Rigpa and Alayavijnana

[the.eleven]

The all-basis, (kun gzhi, ālaya), is just ignorance; it is the Dzogchen term for what in other systems is called "the knowledge obscuration." This is why in the text called Stainless Space in the Lama Yang Tig, the mind, aka all-basis, is called "an obscuration to be abandoned."

It is distinct from the basis (gzhi, sthāna), which is never contaminated by ignorance.

This is very clear. Thanks!

[Lukeinaz]

Malcom, from the perspective of the Heart Essence presentation, there does not seem to be much focus on the alaya, or "basis of all," while in the lower yanas and yogacara, it is given greater significance. Why is the concept of the "alaya" less discussed within mengagde teachings?

One Western teacher uses the word "substrate" to reference "alaya," and further states that one must first achieve shamatha before the practitioner can break through this substrate to abide in rigpa. This seems to differ from other presentations of the path of trekchö, and it feels like a conflation with first wheel teachings. Could you comment on this?

Not exactly what he has said.

What he has said very clearly is that nirvana can never come from the alaya. Which makes sense to me, because how could nirvana arise from a product of ignorance?

[the.eleven]

I wasn't paraphrasing anything Malcom wrote, nor offering critique.

Could you please clarify what you are referring to in your comment?

[Lukeinaz]

I wasn't paraphrasing anything Malcom wrote, nor offering critique.

Could you please clarify what you are referring to in your comment?

Sorry for not being more clear.

It is commonly known that all of samsara and nirvana arise frim the alaya. I was referring to the western teacher you speak of not Malcom.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Malcom, from the perspective of the Heart Essence presentation, there does not seem to be much focus on the alaya, or "basis of all," while in the lower yanas and yogacara, it is given greater significance. Why is the concept of the "alaya" less discussed within mengagde teachings?

One Western teacher uses the word "substrate" to reference "alaya," and further states that one must first achieve shamatha before the practitioner can break through this substrate to abide in rigpa. This seems to differ from other presentations of the path of trekchö, and it feels like a conflation with first wheel teachings. Could you comment on this?

Not exactly what he has said.

What he has said very clearly is that nirvana can never come from the alaya. Which makes sense to me, because how could nirvana arise from a product of ignorance?

It's not really even that close to what he says that I know of- if it's BAW we're talking about. What he says is that the Jhanas are not necessary but that achieving the first one/Shamatha really helps in terms of Dzogchen. Might not be everyone's cup of tea, but if people are going to criticize they should probably be more specific, and I don't think its that controversial of a position either..

[Queequeg]

Thank you guys for the responses and then the follow up discussions.
I clearly need to learn more to understand most of what was discussed above!

[jake5521]

I have heard some pretty good explanations from Lama Jigme Rinpoche on alaya consciousness. Thanks for the other posts too, great to read.

Lama Jigme Rinpoche
https://padmarigdzinling.org/

[Josef]

Malcom, from the perspective of the Heart Essence presentation, there does not seem to be much focus on the alaya, or "basis of all," while in the lower yanas and yogacara, it is given greater significance. Why is the concept of the "alaya" less discussed within mengagde teachings?

One Western teacher uses the word "substrate" to reference "alaya," and further states that one must first achieve shamatha before the practitioner can break through this substrate to abide in rigpa. This seems to differ from other presentations of the path of trekchö, and it feels like a conflation with first wheel teachings. Could you comment on this?

Not exactly what he has said.

What he has said very clearly is that nirvana can never come from the alaya. Which makes sense to me, because how could nirvana arise from a product of ignorance?

It's not really even that close to what he says that I know of- if it's BAW we're talking about. What he says is that the Jhanas are not necessary but that achieving the first one/Shamatha really helps in terms of Dzogchen. Might not be everyone's cup of tea, but if people are going to criticize they should probably be more specific, and I don't think its that controversial of a position either..

Since shamatha is basically one of the four yogas of semde this position that it is helpful makes sense. BAW gets criticized legitimately when this is presented as a prerequisite for practicing Dzogchen.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Not exactly what he has said.

What he has said very clearly is that nirvana can never come from the alaya. Which makes sense to me, because how could nirvana arise from a product of ignorance?

It's not really even that close to what he says that I know of- if it's BAW we're talking about. What he says is that the Jhanas are not necessary but that achieving the first one/Shamatha really helps in terms of Dzogchen. Might not be everyone's cup of tea, but if people are going to criticize they should probably be more specific, and I don't think its that controversial of a position either..

Since shamatha is basically one of the four yogas of semde this position that it is helpful makes sense. BAW gets criticized legitimately when this is presented as a prerequisite for practicing Dzogchen.

Where does he actually do that? And how are you differentiating "helpful" from "necessary" here? Factually, there are all kinds of Dzogchen instruction manuals that start out with a very basic experience of Shamatha as a prerequisite (often talking about the signs once one is sufficient), and plenty of semde teachings use Shamatha as the vehicle for introduction and contemplation.

So to make such a criticism, we need to be specific, or it actually is not legitimate because it is too vague a criticism to mean anything.

[DewachenVagabond]

I have heard some pretty good explanations from Lama Jigme Rinpoche on alaya consciousness. Thanks for the other posts too, great to read.

Lama Jigme Rinpoche
https://padmarigdzinling.org/

Is this lama legit? The only place I can find information about him is on his website and the website for the Lohan Spiritual and Cultural Center in Las Vegas. Given that it is fairly close to me I was considering checking it out, but I don't want to waste my time if he isn't legitimate. Some of the services he offers seem a little strange for a Tibetan Buddhist. For example, the Feng Shui counselling.

[nagpo]

But how do you directly experience alayavijnana? How Can you percieve or dustinguish it experientially? How is lungmaten related with that?

[Josef]

It's not really even that close to what he says that I know of- if it's BAW we're talking about. What he says is that the Jhanas are not necessary but that achieving the first one/Shamatha really helps in terms of Dzogchen. Might not be everyone's cup of tea, but if people are going to criticize they should probably be more specific, and I don't think its that controversial of a position either..

Since shamatha is basically one of the four yogas of semde this position that it is helpful makes sense. BAW gets criticized legitimately when this is presented as a prerequisite for practicing Dzogchen.

Where does he actually do that? And how are you differentiating "helpful" from "necessary" here? Factually, there are all kinds of Dzogchen instruction manuals that start out with a very basic experience of Shamatha as a prerequisite (often talking about the signs once one is sufficient), and plenty of semde teachings use Shamatha as the vehicle for introduction and contemplation.

So to make such a criticism, we need to be specific, or it actually is not legitimate because it is too vague a criticism to mean anything.

He does this is Stilling the Mind. It actually made the book somewhat problematic.
Shamatha is always helpful, it is by no means a necessary pre-requisite to Dzogchen since it is accomplished via Dzogchen practice.

[Malcolm]

But how do you directly experience alayavijnana? How Can you percieve or dustinguish it experientially? How is lungmaten related with that?

One can’t.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Since shamatha is basically one of the four yogas of semde this position that it is helpful makes sense. BAW gets criticized legitimately when this is presented as a prerequisite for practicing Dzogchen.

Where does he actually do that? And how are you differentiating "helpful" from "necessary" here? Factually, there are all kinds of Dzogchen instruction manuals that start out with a very basic experience of Shamatha as a prerequisite (often talking about the signs once one is sufficient), and plenty of semde teachings use Shamatha as the vehicle for introduction and contemplation.

So to make such a criticism, we need to be specific, or it actually is not legitimate because it is too vague a criticism to mean anything.

He does this is Stilling the Mind. It actually made the book somewhat problematic.
Shamatha is always helpful, it is by no means a necessary pre-requisite to Dzogchen since it is accomplished via Dzogchen practice.

Can you describe how he does that,like what he actually says vs your interpretation?

[Josef]

Where does he actually do that? And how are you differentiating "helpful" from "necessary" here? Factually, there are all kinds of Dzogchen instruction manuals that start out with a very basic experience of Shamatha as a prerequisite (often talking about the signs once one is sufficient), and plenty of semde teachings use Shamatha as the vehicle for introduction and contemplation.

So to make such a criticism, we need to be specific, or it actually is not legitimate because it is too vague a criticism to mean anything.

He does this is Stilling the Mind. It actually made the book somewhat problematic.
Shamatha is always helpful, it is by no means a necessary pre-requisite to Dzogchen since it is accomplished via Dzogchen practice.

Can you describe how he does that,like what he actually says vs your interpretation?

I dont have the book in front of me but worked on it's initial publication. During that process this was the challenge with the book. It wasnt only my interpretation, this was the feedback from Nyingma masters that I asked to give the book an endorsement as well.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Still doesn’t tell me what he says that you object to. The reason I ask is that I am taking his Wisdom Experience courses, and what you are saying here is contradictory to what I am getting from them. Might just be me, but given those factors I can’t regard it as valid criticism without more specifics, because so far what I have learned has been in accord with other semde presentations, perhaps with a little extra shamatha cheerleading.

I also think the courses are excellent in general, and quite lucid, so that’s my bias.

[Josef]

Still doesn’t tell me what he says that you object to. The reason I ask is that I am taking his Wisdom Experience courses, and what you are saying here is contradictory to what I am getting from them. Might just be me, but given those factors I can’t regard it as valid criticism without more specifics, because so far what I have learned has been in accord with other semde presentations, perhaps with a little extra shamatha cheerleading.

I also think the courses are excellent in general, and quite lucid, so that’s my bias.

Okay, I've merely recounted my experience of working on a book by BAW about a decade ago. The critique was primarily from Nyingma lamas that he was positioning shamatha as a prerequisite for Dzogchen, he may have corrected that error by now.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Still doesn’t tell me what he says that you object to. The reason I ask is that I am taking his Wisdom Experience courses, and what you are saying here is contradictory to what I am getting from them. Might just be me, but given those factors I can’t regard it as valid criticism without more specifics, because so far what I have learned has been in accord with other semde presentations, perhaps with a little extra shamatha cheerleading.

I also think the courses are excellent in general, and quite lucid, so that’s my bias.

Okay, I've merely recounted my experience of working on a book by BAW about a decade ago. The critique was primarily from Nyingma lamas that he was positioning shamatha as a prerequisite for Dzogchen, he may have corrected that error by now.

Fair enough, I should read the book in full, I've only read excerpts.

[haha]

But how do you directly experience alayavijnana? How Can you percieve or dustinguish it experientially? How is lungmaten related with that?

I have the opinion that experienced teacher can help you to distinguish them. It can be distinguished: one can know this is mind, this is mental factors, this is bhavanga, this is alaya, this is sensation, this is wisdom, this is cessation, etc. There is demarcation to distinguish them.

If one has basic foundation of vipassana whether that is based on Theravadi model or that is based on Vajrayana model. One can read abhidharma and related materials, and then, one can practically apply it for this purpose.

[Malcolm]

But how do you directly experience alayavijnana? How Can you percieve or dustinguish it experientially? How is lungmaten related with that?

I have the opinion that experienced teacher can help you to distinguish them. It can be distinguished: one can know this is mind, this is mental factors, this is bhavanga, this is alaya, this is sensation, this is wisdom, this is cessation, etc. There is demarcation to distinguish them.

Your opinion is not shared by Vimalamitra.