

Progress in Vipassana meditation is very counterintuitive. Progressing from one stage of practice to the next doesn't necessarily mean that you are going to feel different, it means that you will begin to understand something more clearly, so you can't judge progress by what your meditation feels like.

I was told by my meditation teacher that it is how you are in life rather than what you feel that shows progress. Also, others around you will see the changes that you cannot. Take Heart.

@ShinuJacob why don't you proceed to watch sensations all over the body, subtle or gross, remain equaniomous

@TheDarkKnightRules I do that religiously friend, each and every day. But I don't seem to be progressing anywhere. My mind seems to have become more peaceful, but nothing extra-ordinary has happened yet that can suggest that I'm progressing towards Nirvana.

@ShinuJacob this is a late comment. It may be that you're looking, but not observing. The ordinary and mundane are extraordinary in themselves. You just need to observe calmly. It may do good to question your thought process a little more. What extraordinary thing are you looking for?

To achieve Nirvana you have to follow he 3 fold practice:

Morality
Control over the mind so you can bee focused on a chosen object to see its true nature
Wisdom through the understanding of reality and universal nature of suffering and the way out off the than looking at the world through your perceptions

Morality will calm your mental wondering and also bodily fabrications mildly so you can develop better concentration. Through concentration and calming your metal fabrication you can develop wisdom. Through calming all fabrications you can come out of misery.
Your practice should evolve around calming fabrication through the 3 fold practice. Also over coming the 5 hindrances when they arise.
Morality
When practising morality you can start this as a rite or ritual by observing the precepts. As you go on you can do it at an intellectual level by rationalising if any action is to your benefit or the benefit of others. Later you can start looking at the formations your volition bring through the sensations it creates and them identify what is conducive and not through wisdom. Moral base is needed to keep you mind at ease without agitation and thought proliferation.
Concentration
You should develop concentration to the extend you mind can stay on the chosen object. You study your mind in the process. This way you can reduce verbal fabrications. Then dominantly sensations and perceptions remain. As concentration goes up perceptions decrease.
Wisdom
By developing wisdom you see things as they really are without being clouded with perception. You should calm your metal fabrications. Once this is done you you will experience some thing beyond sensations and perception. This is your 1st glimpse of Nirvana.

Aren't these three ways called sila, samadhi & pradnya respectively, and for development of last two, samatha and vipassana meditations needed? Can you recommend me some good text for learning vipassana meditation?

Yes. But using English wordings.

Nirvana is not another project, don't manage it. One has several awakening experiences that are popularly known as stream entry etc, but enlightenment is a journey in which one never arrives.
One must lose all ideas of gaining something.
Embody compassion, virtue, kindness, loving sympathetic joy, don't think for a moment about nirvana. It'll happen on its own when you're ready for it.
If you have a desire to be a monk, go ahead and do that. It's no guarantee of anything, but at least you'll have time to think about the idea, and a sense of satisfaction of having tried.
Truth is a pathless land, no guru or teaching can guarantee enlightenment. Even the Buddha only converted a handful of his disciples into Arahats.
Your discovery may take days, months, years or life times. Who knows... Relax, live in this moment, do good, be good.

I like that quote: "Do Good. Be Good." Swami Sivananda? Pathless - but you are already on your path, you cannot get off of it.

Nobody, just something I wrote.

@nocomprende The expression reminds me of "Ceasing to do evil, Cultivating the good, Purifying the heart: This is the teaching of the Buddhas".

It's like asking when one will become a master of martial arts or a master pianist if one starts training now. There're lots of different factors involved: the conditions of equipments, training facilities, quality of the teacher, one's own effort and time, one's own innate potential, etc. That's why the length of time will vary greatly from person to person. Just notice that while becoming a fulltime monk might gives some advantage in terms of equipment and "training facility", a person is still on his own regarding effort, time, and innate potential..

A householder or householder's son, hearing the Dhamma, gains conviction in the Tathagata and reflects: 'Household life is confining, a dusty path. The life gone forth is like the open air. It is not easy living at home to practice the holy life totally perfect, totally pure, like a polished shell. What if I were to shave off my hair and beard, put on the ochre robes, and go forth from the household life into homelessness? ~~ DN 02 ~~

"How old will I be by the time I learn to play piano?" "The same age as if you don't"! ha ha!

Liberation is not to be gained in the future. It exists forever, here and now. To seek and grasp implies a projected concept of separation which is opposite from Truth.

Before you can even practice vipassana--which is just present-minded awareness--one must have strong mastery of the jhanas, at least the 1st jhana.
Only then will you automatically go through the 10 Stages of Insight, especially by doing a retreat! Thus in answer to your question, the most methodical sure way is to take yourself to a powerful concentration state and then just be aware of the present moment especially as the Maha Satipatthana Sutta instructs. Then, one will automatically go through the 10 Stages of Insight (so long asone doesn't cling to any of them) and attain Fruition/Emptiness for the first time.
Thus, the question becomes... how to attain jhana methodically as possible?
And how does anapanasati relate to samatha and vipassana?
The answer to the last question is that anapanasatti integrates both practices exactly in the samatha->vipassana sequence mentioned!
Also, in answer to your question if joining a Sangha is necessary, no it is not,  although it is certainly conducive to it.
The most important is your own jhana power prior to retreat. If you do a retreat without jhana (basically the ability to concentrate with ease and happiness) then you'll get nowhere.
So practice 2 hours each day and night until you can do that much at least before doing an all-day retreat!

I've done 2-weeks Mahasi-style vipassana without prior practice of jhanas. With that kind of dry vipassana, one builds concentration and mindfulness skills simultaneously.

I would be interested to know which schools endorse the idea that jhana is required for Vipassana practice.

All schools do! The Buddha had mastered all the dhyanas before he was able to properly break through!
I'd like to go into a long discussion as to why having good concentration is important to cultivating insight but I would rather let the book "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha" explain.
Also remember that the 1st training is morality, the 2nd training is concentration, and THEN the 3rd training is wisdom (vipassana training).

Downvoted because the practice of jhana is  not required for the practice of vipassana at all. Also it's untrue that all schools say it is necessary.

@Medhiṇī Theravada certainly did which is the foundation of Buddhism. Anyway, it is not a bad idea to learn to be calm (jhana) before you learn to be aware (vipassana).

As someone pointed out, "if I try harder" -> "it takes more time".
What you need to keep in mind is that we're all here to fulfill our purpose. The important part is to do that every day with absolute equanimity, yet best effort. Once you go through that path, you will reach Nirvana.
Vipassana is not a technique for Nirvana, its a technique for equanimity. And equanimity is a way to Nirvana. Becoming a monk is sometimes easy because it protects you from the outside world and hence its harder for some of your samskaras to come to the fore, and hence you never face them with equanimity. Its like playing a game against a weaker opponent vs. playing against a more challenging opponent - the latter scenario will develop you more.
To sum up, your goal should be to live your life with equanimity in any situation, Nirvana or no Nirvana. This also applies on a meta level, try to be equanimous towards your attachment/aversion- by that I mean avoid aversion against attachments and aversions. Only then will you be able to get over them. Having said that, if your job requires you to do things that are not ethical, then by all means quit your job. Basically do something that's meaningful.
I should add that if you do feel like becoming a monk and think that you're equanimous in general, or are not but have no attachment to anything, then by all means, feel free to become a monk. On the other hand, if you do feel like you are still attached, but would like to ease up things, then try to go for a longer meditation retreat.
As I said staying away does make things easy, so maybe start with easy first and do the difficult later.

If you are CRAVING nibbana, Goenkaji says you are working contrary to Vipassana. Therefore, your craving causes new sankharas and you are pushing yourself that much farther away from nibbana.

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

You're already doing great. Instead of focusing on achieving Nirvana, focus on smaller steps and forget about Nirvana completely.
Meditate upon these questions:
How does everything arises and ceases in myself?
When you find the answer, progress to the next question:
Who am I?
And so on...:
How everything arises and ceases outside myself?
Why does everything arises and ceases?
Questions will come and answers will come. Just don't force it. Let go and just let it happen. If you let it happen and it happens, Nirvana will come when you answer all your questions.

The book"art of living" by william harts gives a little brief outline of the sankharas,process of becoming and eradication . it is very helpful book for at least beginners who do not know any thing of sankharas,becoming etc. Dont concentrate on big/huge word like nirvana. concentrate on liberation from the age old habit of mind of reacting with aversion or craving to the asised sensations. REFER DEPENDENT ORIGINATION. Now it is very very true that we are ignorant , that is why we are in this birth. We are equipped with five sensory bases and the mind with its four faculties as soon as birth is taken in human form. The contact with external world and encountering of mental thoughts/emotions/feeling is bound to happen through this six sensory bases. sensation thus arised is reacted by mind "s reacting faculty only to strengthen further its habit/conditioning of doing same. If care is taken to abide from five sensory bases to receive inputs. Then the stored sankharas ,since many lives cropps up . If that arising is not reacted upon with craving/aversion it passes away . Till the mind"s habit/conditioning of reacting is slowly slowly weakened and finally eradicated and understanding permanently at experiential level the anicca,i.e impermanence of whatever is arising (with preceding some condition) ,liberation is not possible. If we are to eradicate each sankhara (kamma vipakas) then you can imagine how many are stored sankharas since numerous lives ,which we will have to eradicate. The liberation seem almost impossible.  But the experience of anicca ,one cannot say when it will come. A student in school learns something with receiving one cane on hand by the teacher or learns after 10 canes. It cannot be concretely said as to when . A person"s wife dies, at least for a year  or so  he loses all his craving in material world. The habit of reacting with craving is retarded a bit ,but only at conscious level. The subconscious is busy 24/7 reacting to the sensations arise abiding to its age old habit. So concludingly there are two factors how many kamm vipakas are there stored in you and how much strengthened/tough your habit /conditioning of mind to react is. the development of internal wisdom/pradnya cannot be said exactly when it will occur. Even Buddha also has 11 kamm vipakas left to be eradicated on achieving enlightenment. You mar refere the site "pure dhamma" in which the kilesas,cetasikas,kamma vipaka  are all elaborated ,very helpful. Forget enlightenment first cleanup yourselves with the stored sankharas .When there are only good sankharas are dominant at death , you will again be having birth ,a chance to continue your process.

This answer is so late in the thread that it probably will never be read, but...
You remind me of the old joke about the person who, after a lifetime of waiting to see the Louvre, dashes in and shouts: "Quick, where is the Mona Lisa? I'm double parked."
While Sova gave a pretty good answer, I believe that the Buddha, with his answer, was making this the "Fifteenth Unanswerable Question".
No one can know how long, or, better, "as long as it takes".
Best of success on your Journey!

depends upon how much sankaras(defilement), you have accumulated in past

You have planted your mango tree, and you keep it well nourished and watered, protect it from harm and from parasites. That's excellent, but you cannot wish it for it to grow in one day, no matter the amount of effort.
For the mango tree to produce its sweet juicy fruit, it takes both time and effort.

"Nine women cannot make a baby in one month."-!


text:
Life testament, illness and Buddhism
I would like to ask a question about ones last will and how buddhism views that.
In Denmark where i live we have an option called a "life testament". In here there are 2 options that will be taken into account if one becomes severely ill or are about to die.

Does one want life-prolonging treatment if one is about to die?
Does one want life-prolonging treatment if illness or injury is leaving one behind without the possibility to take care of oneself either physically or mentally?

I was wondering if im breaking any buddhist rules if i answer no to any of those?
I have tried thinking about it but i cannot fully grasp it at the moment.
Lets say i was in a traffic accident and was left as a vegetable. By writing the life testament and answering no to life-prolonging treatment because it would only op hold the life of a vegetable am i then breaking anything?
Is this the desire/craving for non-existence im wandering into here?
Should i just let things be and play out according to my kamma. Im a bit confused.
Help would be much appreciated. Thank you.
May you be happy, peaceful and free from physical and mental suffering.
Harshani

No, you are not breaking any rules(precepts) by saying 'no' to either of them. You are simply saying "I don't want your help". That doesn't break the 1st precept. Whether it is Vibhava tanha or not depends on the mind state at the time. If the intention is not to be a burden to the society or to your loved ones, it is not Tanha. Even monks are allowed to reject medicine in that case.

Thank you for the answer Sankha. Im a bit worried about this still. So i will not fill out that Life testament at all. I will just let life take its course and let my kamma play out. What happens, happens.

Meditate on the worrying :)

There are many views among Buddhists on the issue of euthanasia, but many are critical of the procedure.
An important value of Buddhism teaching is compassion. Compassion is used by some Buddhists as a justification for euthanasia because the person suffering is relieved of pain. Keyword is intention (cetana). However, it is still immoral "to embark on any course of action whose aim is to destroy human life, irrespective of the quality of the individual's motive."
For bhikkhus the rules are explicitly spelled out.
The monastic code (Patimokkha) states:

"Should any bhikkhu intentionally deprive a human being of life,
  or search for an assassin for him, or praise the advantages of death,
  or incite him to die (thus): 'My good man, what use is this wretched,
  miserable life to you? Death would be better for you than life,' or
  with such an idea in mind, such a purpose in mind, should in various
  ways praise the advantages of death or incite him to die, he also is
  defeated and no longer in communion."

On the other side, there are the Vakkali Sutta and the Channa Sutta.
a) In the Vakkali Sutta (SN 22.87), the monk Vakkali, who is "sick, afflicted, gravely ill," tells other monks of his intention to use a knife to commit suicide. Upon learning of Vakkali's intention, the Buddha personally visits Vakkali to speak with him. In the course of their discussion, it becomes apparent that Vakkali is well progressed on the path to enlightenment—having already gained direct and genuine insight into the impermanent, self-less, and ultimately unsatisfactory nature of existence. After the Buddha parts company with Vakkali, he goes to the nearby Mount Vulture Peak to dwell for the rest of the day and night, and that night he is visited by "two devatas of stunning beauty" who remark to him that Vakkali is "intent on deliverance" and that "he will be liberated as one well liberated." The next day the Buddha has monks deliver a message to Vakkali recounting the devatas' auspicious visit and assuring Vakkali that his death will be a good one: "Do not be afraid, Vakkali, do not be afraid! Your death will not be a bad one. Your demise will not be a bad one." After Vakkali receives this message from the Buddha, he "uses the knife," as planned, and kills himself.
Upon receiving word of Vakkali's suicide, the Buddha leads a group of monks to the Black Rock on the Isigili Slope, where Vakkali's corpse can be seen:
"Then the Blessed One, together with a number of bhikkhus, went to the Black Rock on the Isigili Slope. The Blessed One saw in the distance the Venerable Vakkali lying on the bed with his shoulder turned. Now on that occasion a cloud of smoke, a swirl of darkness, was moving to the east, then to the west, to the north, to the south, upwards, downwards, and to the intermediate quarters. The Blessed One then addressed the bhikkhus thus: 'Do you see, bhikkhus, that cloud of smoke, that swirl of darkness, moving to the east, then to the west, to the north, to the south, upwards, downwards, and to the intermediate quarters?' 'Yes, venerable sir.' 'That, bhikkhus, is Mara the Evil One searching for the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali, wondering: 'Where now has the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali been established?' However, bhikkhus, with consciousness unestablished, the clansman Vakkali has attained final Nibbāna.'"
b) In the Channa Sutta (SN 35.87) the monk Channa, who is suffering intensely due to sickness, tells the monks Sariputta and Mahacunda that his condition is worsening and that he intends to kill himself using a knife:
"Friend Sariputta, I am not bearing up, I am not getting better. Strong painful feelings are increasing in me, not subsiding, and their increase, not their subsiding, is to be discerned. Just as if a strong man were to split my head open with a sharp sword, so too violent winds cut through my head. I am not bearing up… Just as if a strong man were to tighten a tough leather strap around my head as a headband, so too there are violent pains in my head. I am not bearing up....Just as if a skilled butcher or his apprentice were to carve up an ox's belly with a sharp butcher's knife, so too violent winds are carving up my belly. I am not bearing up....Just as if two strong men were to seize a weaker man by both arms and roast him over a pit of hot coals, so too there is a violent burning in my body. I am not bearing up, I am not getting better. Strong painful feelings are increasing in me, not subsiding, and their increase, not their subsiding, is to be discerned."
Sariputta and Mahacunda exhort Channa not to kill himself but he decides to do so anyway, asserting that he has led a “blameless” life. Sariputta, believing that Channa may have broken precepts of the Patimokkha by having inappropriately close relationships with laity—and assuming that Channa would not attain Nibbana upon death as a result—approaches the Buddha to inquire about the nature of Channa's rebirth. The Buddha replies that Channa has done nothing wrong and that he has, in fact, attained freedom from the round of birth and death:
"The Venerable Channa did indeed have these friendly families, Sariputta, intimate families, hospitable families; but I do not say that to this extent one is blameworthy. Sariputta, when one lays down this body and takes up another body, then I say one is blameworthy. This did not happen in the case of the bhikkhu Channa. The bhikkhu Channa used the knife blamelessly. Thus, Sariputta, should you remember it."
It is noteworthy that Channa’s suicide appears to be something of a non-issue in his case, and we may reasonably conclude from this sutta that suicide—when carried out to avoid unbearable physical pain associated with terminal illness—was considered, by the Buddha himself, to be an acceptable course of action."

Thank you Utamwara. Does the Pitaka say anything about euthanasia, suicide and that matters for laypeople?

@Harshani - AFAIK are these the only references in the Pitaka.

Human life is are and if you have not got to any stage of sainthood then the best option is to prolong your life. Perhaps this will give you an option to practice more targeted at liberation if things turn out for the better.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Noumenon and "mind only"
according to wikipedia anyway:

The noumenon (/ˈnɒuːmɨnɒn/) is a posited object or event that is known
  (if at all) without the use of the senses.

I know that the term is used in Buddhism, at least after its sinification. Often noumenon seems to mean reality itself, the buddha nature.
Avoiding that last gloss, may I ask if the "noumenon" is "mind"?
And whether extinction, be that impermanence, nirvana or final nirvana, is noumenally real?

I think that this might be the result of a translation problem. The concept of a noumenon in western philosophy is very foreign to Buddhism I think. In western philosophy a noumenon is the opposite of a phenomenon. A phenomenon is something that is experienced, whereas a noumenon is something that is somehow outside of experience all together but somehow exists anyways.
Most forms of Buddhism don't settle well with the idea of any kind of reality having some sort of existence that is independent like that because it falls into the error of essentialism, or at least it appears to.
I think you may be coming across this word in an off translation or something relying on such a translation, because I suspect a translator may be trying to translate the concept of 體用 (tǐ yòng, usually now translated as essence and function) as noumena-phenomena, but I don't think this is a very good comparison at all. Definately the term 體 does not mean noumena, but something more like the nature of something.

Well actually in the teachings with regard to the sense-consciousnesses, six are enumerated:

Auditory consciousness (sense of hearing, the ear, its "objects" like sounds)
Visual consciousness (sense of seeing, the eye, its "objects" like sights)
Scent consciousness (sense of smelling, the nose, " " smells/scents/odors/aromas)
Taste consciousness (sense of tasting, the tongue, " " tastes)
Tactile consciousness (sense of touching, the body/skin, " " textures, etc.)
Mind consciousness, or mental consciousness

The raw perceptions of the first 5 themselves have no dialogue, no commentary, no "story" ... the sixth one can meld and blend the first 5
So in Buddha's teachings, there is nothing outside the Six sense-consciousnesses, and therefore it seems untenable that one could argue that mind is "knowable but beyond the senses" unless one is referring to a different breakdown of the sense faculties, their focal points/objects, and the combined consciousness.
You should know that it is possible for a yogin to "withdraw" from the five coarse sense perceptions and experience the luminosity and delight of the sixth sense-consciousness.  There are instructions in the suttas/sutras, most notable is perhaps the Buddha's discourse on breathing meditation, which is in most traditions the foundation to introspection, insight, attainment, and liberation.

Yes, Noumenon is our Tathagata nature, our Buddha Nature, Tao, God, Allah, Brahmin... whatever that thing is that is beyond the dualism of existence and non-existence: the Mind.
Noumenon is the opposite of phenomena, things that are perceivable through the senses or in Buddhist terms are a part of the five skandhas (see Surangama Sutra).
This is why it is so important to become more detached from phenomena because they detract the Buddhist from realizing the only worthy goal of the Noumenon, the Source of all things, the Us that is beyond time and space.
The more one develops a worldly way, the more one is attached to meaning-ful phenomena be it money, sensual pleasure, relationships, and the infinite dualities that trap us to the wheel.
The more one grows in the spiritual path, the more one is able to perceive the foundational unity of all things. The profound truth in Emptiness.
One is unable to be so attached to any particular thing--not with a numbness, but with a crystal clear clarity developed through the understanding of Dharma and most importantly through the transformation of consciousness itself that takes place by success in meditation/awareness/vipassana.
This is the Right Path as espoused by the Eightfold Path and the last question you asked is different question, that would take an entire paper to discuss, but basically yes.

This is really a misleading new-age'ish answer, concepts don't cross cultures and noumenon (in Kantian sense) has definitely nothing to do with God, Allah or whatever else you mention.

"concepts don't cross cultures"
this is incorrect. concepts do not become owned by a culture. information is freely shared and the spiritual path, all spiritual paths, however tangential they may become, are connected to this path of acheiving "whatever that thing is that is beyond the dualism" of the senses (your "Kantian" definition)

If you read Kant, you will see that he defined noumenon very technically, and that it does not overlap with "God" (he was Christian). You can use concepts in vague ways, but it is just not helpful. Equating Tao, Mind, "whatever is beyond the dualism of existence and nonexistence" etc is just a pseudo-intellectual reverie.

No it isn't. Nondualistic attainment is the aim of Buddhism.

Noumenon is definitely not nondualistic attainment, but a theoretical concept, part of Western philosophy tradition, having its background, reasons (highly technical) it was being created etc, and as such not even remotely equivalent to those other ones. You can't mix everything together.

Ohh OK. I'm not talking about that technical stuff. Just "whatever that thing is that is beyond the dualism of existence and non-existence: the Mind."
I'm pretty sure a lot of other religions would get mad at my usage of their God-terms as well to reference to this All Important Concept.

Nonetheless however New Agey it may feel, I think it is valuable to make these kind of references to the common student who dislikes philosophy because I've seen plenty of philosophy students light up when they see how what they were actually looking for was Buddhadharma all along. I think Buddha left the most important concepts behind to support our practice and oftentimes a lot of complex ideas are easily expressed with Buddhadharma..

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


text:
Does hand gesture have an impact on meditation or attainment of Nirvana?
The question regarding the gesture while sitting for meditation has always intrigued me. When I tried to ask this to a Vipassana teacher in my 10-day course, he put it off saying I should concentrate on meditation first without worrying about these matters. Does it mean that it doesn't make any difference?
I personally use the dhyana mudra (fore-finger touching the thumb in a circle, and other three fingers straight out) while sitting cross-legged. But in many of Buddha's statues, I've seen him keep the left hand over right, and in some others, thumb touching forefinger and hand kept straight across the chest gestures.
Want to know from advanced practitioners, what do the Buddha's postures indicate? More importantly, does having a certain gestures have any good or bad effect on our vipassana practice?

Yes and no.
Certain hand gestures cause better energy flow through your body and vibrations. These vibration can be some times an aid in dissolving pain and also fabrication.
If you get attached to the vibrations and gestures this will do more harm than good in your progress.
So my advice is do not bother too much about these as their contribution to your final goal is marginal or non existent through it might give a mild boost to better practice in certain situation is making you conferable to be seated for a long time by creating Piti which is one of the enlightenment factors but keeping in mind you cannot bake a cake with one ingredient and attachment to the feeling or creating view and perception around the gestures will hold you back

From my reading of around 40 suttas that mentioned Anapanasati, Buddha never mentioned about where to place your hands or arms. However, in those suttas, he mentioned sitting down crossed legs in quiet place (forest, under a tree, empty house (room) etc.  he didnt even mention that you have to close your eyes. then place your attention to the present and your breathing.  knowing clearly if breathing is short or shallow etc.
Here we go  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html

True, those statues of Buddha sitting in dhyana mudra must by only artistically inspired then.

As regards closing the eyes, it certainly aids insight meditation. Considering the Buddha didn't have an opinion in this regard, we can certainly use it to aid our meditation.

In traditions such as Zen, holding the hands in a mudra position is another way of directing mindfulness to the body, just as is having the legs, arms, torso, etc in proper alignment. Other traditions emphasize complete relaxation of the body, and the hands are just kept resting loosely. It is true that meditation is about what goes on between your ears, not your fingers -- see what works for you but don't let it become a source of distraction or frustration.

No one seems to have answered this from the obvious point of view: tantra. According to the 9th century Japanese Tantric Buddhist practitioner, Kūkai, the abhiṣekha, or initiation, is a communication aimed at the body, speech and mind of the practitioner. As such it consists of gestures, words, and images (mudra, mantra, and maṇḍala). The communication of the abhiṣekha recapitulates the first communication of the Dharma from Mahāvairocana to Vajrasatva. The primordial Buddha, Mahāvairocana had been sitting in the perfect equanimity of full and perfect awakening, but realised that until he communicated his experience. So he manifested a being called Vajrasatva and through mudra, mantra and maṇḍala directly communicated his experience to Vajrasatva who was immediately fully and perfectly awakened. Mahāvairocana then asked Vajrasatva to pass on the abhiṣekha to other beings (who are also manifestations of Mahāvairocana).
This all takes place in a world conceived of as the body, speech and mind of Mahāvairocana. All phenomena are the body of Mahāvairocana; all sounds are the speech of Mahāvairocana. All mental acticity is the mind of Mahāvairocana.
So in terms of Tantric Buddhist practice, yes, the mudras are a vital part of the process. In doing a Tantric visualisation one is attempting to repeat that first ever conversation in mudra, mantra, and maṇḍala.


text:
What happens to the five aggregates after death?
What happens to the five skandhas of a particular person after death?

Do they stay together, and cause birth of a one specific person (which can be called rebirth), or do they separate?
If they separate, do they separate just into 5, or does each aggregate split into smaller parts?
If they separate, do they cause births of many different persons?

I'm interested in answers from many traditions, with references to relevant sources (scriptures, books, articles).
EDIT: I didn't get unambiguous answers to my questions, but what Suminda and Prahlad write seems to suggest that all the aggregates arise and pass all the time, but when we look at them at a higher level, we can conclude that four of the aggregates (sensation, perception, mental formations and consciousness) stay together and cause a new birth of one specific person, while the remaining aggregate (rūpa, matter) separates and splits into parts. Can anyone confirm/disconfirm this?
EDIT 2: I was asked to specify what is exactly meant by "overall structure of the aggregates remain intact", when we know that the aggregates arise and pass all the time. What I mean is the continuity of the illusion called "self". I have the illusion that I'm the same person as a moment ago, even though my body, my feelings, etc. have changed. Does this illusion continue after death? According to Buddhist doctrines, is there an illusion of the continuity of consciousness? Of the continuity of feelings? Of the continuity of the body?
I watched Yuttadhammo's video about rebirth and understood that Buddhists believe in perceived continuity of the consciousness after death. Is this a canonical opinion that can be concluded from Buddhist scriptures? How about the continuity of other aggregates?

1. Do they stay together, and cause birth of a one specific person (which can be called rebirth), or do they separate?
Even when you are alive, the 5 skandhas arise together in every experience. So when you ask "do they stay together", you are asking if the experience stays. No! The experience disappears immediately. There's no staying. The skandhas in this experience are not the same as the skandhas in the next.
2. If they separate, do they separate just into 5, or does each aggregate split into smaller parts?
The 5 skandhas are grouped into 2 categories. Nāma (mental) and Rūpa (physical). Rūpa contains only the 1st skanda and the Nāma contains the remaining 4.
Usually only Rūpa can arise independently, e.g.: a log, stone, corpse etc.
Nāma always needs to arise in association with Rūpa except in Arupa Brahma Realms. But again, when you ask "if they separate", you are making the assumption that there's something fixed lasting for a certain time period. It doesn't work that way. A single experience can contain a maximum of 17 thought moments. 1 Rūpa unit lasts only for 17 thought moments and there's no example in nature to compare to the time 1 thought moment lasts but to the lifespan of another thought moment.
The mind at the time of death

When a person is about to die the bhavanga is interrupted, vibrates for one moment and passes away. The interruption is caused by an object which presents itself to the mind-door. As a result of this a mind-door-adverting citta arises. This is followed by five javana thought moments which are weak, lack reproductive power, and serve only to determine the nature of rebirth consciousness. The javanas may or may not be followed by two registering thought moments (tadaalambana). After this comes the death consciousness (cuti citta), which is identical in constitution and object to the bhava"nga citta. The cuti citta merely serves the function of signaling the end of life. It is important to appreciate the difference between the cuti citta and the javanas that precede it. The cuti citta is the end of the bhava"nga flow of an existence and does not determine the nature of rebirth. The javanas that occur just before the cuti citta arises form a kammic process and determine the nature of the rebirth consciousness.

3. If they separate, do they cause births of many different persons?
There's no separation. When a person dies, the Nāma doesn't appear in the body anymore. Only Rūpa caused due to reasons other than Nāma continue to appear. There's only one Patisandi citta. So the death of a being does not result in multiple births.

we can conclude that four of the aggregates (sensation, perception,
  mental formations and consciousness) stay together and cause a new
  birth of one specific person, while the remaining aggregate (rūpa,
  matter) separates and splits into parts.

Again, there's no staying. They appear together and disappear instantly. Nāma does not go from this life to the next. The first citta of the next life is a result of the Javana cittas that occur just before the cuti citta.

I have the illusion that I'm the same person as a moment ago, even
  though my body, my feelings, etc. have changed. Does this illusion
  continue after death?

Ignorance or Moha is a cetasika. The cetasikas are the mental factors or concomitants that arise and perish together with consciousness (citta), sharing its object and basis. Cetasikas don't appear independently from the cittas. So there's nothing going from this moment to the next. But that doesn't mean the next citta cannot have an ignorance cetasika.

I watched Yuttadhammo's video about rebirth and understood that
  Buddhists believe in perceived continuity of the consciousness after
  death.

Venerable Yuttadhammo is talking about the continuity of experiencing. He's not implying a panchaskanda going from this life to the next or from this moment to the next.

Wow! I can't believe someone has placed a bounty for a philosophical question. This usually happens only on stackoverflow.com, the computer programming related SE site.
Anyways, since all relevant suttas and Buddhist texts are already quoted and elucidated, I will again try to answer your questions from a more pragmatic view point. From your questions, I gather that you have an intense curiosity to know about the nature and characteristics of your next birth. Instead of asking these questions about aggregates, I suggest you study the life and times of people in known history having had known memories and anecdotes of their past lives. Here are some examples I can offer:

Emperor Ashoka: He was a great ruler in ancient India (~250 B.C.) who adopted Buddhism and the principles of non-violence during his lifetime. Now, it so happens that Gautam Buddha had foretold his rebirth and ascension to Kingship in his past life. This entire incident could be found in Ashokavadana, a Buddhist text recording the history of Emperor Ashoka.
Shanti Devi, a small kid in the 1930s British India who could remember her past life as a house-wife who had a husband and kids.
James Leininger: Another small kid who used to play with nothing but toy airplanes. After James told his father that he had been killed in his plane at Iwo Jima, his father discovered a pilot called James M. Huston Jr. who had died there.

By reading about these accounts what do you feel? The aggregates (perception, consciousness, formations, sensations and forms) are just momentary, their impermanence is what Buddhism teaches us. Whether they separated after your death doesn't matter (they are constantly flickering anyway). What matters is that your conditioned self (the illusion called I created by the aggregates) will maintain its integrity through all your lives, until you achieve Nirvana. It has to do that, otherwise how will it enjoy (or suffer) the fruits of its past Kamma? - The results of its cravings and aversions of the previous lives?

The arise and pass away moment to moment. At death also it is the same but the contentiousness arises in another body. When you die your form is left behind in case you do have a material form. In Deva worlds you disappear. Your mind passes away and arises in another body. The process continues.

Do they stay together, and cause birth of a one specific person (which can be called rebirth), or do they separate?

No. They arises and passes away moment to moment.

If they separate, do they separate just into 5, or does each aggregate split into smaller parts?

No. They arises and passes away moment to moment.

If they separate, do they cause births of many different persons?

No. They arises and passes away moment to moment.
Rupa / form part is left behind at the time of death. But still the process continues. At on instance there is passing away and then arising but the arising happens in a new body than where the passing away happened at the time of death.

Do they stay together, or do they separate? If they split, do they split into 5, or into smaller parts? Do they cause birth of one or several persons?

When the question is "A or B?", answering "no" doesn't make any sense. I understand that they arise and pass away from moment to moment, but still don't know whether they arise and pass away together, arise and pass away with each skandha doing that independenly of others, or arise and pass away with each skandha splitting into smaller parts.

@michau "No. They arises and passes away moment to moment." What is meant here is that the sensations themselves arise and pass away from moment to moment, but the overall structure remain intact at a higher level. Consider the analogy of the human body - the cells always keep dying and regenerating, in fact your entire body has completely new cells after seven years. Yet still at a higher level, the physical You stays integrated. Similarly, the five aggregates don't loose their essence at a higher level (otherwise how would they know where to arise and fall again in the next birth?)

@Prahlad I don't understand - I'm asking about the moment of death. Are you claiming that after death the body stays integrated? Body is, after all, one of the five aggregates.

@michau "Are you claiming that after death the body stays integrated?" Not the physical body of course, but the conditioned self (not to be confused with permanent self which has no existence) consisting of aggregates including consciousness, perception, etc. That`s how you carry on your samskaras (impressions) from this birth to the next.

@michau - Have a look at Dhammapada verses 153-154 to understand this better.

Most of this answer is from the Theravada tradition.
This is a good answer from Milindapanha 3.5.5:

The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, is it so that one does not
  transmigrate and one is reborn?" "Yes, your majesty, one does not
  transmigrate and one is reborn." "How, venerable Nagasena, is it that
  one does not transmigrate and one is reborn? Give me an analogy."
  "Just as, your majesty, if someone kindled one lamp from another, is
  it indeed so, your majesty, that the lamp would transmigrate from the
  other lamp?" "Certainly not, venerable sir." "Indeed just so, your
  majesty, one does not transmigrate and one is reborn." "Give me
  another analogy." "Do you remember, your majesty, when you were a boy
  learning some verse from a teacher?" "Yes, venerable sir." "Your
  majesty, did this verse transmigrate from the teacher?" "Certainly
  not, venerable sir." "Indeed just so, your majesty, one does not
  transmigrate and one is reborn."

And another from Ven. Yuttadhammo's answer:

There isn't in fact any such thing as rebirth, in ultimate reality.
  Nothing is truly reborn, ever. Every experience that is made up of the
  five aggregates arises and ceases without remainder. That is true
  death. Rebirth is a concept used to describe the change between one
  artificial framework of experiences (e.g. a human life) to another.
  The ultimate reality is that the mind simply arises and ceases at the
  last moment of life and then a new mind arises at the first moment of
  rebirth based on the last one, very similar to as has been occurring
  throughout one's life, except this time there is no old physical
  phenomena for it to be based on, so it is based solely on one's final
  state of mind in the last life.

In other words, all five aggregates pass away completely at death and nothing of it is transmigrated to a new form.  The only thing that is transferred is "information" (the flame).
There is something relevant in the Dvedhavitakka Sutta:

"Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that
  becomes the inclination of his awareness. If a monk keeps pursuing
  thinking imbued with sensuality, abandoning thinking imbued with
  renunciation, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with
  sensuality. ...

In other words, what is transferred on rebirth, is not his sensation, perception, consciousness, thoughts and memories, but rather, the general "inclination of awareness". Quotes below describe that the inclination become the last state of mind at death.
Here's another quote by Ven. Narada Mahathera about the transfer of "information" using the analogy of radio waves picked up by a radio set:

Rebirth takes place immediately, irrespective of the place of birth,
  just as an electromagnetic wave, projected into space, is immediately
  reproduced in a receiving radio set. Rebirth of the mental flux is
  also instantaneous and leaves no room whatever for any intermediate
  state (antarabhava). Pure Buddhism does not support the belief
  that a spirit of the deceased person takes lodgement in some temporary
  state until it finds a suitable place for its "reincarnation."

And another two excellent quotes by V. F. Gunaratna:

It is not life in this existence only that is a process of becoming.
  The process of becoming continues into the next existence also,
  because there is a continuity of consciousness. The last consciousness
  (cuti-citta) in one life is followed by what is known as a re-linking
  consciousness (patisandhi-viññana) in the next life. The process of
  one consciousness giving rise to another continues unbroken, the only
  difference being a change in the place where such consciousness
  manifests itself. Distance is no bar to the sequence of cause and
  effect. Life is a process of grasping and becoming, and death is a
  change of the thing grasped leading to a new becoming. Grasping is a
  continuous feature where human living is concerned. It is this
  grasping that leads to becoming.

Also from the same source:

This last thought series is most important since it fashions the
  nature of his next existence, just as the last thought before going to
  sleep can become the first thought on awakening. No extraneous or
  arbitrary power does this for him. He does this for himself
  unconsciously as it were.
It is the most important act of his life, good or bad, that conditions
  the last thought moment of a life. The kamma of this action is called
  garuka kamma or weighty Kamma. In the majority of cases the type of
  act which men habitually perform and for which they have the strongest
  liking becomes the last active thought. The ruling thought in life
  becomes strong at death. This habitual kamma is called acinna kamma.

So, to summarize, every person's habitual thoughts and actions (karma) shapes his "inclination of awareness", that becomes the last state of mind at death, and this is the "information" that gets transferred without carrier, the way flame is transferred from candle to candle, or radio waves are transferred from one radio to another.
According to this source, the above is the Theravada perspective. According to it the Abhidharmakosa tradition states that the non-physical aggregates move together after death. And Tibetan Buddhism discusses "in-between" (antarabhava) states between two lives called bardo.
This question and this question are relevant.

Thank you, not everything is clear yet, but we're getting close. What you say doesn't seem to agree with Yuttadhammo's opinion that the moment of death is exactly the same as any other moment of one's consciousness, which suggests much more than transfer of some inclinations. Is your answer based on some particular tradition?

I tend to be biased towards Theravada, but these info come from various sources. I just updated my answer. The inclinations of a person become the last thought in this life and shapes the initial state of the next life.

Added a summary at the end. I think that covers the whole of the ideas. But I hope that it would be possible to get authentic quotes of the Buddha on these. However, generally, the Buddha doesn't prefer us to focus on the details of how the universe works (MN 63), instead preferring to focus on how to escape suffering.

Updated from a source that states a difference between different Buddhist traditions. My answer is mostly Theravada.

All of the aggregates are impermanent including Form, Sensation, Conception, Volition ("mental formations"), and Consciousness (and all its levels, including the storehouse).
To understand the aggregates on a profound, modern level, I highly recommend the "Chapter 5: The Five Aggregates Schema and the Various Levels of Consciousness" from "How to Measure and Deepen Your Spiritual Realization" by Master Huai-Chin Nan and William Bodri.
I understand that some Buddhists would argue against the following explanation because they have never seen it before but I am providing it nonetheless as a Buddhist idea because it is a theory that tightly relates the 12 nidanas to the 5 aggregates with some Tibetan Buddhist elements.
I would re-recommend the previously mentioned book by Master Nan and his student to master the concepts first and also to understand certain depths that I do not go into for this answer because I do not want to write an essay right now but want to answer your question.
Also, when I mention skandha... skandha = aggregate. They mean the same thing.
And now here is the answer to your question about what happens when you die.
Read it like a story. It's undoubtably the most important story to understand and sorry if I'm light on the details, there are many many interdisciplinary connections to make.

form recedes into sensation: upon death, your coarsest skandha, form, dissolves and you feel the intense sensations of pain and freedom and clarity among myriad of other things as you are dying. You are no longer your flesh. The five elements recede one after another into each other, causing specific feelings, until only wind is left and you feel a "very strong thirst." After coalescing into a chi body and leaving your flesh body you have basically started your journey as a bardo spirit.
sensation recedes into conception: sensation, the intense feelings and judgements still there, you are pushed around by strong feelings until you jump directly into an animal incarnation or ghost incarnation or hell. The recession process HALTS and you go forward through the nidanas and become ignorant and alive again... OR.. (the better option:) if you are able to overpower the overwhelming sensation skandha through equanimity or did not have much poison in the first place!... the aggregate itself dies out and recedes and you progress to...
conception recedes into volition: having overcome the coarsest aggregates, as a bardo spirit, you now experience the conception skandha and see the story of your life, judgments, etc. clearly seeing all your mistakes and praiseworthy actions.
volition recedes into consciousness: eventually if you can go beyond even this and not be tormented, then your next trial will be the volition skandha where you must somehow even defy the inner-most beliefs and ideas about self and life.
pure consciousness, possibility for Tao: supposing one succeeds past that stage, there is now the enormity of the consciousness skandha to transform! Pure consciousness, no flesh (form), no judgment (sensation), no discrimination (conception), and even no laws (volition). Depending on one's level of Awakening, one's level of bhumi (hint: ignorant people stuck in the coarser aggregates, do not make it this far), one can either be very clear or mildly clear during the following process. One still exists as a spirit of some sort beyond all the previous aggregates and gradually there comes before oneself an egg. This is an egg from the alaya consciousness (the last level of consciousness). One looks at this egg and depending on one's affinity, one will either feel attraction, repulsion, or neutrality. (This is a sign of karma and the ever "perfuming" nature of the seeds within the alaya consciousness.) One can also look deep into one egg then dwelling on it, one can see what kind of story one will live if one chooses to enter that egg. If one chooses to not enter this egg, there are (according to Tibetan Buddhism) other eggs that come about. One can then choose that egg.
This is tremendously valuable information to know! Most likely we will die without attaining Buddhahood! Perhaps we may get wise learn a bit of Tibetan Buddhist death cultivation to use to choose a good egg.

--When I say "recede" the entire aggregate does not completely recede but gets deactivated--only to get further activated after the new seed for a new life is chosen (from the alaya). Sequentially, through the 12 steps of causation, a new birth happens as well as the a new forging of a seeming personality, ego, and a life.
--Towards the later stages of recession, past the sensation aggregate, I suspect that the phenomenon whereby Tibetan Buddhists say that even those that were not so successful in their meditation can take the opportunity of Clear Light phenomenon to jump directly into Awakening! This is possible because the body and mind is an obstacle to Awakening and when thus cleared the opportunity to reach initial Awakening (of interdependent origination and non-self/Oneness) is easier. Remember to take advantage of this certain opportunity after you die.
--Please do not share this information with non-Buddhists. The above writing are Tibetan ideas and conveying such information to non-Buddhists or anyone that it would cause excessive alarm or repugnance can certainly cause them reincarnative harm (according to what I was taught).

You do realise that there are quite a few non-Buddhists reading this site, don't you? Not to mention everyone who may come here through a Google search.

They visit of their own curiousity which is great. Not by forceful sharing. I only mention because although this information I have provided is extremely valuable, any dharma can have bad effects if shared with someone not ready for it.

"What happens to the five skandhas of a particular person after death?"
As far as I understand the doctrine (since I can't remember my deaths, so far): they cease. Then, new skhandhas appear, conditioned or causally related by the previous ones (no different answer than all the others here, i guess).
"Do they stay together, and cause birth of a one specific person (which can be called rebirth), or do they separate?"
The above seems to suggest skandhas are objects or structures. I think it's troublesome, for example, to understand sañña as a structure, existing or tied to the other four skandhas (which also exists somehow?); in other words, I don't see a sañña  structure that "perceives perceptions". This also seems to lead to an Eternalist view.
What the suttas say is that:

Dependent on the eye and forms eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as condition there is feeling. What one feels, that one perceives.
-- Madhupindika Sutta (Ñānamoli/Bodhi trans), MN 18

Thus, for example, when there is "perception of blue" there is sañña (this is sañña). When there is pleasant feeling, there is vedanā. The pleasant experience itself is vedanā. Observing that feeling cease, is observing vedanā cease.
So, in this perspective, we experience all those "things", moment after moment. They are in the domain of our reality. In our individuality, these experiences are very inter-related and we refer to them to describe ourselves and understand our process of becoming. Through the skhandha point of view, we are taught how to distinguish each discrete real experience and understand it, its kind and its role in that overall process.
Now the pleasant feeling subsides. Right after, to say vedanā is still "there", when it's not, is imagining something else "behind" and declaring it's name is "vedanā".
"If they separate, do they cause births of many different persons?"
Again, that seems to imply that each skandha is an object or individual self on its own. Somewhat related:

Karel Werner (1988) has sought to develop an alternative explanation of how character-continuity is conserved. He takes early Buddhist terms such as vinnana (discernment) and citta as referring, in certain instances, to a "personality structure" with changing contents, but an ongoing identity (p.89). He sees this, in turn, as similar to the Vedic idea of tanū, the "likeness" which when 'filled' with phenomenal elements is a person's 'character', but which momentarily exists without content after death (pp. 78-9). Such an "empty structure" is not an unchanging entity but a "structural continuum which registers and preserves ... the imprints of past experiences, volitions and capabilities" (p.79). The "personality structure" of such a model, though, seems indistinguishable from the 'person' of the Personalists (Pudgalavāda), which has already been shown to lack any foundation in the 'early Sutta' world-view (Paras.l.36-42).
-- Peter Harvey, The Selfless Mind, pg 73

Now, to use Sue Hamilton's words:

[the Buddha teaches] that the analysis of the human being into five khandhas is not an analysis of what the human being consists of, but of those processes and events with which one is constituted.
--  Identity And Experience: The Constitution of the Human Being According to Early Buddhism

"EDIT: I didn't get unambiguous answers to my questions, but what Suminda and Prahlad write seems to suggest that all the aggregates arise and pass all the time"
we are all in agreement, it seems.
"but when we look at them at a higher level, we can conclude that four of the aggregates (sensation, perception, mental formations and consciousness) stay together and cause a new birth of one specific person, while the remaining aggregate (rūpa, matter) separates and splits into parts. Can anyone confirm/disconfirm this?"
You seem to have imagined another set of aggregates that do not arise and pass away, but whose parts are permanent and tied together. And you seem to be imagining them existing in this "higher level".
I don't think there is a "higher level" where these imagined 5 aggregates can be actually observed outside imagination. There is no vedanā without an actual feeling. There is also no "same body" persisting through time.
"EDIT 2: I was asked to specify what is exactly meant by "overall structure of the aggregates remain intact", when we know that the aggregates arise and pass all the time. What I mean is the continuity of the illusion called "self". I have the illusion that I'm the same person as a moment ago, even though my body, my feelings, etc. have changed. Does this illusion continue after death?"
I'm not sure I understand. Considering "self" to be what is understood in Buddhism (permanent, eternal, dukkha-free, etc):

Do you mean to ask if you will still believe in a self after death? I don't know.
Or do you mean to ask if sentient beings, after death, are still led to believe in self? According to Buddhism, likely, yes.
Or do you mean to ask if, after death, it will be obvious that the self is an illusion? According to Buddhism, not necessarily.

"According to Buddhist doctrines, is there an illusion of the continuity of consciousness? Of the continuity of feelings? Of the continuity of the body?"
Buddhism acknowledges that people hold to the above beliefs. That is, that people end up believing that consciousness, feelings, body, etc. are permanent. And the Buddha declared these beliefs as misleading.
"I watched Yuttadhammo's video about rebirth and understood that Buddhists believe in perceived continuity of the consciousness after death. Is this a canonical opinion that can be concluded from Buddhist scriptures? How about the continuity of other aggregates?"
I don't know which video you watched, but I would be surprised to know that Yuttadhammo claimed that consciousness (viññāṇa) transmigrates. There is a sutta about a bhikku named Sāti who was debunked by the Buddha for declaring this:

Now on that occasion this pernicious viewpoint had arisen in a bhikkhu named Sāti, son of a fisherman, thus: "As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders through the round of rebirths, not another."
[...]
[the Blessed One said to him] "Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways consciousness to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no origination of consciousness?
-- Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta (Ñānamoli/Bodhi trans), MN 38

Perhaps in said video, he could have talked about "stream of consciousness", which is not the same thing: in one sutta (and apparently nowhere else?) the respective term, "viññāṇa-sota", appears:

[...] he comes to know the unbroken stream of human consciousness as established both in this world and in the next.
[...] he comes to know the unbroken stream of human consciousness that is not established either in this world or in the next [n: Arahants].
-- Sampasādanīya Sutta (Walshe trans), DN 28

In the notes, we read:

viññāṇa-sota: a rare expression which seems to equate with bhavanga, the (mainly) commentarial term for the 'life-continuum' (Nānamoli). [...]

Another sutta that refers to the role of consciousness in the process of rebirth is:

"Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the moisture. The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving is established in a [lower/middling/superior] realm. Thus there is the production of renewed becoming in the future."
-- Bhava Sutta, AN 3.76

In general, I understand there is no consensus as to how the process of rebirth happens in detail and later schools seemed to have developed their own theories. A supposedly less polemic link of births is kamma:

"Student, beings are owners of their actions, heirs of their actions, they originate from their actions, are bound to their actions, have their actions as their refuge.
-- Cūlakammavibhanga Sutta (Ñānamoli/Bodhi trans), MN 135

It might be a good idea to first see what the Buddha said about the aggregates. For example, about feeling:

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "There are these three feelings. Which three? A feeling of pleasure, a feeling of pain, a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. These are the three feelings. ~~ Iti 52 ~~

Now, imagine a minute ago, you just ate a sweet mango and experienced a very pleasant feeling. Then a minute later, you trip and fall flat on the hard wood floor and experience a very painful feeling. Now ask yourself, does the feeling a minute ago still "stay together" with the rest of the aggregates now?
Similarly, about perception:

There are these six kinds of perception: the perception of form, the perception of sound, the perception of aroma, the perception of flavor, the perception of tactile sensation, the perception of ideas. ~~ AN 6.63 ~~

Now, imagine a minute ago, you saw someone and recognized that she was a good old friend of yours. Then a minute later, you hear a loud boom and recognize 2 cars crash into each other in a terrible accident. Now ask yourself, doe the perception a minute ago still "stay together" with the rest of the aggregates now?
Similarly, for the rest of the aggregates... if one's aggregates don't even "stay together" from moment to moment, how do you expect them to stay together from life to life?
The last and probably the most important sutta reference to address your query on the aggregates' "togetherness". The root cause to this query is because there's an assumption that they're somehow "bound" to a concrete and immutable self. Here is what the Buddha said:

Bhikkhus, how do you conceive it: is form permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, venerable Sir." — "Now is what is impermanent painful or pleasant?" — "Painful, venerable Sir." — "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? — "No, venerable sir."
"Is feeling permanent or impermanent?...
"Is perception permanent or impermanent?...
"Are determinations permanent or impermanent?...
"Is consciousness permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, venerable sir." — "Now is what is impermanent pleasant or painful?" — "Painful, venerable sir." — "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? — "No, venerable sir. ~~ SN 22.59 ~~

Let me quote Prahlad: "What is meant here is that the sensations themselves arise and pass away from moment to moment, but the overall structure remain intact at a higher level". Does the overall structure of the 5 aggregates remain intact at a higher level when a person dies? Can you answer the question I posted after the edit?

I have provided the exact definitions of the five aggregates from the suttas. I also provided the logical conclusion based on those definitions. Now you'll need to provide the exact definition of the "overall structure" of them from the suttas before we can come up with any logical conclusion based on that definition.

I edited the question to clarify it.

I would think that all processes related to the senses will fade in the dying being, i.e. stop arising, as vitality is ebbing. Only Karma formations aggregate (Sankhara) will remain, along with the consciousness that is conditioned by it, the mind-object consciousness, in a very muted form, enough to be the seed for a new life.These are what reappear in another womb, as the bases for new life, the formations ensuring Karma continuity, and mind-object consciousness ensuring life-force. Once the new life starts to develop sense bases, then other skandhas develop in the new being and grow. Actions performed by the new being add to the formations aggregate, which thus records all actions from the past and present.
Remember that the Buddha did not point to the top of the mountain and parse the topography, but instead pointed to the base of the mountain and taught people how to climb it. Detailed breakup of the processes does not conduce to liberation, only intellectual play.

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


text:
What is the difference between Satipatthana and Vipassana?
In short, if i practice Vipassana meditation does it means i practice Satipatthana?

This topic was also discussed here: http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3547/what-exactly-differentiates-vipassana-from-samatha-meditation

Satipatthana is the name of the actual practice, and Vipassana is the name of the quality of clearly seeing reality which Satipatthana produces.

Satipatthana is the name of the actual practice Thanks a lot.  Could you kindly explain what is the actual practice? Do you mean the practice of Vipassana meditation?

Vipassana itself is True Awareness, clear-seeing presence in the moment absent of wandering thoughts.
There is no Awakening without some success in Vipassana practice.
Continued Vipassana practice aka True Awareness, results in Complete Enlightenment.
Buddhism is really that simple and that's why the Buddha said "Mindfulness is liberation"!
Satipatthana is merely a pathway (or meditation method) for Vipassana training.
Another pathway would be Anapanasati (breathing meditation).
These are the two best paths and have sutras and many commentaries worth reading explaining how to construct that pathway.
In reality though all paths are the same and you will understand this after developing fluency over how to practice various meditation methods.

Satipatthana is a something for Vipassana training Thanks a lot. Could you kindly explain what is the something? An example maybe?

i was trying to keep it super simple because it really is. i rephrased it as "pathway" in original answer

satipatthana = vipassana.
Vipassana is the meditation practice that follows the teachings of the Satipatthana Sutta (MN 22).

Thanks a lot. How about Anapanasati? Is it Satipatthana?

Yes. Anapanasati is mentioned in the Satipatthana Sutta as the 1st meditation object of the body (kayanupassana - 1st foundation of mindfulness).

It's questionable whether the satipatthana sutta was really by the Buddha or just a later addition. It is just a collection of meditations without any instructions. Please watch this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MKL1arphx9A

Yes, it is. Buddha first taught Vipassana meditation just after delivering Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, when setting the Wheel of Dhamma in motion, to Pañcavaggiyas (five disciples - Kondanna, Bhaddiya, Vappa, Mahanama and Assaji).
Later Buddha delivered Satipatthana how to practice Vipassana in details.

Satipatthana is the establishing of awareness, which can be achieved by Vipassana meditation.
Source: from the discourse summaries book by S.N Goenka:


text:
What is the relation between the Eight Consciousnesses and the Five Aggregates?
What is the relation between the Eight Consciousnesses and the Five Aggregates?
Are all the 8 consciousnesses subtypes of the fifth aggregate (vijñāna/viññāṇa)? The name suggests so, but it looks strange to me: the first 5 of the 8 consciousnesses seem to be more related to the third aggregate (samjñā/saññā). I would be glad for a clarification.

All 8 types of consciousness described in Yogacara texts fit into the aggregate of consciousness, not perception. The confusion comes down to difficulty in the English translations for these terms.
The word translated as perception doesn't actually mean perception in the ordinary English sense of the word. In ordinary English perception means to be aware of something through the senses, but that is not the meaning of the word saññā.  refers specifically to the way that something is interpreted by the mind, especially in terms of pattern recognition and memory. For example, when you look at a chair, you are aware of actually seeing something (which is eye-consciousness) and at the same time you are giving an interpretation to what it is, which in this case is a chair. This second layer of gathering things together and interpreting them is what saññā is in Buddhism.

Yes each of the 1st three aggregates seem to have some resemblance to the 8 consciousnesses don't they?
The form aggregate is the "forming" of a reality through the aid of the first 6 consciousnesses (this reality, according to modern physics, does not exist!), the sensation aggregate is like an "emotional judgement" of sensory input, whereas the third aggregate is as Bakomon suggests.
This third aggregate is more accurately termed "discrimination" and refers to the mind's categorizing capacity.
The eight consciousness are naked consciousness, which are still false. On the other hand, the first 3 aggregates which can be confused for the consciousnesses are dense habits and are transformed earlier in the path. The work of the consciousness aggregate is very subtle and is reserved for bodhisattvas who are walking up the bhumis to Buddhahood.
For a more modern account on all these subjects I would reccommend the ~200 page chapter on the aggregates from Bill Bodri's manual "How to Measure and Deepen Your Spiritual Realization." If you cannot afford the book I highly recommend Surangama Sutra because knowing this topic of the aggregates will give oneself a complete understanding of afflictions that are transformed on the road to Complete Enlightenment!


text:
I can feel the rising and falling of sensations in vipassana, but what to make of thoughts?
There are two things I want to understand here. Firstly, though I'm not overly disturbed by thoughts during vipassana sitting, I just don't know how do I treat them. What I presently do is just try to ignore them and continue observing the rising and falling. But if the thoughts are too strong and persist, I tend to observe them impartially until they leave of their own accord (but during this time my observance of anicca has stopped). Am I doing this thing rightly or not?
Secondly, I want to understand the reality of thoughts. I know that ultimately none of these have permanent reality, but compared to conditioned reality of sensations what is the conditioned reality of thoughts? Basically, I want to know whether they have any objective reality, or they are subjective (just things in my head)?
I recently read in a book that reality keeps vibrating each and every instant, and we need to look into the arising/vanishing of these vibrations, as that is what anicca is all about. My question is do these vibrations apply to thoughts as well or just sensations?

Hi Shinu! You mention a book you read that describes reality as vibration. What is the name of the book?

How should I treat thoughts?
You should strive to know thoughts as thoughts. If you are observing impartially, that's good. If you are ignoring the light, fleeting thoughts, it depends what you mean. You don't want to actively ignore anything as that will cultivate aversion or even a dullness of mind. If you mean the thoughts are just too light, too fleeting to catch, then you're doing what you can, and your coverage will improve with practice, if you strive for it.
The other side of this is that it's more important to impartially observe whatever comes up, rather than simply impartially observing thoughts. That is, you should try to stay in the here and the now. A thought might become frustration, and you should observe that impartially. Then the frustration becomes hotness in the body. As soon as we are aware of the hotness, we should observe the hotness. Or perhaps coldness following fear. And then maybe the thought comes back, and we observe that, or we feel an irritation on the skin, and we observe that. I'm giving as many examples as I can from my own experience to try to illustrate that when a thought overtakes us, the here-and-now can be a swiftly-moving target.
What is the conditioned reality of thoughts?
The Buddha placed thoughts on an equal footing with all other sensations, as you can read in the very brief Sabba Sutta (found in the Samyutta Nikaya, Sutta #35.23):

"Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."
"As you say, lord," the monks responded.
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."

So from a meditative point of view, the most objective things you have are the thoughts and the senses. Don't worry too much whether thoughts are objective or subjective. Rather consider objectively that a thought is a thought, and seeing it as anything else is subjective.

Great answer my friend. I liked the part where you draw on your own experiences from meditation. I can truely recognize from my own meditation how the here-and-now can be a moving target and especially the thought->sensation->bodily manifestation and then suddenly car noise from the street, then an itching feeling on the nose and then back to a thought. Quite interesting to watch.

Here is a video called "Ask A Monk: Correct Observation of Thoughts" by Ven. Yuttadhammo.
In here its talked about how to observe thoughts and also about what happens when one is forcing thoughts to go away or to trying to stop thinking. You might this video useful.
There is also a short quote on how to deal with thoughts from the book "How To Meditate: A Beginner's Guide to Peace" by Ven. Yuttadhammo, p. 11:

"...In regards to the mind, if thoughts arise during meditation, one should acknowledge them as “thinking”. It doesn't matter whether one is thinking about the past or future or whether one's thoughts are good or bad; instead of letting the mind wander and lose track of reality, bring the mind back to the reality of the thought with, "thinking". Then return to the rising and falling and continue practice as normal..."

Thoughts are result in verbal fabrications which result in sensations, when the thought makes contact with the mind sense door.
Each time a thought arises there is an associated sensation through out the body. If you have many successive such thoughts this sensation accumulates. E.g. multiple depressing thoughts will leave you depressed. Happy memories will leave you happy and smiling.
Main few things you actively do:

Calm down the verbal and metal fabrications by trying to bring your wondering mind to a chosen object
Look at the sensation in the body (mainly around your head) the thought proliferation has created. (Tightness, heaviness, depressed, happy, excited, passionate, etc. - also if you look deeply these are combinations of the Elements) due to thoughts. This will calm any bodily fabrications. Also pay attention to changes in breathing. If breathing becomes fast. If breathing has stopped does it start again. Also you pulse.
Identify if the sensation is due to a mental reaction due to perception and see perception creates misery also and dilute these perceptions.

But if the thoughts are too strong and persist, I tend to observe them impartially until they leave of their own accord (but during this time my observance of anicca has stopped). Am I doing this thing rightly or not?

Your observance of anicca should not stop.

Secondly, I want to understand the reality of thoughts. I know that ultimately none of these have permanent reality, but compared to conditioned reality of sensations what is the conditioned reality of thoughts?

You should answer your question yourself. Wisdom gained through experience is the right path to liberation. If you want to know what is the conditioned reality of thoughts, do this:

Mindfully observe your thoughts arising and ceasing until they leave of their own accord.
Do step 1 until you mindfully observe: "There are no thoughts arising in me". Once you note that your mind is completely stilled, proceed to the next step.
Mindfully and slowly arise a thought, for example arise a visualization of an object. Observe how the thought visualization of the object arises. Then, mindfully and slowly let go of this same thought visualization of the object. Observe how the thought visualization of the object ceases. Repeat the process. The key here is mindfulness.

Like an experienced forensic who is dissecting every inch of a crime scene, so should you dissect your mind when a thought arises and ceases.
By doing the above exercise and mindfully observing what happens in step 3, you will understand the reality of thoughts. You will see why they arise. You will see why they cease.


text:
Can there exist two Dalai Lamas at one instance of time?
I am developing an application which calculates peoples age/ birthdays. In this app I have one entry for the Dalai Lama.
My understanding is that its the 14 Dalai Lama who is alive right now. So a concern is raised that should I use the name Dalai Lama or 14 Dalai Lama
I want to know if there can be two Dalai Lamas alive at the same instance if this is not true I can simply use the name Dalai Lama Please shed light on this aspect!

Basically you should always use "14th Dalai Lama" even though the Dalai Lama is that same continuous Awakened being incarnating as Dalai Lama, because each and every Dalai Lama has a different ego, body, and often temperament and purpose in life. Also to answer your main question, they also never live at the same time i.e. 13th has to die before can incarnate as 14th.
If you are mentioning the "14th Dalai Lama" solely in your writing, then it is OK to shorten it to just "the Dalai Lama." Even better than this is to avoid the convention altogether and refer to him by his real name "Tenzin Gyatso."
This naming convention also goes for the countless Buddhas. The Buddha of our planet is "Shakyamuni" (the jewel of the shakya clan") or referrable by other more specific personal names.
There's some good books and articles out there showing each Dalai Lama's life.
It makes one think... "when I become a bodhisattva, what incarnations will I take on to complete various karmas and purposes?"

It should be "14th Dalai Lama" or "14th Dalai Lama", not "14 Dalai Lama".
I think that "Dalai Lama" is a title, not a name.
According to Wikipedia,

The 14th Dalai Lama (religious name: Tenzin Gyatso, shortened from Jetsun Jamphel Ngawang Lobsang Yeshe Tenzin Gyatso, born Lhamo Dondrub,[1] 6 July 1935) is the current Dalai Lama

Another example of a title is "President of the United States". For example, Barack Obama is "the President", and he is also more specifically called "the 44th President".

Agreed on the 14th part, but it is still not clear enough if I should use Dalai Lama or 14th Dalai Lama

The controversy of a Chinese Dalai Lama and TIbetian Dalai Lama also surrounds this problem!


text:
Buddhist funeral process
I am seeking a proper guide on Buddhist funeral process in India.
What are the things needs to be taken care while performing the last Ceremony
With Metta

There is no universal Buddhist funeral but some customs have developed in Buddhist countries around Buddhism. Following may be of some help:

Ceremonies and Funeral Rites for the Dead
Funeral (Buddhism)
A Guide to a Proper Buddhist Funeral