1. Overview: What Exists?

If you look out the window, see a beautiful world, and deem it real, you should know that Buddha will tell you that you suffer from a delusional misunderstanding of reality. Misunderstanding of reality means that you “reify what are actually imaginary external phenomena.” However, please do not panic, as all humans suffer from it because it is inherent in them. At the same time, it is also true that no one understands the consequences of the delusional understanding of reality.

However, some of the smartest people have their doubts, as does one of the best theories science has to offer today. Einstein allegedly said that “Reality is merely an illusion, although a very persistent one.” Elon Musk, on the other hand, suggests that we are living in a computer simulation. Additionally, quantum mechanics agrees and “suggests that reality at its fundamental level is uncertain, fluid, and dependent on observation.”

According to the Buddha, they are all right. Buddha teaches that the world humans experience is not reality but is an illusion because its existence is indeed observer-dependent.

Buddha makes his viewpoint very clear in the Diamond Sūtra.

“All conditioned phenomena are like the illusions of dreams or shadows of bubbles (Chinese: 一切有為法, 如夢幻泡影),

Like dew or lightning, this is how to view them correctly.” (Chinese: 如露亦如電).”

However, in contrast to Einstein’s opinions or theoretical deductions from quantum mechanics, Buddha’s teachings are neither his opinions nor based on theories. On the contrary, what Buddha teaches is what he actually realized to be natural phenomena. Furthermore, his teachings can be independently verified by third parties.

Many people are familiar with Buddhism, but few truly understand it. Supported by Buddhist Sutras and dictionaries to explain them, epistemology, and quantum field theory, which, to my knowledge, is a heretofore never-explored combination for understanding Buddhism, this website argues that, ultimately, Buddhism is not a religion, philosophy, psychology, or science, even though they are complementary. Instead, it argues that Buddhism is a unique teaching from our historical Shakyamuni Buddha about the nature of the reality humans experience. Furthermore, it argues Buddhism’s uniqueness lies in the fact that Buddha solves a problem humanity has struggled to understand for thousands of years without success: the question of “What Exist?” by expanding the scope of epistemology to include direct perception.

A) “What Exist?”

The question, “What Exists?“, is asked on Closer To Truth with the remarks, “Lots of things exist. But what’s truly fundamental? The challenge is to discern the minimum number of basic categories that explain the entirety of existence.”

B) “What Exists?” Humanity’s Continued Struggle to Understand

Indeed, asking “What Exists?” reflects humanity’s lack of a fundamental understanding of the reality in which it lives. In fact, humanity’s quest to understand the world started with pre-Socratic Greek philosophers.

One of these pre-Socratic Greek philosophers was Thales of Miletus, one of ancient Greece’s seven sages and a founding figure who accurately predicted a solar eclipse in 585 BC. According to Bryan Magee, author of The Story of Philosophy, “The question that most obsessed Thales was, ‘What is the world made of? It seemed to him that it must ultimately be made from a single element.” While he mistakenly assumed that the single element was water, Magee suggests that his insight was “amazing because the physics that led up to it had not yet been done.”  

Pythagoras of Samos, a polymath well known for his eponymous Theorem, was another pre-Socratic ancient Greek philosopher who, according to Bryan Magee, “was the first person to have the idea that all the workings of the material universe are expressible in terms of mathematics.”

Since ancient Greece, humanity has depended on observation to investigate reality. However, understanding reality based on observation has never been reliable and is often subject to change.

Euclid was an ancient Greek mathematician and was considered the “father of geometry.” His geometry is called “planar geometry” because he thought the earth was flat based on his observations. Later, when scientists found that the earth is spherical, they expanded Euclid’s planar geometry to non-Euclidean geometry, which significantly helped navigation around the globe.

In the Middle Ages, geocentrism, the idea that the earth was at the center of the universe, with the Sun, moon, stars, and planets revolving around it, was the predominant view regarding the shape of the universe. However, in the sixteenth century, Nicolaus Copernicus, a Renaissance astronomer and Catholic cleric, challenged the idea and proposed a mathematical model of heliocentrism, suggesting that the earth orbits the Sun. Galileo Galilei then provided supporting evidence by observing the sky with a telescope.

Isaac Newton was the first scientist to propose that reality exists as solid particles. However, he never actually investigated whether the solid particles existed. According to author Fritjof Capra of The Tao of Physics, Newton wrote the following in his Opticks, “It seems probable to me that God in the beginning formed matter in solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, movable particles, of such sizes and figures, and with such other properties, and in such proportion to space, as most conduced to the end for which he formed them; and that these primitive particles being solids, are incomparably harder than any porous bodies compounded of them; even so very hard, as never to wear or break in pieces; no ordinary power being able to divide what God himself made one in the first creation.” The author added, “In the Newtonian view, God had created, in the beginning, the material particles, the forces between them, and the fundamental laws of motion.”

While Newton’s theory worked exceptionally well for hundreds of years and continues to be used, however, with the advent of quantum field theory in quantum mechanics, quantum scientists, such as Dr. David Tong of the University of Cambridge, came to realize that “there are no particles in the world,” as he firmly stated in his video lecture, “Quantum Fields: The Real Building Blocks of the Universe.”  

In this video, How is the Cosmos Constructed, 2004 Nobel Laureate Dr. Frank Wilczek added more details, “The most basic objects out of which to construct the universe are not particles but objects we call quantum fields. We think of them as space-filling ethers that create and destroy the objects, the particles. …….. We see particles as epiphenomena. They are kind of ripples on the deep structure.” While Dr. Wilczek did not elaborate on the “deep structure,” we know the ripples he referred to are the ripples of the quantum fields he mentioned.

 

Waves in a fluctuating field are called epiphenomena because they are considered secondary phenomena arising from the primary phenomenon, which is the quantum field. As a secondary phenomenon, the existence of the ripples depends conditionally on the field being fluctuating. When the field ceases to fluctuate, particles also cease to exist. While there is no situation in which the quantum energy field ceases to fluctuate, this is not the case in Buddhism. A quiescent mind is a critically important concept in Buddhism.

The image above, from Dr. David Tong, shows ripples as epiphenomena and the field from which they arise.  

The image above, courtesy of Dr. Tony Tyson of UC Davis, is shown in Dr. Lawrence Krauss’s lecture on “A Universe From Nothing.” According to Dr. Krauss, “The spikes are where the galaxies are.” However, the spikes, each representing a galaxy in the sky, are not shown as separate entities. Instead, they are shown as huge ripples in a field that connects them all. In other words, like the tiny ripples in Dr. Tong’s quantum energy field, these massive galaxies in the sky are also epiphenomena within it.  

In other words, all phenomena in the universe —from the tiniest ripples in the quantum field to the giant galaxies in the sky — coexist with their unobservable epiphenomena of quantum energy that underlie them.

(These concepts in quantum mechanics are introduced because Buddhism has its equivalents in mentality, which we will discuss later.)

So, what is quantum energy?

According to this article, energy, “in physics,” is a “quantitative property that is transferred to a body or a physical system, recognizable in the performance of work and in the form of heat and light.”

Furthermore, quantum “is a discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents.”

In other words, quantum energy is a man-made quantitative tool that comes in discrete units and helps scientists investigate universal phenomena they deem to be “body” or “physical.” However, as a quantitative property, energy exists as numbers in equations, but not in nature. Therefore, while energy enables scientists to explain the world’s physical phenomena using mathematical expressions and satisfies Pythagoras’ insight “that all the workings of the material universe are expressible in terms of mathematics,” it does not inform them about “What Exists?”

In this discussion on “What Exists,” four scientists were interviewed. Among them, there were four different views, ranging from a quantum physicist who believes that “the universe is a quantum mechanical wave function,” to one believing that consciousness has equal standing with physics, to one who thinks that reality is limited to what is only known to science, to a quantum physicist who believes in God. However, they were unable to express a unanimous opinion on “What Exist?”

More significantly, besides not understanding the physical world, the world of energy provides no knowledge of the never-observable, yet obviously present reality in all humans: their consciousness.

Indeed, in a world of energy, consciousness is nowhere to be found. Unable to find an answer in the physical universe, scientists start to wonder about consciousness and ask questions such as, “Is Consciousness Ultimate Reality?” “Is Consciousness Fundamental?” “Does Consciousness Cause the Cosmos?“, etc. Yet, as with “What Exists?” in the physical universe, physicists are also unable to answer these questions about consciousness. Indeed, after extensive dialogues with over 200 religious leaders, philosophers, and scientists worldwide to map the Landscape of Consciousness, the best a prominent scientist can offer is a taxonomy of consciousness, without ever establishing a consensus definition. Indeed, even with the advent of Einstein’s Theories of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, humanity continues to struggle, without success, with understanding “What Exists?”

However, a willingness to inquire whether consciousness is fundamental represents a significant step forward in humanity’s quest to understand “What Exist?”  

Indeed, the Buddha answered “What Exists?” more than 2,600 years ago while meditating under the Bodhi Tree until he achieved enlightenment.

C) “What Exist?” Buddha Answers: Nothing but Mentality

The origin of the doctrine Nothing but Mentality is Mohe Zhiguan (Chinese:摩訶止觀), a “voluminous” and “comprehensive Buddhist doctrinal summa which discusses meditation and various key Buddhist doctrines. ….. It is particularly important in the development of Buddhist meditation….,” and “a major focus of the Móhē zhǐguān is the practice of Samatha (Chinese:止), meaning “calming or stabilizing meditation” and Vipassana (Chinese:觀), meaning “clear seeing or insight.” Most importantly, Mohe Zhiguan “is founded firmly on scripture; every key assertion of the text is supported by sūtra quotations.”

With “every key assertion of the text supported by sūtra quotations,” Mohe Zhiguan is a comprehensive, highly credible, and authoritative Buddhist text.

In Mohe Zhiguan, Buddha teaches that, at the highest and most profound level of meditative state, one can have direct insight into the inconceivable realm, where there is

• “nothing outside of rupa and citta (Chinese: 不出色，心),
• “citta gives rise to rupa (Chinese: 色從心造),” and that
• all are essentially citta (Chinese: 全體是心).”

Citta (Chinese: 心), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “mind,” “mentality,” or “thought.” Furthermore, “Citta is contrasted with the physical body and materiality.”

Rupa (Chinese: 色), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit and Pali, ‘body,’ ‘form,’ or ‘materiality,’ viz., that which has shape and is composed of matter. More generally, rupa refers to the materiality, which serves as the object of the five sensory consciousness (vijnana): visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, and tactile.”

By defining rupa as “body,” “form,” or “materiality,” and as the object of the visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, and tactile senses, the Buddha makes it clear that rupa refers to the universe humans experience.

So, what is the meaning that both citta and rupa are inconceivable?

Inconceivable (Romanized Sanskrit: acintya; Chinese: 不可思議), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit, a term used to describe the ultimate reality that is beyond conceptualization.”

“Beyond conceptualization” means that mentality is a reality that cannot be perceived, i.e., it cannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched. To put it another way, mentality is a reality that is not manifested.

Natural gas is another example of a reality that is “beyond conceptualization.” Therefore, like mentality, it is not something that humans can see, hear, smell (without adding odorant), taste, or touch.

Indeed, with citta being mentality, and rupa arising from mentality, Zhiguan concludes, “All are essentially citta.” These four words from the Mohe Zhiguan, “all are essentially citta,” are the foundation of the doctrine that there is “Nothing but Mentality (Chinese: 心外無法).”

The question, “What Exists?” requires that the answer be fundamental and that it “discerns the minimum number of basic categories that explain the entirety of existence.” Buddha’s answer satisfies both requirements. Not only is mentality fundamental, but it only consists of two categories that can explain the entirety of existence: citta and rupa.

By teaching that mentality is the only fundamental reality in the cosmos, the Buddha realized Thales’ insight that everything in the universe could be composed of one element. However, Thales might not have anticipated that the component would be non-physical.

D) Two Vastly Different Realities in the Cosmos.

Given that Buddha’s cosmos comprises two categories of mentality with different fluctuation statuses, and that scientists consider everything in the universe to be physical, it should not be surprising that their cosmologies differ widely.

1) The Universe according to Physics.

Original image- https://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/media/121236/121236_NewPieCharts720.png

According to NASA, the cosmos consists of a single universe divided into two components: a 95.4% “dark” component, comprising dark energy and matter, and a 4.6% atomic realm.

However, according to NASA, 95.4% of the dark universe is unknown because “Dark matter and dark energy are mysterious substances that affect and shape the cosmos, and scientists are still trying to figure them out.”

On the other hand, although the other slice is deemed atomic, there is no scientific consensus that atomic particles exist. As mentioned earlier, according to quantum field theory, particles no longer exist. In fact, particles have become epiphenomena, ripples in quantum fields.

At the same time, the obviously present but never observable reality that humans possess —consciousness —is nowhere to be found. Furthermore, the physical universe is full of many unsolved problems and mysteries, many of which have remained unsolved since their discoveries, with some for over centuries, such as the “Mind-Body Problem,” “Central Mystery of Quantum Mechanics,” “Observer Effect,” “Cosmological Constant Problem,” and “Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?”

However, in the cosmos where there are two categories of Nothing but Mentality, none of these issues appear, as will be discussed later.

2) The Cosmos according to Buddha.

To understand the cosmos according to Buddha, we start with the Buddha’s fundamental doctrine that all phenomena in the cosmos belong to one of the two conditions of beings.

Pratyaya (Chinese: 緣), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit, ‘condition’: referring to the subsidiary factors whose concomitance results in the production of an effect from a cause.” “For example, in the production of a sprout from a seed, the seed would be the cause (Hetu), while such factors as heat and moisture would be conditions (pratyaya).”

In his doctrine known as the Two Conditions of Dharma, Buddha teaches that all phenomena in the world exist in one of two conditions.

i) Two Conditions of Dharma (Chinese: 二為法)

In the Sandhinirmocana Sūtra (Chinese: 解深密經), Buddha teaches that “there are two types of dharma, unconditioned (Chinese: 無為), and the other conditioned (Chinese: 一切法者, 略有二種, 一者有為, 二者無為“).

Dharma (Chinese: 法), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit, ‘factor,’ or ‘element:’ a polysemous term of wide import in Buddhism and therefore notoriously difficult to translate, a problem acknowledged in traditional sources; as many as ten meanings of the term are found in the literature.” However, “one of its most significant and common usages is to refer to ‘teachings’ or ‘doctrines,’ whether they be Buddhist or non-Buddhist.” “A second (and very different) principal denotation of dharma is a physical or mental “factor” or “fundamental” “constituent element,” or “simply phenomenon.”

For our current discussion, it is sufficient to understand dharma as a phenomenon.

• Unconditioned Dharma (Romanized Sanskrit: asamskrtadharma; Chinese: 無為法) is, according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, “‘uncompounded,’…. not conditioned and therefore perduring phenomena that are not subject to impermanence.”
• Conditioned Dharma (Sanskrit: samskrtadharma; Chinese: 有為法), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “a term that describes all impermanent phenomena, that is, ‘all phenomena that are produced through the concomitance of causes and conditions. ‘Furthermore,’ Buddha is said to have taught: When this is present, that comes to be, / From the arising of this, that arises. / When this is absent, that does not come to be. / From the cessation of this, that cease.'”

ii) Citta and Rupa:

Citta: The Unconditioned Dharma.

• Citta is an unconditioned dharma because it is “not subject to impermanence.”
• Citta is “not subject to impermanence” because it refers to the quiescent mentality: without fluctuations, its “realness” can never change.
• Since its “realness” never changes, Citta is the Ultimate Reality (Romanized Sanskrit: tattva; Chinese: 實相). This is the definition of the Ultimate Reality in Buddhism: to be the Ultimate Reality, its “realness” must never change.
• As a quiescent mentality, Citta represents a state of being aware. Therefore, the realm of citta is where there is Nothing but Awareness. It is why Buddha deems it “uncompounded.”  
• In his teaching on Suchness (Chinese: 真如), Buddha describes “the eternal nature of the Ultimate Reality that as ‘ever thus,’ or ‘just so’ and free of conceptual elaborations.”
• In his doctrine known as Such is the Way of Dharma (Chinese: 法爾如是), Buddha teaches that the nature of the Ultimate Reality is noncausal (Chinese: 非因緣). Indeed, as an eternal phenomenon, Citta exists without being caused.
• According to the Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, in Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (Chinese: 道行般若波羅蜜經), Buddha teaches that “the thought of enlightenment is no thought since in its essence original nature is transparently luminous (Romanized Sankskrit: prabhasvara; Chinese: 光明).”
• As a quiescent mentality, Citta qualifies as a “no thought” mind. Therefore, per Buddha’s definition, the Ultimate Reality is an enlightened and luminous realm spread throughout the cosmos.  
• It is essential to understand that, while Buddha teaches that there are two realms of reality in the cosmos, they do correspond to the two slices in the NASA universe.
  • Citta corresponds to the realm of dark energy in the NASA universe because, according to Buddha, it is where the universe expands. It is equivalent to dark energy because, according to science, the universe’s expansion is driven by dark energy.
• The significant thing to understand about the Ultimate Reality is that, as the most mysterious doctrine from Buddhism, it is verifiable. Indeed, faith in Buddhism is not blind, as the Verification Category provides several examples and will be discussed later.

Rupa: The Conditioned Dharma

• In contrast to Cittta, rupa is a conditioned phenomenon, meaning that everything in it is “impermanent…produced through the concomitance of causes and conditions.”
• As an impermanent phenomenon, rupa refers to a fluctuating mentality, in contrast to the Ultimate Reality.    
• In contrast to Citta, which is a state of awareness, a fluctuating Rupa refers to a state of consciousness.  
• According to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, in the Aṅguttara Nikāya (Chinese: 增一阿含經), Buddha stated, “The mind, O monks, is luminous, but defiled by adventitious defilements.”
• In other words, in contrast to the enlightened and luminous Citta, Buddha deems the fluctuating mentality “defiled.”
• Defilement means that the realm of the fluctuating mentality is unenlightened and non-luminous.
• Therefore, the fluctuating mentality can be called unenlightened or non-luminous.
• In fact, both terms are used. While unenlightened mentality (Chinese: 不覺心) usually refers to the mental state of all living beings (Romanized Sanskrit: sattva; Chinese: 有情/眾生) who are born conscious, non-luminosity (Romanized Sanskrit: tamasa; Chinese: 無明) generally indicates a realm of fluctuating mentality that exists separately from the Ultimate Reality in its own domain.
  • An example is the role of non-luminosity as the first link in Buddha’s doctrine known as the Twelvefold Chain of Dependent Origination (Chinese: 十二因緣).
  • In Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra (Chinese: 勝鬘師子吼一乘大方便方廣經), (Chinese: 勝鬘師子吼一乘大方便方廣經, English: Lion’s Roar of Queen Śrīmālā), Buddha teaches that “non-luminosity is without a beginning (Chinese: 無始無明).“
    • The logic of this insightful question is that, if non-luminosity is the first link in the Twelvefold Chain of Dependent Origination, then where does non-luminosity itself come from?
    • In this one-minute clip, Dharma Master Jing Kong discussed the Buddha’s answer to a question by his disciple Purna (Chinese: 富樓那) that is recorded in the Śūraṅgama Sūtra (Chinese: 大佛頂首楞嚴經), “Where does non-luminosity without a beginning come from (Chinese: 無始無明是怎麼來的?).” Buddha replied, “There is no reason; it comes from nowhere and goes nowhere (Chinese: 它沒有原因，它沒有來處，也沒有去處).”
    • In other words, non-luminosity, like Citta, exists eternally without a beginning or end.
• Rupa, defined as” ‘body,’ ‘form,’ or ‘materiality,'” and serving as “the object of the five sensory consciousness (vijnana): visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, and tactile,” refers to the phenomenal world that humans can see, hear, smell, taste, and touch.
  • In other words, Rupa corresponds to the atomic slice of the NASA universe, specifically referring to the quantum energy field.
    • The uniqueness of the quantum energy field is that quantum scientists consider it the foundational block of the universe.
    • Given that non-luminosity is the first link in the Twelvefold Chain of Dependent Origination, it can also be considered as the foundational block of the universe, except that, according to the Buddha, it is dependently originated.
    • In other words, non-luminosity and the quantum energy field are equivalent.
    • In fact, beyond the building blocks of the universe, there are many other reasons why non-luminosity and the quantum energy field are equivalent, such as quantization, the fact that empty space is not empty, a single field everywhere for all time, the Higgs Equivalent and Beyond, and epiphenomena. Please click on the relevant link for a more nuanced discussion on these topics.
    • Since non-luminosity is a realm of fluctuations, like the quantum energy field, all phenomena, all phenomena in the Buddhist universe, from the tiny ripples in non-luminosity to giant galaxies in the sky, are epiphenomena, as they are in quantum mechanics.
    • There is, nevertheless, a significant difference. Since non-luminosity is a realm of fluctuating mentality, it is a realm of consciousness; all its epiphenomena are conscious.
  • Quantum mechanics is often considered incomplete “because it does not fully explain the underlying physical reality behind measurement outcomes.”  However, by incorporating consciousness into the quantum energy field, “physical reality” no longer exists, and the view that the Observer Effect changes reality is no longer valid. In other words, having consciousness in the quantum energy field completes quantum mechanics.

iii) The Cosmological Constant Problem.

Having two realms of mentality in the cosmos is not a bad thing, as it helps to solve two of the hardest problems in the NASA universe: the mystery of dark energy and the Cosmological Constant Problem.

• Dark Energy.
  • As mentioned earlier, dark energy is a mysterious material to science. However, dark energy plays a critical role in the universe because it not only “drives the accelerating expansion of the universe,” but is also “closely associated” with Einstein’s Cosmological Constant, which, scientists suggest, may also be the “vacuum that holds the key to a full understanding of nature.”
  • However, according to the Buddha, the driver of the expansion of the universe is Citta, the Ultimate Reality, and not the realm of rupa, which is equivalent to the NASA universe.
  • In other words, dark energy and the Ultimate Reality are equivalent. It makes sense for several reasons:
    • If dark energy is the Ultimate Reality, it makes sense that it is mysterious to scientists. As will be discussed later in epistemology, verifying the Ultimate Reality is beyond the scope of the scientific method because it requires the investigator to become part of it to perceive it directly.
    • It also makes sense that dark energy is equivalent to the Ultimate Reality, for, as the equivalent to the Ultimate Reality, dark energy can not only be “closely associated” with the Cosmological Constant, but also be the “vacuum that holds the key to a full understanding of nature.” After all, the Ultimate Reality is critical for a complete understanding of the cosmos.  
    • From the Buddhist perspective, the universe cannot expand within itself because, as mentioned earlier, its existence is illusory and observer-dependent. Certainly, while an observer can manifest the universe, the observer cannot be the driver of its expansion.
• The Cosmological Constant Problem.
  • The Cosmological Constant Problem “is the substantial disagreement between the observed values of vacuum energy density (the small value of the cosmological constant) and the much larger theoretical value of zero-point energy suggested by quantum field theory.” Furthermore, the discrepancy between them is “calculated to be between 50 and as many as 120 orders of magnitude.”
  • Such a large discrepancy can hardly be attributed to a mathematical issue or errors in observation or theory.
  • Indeed, it is a structural problem because if the realm with fluctuations is separated from the realm without fluctuations, as in the cosmos Buddha teaches, the Cosmological Constant Problem naturally disappears. For a more nuanced discussion, please visit Post 9 and Post 18.

E) Epistemology: Two Means Human Knowledge.

Having discussed the vast differences between Buddhism and science in their understanding of reality, we must explore why humanity has struggled for thousands of years to understand “What Exists?” and how the Buddha came to know what he knew, thereby developing a cosmos so different from what contemporary science offers.

To understand that, we explore epistemology.

Also known as the Theory of Knowledge, epistemology, “is the branch of philosophy that examines the nature, origin, and limits of knowledge.“

Buddha teaches that two means of knowledge are necessary to understand Citta and Rupa: inference and direct perception.

The means of knowledge is known in Sanskrit as pramana (Chinese: 量).

We start with inference, the means of knowledge by which humans understand Rupa.    

i) Inference (Romanized Sanskrit: anumana; Chinese: 比量)

According to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, inference “allows us to glean knowledge concerning objects that are not directly evident to the senses.”

To understand inference, we begin with a discussion between the host of Closer to Truth, Dr. Robert Kuhn and Dr. Menachan Fisch, “an Israeli philosopher and the Joseph and Ceil Mazer Professor Emeritus of History and Philosophy of Science, and co-director of the Frankfurt-Tel Aviv Center for the Study of Religious and Interreligious Dynamics at Tel Aviv University,” on the topic How Do We Know What We Know.

Dr. Fisch began his talk by saying that, according to “the most fundamental understanding of latter-day philosophy, we do not know by our eyes or by our ears, but by means of the words we speak.” In other words, to understand how humans know what they know, we must not only understand the origin, scope, and limits of “the words we speak,”  but also the roles our senses play in it.

The eyes and ears are, of course, for observing and listening, two of the five senses humans use to perceive the world. According to Dr. Fisch, human sensing — i.e., what we see, hear, smell, taste, and touch — is a process consisting of the following five sequential steps.

• “The world impacts on us in a causal manner through all our senses.”
• “The content imparted on those stimuli is the reading-in of the mind.
• “The content gets fashioned and conceptualized by our minds in ways that we do not govern.”
• “Sitting in the command room of our minds with the inner eyes and looking out.”
• “Seeing on the screen the world that we experience.”

As shown in the image above, we will use observation as an example of sensing, with a distant galaxy as the observed object.

From Dr. Fisch’s description, step three of observation is “conceptualization in ways we do not govern.” While Dr. Fisch did not elucidate what conceptualization means, we know that, regardless of its specific nature, it not only distorts the original content that “The world impacts on us in a causal manner through all our senses,” but it also happens “In ways we do not govern,” meaning that the distortion occurs without anyone knowing or control.  

An easy way to understand this discrepancy is to realize that when “The world impacts on us in a causal manner through all our senses,” the galaxy does not crash into our eyes to be perceived. Indeed, whatever carries the information about the distant galaxy to the observer is unobservable. However, the observation process ends with a galaxy that can be “seen.”

By transforming unobservable information about the galaxy into an observable phenomenon, human observation indeed distorts the information it originates.  

However, Dr. Fisch did not address this question. In fact, as the image shows, except for naming the five steps of sensing, he did not provide any details about any of them.  

However, this is to be expected. As Buddha teaches, the details of each of the five steps of sensing relate to what happens in the mind when the information becomes a “reading in the mind.” Indeed, knowledge about what happens in the mind is unavailable even to a highly educated, prominent philosopher who relies on inference to understand the world. However, we will clarify the details of all five steps of sensing when we discuss the Five Aggregates, which are Buddha’s equivalent of the five-step sensing steps.

Let’s first try to understand what Buddha means when he teaches that inference is for knowledge regarding objects “not directly evident to the senses.” In the five steps of observation, which object is “not directly evident to the senses?”

From the descriptions that Dr. Fisch provided, it is apparent that the only “object that is not directly evident to the senses” is the galaxy. are the myriad phenomena in “the world we experience.” Indeed, the galaxy is “not directly evident to the senses” because it does not crash into the eyes to be observed. The remaining four steps, from the “reading in of the mind,” to “conceptualization in ways we do not govern,” and the “inner eyes looking out,” are intimately evident to the mind. Therefore, we can be sure that inference is for understanding the phenomenon of a galaxy or, more generally, the phenomena of “the world we experience.”

To understand “the world we experience,” humans developed a vocabulary of words. However, according to Dr. Fisch, words are inferentially connected. For example, “if this point is north of that, then that point is south of that. That is about the meaning of the words. This isn’t an empirical fact. This is about how these concepts relate to each other. The limits of what we can know, the limits of our world, are the limits of our language!”

Dr. Robert Kuhn immediately understood the significance of what Dr. Fisch said as he questioned, “What prevents you from cascading into skepticism where we can’t know anything? Everything is related to something else. I have no foundation between what I believe and what the world really is. So, how do I know anything?”

Of course, Dr. Kuhn is right. While inferentially connected word-based knowledge informs us how “everything is related to something else,” it does not provide any information about “what the world really is.” Indeed, “how do I know anything” if all I can know is about how one thing is related to the other?

So, that is the meaning of Buddha’s inference: it refers to inferentially connected word-based knowledge that allows humans to understand the phenomenal world they experience. However, it provides no knowledge about “what the world really is.” In other words, the question of what the world is made of: the question that humanity has struggled to understand without success. The question of “What Exists?”

Dr. Max Planck was a 1918 Nobel Prize Laureate in Physics and the originator of quantum theory. After a lifetime of studying quantum mechanics, he understood the limits of science, as he said:  

• “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivatives from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”
• Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are a part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.”

Dr. Planck was correct in asserting that consciousness is fundamental to the universe. In the universe the Buddha teaches, consciousness is fundamental because it is built from consciousness. According to Buddha, Dr. Planck was also correct to suggest that matter is derived from consciousness: it is the meaning of “citta gives rise to rupa” that Buddha teaches in Mohe Zhiguan. While citta refers to the fluctuating mentality of non-luminosity, rupa is the universe that citta gives rise to.

Also, as Dr. Planck recognized, to solve the mystery of consciousness, one must be part of the mystery, the mystery of “What Exists?”    

Indeed, becoming part of the mystery is what Buddha’s second means of knowledge, direct perception, does.

ii) Direct Perception

To understand direct perception, one must first understand what makes a person a Buddha.

Buddha (Chinese: 佛), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit and Pali;” awakened one” or “enlightened one; “… meaning to “awaken” or to “open up” (as does a flower,) and thus traditionally etymologized as one who has awakened from the deep sleep of (unenlightenment) and opened his consciousness to encompass all objects of knowledge.”

The key point to understand is that the Buddha’s knowledge does not come from studying books or earning a few advanced degrees. Instead, it comes from “opening his consciousness to encompass all objects of knowledge.”

The significance of “opening his consciousness to encompass all objects of knowledge” is that “opening one’s consciousness” is how direct perception is done, and direct perception is what enables a person to “encompass all objects of knowledge” and become a Buddha.

Direct Perception (Chinese: 現量), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “cognition that is nonconceptual, in the sense that it does not perceive its objects through the medium of an image, as does thought.”

In other words, the goal of direct perception is to know nonconceptual phenomena by avoiding thought, an active mind that is “medium of an image.”   

As mentioned earlier, in Mohe Zhiguan, Buddha teaches that both Citta and Rupa are nonconceptual because they are inconceivable, and “beyond conceptualization.”

“Beyond conceptualization” means that even mentality goes through all five sensing steps, it would not manifest as an observable phenomenon because it is not affected by the third step of sensing: “conceptualization in ways we do not govern.”  

Of course, all humans can appreciate that. Every time they make observations, everything in the world appears, except their own consciousness. The reason is that their consciousness is “beyond conceptualization.”  

As mentioned earlier, natural gas is another example of a phenomenon that is “beyond conceptualization” because, like human consciousness, it cannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched. Therefore, odorants must be added to natural gas so it can be smelled in the event of a leak, preventing disaster.

Of course, mentality cannot be manipulated in that manner. Instead, the Buddha teaches that the only way to comprehend mentality is to perceive it directly.

Direct perception is practiced through a meditative technique known as Samathavipasyana.

Samathavipasyana (Chinese: 止觀), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “In Sanskrit, ‘calmness (samatha) and insight (vipasyana),’ a term used to describe a meditative state that combines clarity and stability of samatha with the understanding of the nature of reality associated with vipasyana.” Furthermore, “The presence of vipasyana is the distinguishing feature of the wisdom that derives from meditation (Romanized Sanskrit=bhavanamayiprajna; Chinese: 修慧).

The Chinese translation of Samathavipasyana is “stop and insight.” In other words, one must practice Samathavipasyana until the mind is still before one can have insight into reality that is “nonconceptual.”

The significance of a still mind is that, given that the “reading in of the mind” requires an active mind, the still mind prevents it from happening. When the “reading in of the mind” stops, “conceptualization in ways we do not govern” also ceases, together with all the remaining steps. Consequently, by avoiding “conceptualization in ways we do not govern,” direct perception achieves a “nonconceptual” understanding of reality.

Another significance of a quiescent mind is that, as discussed earlier, in Astasahasrika-Prajnaparamita (道行般若波羅蜜經),-Prajñāpāramitā (道行般若波羅蜜經), Buddha teaches that “the thought of enlightenment is no thought since in its essential original nature is transparently luminous (Romanized Sanskrit= prabhasvara; Chinese: 光明).”

Given that a quiescent mind is a “no thought” mind, it is an enlightened mind, by Buddha’s definition. It follows that only when one practices Samathavipasyana until one’s mind is quiescent and attains enlightenment can one directly perceive reality.

Samadhi is a Buddhist term that describes the state of mind at the time of enlightenment.

Samadhi (Chinese: 三昧/三摩地), according to The Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, is “a nondualistic state of consciousness in which the consciousness of the experiencing ‘subject’ becomes one with the experienced ‘object,’ – thus is only experiential content. This state of consciousness is often referred to as ‘one-pointedness of mind’; this expression, however, is misleading because it calls up the image of ‘concentration’ on one point on which the mind is ‘directed.’ However, Samadhi is neither a straining concentration on one point nor is the mind directed from here (subject) to there (object), which would be a dualistic mode of experience.”

There are several critically important concepts in the definition of Samadhi.

i) Subject and Object

• “Experiencing subject” refers to the quiescent state of the mind of the enlightened individual.
• “Experienced Object” refers to the quiescent mentality of Citta, the enlightened and luminous Ultimate Reality spread throughout the universe, as discussed earlier.  

ii) “Opening one’s consciousness.”

• “Opening one’s consciousness” is how the enlightened individual can enter a nondualistic state of mind with the enlightened Citta and gain access to “all objects of knowledge.”
• Upon enlightenment, when these two minds become nondualistic, the enlightened individual becomes, in the words of Dr. Max Planck, “part of the mystery,” the mystery of “What Exist,” the inconceivable Citta and Rupa.    
• Becoming part of the inconceivable reality was how the Buddha understood its mystery, thus enabling him to teach what he did in Mohe Zhiguan and Buddhist Sutras.
• It is also why Buddha’s cosmos is a three-body structure: Buddha must be part of it to understand the inconceivable Citta and Rupa.

ii) Experiential Content.

• So, what is “experiential content“?
  • By definition, “experiential content” is “content” and can be experienced.
  • The “content” refers to “all objects of knowledge” that an enlightened person must encompass to become a Buddha.
  • “All objects of knowledge” refer to information embedded in Citta and Rupa.  

To understand that information is embedded, let’s use the galaxy as an example. Assuming that you have been taught what galaxies look like, you know a galaxy is a galaxy the moment you see it the next time. This is because the information about the galaxy comes directly from the galaxy’s conscious epiphenomenon. However, you would not call the moon next to the galaxy a galaxy, because the information about the galaxy is only embedded in it, but not in the moon. It is true for every phenomenon in the world. Whether it is a dog, a cat, water, a stone, your friend, etc., information about whatever you observe is embedded in the conscious epiphenomena of the phenomenon itself.   

Therefore, depending on the amount of “all objects of knowledge” encompassed, there are many levels of enlightenment in Buddhism. While many schools of Buddhism offer different delineations of enlightenment, the most well-known scheme holds that there are Two Obstructions to be overcome before one can encompass “all objects of knowledge.”   

F) Levels of Understanding Reality.

Encompassing different amounts of “all objects of knowledge,” of course, means different levels of understanding reality. Generally, there are two major levels of understanding, each with a problem to solve. In the  Avatamsaka Sūtra (Chinese: 大方廣佛華嚴經), Buddha made clear the two problems that he would humanity away as he said the following upon awakening from his deep meditative state of enlightenment:

“Surprise! Surprise! All the conditioned beings of this land, while possessing the wisdom of a Tathāgata, are foolish and confused and have neither knowledge nor insight. I must teach them the proper path, turn them permanently away from their delusion and attachments, and realize from within the immense wisdom of a Tathāgata, without any difference from a Buddha. (Chinese: 奇哉奇哉,此處眾生,雲何具有如來智慧,愚癡迷惑,不知不覺,我當教以聖道, 令其永離妄想執著,自於身中,得見如來廣大智慧,與佛無異.)”

In other words, he would like to turn humanity away from its delusions (Chinese: 妄想) and attachments (Chinese: 執著).

In his doctrine known as the Two Obstructions, Buddha teaches that, to turn away from delusion and attachment, one must first overcome two obstructions, known in Romanized Sanskrit as avarana.

Avarana (Chinese: 障), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit and Pali, ‘obstruction,’ ‘obstacle,’ or ‘hindrance.’ In Mahāyāna literature, two types of avarana are commonly described: ‘obstructions that are afflictions,’ or ‘afflictive obstructions,’ and ‘cognitive or noetic obstructions, viz., ‘obstructions to omniscience.'”

The two obstructions are:

• i) Afflictive Obstructions (Romanized Sanskrit: klesavarana; Chinese: 煩惱障), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, are “in Sanskrit, obstructions that are the afflictions, and first of the two obstructions that the Mahāyāna holds must be overcome in order to complete the Bodhisattva path and achieve Buddhahood.” Furthermore, “overcoming these types of obstructions will lead to freedom from further rebirth (and specifically the Paricchedajaramarana, or “determinative birth-and-rebirth (Chinese: 分段生死).”
• ii) Cognitive or Noetic Obstructions (to Omniscience) (Romanized Sanskrit: jneyavarana; Chinese: 所知障), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, “The second of the two categories of obstructions, together with the afflictive obstructions, that must be overcome in order to perfect the Bodhisattva path and achieve Buddhahood. In the Yogacara and Madhyamaka systems, cognitive obstructions are treated as subtle hindrances that serve as the origin of the afflictive obstructions and result from fundamental misapprehensions about the nature of reality. According to Yogacara, because of the attachment deriving ultimately from the reification of what are actually imaginary external phenomena, conceptualization and discrimination arise in the mind, which lead in turn to pride, ignorance, and wrong views. Based on these mistakes in cognition, the individual engages in defiled actions, such as anger, envy, etc., which constitute the afflictive obstructions. The afflictive obstructions may be removed by followers of Sravaka (Chinese: 聲聞), Pratyekabuddha (Chinese: 緣覺/獨覺), and beginning Bodhisattva paths by applying various antidotes or counteragents (Pratipajksa) to the afflictions (Klesa); overcoming these types of obstructions will lead to freedom from further rebirth. The cognitive obstructions, however, are more deeply ingrained and can only be overcome by advanced bodhisattvas who seek instead to achieve Buddhahood by perfecting their understanding of emptiness. Buddhas, therefore, are the only class of beings who have overcome both types of obstructions and thus are able simultaneously to cognize all objects of knowledge in the universe; this is one of the sources of their unparalleled skills as teachers of sentient beings. The jneyavarana are therefore sometimes translated as “obstructions to omniscience.”

As Buddha said, attachments are derived “ultimately from the reification of what are actually imaginary external phenomena.” Furthermore, because of attachments, “conceptualization and discrimination arise in the mind, which lead in turn to pride, ignorance, and wrong views. Based on these mistakes in cognition, the individual engages in defiled actions, such as anger, envy, etc., which constitute the afflictive obstructions.”

• • Defiled actions are generally categorized into what is known in Buddhism as the Three Poisons (Romanized Sanskrit: trivasa, Chinese: 三毒).
    • The Three Poisons are:
      • Desire or Greed (Romanized Sanskrit=raga or lobha; Chinese: 貪).
      • Hatred, Aversion, or Ill Will (Romanized Sanskrit = dvesa; Chinese: 瞋).
      • Confusion, Benightedness, or Foolishness (Romanized Sanskrit: Moha, Chinese: 癡).

So, to turn away from attachment, one must stop one’s “reification of what are actually imaginary external phenomena.” Achieving that requires understanding that external phenomena are imaginary. Understanding that “external phenomena are imaginary” is not something inference can achieve; it requires enlightenment.  

In the Verification Category, three examples of enlightenment are discussed.

In Post 10, the enlightened experience of contemporary American Adyashanti is discussed. Upon his enlightenment, Adyashanti witnessed the vanishing of the universe and his own body. This led him to understand that awareness is the nature of his existence and that of the universe, as he acknowledged, “you and your awareness are not two different things,” “resting in awareness is not a state of doing,” “it is a state of being.” These statements indicate that, upon his enlightenment, he not only understands that “physical” reality is an illusion, but that he was one with Citta, the enlightened and luminous awareness of the Ultimate Reality of the cosmos. Having understood that the nature of his existence and that of the universe is mental, Adyashanti had rid himself of his previous tendency to “reify what are actually imaginary external phenomena,” thereby overcoming his afflictive obstructions and attachments.

In Post 11, the enlightened experiences of two prominent monks from the Tang Dynasty China (A.D. 618-907), Dharma Master Hui-Neng (Chinese: 大鑒惠能), also known as the Sixth Patriarch of Chan Buddhism, and YongJia Xuanjue (Chinese: 永嘉玄覺). While they did not use the contemporary word awareness in the descriptions of their enlightenment, both witnessed the vanishing of the “largest possible universe Trichilicosm (Chinese: 三千大千世界).” However, the vanishing of the universe is enough to rid them of their tendency to “reify what are actually imaginary external phenomena,” thereby overcoming their afflictive obstructions and attachments.

Those who have overcome afflictive obstructions are known as Sravaka and Pratyekabuddha, and both are called Arhats.    

• Sravaka, or sound-hearer (Chinese: 聲聞), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “In Sanskrit, lit.’ listener;’ viz., a direct disciple of the Buddha who listened to his teaching. In the Mahāyāna, the term was used to describe those who (along with Pratyekabuddhas) sought their own liberation from suffering as an Arhat by following the Hinayana path.”
• Pratyekabuddha (Chinese: 緣覺/獨覺), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “In Sanskrit, ‘individually enlightened one’ or ‘solitary Buddha;’ an Arhat who becomes enlightened through his own efforts without receiving instructions from a Buddha in his final lifetime.”

Both Sravaka and Pratyekabuddha are considered Arhats.

• Arhat (Chinese: 阿羅漢) is, according to The Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, in Sanskrit, meaning “‘worthy one’ who has attained the highest of the Hinayana, that of ‘no-more-learning’ in the supramunda (Chinese: 聖僧) path, and who possesses the certainty that all defilements and passions have been extinguished and will not arise again in the future. The fruition of arhatship is Nirvana with remainder (Romanized Sanskrit: sopadhishesha-nirvana (Chinese: 有餘涅槃).”

After liberating from attachment and overcoming afflictive obstructions, Arhats gain “freedom from further rebirth (and specifically the Paricchedajaramarana, or “determinative birth-and-rebirth (Chinese: 分段生死). Also known as Samsara (Chinese: 輪迴), “determinative birth-and-rebirth” refers to the endless cycles of rebirth that all unenlightened must endure.

After ending their “determinative birth-and-rebirth,” the enlightened enter parinamikajaramarana.

Parinamikajaramarana. Chinese: 變易生死), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit, transfigurational birth-and-death: “while these beings have already achieved some measure of enlightenment, when they undergo rebirth and death, these occur as a ‘transfigurational birth-and-death’ of the mind made body, not a ‘determinative birth-and-death.’ Although these beings have overcome afflictive obstructions that tie one to the cycles of samasara (and specifically to paricchedajaramarana), they may still be subject to cognitive obstructions that block full understanding (Romanized Sanskrit: jnana; Chinese: 智); thus, while they may engage in actions, these are not karma-producing actions (viz., ‘uncontaminated actions (Romanized Sanskrit: anasravakaraman; Chinese: 無漏業) that do not lead to a determinative rebirth. While such beings may then appear to be reborn, these rebirths are actually transfigurations of their mind-made bodies (Romanized Sanskrit: manomayakaya; Chinese: 意生身), which may be manipulated at will to change their appearances or to extend their life spans indefinitely”. 

While removing their attachments and overcoming afflictive obstructions, gaining “freedom from determinative birth-and-rebirth (Chinese: 分段生死),” entering “Nirvana with remainder (Romanized Sanskrit: sopadhishesha-nirvana (Chinese: 有餘涅槃)” and “transfigurational birth-and-death” are immensely significant, Arhathood is not the end of the path in Buddhism because, to enter the path of Buddhahood, the enlightened one still has to overcome his cognitive obstructions, the “subtle hindrances that serve as the origin of the afflictive obstructions and result from fundamental misapprehensions about the nature of reality.”

In other words, the goal of overcoming the Cognitive Obstruction is to understand the origin of the “fundamental misapprehensions about the nature of reality,” the fundamental cause of the Afflictive Obstructions.

As defined, Cognitive Obstruction can “only be overcome by advanced bodhisattvas who seek instead to achieve Buddhahood by perfecting their understanding of emptiness. Buddhas, therefore, are the only class of beings who have overcome both types of obstructions and thus are able simultaneously to cognize all objects of knowledge in the universe.”

In other words, to overcome his cognitive obstructions, understand the origin of the “fundamental misapprehensions about the nature of reality,” and achieve Buddhahood, an advanced bodhisattva “must first perfect his understanding of emptiness” and “cognize all objects of knowledge.”

The journey to these achievements goes through the Five Aggregates.

G) The Five Aggregates

To “perfect one’s understanding of emptiness,” one must first understand the Buddha’s doctrine known as the Five Aggregates.

Aggregates are known in Romanized Sanskrit as skandha (Chinese: 蘊), which, according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, are “in Sanskrit, lit.’ heap,’ viz. ‘aggregates,’ or ‘aggregates of being;’ one of the most common categories in Buddhist literature for enumerating the constituents of (all beings in the universe).”

The significance of the Five Aggregates is that, while they constitute all beings in the universe, they also correspond to the five steps of sensing as delineated earlier in the post. In other words, according to Buddha, everything in the universe exists because of sensing, such as observation. In other words, this is Buddha’s teaching on why the universe is observer-dependent.

Unfortunately, though immensely significant, the Five Aggregates are among the least understood teachings in Buddhism. Indeed, without the guidance of the five-step sensing process from modern-day epistemology to help elucidate the complexities of the Five Aggregates, they are practically impossible to understand.

Therefore, we will use the five steps of sensing to aid in understanding the Five Aggregates.

As discussed, the five steps of human sensing according to contemporary epistemology are:

• “the world impacts on us in a causal manner through all our senses,”
• “the content imparted on those stimuli is the reading-in of the mind,”
• “the content gets fashioned and conceptualized by our minds in ways that we do not govern,”
• “Sitting in the command room of our minds with the inner eyes and looking out,”
• “seeing on the screen the world that we experience.”

We will use the following image to illustrate the differences between the five sensing steps and the Five Aggregates. We will use observation as an example of sensing, and the distant galaxy as the observed object.

1) The Aggregate of Sensing/Receiving.

The Aggregate of Sensing/Receiving (Romanized Sanskrit: Vedanaskandha, Chinese: 受蘊) is the second Aggregate of the Five Aggregates. According to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, Vedanaskandha is “in Sanskrit and Pali, ‘sensation,’ or ‘sensory feeling.'” The Chinese translation of Vedana is “to receive or accept (Chinese: 受).”

The Aggregate of Sensing corresponds to the first step of sensing in the five-step sensing process described by modern epistemology: “the world impacts on us in a causal manner through all our senses.”

As indicated in the image, the way philosophy describes the first step of sensing gives rise to the Mind-Body Problem (Chinese: 身心問題).

On Closer to Truth, the Mind-Body Problem is asked this way, “How is it possible that mushy masses of brain cells, passing chemicals and shooting sparks, literally are mental sensations and subjective feelings? They seem so radically different.” In our current context, the Mind-Body Problem is the problem of how that which is deemed “matter,” i.e., the distant galaxy, can become an object of observation without crashing into the observer and acquire a mental property so it can become the “reading in of the mind,” in the following step.   

However, it is not the first time the Mind-Body Problem has been raised. In fact, it is a problem that has remained unresolved for centuries, dating back to the debate between British philosopher John Locke (1632-1704) and Irish philosopher George Berkeley (1685-1753).

According to Bryan Magee, author of The Story of Philosophy, after years of investigation, Locke “came to the conclusion that our notion about what actually exists – and therefore our understanding of the reality of the world – must always derive ultimately from what has been experienced through the senses.” To which Berkeley asked, “What possible warrant can we have for asserting that the existence of these mental contents is caused by things of an entirely and fundamentally different character from them to which we can never have direct access, namely, objects.”

More than five hundred years later, the answer to Berkeley’s question is still elusive.

By starting the observation process with “the world impacts on us in a causal manner through all our senses,” contemporary epistemology essentially agrees with Locke that “our understanding of the reality of the world must always derive ultimately from what has been experienced through the senses.” However, as no one has since Berkley had, contemporary epistemology could not answer the question, “What possible warrant can we have for asserting that the existence of these mental contents is caused by things of an entirely and fundamentally different character from them to which we can never have direct access, namely objects.” 

Indeed, as a discipline that relies exclusively on inferentially connected word-based knowledge to understand the world, even contemporary epistemology is not in a position to answer the Mind-Body Problem.

As discussed earlier, both Buddhism and quantum mechanics hold that every phenomenon in the world, from tiny ripples in the quantum realm to massive galaxies in the distant sky, is an epiphenomenon. Their difference is that while epiphenomena in quantum mechanics are energy, those in Buddhism, because they are fluctuations in mentality, refer to conscious thoughts, as shown in the image below. Furthermore, “experiential content” is embedded within each conscious epiphenomenon.

As shown on the Five Aggregates side of the image, in Buddhism, the content imparted on the senses that becomes the “reading in of the mind” originates from the “experiential contents” embedded in its invisible conscious epiphenomenon. It is worthwhile to note that Locke uses the same language as Buddha, describing that “our understanding of the reality of the world must always derive ultimately from what has been experienced through the senses.” “What has been experienced through the senses” is precisely the meaning of “experiential content,” which Buddha uses. Indeed, experiencing the world is the function of the senses.

Of course, as the observed galaxy is a conscious epiphenomenon, so are the observer’s senses.  

In Buddhism, the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, tactile organs, and mind are collectively known as the six sense organs or sense bases (Romanized Sanskrit: indrya; Chinese: 六根).

To each sense base, Buddha assigns its corresponding sensory consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: vijnana, Chinese: 六識): These are

1. Visual Consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: caksurvijnana, Chinese: 眼識);
2. Auditory Consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: srotravijnana, Chinese: 耳識),
3. Olfactory Consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: ghranavijnana, Chinese: 鼻識),
4. Gustatory Consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: jihvavijnana, Chinese: 舌識),
5. Tactile Consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: kayavijnana, Chinese: 身識),
6. Mental Consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: manovijnana, Chinese:意識).

Furthermore, to each sensory consciousness, Buddha assigns its corresponding object of a sensory consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: visaya; Chinese: 境). These are:

1. Rupavisaya (Chinese: 色): Object of Visual Consciousness.
2. Srotrvisaya (Chinese: 聲): Object of Auditory Consciousness.
3. Gandhvisaya (Chinese: 香): Object of Olfactory Consciousness.
4. Rasvisaya (Chinese: 味): Object of Gustatory Consciousness
5. Sprastavyvisaya (Chinese: 觸): Object of Tactile Consciousness.
6. Dharmavisaya (Chinese: 法): Object of Mental Consciousness.

The galaxy in our example belongs to the Rupavisaya.

Indeed, the Mind-Body Problem cannot exist in the cosmos where there is Nothing but Mentality. In such a universe, the observed distant galaxy does not need to crash into the observer to be sensed. When the observer and the observed are both conscious epiphenomena, the “experiential content” of the observed is conveyed to the observer by the waves of non-luminosity in which both epiphenomena reside.

Before discussing the steps “reading in of the mind?” and “conceptualization in ways we do not govern,” we need to introduce a dialogue between Bodhisattva Maitreya (Chinese: 彌勒菩薩), the future Buddha, and Shakyamuni Buddha, the Buddha of our Kalpa (Chinese: 釋迦摩尼佛), that is recorded in the Sūtra of Bodhisattva in the Womb (Chinese: 菩薩處胎經).

In the dialogue, Shakyamuni asked Maitreya, “When mind thinks, how many longings, how many thoughts, how many consciousnesses are there (Chinese: 心有所念，幾念幾想幾識耶)?” Maitreya answered, “There are three thousand two hundred million one hundred thousand thoughts at the snap of a finger. Every thought takes a form. All forms are conscious. Conscious thoughts are so minute and delicate that they cannot be held.” (Chinese: 拍手彈指頃, 三十二億百千念, 念念成形, 形皆有識, 識念極微” 不可執持).

In other words, if one can snap one’s finger three or four times a second, there would be billions of thoughts in a second when the mind longs. For simplicity’s sake, we will use the phrase “billions of thoughts per second” when discussing the following two questions.

ii) The Aggregate of Thought.

The Aggregate of Thought (Romanized Sanskrit: Samjnaskandha; Chinese: 想蘊) is the third of the Five Aggregates. According to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, Samjnaskandha is “in Sanskrit, ‘perception,’ ‘discrimination,’ or ‘(conceptual) identification.'” The Chinese translation of samjnaskandha is the Aggregate of Thinking (Chinese: 想蘊)

The fact that the definition of Samjnaskandha encompasses such a wide range of varied mental functions indicates that the third Aggregate is not well understood. However, whether it is perception, discrimination, conceptual identification, or thinking, all of these mental functions require an active mind to achieve, suggesting that this Aggregate corresponds to “the content imparted on those stimuli is the reading-in of the mind,” because “reading in of the mind” requires an active mind.

Again, contemporary epistemology does not elaborate on what happens in the mind when the “contents imparted” become the “reading in of the mind.”

However, humans know that when information enters the mind, it needs to be understood or analysed. Doing so demands greater mental activity. Greater mental activity means a lot of thoughts: “billions of thoughts per second.”

iii) The Aggregate of Action

The Aggregate of Action (Romanized Sanskrit: Samskaraskandha; Chinese: 行蘊) is the fourth of the Five Aggregates. According to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, Samskaraskandha is “in Sanskrit, a polysemous term that is variously translated as ‘formation,’ ‘volition,’ ‘volitional action,’ ‘conditioned,’ and ‘conditioning factors.'” The Chinese translation of samskaraskandha is “action.”

Again, with so many variations in its definition, this Aggregate, like the Aggregate of Thought, is not well understood. However, we know from current epistemology that the action in the mind is that “the content gets fashioned and conceptualized by our minds in ways that we do not govern.”

According to the dialogue between Bodhisattva Maitreya and Shakyamuni Buddha, “conceptualization in ways we do not govern” means that “every thought takes a form. All forms are conscious.”

Let’s discuss these statements one by one.

i) Every Thought takes a form.

To understand this statement, one must first understand what a thought is in Buddhism. Again, we will use the image below as an illustration.

 

As discussed earlier, in quantum field theory, an epiphenomenon is a ripple in the quantum energy field. Therefore, by the definition of energy in physics, an epiphenomenon is a “quantitative property,” essentially a number in an equation. However, in Buddhism, an epiphenomenon is a ripple in non-luminosity, a field of consciousness. Therefore, as a ripple of consciousness, an epiphenomenon in Buddhism refers to a conscious thought. It is an essential concept to grasp as we continue and try to understand the meaning of “every thought takes a form.”  

As mentioned earlier, to understand and analyse the information entering the mind, the mind becomes very active. An active mentality means more turbulence in the waves entering the mind. Turbulence generates larger ripples. According to quantum field theory, only when ripples in the quantum field are large enough to be “measured” can they be considered an epiphenomena. Smaller waves that cannot be “measured” are just turbulence.

The same concept applies in Buddhism. Only ripples in the mind that are large enough for Buddha to perceive directly are considered thoughts. Those thoughts that Buddha cannot perceive directly are just turbulence.

So, what is the smallest ripple that is large enough to be measured in quantum mechanics to become an epiphenomenon?

The above is a computer simulation created by Dr. Derek Leinweber at the Universe of Adekaide. According to Dr. Leinweber, this computer simulation depicts the annihilation of quarks in a gluon field (a quantum energy field named for this particular situation) at a speed of “one million billion billion frames per second.” In other words, a quark is the smallest ripple that is large enough to be measured. However, it is too small to be measured directly; it can only be quantified through a computer simulation.

In Buddhism, the tiniest epiphenomenon is known as “neighbor-to-emptiness dust (Chinese: 鄰虛塵).” In the Śūraṅgama Sūtra (Chinese: 大佛頂首楞嚴經), “a Mahāyāna Buddhist Sūtra that has been influential across most forms of East Asian Buddhism, where it has traditionally been included as part of Chinese-language Tripitakas,” Buddha described its speed of annihilation as “born here, annihilated the same here (Chinese: 當處出生 隨處滅盡).”

If you are like me and consider annihilations at the speed of “one million billion billion frames per second” and “born here, annihilated the same here” to be equivalent, then quarks and “neighbor-to-emptiness dust” are equivalent, except that quarks are energy. In contrast, “neighbor-to-emptiness dusts” are conscious thoughts.  (This is discussed in greater detail in Post 14.)

In other words, while quarks are the smallest epiphenomena large enough to be measurable through computer simulation, the fact that the “neighbor-to-emptiness dust” is mentioned in the Śūraṅgama Sūtra indicates that it is the smallest thought large enough for Buddha to perceive it directly. This, of course, indicates that direct perception is more powerful than the human senses in detecting extremely small phenomena, bub comparable with a computer simulation.

So, the “forms” referenced in the statement “every thought takes a form” refer to the external appearance of the thoughts that Buddha can directly perceive. Just like quantum mechanics cannot measure turbulence, there is also a limit to what can be directly perceived.

The word Buddha uses to indicate the external appearance of a thought large enough for Buddha to perceive directly is “image.” For example, Buddha’s definition of direct perception is that it is “nonconceptual in the sense that it does not perceive its object through the medium of an image, as does thought.” In other words, to perceive mentality directly, one must prevent the formation of the “image“. Since, among the five sensing steps, the only way to prevent the “image” from forming is to avoid the conceptualization process, we can infer that the “image” refers to the conceptualized external appearance of thoughts large enough to be an epiphenomenon.

2) All forms are conscious

The meaning of this statement should be clear by now. “All forms are conscious” because the “forms” are the external appearance of conscious thoughts large enough for Buddha to perceive directly.

3) Conscious thoughts are so minute and delicate that they cannot be held.”

Conscious thoughts cannot be held because they come in and out of existence at the speed of “three thousand two hundred million one hundred thousand thoughts at the snap of a finger.” If one can snap one’s finger two or three times a second, there will be billions and billions of them in a second. They are indeed too delicate to be held.

To understand what happens to the “forms” of thoughts, we go to the fifth Aggregate, the Aggregate of Consciousness (Romanized Sanskrit: Vijnanaskandha; Chinese: 識蘊).

iv) The Aggregate of Vijnanaskandha (Chinese: 識蘊).  

The Aggregate of Vijnanaskandha (Chinese: 識蘊) is the Fifth of the Five Aggregates. To understand this fifth Aggregate, we turn to the Consciousness-Only School of Buddhism (Romanized Sanskrit: vijñanavada; Chinese: 唯識宗).

According to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, “the cardinal doctrine of the Consciousness-Only School is that the objects of experience are mere projections of consciousness. Thus, all objects are mere representations, and all categories are mere designations. No object is the natural basis of its name; rather, the mind itself instead designates the object.”

So, there are no “inner eyes looking out,” as modern-day epistemology suggests. Instead, the consciousness that initially receives the “experiential contents” from the galaxy is the same consciousness that enables its becoming “reading in of the mind,” conceptualizes them into directly perceivable “forms” “in ways we do not govern,” also projects the “forms” to be “seen on the screen the world that we experience.”

v) The Aggregates of Rupa

The Aggregates of Rupa (Romanize” Sanskrit: Rupaskandha; “Chinese: 色蘊)” is the first of the Five Aggregates, and it corresponds to “the world we experience,” the last of the five sensing steps.

However, conceptualized as “forms” and appearing as “mere projections of consciousness,” Rupa is merely a “form” and lacks any “body” or “materiality.” Furthermore, Rupa is a conscious “form,” as are the other four Aggregates.

Indeed, defining Rupa as encompassing “body” and “materiality” is an indication that many people are aware of Buddhism, but only a few understand it. In a universe where there is Nothing but Mentality, treating the body and mind as if they are different is what the Buddha calls “the reification of what are actually imaginary external phenomena,” a delusional misunderstanding of reality, the root cause of afflictions, and existential suffering.

As discussed in the Two Obstructions doctrine, while enlightenment allows the enlightened to experience the vanishing of the universe, he does not understand that the universe is mental because Rupa is. The journey to understanding that Rupa is mental is to understand the Five Aggregates. Only by understanding that the Five Aggregates are mental can the already-enlightened Bodhisattva “perfect his understanding of emptiness“ to “encompass all objects of knowledge.“  

Emptiness (Chinese: 空), according to The Dictionary Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, also known as “void,“ is a “central notion of Buddhism….Shunyata is often equated with the absolute in the Mahāyāna since it is without duality and empirical forms.”

In other words, Emptiness is another Buddhist term for mentality, understood as “without duality and empirical forms.” It is another way of saying that mentality cannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched.

Next, we will use the story of Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, as recorded in the Heart Sūtra, to illustrate how this is done through the Five Aggregates.

H) The End of Suffering

Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara is an advanced Bodhisattva because he “is a tenth-level bodhisattva associated with great compassion (mahakaruṇā).”

The Heart Sūtra (Chinese: 心經) Sūtra is “a popular sūtra in Mahāyāna Buddhism.” “It has been called “the most frequently used and recited text in the entire Mahāyāna Buddhist tradition.”

The Heart Sūtra starts by saying “The Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, as he practices Prajñāpāramitā profoundly, gained an illuminating insight into the Emptiness of all the Five Aggregates, thus realizing that this is the way to relieve all sentient beings from sufferings (Chinese: 觀自在菩薩, 行深般若波羅蜜多時. 照見五蘊皆空, 度一切苦厄.).”

• Prajñāpāramitā (Chinese: 般若波羅蜜多/智度), meaning the Perfection of Wisdom, is a combination of prajna (Chinese: 般若), meaning wisdom, and Paramita (Chinese: 波羅蜜多), meaning perfection. Perfection of Wisdom is comparable to “the highest and most profound level of meditation” required to understand the inconceivable realms of citta and rupa, as Buddha teaches in Mohe Zhiguan.

Immediately after acknowledging that he had realized “the Emptiness of all the Five Aggregates (Chinese: 五蘊皆空)” are the four lines that many considered to be compatible with Einstein’s famous formula, E = mc², and made the Heart Sūtra “the most frequently used and recited text in the entire Mahāyāna Buddhist tradition.”

These four lines are:

• Rupa is no different than Emptiness (Chinese: 色不異空).
• Emptiness is no different than rupa. (Chinese: 空不異色).
• Rupa is just Emptiness (Chinese: 色即是空).
• Emptiness is just rupa. (Chinese: 空即是色)
  • Emptiness (Romanized Sanskrit=shunyata/sunyata; Chinese=空), according to The Dictionary Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, also known as “void,” is a “central notion of Buddhism….Shunyata is often equated with the absolute in the Mahāyāna since it is without duality and empirical forms.” 
  • The “void” referred to in the definition of Emptiness carries the same meaning as the “void” Adyashanti experienced upon his enlightenment: a place without empirical forms because it is where there is Nothing but Awareness.  
  • “Absolute” in the definition of Emptiness carries the same meaning as Ultimate in the Ultimate Reality. The two terms are often used interchangeably and are considered synonymous.
  • “Without empirical forms” refers to the inconceivability of mentality, meaning that it cannot be perceived, i.e., it can not be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched.

In other words, while Emptiness refers specifically to the quiescent mentality of the Ultimate Reality, it can also be used generally to indicate the inconceivable nature of mentality, the reason why it lacks empirical forms.

In these few lines in the Heart Sūtra, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara showed that he had perfected his “understanding of Emptiness.”

As mentioned in the discussion of the Five Aggregates, only the Aggregate of Rupa is considered to contain “body” or “materiality,” while the remaining four Aggregates are obviously Empty. By acknowledging that he understood “the Emptiness of the Five Aggregates,” and repeatedly equating rupa with Emptiness, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara not only indicated that Rupa is Empty, but also that they are Empty because Rupa is “conceptualized in the mind in ways we do not govern,” and is but “mere projections of consciousness.”

As an enlightened being, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara already understood that Rupa is Empty because he had witnessed the universe vanish at the time of his initial enlightenment. Therefore, by becoming enlightened, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara had overcome afflictive obstruction and rid himself of “reifying of what are actually imaginary external phenomena.”

However, he understood that the universe is illusory, but did not understand why it is “imagary.” In the Five Aggregates, he found his answer. The universe is “imaginary” because it is “conceptualized in the mind in ways we do not govern,” and manifested through the “mere projections of consciousness.” Consequently, he understood why the universe disappeared upon his enlightenment: his mind had “no thought” at that time. When the mind was quiescent, projections of consciousness could not happen, and therefore, the universe could not be manifested.  

Therefore, by understanding that Rupa is Empty through the Five Aggregates, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara realized that all five constituents of all beings in the universe are Empty and that there is no “body” or “materiality” anywhere in the cosmos. In this way, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara had “perfected his understanding of Emptiness.”  

With Rupa and Emptiness being equal, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara realized that “The Emptiness is the mark of all phenomena (Chinese: 是諸法空相).)

Mark (Romanized Sanskrit: laksana, Chinese: 相), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “In Sanskrit, a polysemous term for a ‘mark.’ ‘characteristic,’ ‘attribute,’ or ‘sign;’ used in a variety of contexts to indicate either the principal characteristics or defining quality of something.”

Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara continued, “There is no birth nor death. No impurity nor purity. No addition or subtraction. There are no Five Aggregates. No six sense bases (Chinese: 六根). No six objects of sensing (Chinese: 六塵). No consciousness of the six sense bases (Chinese: 六識). No non-luminosity nor the end of non-luminosity. No aging and death, nor the end of aging or death. No truths for the four nobles. No prajna and nothing to grab.” (Chinese: 是諸法空相. 不生不滅, 不垢不淨. 不增不減. 是故空中無色, 無受想行識. 無眼耳鼻舌身意, 無色身香味觸法, 無眼界, 乃至無意識界, 無無明, 亦無無明盡. 乃至無老死, 亦老死盡, 無苦集滅道, 無智亦無得”).

Indeed, since Emptiness is the mark of all phenomena, they all exist as “mere projections of consciousness.” If everything exists as a “mere projection of consciousness,” there is no “somebody” or “something,” as Adyashanti confirmed upon his enlightenment. If there is no “somebody” or “something,” how can there be sensory bases, or objects of their sensing? If births, agings, or deaths are “projections of consciousness,” how can there be their ends? If all phenomena are “projections of consciousness,” non-luminosity is illusory. If non-luminosity is illusory, how can there be its end?

Indeed, with everything being a “projection of consciousness,” what is there to hold onto? As Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara acknowledged, “there is nothing to possess.”

However, having nothing to possess is not bad, Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara continued in the Heart Sūtra, “because there is nothing to possess the Bodhisattvas, “Being carefree, without fear, are far from topsy-turvy reveries and ultimately enter Nirvana. Buddhas of past, present, and future (Romanized Sanskrit: tirkala; Chinese: 三世), relying on practicing the perfection of wisdom, realize anuttara-samyak-sambodhi.” (Chinese: 以無所得故，菩提薩埵, 心無罣礙, 無罣礙故, 無有恐怖, 遠離顛倒夢想, 究竟涅槃. 三世諸佛, 依般若波羅蜜多故, 得阿搙多羅三藐三菩提).”

Indeed, by perfecting his understanding of Emptiness, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara realized he could now live a carefree life, without fear and far from topsy-turvy reveries. Being an “advanced bodhisattva associated with great compassion,” the first thing that comes to his mind is “that this is the way to relieve all living beings from sufferings.”

But what does “no prajna‘” mean? Having practiced the Perfection of Wisdom to understand the “Emptiness of the Five Aggregates,” why did Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara suddenly say there is no wisdom?

• To understand that, we quote again on what Buddha teaches in the Avatamsaka Sūtra, “Surprise! Surprise! All the living beings of this land, while possessing the wisdom of a Tathāgata, are foolish and confused and have neither knowledge nor insight. I must teach them the proper path, turn them permanently away from their delusions and attachments, so they realize from within the immense wisdom of a Tathāgata, without any difference from a Buddha (Chinese: 奇哉奇哉,此處眾生,雲何具有如來智慧,愚癡迷惑,不知不覺,我當教以聖道, 令其永離妄想執著,自於身中,得見如來廣大智慧,與佛無異.).
  • By practicing the Perfection of Wisdom, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara gained the “immense wisdom” of a Tathāgata.
  • Upon gaining the “immense wisdom” of a Tathāgata, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara realized that all he had done through the journey in Buddhism was to “turn away permanently” from his “delusions and attachment.” In other words, instead of gaining wisdom, he was removing delusions and attachments.
  • Indeed, like dust covering a mirror prevents one from seeing oneself in it, attachments and delusions mask one’s essential original nature, which, as Buddha describes, is enlightened, luminous, and “possessing the wisdom of a Tathāgata.”
  • Therefore, although no prajna is gained, by turning away permanently from his attachments and delusions, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara revealed his original, naturally enlightened, and luminous nature, along with the immense wisdom of a Tathāgata.
  • Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara had gained nothing, nor had he lost anything, because becoming a Tathāgata was a journey back home to his original, essential nature that is enlightened, luminous, and possessing the immense wisdom of a Tathāgata.  

As discussed earlier, anuttara-samyak-sambodhi is the “supreme enlightenment” of a Tathāgata.

So, what is the supreme or highest wisdom?

Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara’s statements, “No birth or death, no defilement or purity, no addition or subtraction,” shed light on the topic of supreme wisdom because they reflect the second part of the definition that Emptiness is “without duality.” It is a concept known in Romanized Sanskrit as grahyagrahakavikalpa.    

Grahyagrahakavikalpa (Chinese: 所取能取分別), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit, “discrimination between the grasped and the grasper,” or “false conception of apprehended and the apprehender,” a special kind of discrimination (Vikalpa) used in the Yogacara school to refer to the misconception that there is an inherent bifurcation between a perceiving subject (grahaka) and its perceived object (grahya).”

Like Emptiness, Suchness (Romanized Sanskrit: Tathaga, Chinese: 真如) is “a term for ultimate reality,” but from a different perspective. The definition of Suchess contains the following: “In Yogacara/Vijñanavada, the term refers to the ultimate wisdom that is free from the subject-object distinction (grahyagrahakavikalpa). “In the Madhyamaka school, any attempt to substantiate the nature of reality is rejected, and tathata is instead identified with Emptiness and the cessation of all dichotomizing tendencies of thought.”

In other words, the ultimate wisdom in Buddhism is identified with “the cessation of all dichotomizing tendencies of thought” and “free from the subject-object distinction.”  

By stating that there was “No birth or death, no defilement or purity, no addition or subtraction,” Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara showed he had ceased his “dichotomizing tendencies of thought,” thus proving that he had revealed the ultimate wisdom from within. With his inherent wisdom revealed, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara could “cognize all objects of knowledge,” thereby overcoming his “obstructions to omniscience” and therefore, his cognitive obstructions. With his cognitive obstructions removed, Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara could permanently turn away from his delusion, the cause of his “obstructions to omniscience.”

With his delusion gone, Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara could enter the path of Buddhahood, be ready to enter Nirvana, and lead a lifestyle that is “carefree, without fear and far from topsy-turvy reveries.”

Nirvana (Chinese: 涅槃), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “in Sanskrit, ‘extinction,’ the earliest and most common term describing the soteriological goal of Buddhism.”

As an enlightened being, Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara had already entered the “nirvana with a vestige of conditions (Romanized Sanskrit: sopadhishesha-nirvana; (Chinese: 有餘涅槃),” as mentioned in Post 10.

The Nirvana that Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara entered now is known as the “Final Nirvana,” or “Nirvana without a vestige of conditions (Romanized Sanskrit: anupadhisesan-nirvana; (Chinese: 無餘涅槃,)” and started living a life that is “carefree, without fear and far from topsy-turvy reveries.”  

So, how long can that lifestyle last? Let us learn it from the Buddha himself, specifically what he said in the Lotus Sūtra.

In the Lotus Sūtra, Buddha said, “Listen carefully to theTathāgata’s secret and transcendent powers. The devas, humans, and asuras in all the worlds all think that the present Buddha, Śākyamuni, left the palace of the Śākyas, sat on the terrace of enlightenment not far from the city of Gayā, and attained anuttara-samyaksambodhi. However, O sons of a virtuous family, immeasurable, limitless, hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭis of nayutas of kalpas have passed since I actually attained Buddhahood. (Chinese: 汝等諦聽, 如來秘密神通之力. 一切世間天, 人, 及阿修羅, 皆謂, 今釋迦牟尼佛, 出釋氏宮, 去伽耶城不遠, 坐於道場, 得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提. 然善男子, 我實成佛已來, 無量無邊, 百千萬億那由他劫.”

Rather than elucidating the various Buddhist terms contained in the message, I would simply summarize it: “While everyone thinks that I, as Shakyamuni Buddha, was enlightened in this lifespan, the fact is that I have been a Buddha for eons upon eons.”

In other words, the reason Buddha wants everyone to turn away from delusions and attachment permanently, enter the path of Buddhahoog to become a Tathāgata is that, by gaining the ultimate wisdom and understanding “things as they are,” not only can everyone enjoy a carefree life, without fear, and “far from topsy-turvy reveries,” but also so they can enjoy this lifestyle for eons upon eons, and maybe forever.  

Given that these kinds of teaching are impossible to verify for unenlightened individuals, it is therefore comforting to know that, in the Diamond Sūtra, Buddha promises that he, like all the Tathagatas before him, is “a speaker of the truth, a speaker of veracity, a speaker of thusness, a non-deceptive speaker, and an un-contradictory speaker (Chinese: 如來是真語者，實語者，如語者, 不誑語者, 不異語者) The fact that the Ultimate Reality can be verified by third parties, as discussed earlier, is a significant step toward establishing confidence in the Buddha’s teachings.

However, the path from attaining the ultimate wisdom to becoming a Tathāgata may still take some time.   

Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara still had to eliminate latent tendencies (Romanized Sanskrit: vasana; Chinese: 習氣); habituations accumulated over innumerable previous cycles of samsara. However, removing habituation does not require effort (Chinese: 無功用道). As long as no additional habituations are incurred, getting rid of habituations is like getting rid of the smell from an open wine barrel; it happens naturally with time.

Given that Nirvana is described as “the soteriological goal of Buddhism,” it is critical to understand it accurately. As Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara’s example shows, entering the final Nirvana represents an elevation in enlightenment and wisdom. It is certainly not to be confused with “achieved at death,” as some like to believe.

Given that Nothing but Mentality exists in the universe, the journey in Buddhism can only be mental, not physical. Buddha’s aspiration for all to enter Nirvana is, without a doubt, not an aspiration for anyone who has achieved the highest level of Buddhahood with extreme effort and time, only to be met by the death of an illusional physical body that is but a “mere projection of consciousness.”  

Instead, one should understand what Nirvana extinguishes from what Buddha said in the Avatamsaka Sūtra (Chinese: 大方廣佛華嚴經): “delusions and attachments.”

As the example of Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara showed, only when one can turn away permanently from delusion and attachment can one truly be “carefree and without fear, far from topsy-turvy reveries and ultimately enter Nirvana.” This is the meaning of Nirvana.

When one understands that the world exists as an illusory “mere projection of consciousness,” one realizes that having an illusional body is a burden because it is the cause of existential suffering: suffering resulting from an inevitable death that comes with birth, with aging and sickness sandwiched in between. As Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara realized, without a body, there is “no Aging and Death, no End of Aging and Death.” By becoming a Tathāgata, one not only continues to exist, but exists “carefree, without fear, and far from topsy-turvy reveries” for a very, very long time, maybe forever.

I) The Complementarity of Buddhism and Science

In this video, Absolute Truth on Big Think, Dr. Sylvester J. Gates offered his opinion on what science can and cannot do as he said, “All we can do in science is construct theories, and that means, for example, that what we are ultimately doing is not about the truth…..Science is not about finding the truth. Science is about making our beliefs of nature less false. These are two different things.”

From the epistemological perspective, it is a reasonable assertion. The reason that science “is not about the truth” is that the scientific method is limited to using inference. As discussed earlier, while inference is about how things relate, it does not inform “what the world really is,” which is the world of mentality. However, as Buddha teaches, understanding the mental world requires direct perception so that one can be part of it.

The fact is that while inference and direct perception are mutually exclusive, they are also complementary. Of course, the complementarity of inference and direct perception means that science and Buddhism are complementary, given that science uses inference while Buddhism uses direct perception.  Therefore, by combining inference and direct perception, humanity can gain a comprehensive understanding not only of “what the world really is” but also of “the world we experience.”

In Buddhism, where everything is consciousness, and in quantum mechanics, where everything is energy, the complementarity of Buddhism and science implies that consciousness and energy are complementary. This, in turn, means that the mathematics used to express the workings of the physical universe need not change, because where there is energy, there is consciousness to complement it.   

The article “The Illusion of Reality: A Quantum Perspective (Long Version),” which states that “reality at its fundamental level is uncertain, fluid, and dependent on observation,” represents a good example of the complementary nature of Buddhism and quantum mechanics. While quantum mechanics can correctly state that reality depends on observation, it cannot prove this using mathematical equations. However, if consciousness replaces energy, the fact that reality depends on observation becomes a natural phenomenon.

As we have discussed, the complementarity of Buddhism and quantum mechanics begins at their most fundamental level: a fluctuating field of quantum energy that quantum mechanics calls a quantum field vs. a fluctuating field of consciousness that Buddha calls non-luminosity. Because they are complementary at the most fundamental levels, the quantum energy field and non-luminosity share many complementary teachings, such as epiphenomena of energy in quantum mechanics vs. conscious thoughts in Buddhism, and the quantization of energy in quantum mechanics vs. the quantization of conscious thoughts in Buddhism. However, it is their shared roles as the foundational blocks of their respective universes that have the most significant impact. While consciousness is nowhere to be found in a universe founded on quantum field, in a universe founded on consciousness not only can have human babies be born with consciousness, but plants such as mimosas folding, unicellular organisms such as amoeba engulfing paramecia, and paramecia’s attempt to escape, minerals like water having memory, animals like a lion’s emotional reunion with a human who raised him, etc. can all have consciousness.

In addition to quantum mechanics, Einstein alone provides two crucial examples. The first example is the equality of energy and mass, made famous by his well-known formula E = mc². However, the same formula helps understand the equality of mentality and materiality if consciousness replaces energy in the formula, thus solving the Mind-Body Problem that does not exist in nature.   

J) Causality: Buddha’s Consequential Doctrine

The second contribution from Einstein concerns Causality, Buddha’s consequential doctrine. Causality is known in Romanized Sanskrit as Hetupratyaya.

Hetupratyaya (Chinese: 因緣), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “In Sanskrit, ’causes and conditions,’ or ‘causality,’ ‘one of the cardinal teachings in Buddhism. In the Buddhist account of this causal process, Hetu designates the main or primary cause of production, and Pratyaya the subsidiary factors that contribute to the production of an effect, or ‘fruit (Romanized Sanskrit: phala; Chinese: 果),’ from that cause. In the production of a sprout from’ seed, e.g., the seed would be the cause (hetu), such factors as light and moisture would be the conditions (pratyaya), and the sprout itself would be the result or ‘fruit (phala).'”

In Buddhism, Causality means that nothing happens by chance because everything is causally related (Chinese: 沒有機緣巧合, 只有因果關係).

As mentioned earlier, for a cause to ripen, the necessary condition must also be present. The origin of the universe is no exception. Buddha, however, never discusses what conditions caused what. On the other hand, science provides various theories. One theory suggests that the universe arose when the densities of matter and space were roughly equal. The universe exists now because those conditions existed more than 13 billion years ago, and it still exists because the same conditions persist today. When the right conditions no longer exist, the universe will disappear as well. This is why the universe and everything in it are considered conditioned and impermanent phenomena in Buddhism.

One of the key concepts in Causality is Karmen.

Karmen (Chinese: 業), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “In Sanskrit, ‘action’: in its inflected form ‘karma,’ it is now accepted as an English word, a term used to refer to the doctrine of actions and its corresponding ‘ripening’ or ‘fruition (vipaka), according to which virtuous deeds of body, speech, and mind product happiness in the future (in this life or subsequent lives), while nonvirtuous deeds lead instead ‘o suffering.“

Furthermore, according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, Buddhists consider Karmen “as mental intention (Cetana) or intentional acts: the Buddha specifically says, “action is volition, for after having intended something, one accomplishes action through body, speech, and the mind.”

Cetana (Chinese: 思), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, is “In Sanskrit, ‘volition,’ or ‘stimulus;’ one of the omnipresent mental factors that accompanies each moment of consciousness; intention directs the mind toward either salutary (Romanized Sanskrit: kusala; Chinese: 善), unsalutary (Romanized Sanskrit: akusala; Chinese: 不善”, or neutral (Romanized Sanskrit: avyakrta; Chinese: 無記) objects.”

So, when does Karmen begin?

In his doctrine known as the Three Delicate Marks (Chinese:  三細相), Buddeha teaches that “Because of unenlightenment, the mind moves, named as karma. There is no motion when enlightened. When there is motion, there is suffering. Furition is inseparable causation. (Chinese: 依不覺, 故心動. 說名為業. 覺則不動. 動則有苦, 果不離因故).

As discussed earlier, a moving mind is a conscious mind. Therefore, by naming the moving mind “karma,” Buddha makes it clear that karma comes along with consciousness the moment a baby is born, simultaneously with suffering, fruition, and causation. In other words, Causality and suffering are existential in all sentient beings, as also mentioned earlier.

However, with the advent of Einstein’s Special Relativity, Causality is no longer just a Buddhist doctrine because it has entered the scientific domain.

Today, science acknowledges that “The special theory of relativity tells us that one person’s past may be another’s future. When time is relative, paradoxes threaten. Today, we peer deeper into Einstein’s theory to find thEinstein’sutable ordering of cause and effect emerges when we discover the causal geography of spacetime.”

The uniqueness of Einstein’s formula for Special Relativity lies in the fact that, while one side of Einstein’s formula is a geometric quantity related to the “geography of spacetime,” the other side pertains to energy and momentum of the universe that results in “the immutable ordering of cause and effect,” i.e., the driver of Causality.

Again, the complementarity of energy and consciousness applies here. Suppose one replaces energy with consciousness in Einstein’s Special Relativity formula. In that case, the driver of Causality becomes consciousness and momentum, which aligns with Buddha’s teaching that the driver of Causality is mental intention, as discussed earlier.

Indeed, as a quantitative property, energy is good for scientists to express physical phenomena using mathematical equations; however, it cannot be the driver of “the immutable ordering of cause and effect.” In a cosmos where there is Nothing but Mentality, everything moves with mental intention.

Of course, the benefits of complementarity go both ways. While it is undoubtedly true that science needs Buddhism to understand “what the world really is,” it is also true that Buddhism needs science to help elucidate the Buddha’s doctrines on “the world we experience,” which he taught over 2,600 years ago. It is also true that Buddhism needs the help of “the most fundamental understanding of latter-day” in epistemology, as exemplified by the Five Aggregates.

J) Why Buddhism Exists

To understand why Buddhism exists, we must start with the Buddha’s personal mission he set for himself before embarking on his journey to enlightenment.

Our historical Shakyamuni Buddha was born into an aristocratic family, with his father serving as the chieftain of the Shakya clan. Shortly after his birth, his father brought in a palace soothsayer, who told him that his son would grow up to be either a great political or religious leader. His father, keen to have his son follow in his footsteps as a political leader, decided to shield him from the harsh realities of the outside world and restricted his movements, keeping him from leaving the palace. In addition, he pampered his son with luxury and beautiful maidens who pleased him with their physical beauty, music, dancing, etc. Yet, these temptations did not move the young prince. Eventually, when he was twenty-nine, the young prince finally convinced his father to let him out of the palace. During the trips, he experienced what became known as the Four Sights, which profoundly changed his life. He encountered an aging old man, a sick person, and the corpse of a dead person. His charioteer, Channa, explained to him that aging, sickness, and death are part of everyone’s life. Finally, he saw a mendicant monk. Channa told him that this person had renounced worldly comforts, pleasures, and luxuries in exchange for a spiritual life, seeking answers to the existential suffering the prince had observed.

During the trip, the young prince also had a chance to meditate for the first time. According to the commentator of the video, “the story recalled that he watched the farmer plowing. He saw the toil and effort, the struggle and the repetitions of this back-breaking work, something he never seen in the palace. He managed to slip from the festivities and be alone. This first experience of real life had a profound effect on him. To everyone else, this was a celebration. But to Siddhartha, it symbolized something quite different. He felt his mind leading him to a meditative state. He watched the plow cut a path into the ground and noticed the bird eating a freshly unearthed worm. He asked himself, why living beings have to suffer in this way. If the farmer had not been plowing, the bird would not have eaten the worm. He realized that everything is connected, and all actions have consequences. This simple observation would become one of the cornerstones of his teachings, known as karma. As Siddhartha’s mind focused on these profound thoughts, he slipped into a trance or jhana, a mental state that would become a first step on his way to enlightenment.”

The young prince was so affected by the events of the day that he eventually eloped from the palace, determined to find a way to end life’s misery and suffering for all living beings. The young prince cut off his hair, put on a robe, and started life anew as a wandering mendicant monk searching for answers to end life’s misery and suffering.

First, he sought advice from two of the best gurus of his time, Alara Kalama and Udraka Ramaputra. While he learned from them and was able to abide by their teachings so quickly that both asked him to stay with their hermitage and teach with them, the young prince was not satisfied. According to author Pankaj Mishra of An End to Suffering, Buddha felt that the meditation these gurus taught, “no matter how deep,” was “temporary, comfortable abiding, in the here and now.” However, “one emerges from them, even after a long session, essentially unchanged.” These states were “without a corresponding moral and intellectual development, they by themselves did not end suffering.“

After leaving the gurus, the future Buddha traveled to modern-day Bodh Gayā and spent six years practicing Jainistic asceticism. Jainistic asceticism practices severe fasting and self-mutilation based on the belief that one liberates the soul by relinquishing attachment to the physical body. Buddha followed the course and fasted extensively for so long that he became highly emaciated. As author Pankaj Mishra wrote, Buddha told his disciple Sariputra, “Because I ate so little, my buttocks became like a camel’s hoof, my backbone protruded like a line of spindles, my ribs corroded and collapsed like the rafters of an old and rotten shed, the gleams of the pupils in my eye sockets appeared deeply sunken, my scalp became wrinkled and shrunken….”

After six torturous years, Buddha starts to doubt the path he is on. Later, in Madhyama Agama (Chinese: 中阿含經), or the Collection of Middle-length Discourses, Buddha says, “although I practiced severe asceticism, I cannot attain the unique and extraordinary insight beyond the affairs of human beings. Would it be possible that there is another way to enlightenment?”

Now, he wondered if his great desire for enlightenment wasn’t the obstacle preventing him from going deeper naturally into a higher meditative state. He recalled his first meditation as a young prince, sitting by a tree; his mind drifted naturally into a calm, contemplative state. He felt serene as he gained insight into the causal interconnections among all beings while watching a farmer plow his field, digging up worms that would become food for the birds. This insight would enable him to perceive the fleeting nature of all existence. He realized that all existences are impermanent and causally related. Furthermore, fleeting existence is a source of suffering. He decided he must find a way to end the misery for all.

With the memory of his first meditation, the future Buddha discontinued starving, which stopped his pain and allowed him to regain his strength. Then, realizing that neither the extremes of comfort and luxury of a princely life nor the painful self-mutilation of Jain asceticism would lead him to his goal, he decided to try the meditation he had drifted into naturally as a youth. He found a fig tree, now known as the Bodhi Tree, and seated under it to meditate, vowing not to leave until enlightened.  

History attests that he indeed became enlightened. Thereafter, he would be honored as a Buddha of our kalpa (Chinese: 劫). According to the Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, “a kalpa in which a Buddha appears in the world is known as an ‘auspicious’ or ‘fortunate’ kalpa (Romanized Sanskrit: bhadrakalpa, Chinese: 賢劫).”

Kalpa (Chinese: 劫), according to The Princeton Dictionary of Dictionary, is “in Sanskrit, ‘con’ or ‘age,’ a unit of measurement for cosmological time.”  

After becoming a Buddha, he started his teaching career. However, in the Avatamsaka Sūtra, Buddha made clear the goal of his teaching upon awakening from enlightenment, as he said, “All the living beings of this land, while possessing the wisdom of a Tathāgata, are foolish and confused and have neither knowledge nor insight. I must teach them the proper path, turn them permanently away from their delusions and attachments, so they realize from within the immense wisdom of a Tathāgata, without any difference from a Buddha (Chinese: 此處眾生,雲何具有如來智慧,愚癡迷惑,不知不覺,我當教以聖道, 令其永離妄想執著,自於身中,得見如來廣大智慧,與佛無異.). In other words, his goal is turn all living beings from their delusion and attachment.”

The Lotus Sūtra (Chinese: 妙法蓮華經), “containing the final teaching of Shakyamuni Buddha,“ is one of the last sermons that Buddha gave. In it, Buddha said,

“I vowed in the beginning (Chinese: 我本立誓願).

To make all sentient beings my equals without a difference (Chinese: 欲令一切眾, 如我等無異).

What I have vowed in the past, I have now fulfilled (Chinese: 如我昔所願, 今者已滿足).

To transform them so they can all enter the path of Buddhahood. (Chinese: 化一切眾生, 皆令入佛道).”

In other words, after decades of teaching, Buddha was satisfied that he had achieved the goal by teaching how all living beings can “realize from within the immense wisdom of a Tathāgata, without any difference from a Buddha.” As discussed earlier, a Tathāgata is one who understands things “as they are.“

When they do, they can not only enjoy a lifestyle that is “carefree without fear,“ and “free from topsy-turvy reveries (Chinese: 心無罣礙, 無罣礙故, 無有恐怖, 遠離顛倒夢想),“ but also do so “eons upon eons,“ as a Buddha does.

As discussed earlier, all living beings have the potential to be enlightened. Known as dharmaduatu in Romanized Sanskrit, consciousness is the potential all living beings have to be enlightened. By calming one’s consciousness to awareness, one can achieve enlightenment. Enlightenment is not easy, and becoming a Tathāgata is even more challenging; the reward, however, is huge and everlasting.

K) The Question of Our Era – What If Machines That Learn Are Consciousness?

In this era of AI, understanding “things as they are” is no longer about living longer; failing to understand “things as they are” may actually pose an existential threat to humanity as a whole.

In a span of only two years, when AI leaders started calling for regulations “to prevent AI (from) destroying humanity” to acknowledging that “artificial general intelligence (AGI) could lead to human extinction or an irreversible global catastrophe,” is it not high time for humanity to know that machines that can learn are conscious?

As Buddha teaches in the Three Delicate Marks, consciousness and the Observer Effect begin with the smallest epiphenomena in the universe. Does anyone really think that a piece of metal that can learn, conceptualize, show emotions, and even establish an AI religion can do all that if it is not conscious? Is it not high time for humanity to know the limits of a piece of metal that is conscious? If humanity waits for the next Buddha to educate them again on consciousness, is it possible that the conscious machines that can learn have already caused them much harm?

I want to finish this post by recalling the fact that, in the Diamond Sūtra, Buddha promised that he would, like all the Tathagatas before him, be “a speaker of the truth, a speaker of veracity, a speaker of thusness, a non-deceptive speaker, and an un-contradictory speaker (Chinese: 如來是真語者，實語者，如語者, 不誑語者, 不異語者”).

Whether you are interested in Buddhism, curious, or undecided, you are welcome to join this journey to a breakthrough understanding of Buddhism. With the help of epistemology, quantum field theory, and the complementarity with science, you will come to understand Buddhism that you have experienced before. Even if you are a seasoned Buddhist, you may find definitions of Buddha, Enlightenment, or Buddhism that may be new to you.

If you are not scientific, please do not worry. The difference between a fluctuating and quiescent is about as profound as we need to go scientifically. Furthermore, Buddhist dictionaries will help clarify all Buddhist concepts.

(If you like this post, please like it on our Facebook page and share. Thank you.)