Page 1 of 2

Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 2:41 am
by Oriander
Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:43 am
by Aemilius
Vasubandhu says in his Discussion of the Five Aggregates that Alaya is the same as fifth aggregate, vijñana or consciousness, it is not something outside of the five skandhas or aggregates. So it is definitely individual or subjective.
A universal or shared Alaya doesn't appear in the sutras or commentaries, not to my knowledge anyway. I know that an idea of that kind exists, it may come from the writings of Madam Blavatsky, or someone else from that period.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 5:17 am
by Fortyeightvows
a shared alaya is an impossibility

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 5:58 am
by Thomas Amundsen
I think I understand where OP is coming from with this question. If the alayavijnana is completely personal, then where are collective karmic traces stored? Do you just have ever your own personal copy of the collective karma?

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:58 am
by Fortyeightvows
doesnt' the idea of others arise from the alaya?

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:59 am
by Fortyeightvows
can others experiance the result of a seed we have planted?

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:48 am
by Aemilius
tomamundsen wrote:I think I understand where OP is coming from with this question. If the alayavijnana is completely personal, then where are collective karmic traces stored? Do you just have ever your own personal copy of the collective karma?
There is no collective, because there is no personal. A person exists only in dependence on others, so there is no need for an other, superfluous or extra 'collective'.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:34 pm
by Malcolm
tomamundsen wrote:I think I understand where OP is coming from with this question. If the alayavijnana is completely personal, then where are collective karmic traces stored? Do you just have ever your own personal copy of the collective karma?
There are not traces of collective karma. There are traces which sufficiently resemble each other in each of our minds to create a common vision of the container universe.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:14 pm
by smcj
Malcolm wrote:
tomamundsen wrote:I think I understand where OP is coming from with this question. If the alayavijnana is completely personal, then where are collective karmic traces stored? Do you just have ever your own personal copy of the collective karma?
There are not traces of collective karma. There are traces which sufficiently resemble each other in each of our minds to create a common vision of the container universe.
If I'm not mistaken this is the general consensus of the Cittamatra view, right? If so, and given your post from another thread,
Not really, Dzogchen is not cittamatra.
With your second post I am led to believe that the "traces which sufficiently resemble each other in each of our minds to create a common vision of the container universe" is not a Dzogchen view, right? If I'm right about that, and that being the case, what is the Dzogchen perspective on the "commonality of the container universe"?

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:35 pm
by Malcolm
smcj wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
tomamundsen wrote:I think I understand where OP is coming from with this question. If the alayavijnana is completely personal, then where are collective karmic traces stored? Do you just have ever your own personal copy of the collective karma?
There are not traces of collective karma. There are traces which sufficiently resemble each other in each of our minds to create a common vision of the container universe.
If I'm not mistaken this is the general consensus of the Cittamatra view, right? If so, and given your post from another thread,
Not really, Dzogchen is not cittamatra.
With your second post I am led to believe that the "traces which sufficiently resemble each other in each of our minds to create a common vision of the container universe" is not a Dzogchen view, right? If I'm right about that, and that being the case, what is the Dzogchen perspective on the "commonality of the container universe"?
The distinction is basically this: in cittamatra, phenomena are mental events. The way Lonchenpa explains it is like this. Bodhicitta, awakened mind, is like space, it is the basis, but it is not established in anyway. Its potential or energy [rtsal] arises like the face of a mirror. The display of that potentiality is like the eight examples of illusion. Since the basis, its potential and display are not themselves established because they are all empty, they are nondual. These three are conventionally distinguished because of appearances. Thus, bodhicitta, potentiality and the display are neither single nor plural in terms of their essence, nevertheless, just like the reflections in the mirror cannot be said to be either the same nor different than the mirror's power to reflect, it is understood that the imputations which are the display of the potential of bodhicitta also do not exist either inside or outside of, and hence these appearances are called "nonexistent, clear appearances." Indeed, nothing at all is established in anyway.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:42 pm
by smcj
Malcolm wrote: The distinction is basically this: in cittamatra, phenomena are mental events. The way Lonchenpa explains it is like this. Bodhicitta, awakened mind, is like space, it is the basis, but it is not established in anyway. Its potential or energy [rtsal] arises like the face of a mirror. The display of that potentiality is like the eight examples of illusion. Since the basis, its potential and display are not themselves established because they are all empty, they are nondual. These three are conventionally distinguished because of appearances. Thus, bodhicitta, potentiality and the display are neither single nor plural in terms of their essence, nevertheless, just like the reflections in the mirror cannot be said to be either the same nor different than the mirror's power to reflect, it is understood that the imputations which are the display of the potential of bodhicitta also do not exist either inside or outside of, and hence these appearances are called "nonexistent, clear appearances." Indeed, nothing at all is established in anyway.
Thanks. Nice post.

I suggest that people read it, contemplate it, and bookmark it so they can refer back to it at a later date.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:32 pm
by Wayfarer
What is the meaning of 'not established in any way?'

And isn't Bodhicitta distinguished by, or associated with, 'compassion for all sentient beings'?

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 10:46 pm
by Malcolm
Wayfarer wrote:What is the meaning of 'not established in any way?'

And isn't Bodhicitta distinguished by, or associated with, 'compassion for all sentient beings'?
Here, bodhicitta, awakened mind, refers to the basis, not compassion in the Mahāyāna sense. Not established means any predicates such as it exists, it does not exist and so on do not apply.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 4:52 am
by Fortyeightvows
how about my two questions?

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 6:21 am
by Garudavista
smcj wrote:
Malcolm wrote: The distinction is basically this: in cittamatra, phenomena are mental events. The way Lonchenpa explains it is like this. Bodhicitta, awakened mind, is like space, it is the basis, but it is not established in anyway. Its potential or energy [rtsal] arises like the face of a mirror. The display of that potentiality is like the eight examples of illusion. Since the basis, its potential and display are not themselves established because they are all empty, they are nondual. These three are conventionally distinguished because of appearances. Thus, bodhicitta, potentiality and the display are neither single nor plural in terms of their essence, nevertheless, just like the reflections in the mirror cannot be said to be either the same nor different than the mirror's power to reflect, it is understood that the imputations which are the display of the potential of bodhicitta also do not exist either inside or outside of, and hence these appearances are called "nonexistent, clear appearances." Indeed, nothing at all is established in anyway.
Thanks. Nice post.

I suggest that people read it, contemplate it, and bookmark it so they can refer back to it at a later date.
I agree. That is tight. Thank you, Malcolm.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2015 9:51 am
by Aemilius
Fortyeightvows wrote:doesnt' the idea of others arise from the alaya?

You are supposing here an impersonal & objective alaya, that would exist before the self and world arise.
Because alaya is already personal, being non other than the fifth skandha, what you suppose doesn't exist.
In the Lankavatara alaya is the consciousness that reincarnates. Some explanations say that the third link in the 12 Nidanas, vijñana or consciousness, is the same as alaya. It is the consciousness that acts as a condition for the present existence, the present self (name and form) and the world.
In a sense the first three links of the Dependent Arising are impersonal, if you take the person to last for one life time. The person gradually forms in youth and disintegrates in old age and death. The first three links stand for many or innumerable previous lives, and in effect they become impersonal.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2015 4:25 pm
by Jeff
Fortyeightvows wrote:can others experiance the result of a seed we have planted?
Depending on your concept of result, yes, this can be easily experientally verified by anyone who has begun to expand beyond the local body mind.

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2015 10:51 pm
by Fortyeightvows
Aemilius wrote:
Fortyeightvows wrote:doesnt' the idea of others arise from the alaya?

You are supposing here an impersonal & objective alaya, that would exist before the self and world arise.
Because alaya is already personal, being non other than the fifth skandha, what you suppose doesn't exist.
In the Lankavatara alaya is the consciousness that reincarnates. Some explanations say that the third link in the 12 Nidanas, vijñana or consciousness, is the same as alaya. It is the consciousness that acts as a condition for the present existence, the present self (name and form) and the world.
In a sense the first three links of the Dependent Arising are impersonal, if you take the person to last for one life time. The person gradually forms in youth and disintegrates in old age and death. The first three links stand for many or innumerable previous lives, and in effect they become impersonal.
very good points!

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2015 10:51 pm
by Fortyeightvows
Jeff wrote:
Fortyeightvows wrote:can others experiance the result of a seed we have planted?
Depending on your concept of result, yes, this can be easily experientally verified by anyone who has begun to expand beyond the local body mind.
lets have an example

Re: Alaya-vijnana it is shared or subjective storage?

Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2015 4:49 pm
by Jeff
Pm sent. :smile: