Buddhism loses all purpose if you don't believe in reincarna

[Punya]

1. My understanding is that the alayvijnana has the capacity to store memories. So what you are saying seems to be that memories for ordinary beings (without getting into bardo discussions) get erased at the end of each life. On the other hand the seeds (bijas), which I read as karmic propensities (possibly mistakenly), continue on to the next life. Why does one continue and the other not?

2. Is the manas where (for want of a better word) the I making occurs?

The ālaya does not store memories, it only stores traces (vāsanā) or bijas.

The kliṣṭa-mānovijñāna, the afflictive mental consciousness, generates the sense of "I" in the Yogacara scheme.

Ok. Thank you for your answers. I seem to remember the Yogacaras and Madhymaka Prasangikas have a different explanation for memory but I'm not clear how they differ. Could you briefly explain both viewpoints? (I don't think this is off topic as it still pertains to what continues forward into the next life).

[Sherab]

The ālaya does not store memories, it only stores traces (vāsanā) or bijas.

I am curious. Where are memories of past lives stored so that certain beings (such as enlightened beings or beings who displayed the ability to recollect past lives) could 'retrieve' them?

[Wayfarer]

Have a look at the book mentioned in this thread
http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=97&t=7095

[Sherab]

Have a look at the book mentioned in this thread
http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=97&t=7095

If, as the metaphors of a “dimension” of mind and its “contents”
suggest, cognitive viññan. a is a particular, transient and object-specific
occurrence of an otherwise unceasing, accumulative, and relatively non-intentional
sentience, then why should all those accumulated potentialities, memories, and
impressions associated with this sentience, this samsaric viññan. a, simply cease
when some object-specific form of cognitive viññan. a arises? And what would
happen to samsaric continuity if they did? Though the early texts nowhere say
so, Johansson for one does not shrink from the simplest and most straightforward
answer to these questions. There are, “according to the early Buddhist analysis,
two layers of consciousness: what we called the momentary surface processes, and
the background consciousness. The latter is an habitual state …always there”
(1970: 106 f.)88 (emphasis added).

So the author is arguing that memories are carried in the alayavijnana. But I thought the conventional mind ceases at enlightenment and alayavijnana is part of the conventional mind for Madhyamikas.

[Malcolm]

The ālaya does not store memories, it only stores traces (vāsanā) or bijas.

I am curious. Where are memories of past lives stored so that certain beings (such as enlightened beings or beings who displayed the ability to recollect past lives) could 'retrieve' them?

Why should they be stored?

[Wayfarer]

If a re-incarnate lama recognizes possessions from a previous life, how does he come to have that memory? How is it transmitted from one life to the next?

the author is arguing that memories are carried in the alayavijnana. But I thought the conventional mind ceases at enlightenment and alayavijnana is part of the conventional mind for Madhyamikas.

'The Buddhist Unconscious' is a pretty substantial book. It goes into the history of the debate and discussions which lead to the notion of the 'storehouse consciousness'. I wouldn't want to try and summarize it. Note also that discussions around alayavijnana are highly contested even within Buddhism. I am simply suggesting that as a line of enquiry, in response to your question of 'where memories are stored'.

[Sherab]

The ālaya does not store memories, it only stores traces (vāsanā) or bijas.

I am curious. Where are memories of past lives stored so that certain beings (such as enlightened beings or beings who displayed the ability to recollect past lives) could 'retrieve' them?

Why should they be stored?

What then is the mechanism for recollection (retrieval method) of past lives (data) by a Buddha?

[Punya]

I had already noted some disagreement about memory since my notes on Traleg Rinpoche's The Influence of Yogacara on Mahamudra indicate his view as:

Alayavijnana - the fundamental consciousness, the storehouse consciousness. Retains our memories, our past impressions. It is not positive or negative, it is ethically neutral.

Thanks for the topic link Wayfarer. I'm adding the book to my reading list.

[Malcolm]

What then is the mechanism for recollection (retrieval method) of past lives (data) by a Buddha?

The mechanism for recalling past lives is abhijñā.

[dzogchungpa]

What then is the mechanism for recollection (retrieval method) of past lives (data) by a Buddha?

The mechanism for recalling past lives is abhijñā.

And the mechanism for abhijñā is?

[Malcolm]

What then is the mechanism for recollection (retrieval method) of past lives (data) by a Buddha?

The mechanism for recalling past lives is abhijñā.

And the mechanism for abhijñā is?

Samadhi.

[dzogchungpa]

The mechanism for recalling past lives is abhijñā.

And the mechanism for abhijñā is?

Samadhi.

OK, now it all makes sense.

[Malcolm]

OK, now it all makes sense.

A citation for you. The Jātakamālaṭīkā states:

• If one obtained the concentration [dhyāna] called "clear recollection,"
  this is shown to be the cause of recalling past lives.

[dzogchungpa]

OK, now it all makes sense.

A citation for you. The Jātakamālaṭīkā states:

• If one obtained the concentration [dhyāna] called "clear recollection,"
  this is shown to be the cause of recalling past lives.

Actually, I have no doubt about it, I'm just curious about these things.

[pael]

• If there is attachment to samsara, there is no renunciation.

How one is attached to samsara?
I thought buddhism is for ridding of greed, hatred and delusion. Is that nirvana? Does it require reincarnation-doctrine, wrether it's true or otherwise?

[Malcolm]

• If there is attachment to samsara, there is no renunciation.

How one is attached to samsara?
I thought buddhism is for ridding of greed, hatred and delusion. Is that nirvana? Does it require reincarnation-doctrine, wrether it's true or otherwise?

Being attached to samsara means merely wanting to have a better place of rebirth.

[pael]

Ist it allowed to want rebirth in Sukhavati? Or in body in which you can practice Dharma easily?

[Malcolm]

Ist it allowed to want rebirth in Sukhavati? Or in body in which you can practice Dharma easily?

Sukhavati is not part of samsara.

[Loren]

Ist it allowed to want rebirth in Sukhavati? Or in body in which you can practice Dharma easily?

I feel like I'm not a Milarepa and so will not reach enlightenment in one lifetime. So Sukhavati or a precious human rebirth is what i want. Isn't that common sense? Shambhala but read that takes a lot of karma.

EDIT Do you need total faith that you'll reach enlightenment in one lifetime regardless of renunciation, bodhicitta and emptiness? If I already "realistically" believe that I will not be free of samsara in one lifetime would that be a wrong view?

[Punya]

The ālaya does not store memories, it only stores traces (vāsanā) or bijas.

I am curious. Where are memories of past lives stored so that certain beings (such as enlightened beings or beings who displayed the ability to recollect past lives) could 'retrieve' them?

I had a chance to ask a respected Nyingma khenpo yesterday about memory. He said memory is relative and while memories from the defiled mind do not fit into the alaya, memories from the neutral mind do. This seems to be consistent with what Traleg Rinpoche said.

He also said memories (from the neutral mind) do carry on into the next life and that this was as habitual imprints left on the alaya.