The following is a very interesting Substack post concerning AI. It is dated April 11th, but I just got around to reading it today:
Renaldo
Just to clarify, that in the vinaya monks need to do a thing called “kappiyaṃ karohi” where a knife is sliced by a kappiya on a fruit that has viable seeds or anything else that can grow and is considered a living plant (5 types).
In any case. There are stories about this where devas are living in these plants.
11. bhūtagāmasikkhāpada
11. the training rule on plantstena samayena buddho bhagavā āḷaviyaṁ viharati aggāḷave cetiye.
at one time when the buddha was staying at āḷavī at the aggāḷava shrine,tena kho pana samayena āḷavakā bhikkhū navakammaṁ karontā rukkhaṁ chindantipi chedāpentipi.
the monks there were doing building work. they were cutting down trees and having them cut down.aññataropi āḷavako bhikkhu rukkhaṁ chindati.
then, when a certain monk was cutting down a tree,tasmiṁ rukkhe adhivatthā devatā taṁ bhikkhuṁ etadavoca—
the deity that lived in it said to him,“mā, bhante, attano bhavanaṁ kattukāmo mayhaṁ bhavanaṁ chindī”ti.
“venerable, don’t cut down our dwelling because you want to build a dwelling for yourself.”so bhikkhu anādiyanto chindiyeva, tassā ca devatāya dārakassa bāhuṁ ākoṭesi.
not taking any heed, he just cut it down, and he hurt the arm of that deity’s child.atha kho tassā devatāya etadahosi—
the deity thought,“yannūnāhaṁ imaṁ bhikkhuṁ idheva jīvitā voropeyyan”ti.
“why don’t i just kill this monk?”atha kho tassā devatāya etadahosi—
but then it reconsidered,“na kho metaṁ patirūpaṁ yāhaṁ imaṁ bhikkhuṁ idheva jīvitā voropeyyaṁ.
“it wouldn’t be right to just kill this monk.yannūnāhaṁ bhagavato etamatthaṁ āroceyyan”ti.
let me instead tell the buddha about this matter.”atha kho sā devatā yena bhagavā tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā bhagavato etamatthaṁ ārocesi.
and it approached the buddha and told him what had happened.“sādhu sādhu, devate.
“well done, deity!sādhu kho tvaṁ, devate, taṁ bhikkhuṁ jīvitā na voropesi.
it’s good that you didn’t kill that monk.sacajja tvaṁ, devate, taṁ bhikkhuṁ jīvitā voropeyyāsi, bahuñca tvaṁ, devate, apuññaṁ pasaveyyāsi.
if you had killed that monk, you would have made much demerit.gaccha tvaṁ, devate, amukasmiṁ okāse rukkho vivitto tasmiṁ upagacchā”ti.
the tree over there is empty. take that as your dwelling.”manussā ujjhāyanti khiyyanti vipācenti—
people complained and criticized the monks,“kathañhi nāma samaṇā sakyaputtiyā rukkhaṁ chindissantipi chedāpessantipi ekindriyaṁ samaṇā sakyaputtiyā jīvaṁ viheṭhentī”ti.
“how can the sakyan monastics cut down trees and have them cut down? they are hurting life with one sense.”assosuṁ kho bhikkhū tesaṁ manussānaṁ ujjhāyantānaṁ khiyyantānaṁ vipācentānaṁ.
the monks heard the complaints of those people,
2 Likes
Yes, it’s undeniable that plants have vital functions.
However, the rules concerning plants may not have been established due to any presumed sentience on their part. Rather, they might have been intended to avoid harming the beings that dwell in or around plants — including devas — and to prevent criticism from those who believe plants are sentient.In that case, the concern would not be for the plants themselves, but for the safety and sensibilities of other sentient beings.
1 Like
From the Vinaya
jīvasaññino hi, bhikkhave, manussā rukkhasmiṃ…
Some people regard trees as living or as a lifeform. Does not say trees are a type of lifeform.
From commentary to saṅgītisutta
anindriyabaddhassa tiṇarukkhalatādino pathavīraso āporaso ca paccayo hoti.
Here indriya means kamma born jīvitindriya. Trees do not possess jīvitindriya. They are not any type of life form. Same can be said of any computer.
asañña-sattas possess rūpajīvitindriya.
2 Likes
Hello RobertK, thank you for the analogy, but it is not very strong one.
We can objectively see and measure the seed that lies dormant. Due to objective laws of biology we can make predictions about how and when it will germinate according to conditions.
When it comes to two cittas, we do NOT see the same link between them. Hence why there were so many problems and “solutions” in different Abhidharma books by different teachers about this.
What are these different solutions? The Abhidhamma and Commentaries are entirely consistent although they may examine any condition in various ways.
You are concerned that biology can see seeds and examine them scientifically. Yet we can’t see asanna satta beings, we can’t see kamma working over lifetimes, science cant even see citta which is arising right now.
It would be great wouldn’t it, if we could place each action and result under a microscope and say - ahh this was due to that action done 20 lifetimes ago, this is due to such and such done last week. If that were the case the multitude would certainly align their behaviors in ways to maximise pleasant results for themselves.
However kamma and result is not apparent to scientific instruments.
Nevertheless the vipaka, result, is arising right now, moment by moment. The kilesa too are arising moment by moment. Thus there is a way that they can be understood and that is by the development of satipatthana.
1 Like
I agree with what others have said about AI not being a being nor conscious. All the inventors of AI can do is make a machine that mimics, resembles consciousness, but it’s not real consciousness. Even if you watch the sci fi movies about robots with “feelings” etc, it’s clear it acts that way, because it was programmed to act that way.
Regarding plants, I know Buddhism says it is just rupa, but clearly a plant is different from a rock. A plant breathes air. It will die without air. They give “birth” to new plants, get born and die.
Couldn’t we say that they are rupa and vedana? They do move toward sunlight as they “feel” the sun and go in that direction.
That would make it 2 aggregates, but still insufficient for consciousness to arise due to no brain, no heart and no central nervous system.
To understand the concept of what we call a sentient being, better to look at the ultimate réalities.
For a sentient being, generally five khanda are needed. (Except arūpa Brahma and asaññasatta)
Both plants and ai have only rūpa, they do not possess:
Vedanā ( pleasure and pain)
Saññā ( recognition)
Saṅkhārā (various mental factors)
Viññāṇa (consciousness of any object)
No consciousness,no feeling : they have nothing to do with a sentient being (although their rūpa shows few characteristics closed to it, such as ai “showing empathy” and so on
2 Likes
About plants, I believe that thei are not sentient. But I have found this sutta:
Ime cepi, vāseṭṭha, mahāsālā aṭṭhaṅgasamannāgataṁ uposathaṁ upavaseyyuṁ, imesampissa mahāsālānaṁ dīgharattaṁ hitāya sukhāya
If these great sal trees were to observe this sabbath with its eight factors, it would be for their lasting welfare and happiness*—if they were sentient*." (Sujato)
If these great sal trees would observe the uposatha complete in eight factors, that would lead to the welfare and happiness of these great sal trees for a long time, if they could choose (Bodhi).
I put the original and both translations in ChatGPT to make an analysis (I’m not proficient in Pāli):
*The key word is “upavaseyyuṁ”, which is an optative verb — it expresses a hypothetical or wishful action: “would observe”, “might observe”, “were to observe”.
Now, regarding the conditional: the Buddha is clearly speaking hypothetically, using trees as a rhetorical device. The Pali doesn’t explicitly say “if they were sentient” or “if they could choose” — both Sujato and Bodhi are interpreting the nature of the hypothetical.*
In other words, these translations could definitively settle the question of consciousness in plants—if they weren’t the result of an interpretation of the original text. What remains is to look at how the commentaries interpret this sutta."
2 Likes
Here is the Atthakathā of this Sutta :
“pañcamassa catutthe ime cepi, vāseṭṭha, mahāsālāti purato ṭhite dve sālarukkhe dassento parikappopamaṃ āha. idaṃ vuttaṃ hoti – ime tāva mahāsālā acetanā. sace etepi sacetanā hutvā aṭṭhaṅgasamannāgataṃ uposathaṃ upavaseyyuṃ, etesampi so uposathavāso dīgharattaṃ hitāya sukhāya assa. bhūte pana vattabbameva natthīti.”
Translation
“In the fifth (discourse), regarding the fourth (point), Vāseṭṭha, he gave a simile by pointing to two large sal trees standing in front. Here is the meaning -
‘These great sal trees are inanimate (literally without intention, acetanā). But if even these were to become sentient ( with intention, sacetanā) and observe the Uposatha endowed with its eight factors, then even for them, such a life of Uposatha observance would, for a long time, lead to benefit and happiness.
As for sentient beings, it goes without saying.’”
This is the translation. Likewise, It’s not possible that all human devas and Brahmā observe Uposatha. It’s just a way of pointing out by the Buddha how it could benefit any sentient being to practice it.
3 Likes
How can rūpa loka not have matter? It is rūpa, not “nāma” loka. Since beings in rūpa loka have functioning eyes and ears, they being derivative matter, require 4 great elements.
As far as I know, Brahma’s bodies are made of subtle matter which are also composed of the four elements. By ‘subtle’, I mean their bodies are even softer than devas and invisible to them.
All bodies and physical materials — human and divine — are composed of the four elements.
So yes, brahmas also have the four elements. They can discern the four elements in their body and see ultimate materiality and practice vipassana.
That is correct…
They are missing some rūpas. which is a topic of different thread.
Abhidhammatthasaṅgaha
§27 In the Fine-material World
Rūpāloke pana ghāna-jivhā-kāya-bhāva-dasakāni ca āhāraja-kalāpāni ca na labbhanti. Tasmā tesaṁ paṭisandhikāle cakkhu-sota-vatthuvasena tayo dasakāni jīvitanavakañ ca—ti cattāro kammāsamuṭṭhānakalāpā, pavattiyampi cittasamuṭṭhānā ca labbhanti.In the fine-material world, the decads of nose, tongue, body, sex, and the material groups produced by nutriment do not arise. Therefore, at the time of rebirth-linking, for those beings, there arise four material groups produced by kamma—namely, the three decads of eye, ear, and heart-base, and the vital nonad. During the course of existence, material phenomena produced by consciousness and by temperature are also found.
3 Likes
Ok guys, apparently I need to revise my understanding of fine-matter, subtle matter, sukkhuma rūpa. Because I thought the four elements were restricted to the gross matter of the Kāma Loka.
The most detailed description I have found in the suttas about the aggregate of Form is MN28- Mahāhatthipadopamasutta. It mentions the Four Elements, but its descriptions seems to be limited to the physical body “born from a mother and a father, sustained by rice and porridge”.
If the Venerable or anyone else could share with me references to this or other texts on this subject (the presence of the Four Elements in the Fine-Material World), or point me to any threads already opened on this theme, I would be grateful.
Found a link to this text:
1 Like