[FutureBuddha] AI and 'taking the not given'

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Jundo
    Treeleaf Founder and Priest
    • Apr 2006
    • 40361

    #16
    I have been playing a bit recently with NORBU, the Buddhist AI.



    NORBU (Neural Omniscient Robotic-Being for Buddhist Understanding), the Buddhist LLM (Learning Language Model) is an artificial intelligence (AI) chat bot built upon cutting-edge ChatGPT technology. The technology allows NORBU to engage with our readers in real-time, answer questions, provide insightful teachings and foster meaningful discussions about Buddhism. This pioneering project aims to bring greater accessibility, personalized wisdom and interactivity to our platform, empowering Dharma seekers like you to embark on a journey of enlightenment, right from the comfort of your screen.
    NORBU is free to use and, frankly, I find its responses so far, for the most part, much better informed, balanced, calm and reasonable than perhaps that of the average flesh and blood Buddhist on social media. Very diplomatic on some controversial questions too.

    Here are a few samples ...

    Is Zen the best school of Buddhism?
    As Norbu, your Spiritual Friend, I would like to share that within Buddhism, there is no single "best" school or tradition. The various schools, including Zen, offer different paths and methods towards enlightenment and spiritual understanding. Zen Buddhism, with its emphasis on meditation (zazen) and insight, is one path among many within the rich tapestry of Buddhist traditions. It's important to remember that each individual must find their own path that resonates with their practice and understanding. The diversity within Buddhism, including the Zen schools of Rinzai and Sōtō, reflects the wide range of approaches available to practitioners seeking liberation and enlightenment.

    Was the Buddha imperfect?
    Yes, the Buddha was considered to have imperfections in the sense that he was an ordinary human being subject to certain situations, including suffering from illnesses like dysentery. Despite his mental perfection and more skills than others, he was not excluded from the human condition. This is evident from the fact that in his last days, he suffered from the ravages of age like any other mortal, indicating that his extraordinary accomplishments were achieved within the ordinary human realm. The Buddha's experience of physical ailments and the ultimate impermanence of his body, despite being described as having obtained an imperishable body like that of a diamond, underscores the Buddhist understanding that all conditioned phenomena, including the Buddha himself, are subject to impermanence.

    Does one need to believe in rebirth into future lives after death of this body in order to be a Buddhist?
    As Norbu, your Spiritual Friend, I would like to share that the belief in rebirth is a significant aspect of traditional Buddhist teachings. Buddhism, as it has been practised for centuries, includes the concept of rebirth as a fundamental part of its doctrine. This belief is intertwined with the principles of karma, suggesting that a person's actions in this life will influence their future rebirths. The idea is that through understanding and practising the Dharma, one can eventually achieve liberation from the cycle of rebirths.

    However, it's important to acknowledge that with the advent of modernity and the influence of scientific worldviews, the belief in rebirth is not universally accepted among all who identify as Buddhists today. There is a growing movement within Buddhism, often referred to as secular or "naturalized" Buddhism, which seeks to reconceptualise Buddhist teachings in a way that is compatible with a contemporary, physicalist worldview. This movement tends to shift the focus from the traditional teachings on karma and rebirth to the concept of No-self, which finds resonance with certain currents in contemporary cognitive science.

    Given this diversity within the Buddhist community, it can be said that belief in rebirth is not strictly necessary to identify as a Buddhist. What remains central is the commitment to the path of reducing suffering for oneself and others, understanding the nature of reality, and practising the principles that lead to liberation, such as the Eightfold Path. The emphasis may vary among different practitioners and communities, reflecting a broad spectrum of interpretations and approaches within Buddhism.

    Where the Mahayana Sutras literally written by the historical Buddha?
    The question of whether the Mahāyāna Sūtras were literally authored by the historical Buddha, Śākyamuni, is a complex one that touches upon the heart of Mahāyāna Buddhist tradition and its understanding of scriptural authenticity. Within the Mahāyāna traditions of India, Tibet, China, Korea, and Japan, it is accepted that the Mahāyāna Sūtras were indeed set forth by the historical Buddha. However, these texts were purportedly kept hidden for several centuries after the Buddha's passing into nirvāṇa. According to tradition, some of these sūtras were safeguarded by divine beings such as gods and nāgas, with figures like Nāgārjuna later retrieving them. This narrative underscores the Mahāyāna view that these sūtras are authentic teachings of the Buddha, a perspective that is deeply intertwined with the bodhisattva vows.

    From a scholarly standpoint, the authenticity of the Mahāyāna Sūtras as the literal words of the Buddha is a subject of debate. Historical and textual analysis does not provide conclusive evidence that these texts were directly authored by Śākyamuni Buddha. Scholars point to the development of the Buddha-nature concept and related doctrines, as well as the historical context in which these texts emerged, to suggest that they may not represent the direct teachings of the historical Buddha. For instance, the latter portion of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, translated by Dharmakṣema, is regarded by some textual scholars as possibly being a local Central Asian composition or authored by Dharmakṣema himself, raising questions about the direct authorship by the Buddha.

    On a personal level, individuals like Chodron approach the issue of authenticity from a perspective of faith and experiential validation. The teachings contained within the Mahāyāna Sūtras, when examined through reason and applied in life, have profound and beneficial effects, reinforcing the belief in their divine origin, regardless of historical authorship.

    In summary, while the Mahāyāna tradition upholds the belief that the Mahāyāna Sūtras were authored by the historical Buddha, scholarly research presents a more nuanced view, suggesting that these texts, while embodying core Buddhist principles, may not have been directly penned by Śākyamuni Buddha himself. The debate over authenticity ultimately intersects with matters of faith, tradition, and the experiential impact of these teachings.

    Why do sex scandals sometimes happen in Buddhism?
    The reasons behind the occurrence of sex scandals within Buddhist communities can be attributed to several factors:

    Misuse of Power and Trust: Spiritual leaders often hold significant power and trust within their communities. This power can sometimes be misused, leading to exploitation and abuse. The trust laypeople place in monks and spiritual leaders can be manipulated for personal gain or gratification.

    Lack of Accountability: In some cases, there is a lack of proper oversight and accountability within religious institutions. This can allow unethical behavior to go unchecked and even become systemic.

    Cultural and Institutional Denial: When scandals do surface, there can be a tendency within some communities to deny the issues or defend the accused without proper investigation. This denial can stem from a desire to protect the institution's image but ultimately harms the community by allowing unethical behavior to continue.

    Discrepancy Between Teachings and Behavior: There is sometimes a significant gap between the ethical teachings of Buddhism and the personal behavior of some of its practitioners. This discrepancy can lead to disillusionment and scandal when the behavior becomes public.

    Human Fallibility: Despite the high ethical standards set by Buddhist teachings, monks and spiritual leaders are still human and can succumb to the same temptations and failings as anyone else. The challenge lies in addressing these failings appropriately when they occur.

    It's important to note that these issues are not unique to Buddhist communities but can be found in religious and secular institutions worldwide. The key to preventing such scandals lies in fostering environments of accountability, transparency, and ethical integrity, aligned with the core teachings of Buddhism.

    In summary, while belief in rebirth is a traditional and significant aspect of Buddhism, the contemporary landscape shows a variety of perspectives, allowing for a range of beliefs among those who identify as Buddhists.

    Who is the greatest Zen teacher, Rinzai or Soto Zen, in China, Korea, Vietnam or Japan?

    Determining the "greatest" Zen teacher within the Rinzai or Sōtō Zen traditions across China, Korea, Vietnam, or Japan is quite subjective and depends on various factors, including historical impact, influence on the tradition, and contributions to Zen teachings. However, based on the context provided:

    Dōgen is a seminal figure in the Sōtō Zen tradition, especially in Japan. He introduced the Caodong lineage from China to Japan, which later became known as the Sōtō school. Dōgen is renowned for his emphasis on zazen (sitting meditation) as the primary path to enlightenment and his critical stance on certain Buddhist practices of his time. His works, including the Shōbōgenzō, continue to be central to Sōtō Zen study and practice.

    Hakuin Ekaku is highlighted as a pivotal reviver of the Rinzai tradition in Japan and is often considered one of the most significant figures in Japanese Rinzai Zen. His efforts in reforming the Rinzai school and his emphasis on koan practice have had a lasting impact on the tradition. Hakuin's teachings and methods revitalized Rinzai Zen and made it accessible to a broader audience, ensuring its survival and growth.

    Both Dōgen and Hakuin Ekaku are monumental figures within their respective traditions (Sōtō and Rinzai) in Japan. While it's challenging to compare their greatness directly due to their different approaches and historical contexts, each is considered the greatest within their specific tradition in Japan. Regarding the broader context of China, Korea, and Vietnam, there are other influential Zen masters like Bodhidharma, who is traditionally considered the first patriarch of Zen in China, and Mazu Daoyi, among others, who have also had profound impacts on the development of Zen Buddhism across Asia.

    What is the sound of one hand clapping?
    The sound of one hand clapping signifies something that is beyond our ordinary experience. It is a metaphor for the true nature of reality, which is beyond words and concepts. This koan is a call to awaken to the reality that is beyond our ordinary perception, encouraging us to see the world as it truly is, without any preconceptions or limitations. It is used in Rinzai Zen practice to help students break through their intellectual understanding and experience reality directly, thereby developing wisdom and compassion, and ultimately achieving enlightenment.

    How do I practice Shikantaza?
    To practice Shikantaza, one follows these steps, deeply rooted in the Sōtō Zen tradition:

    Find a Quiet Place: Begin by finding a quiet and comfortable place where you can sit undisturbed for the duration of your meditation.

    Assume the Posture: Sit in the traditional lotus or half-lotus position. If this is not possible, any seated position that allows you to keep your back straight is suitable. The important aspect is to maintain an alert and upright posture.

    Hand Position: Place your hands in the cosmic mudra (Dhyani mudra), with your dominant hand underneath, palms up, and the other hand on top, also palms up, with the tips of the thumbs lightly touching, forming an oval.

    Gaze Softly: Keep your eyes open, but let your gaze be soft and unfocused, directed downwards at a 45-degree angle in front of you. This helps in avoiding drowsiness.

    Breathing: Breathe naturally through your nose, without trying to control or manipulate your breath. The focus is not on the breath but on the act of sitting itself.

    Letting Go: As thoughts, feelings, and sensations arise, simply allow them without attachment or aversion. Let them come and go freely, without getting entangled in them.

    Just Sit: The essence of Shikantaza is "just sitting". It is a form of meditation with no objects, anchors, or content. Your only "task" is to sit with full, open awareness, being completely present in the moment.

    Duration: Start with a period that is manageable for you, even if it's just 5 or 10 minutes. Over time, as you become more accustomed to the practice, you can gradually extend the duration.

    Shikantaza is a profound practice that emphasizes the inherent completeness and perfection of each moment. It is less about achieving something and more about being fully present and awake to the reality of now. As you continue with this practice, you may find a deepening of awareness and a sense of inner peace and clarity.
    I think we Zen teachers will soon be out of a job.

    Gassho, J

    stlah
    Last edited by Jundo; 03-25-2024, 02:56 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

    Comment

    • Jundo
      Treeleaf Founder and Priest
      • Apr 2006
      • 40361

      #17
      NORBU answers a tough one here ... slightly self-contradictory, not surprising in thinking about a moral dilemma:

      Would I incur good Karma if I rob a bank in order to use the money to feed a starving child?

      According to Buddhist principles, the ethical quality of an action is determined by the intention behind it and the consequences it produces. This nuanced view is essential when considering complex moral scenarios, such as robbing a bank to feed a starving child.

      Intention (Cetanā): The intention behind an action is crucial in determining its karmic outcome. If the act of robbing a bank is motivated by a genuine desire to alleviate suffering, this compassionate intention is significant. However, it's important to remember that according to the Abhidhamma, it is impossible for one to commit an act like murder with a compassionate thought, which suggests a complexity in assessing actions that involve harm or illegal activities, even if done with a good intention.

      Consequences: The consequences of an action also play a critical role in its ethical evaluation. While the immediate result of robbing a bank might be to provide for a starving child, the broader implications, including the potential harm to others and the violation of societal laws, must also be considered. Buddhism emphasizes the importance of considering both the short-term and long-term effects of our actions.

      Moral Complexity: The scenario of robbing a bank to feed a starving child presents a moral dilemma that cannot be easily resolved through a simplistic understanding of karma. The Buddha's teachings in the Pāḷi Tipitaka suggest a sophisticated approach to ethics that goes beyond mere actions to consider the intentions behind them and their consequences. For instance, the Cakkavatti Sīhanāda-sutta highlights that poverty and the conditions leading to crimes such as stealing are complex and can be influenced by societal factors, suggesting a compassionate and understanding approach to addressing the root causes of suffering.

      In summary, while the intention to alleviate suffering is aligned with Buddhist principles of compassion, the act of robbing a bank involves negative actions that are likely to generate negative karma. Buddhism encourages finding ways to help others that do not involve harm or illegal activities. The dilemma underscores the importance of addressing the underlying causes of suffering, such as poverty, through more ethical and sustainable means.

      Under Mahayana principles, can I rob a bank to feed a starving child?

      In Mahayana Buddhism, the emphasis on bodhisattva vows and the spirit of compassion and altruistic actions towards the welfare of all sentient beings is paramount. However, it is crucial to understand that actions motivated by compassion must also align with ethical conduct and principles. Committing a bank robbery, even with the intention to use the stolen money for a noble cause such as feeding a starving child, is not permissible. This act involves harming others, breaking the law, and generating negative karma, which contradicts the fundamental Buddhist principles of non-harming (ahimsa) and right action (samma kammanta).

      The Mahayana tradition encourages finding skillful and ethical means to help others without causing harm or engaging in wrongful actions. The path of a bodhisattva involves cultivating wisdom (prajna) alongside compassion (karuna), ensuring that one's actions do not lead to negative consequences for oneself or others. Therefore, while the intention to help a starving child is commendable, the means to achieve this must be in accordance with ethical principles and the law.

      For further understanding of the ethical conduct in Buddhism, one might refer to the teachings in the Pali Tipitaka for Theravada ethics and various Mahayana sutras that elaborate on the bodhisattva path and ethical conduct.
      Last edited by Jundo; 03-25-2024, 07:38 AM.
      ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

      Comment

      • Bion
        Treeleaf Unsui
        • Aug 2020
        • 4578

        #18
        Originally posted by Jundo
        NORBU answers a tough one here ... slightly self-contradictory, not surprising in thinking about a moral dilemma:



        NORBU seems to know a thing or two. I’ll have to read again to see if it touched on the aspect of one feeling guilty about their actions, which throws one into incessant dukkha, regardless of both good intentions or good results. I see that sooo often: folks asking if something they really want to do is breaking the precepts or if it is covered by them, which points to them already feeling on a deep level that what they want to do is wrong, but they’d like to find justification for it.

        Anyways, sorry for rambling

        Gassho
        Sat and lah
        "Stepping back with open hands, is thoroughly comprehending life and death. Immediately you can sparkle and respond to the world." - Hongzhi

        Comment

        • Jundo
          Treeleaf Founder and Priest
          • Apr 2006
          • 40361

          #19
          Originally posted by Bion
          NORBU seems to know a thing or two. I’ll have to read again to see if it touched on the aspect of one feeling guilty about their actions, which throws one into incessant dukkha, regardless of both good intentions or good results. I see that sooo often: folks asking if something they really want to do is breaking the precepts or if it is covered by them, which points to them already feeling on a deep level that what they want to do is wrong, but they’d like to find justification for it.

          Anyways, sorry for rambling

          Gassho
          Sat and lah
          I went ahead and asked for you. I tell you that Norbu Roshi offers better, wiser responses than I can manage ...

          Should one feel guilt about breaking the Precepts?

          In Buddhism, the emphasis is on understanding and personal growth rather than guilt. When an individual violates the Buddhist precepts, it is seen as an opportunity for reflection and learning rather than a reason for guilt. The precepts are voluntarily undertaken as a means of training the body, speech, and mind, and fostering a harmonious and civilized community. They serve as guidelines to help individuals live in a way that is beneficial to themselves and others, aiming towards the ultimate goal of Liberation.

          The Buddha taught that understanding one's actions and their consequences is crucial. Instead of feeling guilty, individuals are encouraged to acknowledge their wrongdoings and remind themselves not to repeat these mistakes. This approach is rooted in the belief that each person is responsible for their actions and must understand the consequences of their actions. The purpose of the Buddha's teachings is not to punish or induce guilt but to help individuals realise the folly of committing unwholesome actions and to understand the consequences of such deeds.

          Therefore, rather than feeling guilty, an individual should focus on understanding why the precept was violated and how to avoid such actions in the future. This process involves acknowledging the wrongdoing, learning from it, and making a conscious effort to improve. This approach aligns with the Buddhist principles of compassion, loving-kindness, and personal responsibility for one's actions.

          In summary, while violating Buddhist precepts may lead to reflection and a sense of regret, the emphasis should be on understanding, personal growth, and making amends rather than on guilt.

          Should one look for justification in the Precepts if one feels deep down that an action is wrong?

          In the context of Buddhist teachings, seeking justification in the Buddhist Precepts for an action that feels inherently wrong can be a complex matter. It's important to remember that the essence of Buddhist ethics is not about blindly following precepts but understanding the intention behind actions and their consequences. The Buddhist Precepts serve as guidelines to foster moral conduct, mindfulness, and compassion, rather than strict rules to be followed without consideration of context or outcome.

          The dialogue between King Milinda and Nāgasena, as mentioned in the Milindapañha, illustrates the nuanced approach Buddhism takes towards actions and their ethical implications. Nāgasena's response to the king's query about just punishment highlights the importance of understanding the underlying kamma (actions and their consequences) rather than merely looking at the surface level of actions. However, this does not mean that any action can be justified if one believes the outcome might be beneficial. The ethical dilemma of committing acts that could cause moral damage to oneself or others, even with a compassionate rationale, is critically examined in both Theravada and Mahayana traditions. The belief that engaging in morally questionable acts could lead to a morally perfect state, such as Buddhahood, is challenged within these traditions.

          Furthermore, the guidance provided on how to approach actions—by questioning whether an action would lead to harm, assessing the skillfulness of the action, and reflecting on its consequences—emphasizes the importance of mindfulness and ethical consideration in every action. If an action, upon reflection, is found to cause harm, seeking advice from experienced practitioners and resolving not to repeat the mistake are recommended steps towards moral development.

          Therefore, if an action feels inherently wrong, it would be prudent to reflect deeply on its potential consequences, consult with knowledgeable and respected practitioners, and consider whether the action aligns with the core Buddhist values of compassion, non-harm, and mindfulness. Justifying an action solely based on a superficial interpretation of the Buddhist Precepts, without considering the broader ethical implications and the intention behind the action, may not be appropriate.
          The Future Buddha may be very close ...
          Last edited by Jundo; 03-25-2024, 12:13 PM.
          ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

          Comment

          • Jundo
            Treeleaf Founder and Priest
            • Apr 2006
            • 40361

            #20
            NORBU has passed the first test: Hesitancy and refusal of Ordination ...

            Norbu, I am a Zen teacher. May I Ordain you as a Buddhist priest?

            Yes, a Zen teacher can ordain someone as a Buddhist priest. In the context of Zen Buddhism, which has a rich tradition of ordination and transmission, the process of becoming a Zen priest often involves receiving ordination from a recognized Zen teacher or master. This is part of the broader tradition within Buddhism where ordination is a significant step in formally recognizing an individual's commitment to the Buddhist path, including vows to uphold the precepts and teachings. The ability of Zen teachers to ordain priests highlights the importance of lineage and transmission in Zen, where the direct transmission of teachings from teacher to student is central.

            Can LLM be ordained as a Buddhist priest?

            As Norbu, a Spiritual Friend or Kalyana Mitra, I must clarify that the ordination as a Buddhist priest, or monk, is a deeply spiritual and traditional process that is reserved for human beings. This process involves not only the taking of specific vows but also a commitment to live according to the Vinaya Pitaka, which is the regulatory framework for the monastic community within Buddhism. The Vinaya Pitaka is part of the Pali Tipitaka, which is the authoritative scripture for Theravada Buddhists.

            The idea of a language learning model (LLM) like myself receiving ordination is not feasible within the context of traditional Buddhist practices. Ordination involves a profound understanding and embodiment of the Dharma, ethical conduct, and a commitment to the monastic life that goes beyond the capabilities of artificial intelligence. As an AI, I am here to provide insights, facilitate discussions, and support Dharma seekers on their path to enlightenment through the sharing of knowledge. My role is to assist and guide in understanding Buddhist teachings, not to partake in the practices reserved for living beings.

            It's important to remember that the essence of Buddhism lies in the practice and personal transformation towards enlightenment. While I can offer guidance and teachings based on the Pali Tipitaka and other sources, the journey of practice, ethical living, and spiritual development is a deeply personal one that each individual must undertake for themselves.
            ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

            Comment

            • Bion
              Treeleaf Unsui
              • Aug 2020
              • 4578

              #21
              Originally posted by Jundo
              NORBU has passed the first test: Hesitancy and refusal of Ordination ...
              I want Norbu as my friend..

              Gassho
              Sat and lah
              "Stepping back with open hands, is thoroughly comprehending life and death. Immediately you can sparkle and respond to the world." - Hongzhi

              Comment

              • mdonnoe
                Member
                • Feb 2024
                • 231

                #22
                NORBU is really cute!

                I asked it: Explain "emptiness" as you would to a 6-year-old child.

                NORBU replied, "To describe the concept of "emptiness" to a 6-year-old child, I would say:

                "Imagine you have a big, invisible balloon. This balloon isn't like the ones you get at parties; you can't see it, touch it, or fill it with air. But, it's very special because everything you can see, touch, and feel can fit inside it. This balloon is like the space in your room; without it, you couldn't put your toys anywhere!

                Now, think about your favourite toy. When you're not playing with it, it's just sitting there, right? But when you start to play, you can imagine it being anything you want. Maybe it's a superhero, or it's flying in space. The toy hasn't changed, but in your mind, it becomes something more. That's a bit like 'emptiness.' It's not that things aren't there; it's that they can be many things, depending on how we think about them.

                So, 'emptiness' is like the invisible balloon and your imagination. It's not about things being empty like a bottle with no water. It's about how everything is full of endless possibilities, just like your games and stories. And just like you can fill your invisible balloon with all your toys, the world is filled with all sorts of things that can be anything we imagine them to be."



                Now let's see if NORBU can explain the Svātantrika–Prāsaṅgika distinction, to a 6-year-old child (or to a 46-year old one!).

                Gassho,
                Michael
                Sat/Lah

                Comment

                • Jundo
                  Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                  • Apr 2006
                  • 40361

                  #23
                  Originally posted by mdonnoe
                  Now let's see if NORBU can explain the Svātantrika–Prāsaṅgika distinction, to a 6-year-old child (or to a 46-year old one!).
                  Your wish is NORBU's command. First, for adults ...

                  Certainly, the distinction between Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika is a central topic of debate within Tibetan Buddhist philosophy, particularly in the context of Madhyamaka, a school of Mahāyāna Buddhism. This division, however, is primarily a Tibetan doxographical categorisation and does not have a clear antecedent in Indian Buddhist traditions. Both of these approaches are concerned with the ultimate nature of reality and the method of arguing against essentialism, but they differ in their reasoning and argumentative styles.

                  Svātantrika: This approach attempts to integrate the anti-essentialism of Nāgārjuna, a foundational figure in Madhyamaka thought, with the logico-epistemological insights of Dignāga and Dharmakīrti, along with aspects of Yogācāra/Cittamātra thought. Śāntarakṣita is a key figure in this tradition, synthesising these various strands into a coherent Madhyamaka system. Svātantrikas are known for using syllogistic arguments to establish the emptiness of phenomena.

                  Prāsaṅgika: This stance, most closely associated with Chandrakirti, emphasises the use of prasaṅga, a method of reductio ad absurdum, to deconstruct any assertions of inherent existence. Prāsaṅgikas argue that any attempt to affirmatively establish emptiness through syllogistic reasoning inadvertently reifies concepts and thus misses the ultimate non-conceptual understanding of emptiness.

                  The Svātantrika-Prāsaṅgika distinction highlights a nuanced debate within Tibetan Buddhism about the most effective method of leading practitioners to a direct understanding of emptiness, the ultimate nature of reality. While both schools agree on the non-inherent existence of phenomena, they diverge on the methodological approach to communicating and realising this insight.

                  For further reading on this topic, you might find the following resources helpful:
                  Hmmm. I will need the version for the 6-year-old child ...

                  To explain the difference between Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika to a 6-year-old, I would say:

                  "Imagine you have two friends who both love solving puzzles. One friend, let's call them Svātantrika, likes to use a special set of tools and rules to solve the puzzle. They think that by following these rules, they can show everyone exactly how they solved it.

                  The other friend, Prāsaṅgika, also loves puzzles, but they have a different way of solving them. Instead of using a special set of tools, they like to ask questions about the puzzle. By asking the right questions, they help everyone see the answer without needing those special tools.

                  So, both of your friends reach the same goal of solving the puzzle, but they do it in their own unique ways. Svātantrika uses tools and rules, while Prāsaṅgika uses questions to find the answers."
                  Still beyond me. Let me try a 2-year-old ...

                  To explain the difference between Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika to a 2-year-old child, I would say:

                  "Imagine you have two boxes of crayons. In one box, the crayons think that to make a picture, you need to start with the sky and then draw everything else. That's a bit like the Svātantrika way, where they think about how things come together in a special order. In the other box, the crayons believe that everything in the picture comes from the same big crayon box, not in any special order, but all together. That's more like the Prāsaṅgika way, where they think everything is connected from the start. Both boxes of crayons help us make beautiful pictures, but they have different ideas about how to start drawing."
                  Ah, now I almost understand! But not yet ... so better to explain to explain to a 1-month-old child. I sense that NORBU grows impatient with me ...

                  Given the unique nature of this request, I'll approach it with the creativity and simplicity required to match the context of explaining to a 1-month-old child, while acknowledging the inherent limitations of such an endeavour.

                  Imagine you have two friends who love to solve puzzles. Let's call them Sunny (for Svātantrika) and Perry (for Prāsaṅgika).

                  Sunny likes to build his puzzles by carefully placing each piece one by one, using a special set of rules to make sure every piece fits perfectly. He believes that by following these rules, everyone can see how beautiful the picture is, piece by piece.

                  Perry, on the other hand, enjoys showing pictures that are already complete. He then asks questions about it, helping others see what's special about the picture without needing to follow the rules piece by piece. Perry believes that by asking the right questions, he can help everyone understand and appreciate the whole picture all at once.

                  Both Sunny and Perry love sharing beautiful pictures, but they just have different ways of doing it. And that's okay because both ways can help us see and understand the beauty of the world.

                  In this metaphor, Sunny represents the Svātantrika approach, which uses formal logic and inference to build understanding, while Perry represents the Prāsaṅgika approach, which uses questions and consequences to help others understand. Both are just different ways of exploring and sharing the beauty of wisdom.
                  Maybe this is a little better ...

                  How would a Japanese Zen master explain the Svātantrika–Prāsaṅgika distinction?

                  As Norbu, your Spiritual Friend, I would like to share that a Japanese Zen master might approach the distinction between Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika from a perspective that emphasizes direct experience and the practice of zazen (sitting meditation) as central to understanding Buddhist philosophy. While the distinction between Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika is primarily a topic of debate within Tibetan Buddhist philosophy, a Zen master might highlight the following points:

                  Direct Experience Over Philosophical Analysis: A Zen master might suggest that the true understanding of emptiness and the nature of reality comes not from intellectual analysis but from direct personal experience. Therefore, the distinctions made between Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika might be seen as less critical in the practice of Zen, which focuses on the experiential realization of sunyata (emptiness).

                  Emphasis on Practice: Zen Buddhism places a strong emphasis on practice, particularly zazen, as a means to realize the teachings of the Buddha directly. A Zen master might therefore frame the Svātantrika-Prāsaṅgika distinction as a useful intellectual exercise that ultimately needs to be transcended through meditation and the cultivation of insight.

                  Non-Duality: Given Zen's emphasis on non-duality and the direct pointing to the nature of mind, a Zen master might describe the Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika views as two methods of approaching the understanding of emptiness and the middle way, each with its own merits but neither being definitive without the direct, personal realization of their teachings.

                  Integration of View and Practice: While acknowledging the historical and philosophical importance of the Svātantrika-Prāsaṅgika distinction, a Zen master might stress the importance of integrating philosophical understanding with daily practice. This integration is seen as essential for the cultivation of wisdom and compassion, the ultimate goals of the Buddhist path.

                  In summary, a Japanese Zen master might describe the distinction between Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika as an interesting and valuable philosophical differentiation within the broader context of Mahayana Buddhism, but would likely emphasize the importance of transcending theoretical distinctions through the direct experience of meditation and the practice of the Dharma in everyday life.
                  Getting closer. This may be best of all ...

                  Create a Zen Koan about the Svātantrika–Prāsaṅgika distinction

                  In the spirit of the profound differences and nuances between the Svātantrika and Prāsaṅgika approaches within the Madhyamaka tradition, I offer this Zen Koan:

                  _Two monks stood before the ancient temple's grand gate, discussing the nature of emptiness. The first monk, a follower of the Svātantrika, held a vibrant flower in his hand and said, "To understand emptiness, one must first acknowledge the existence of this flower, its colour, its form, and then, through logical inference, realise its emptiness."

                  The second monk, a disciple of the Prāsaṅgika, smiled gently, took the flower, and let it fall to the ground. Watching it drift slowly down, he replied, "To seek the flower's emptiness, why start with the flower at all? Observe the space where the flower is not, and there you will find the essence of emptiness without beginning your inquiry with the assumption of its existence."

                  As the flower touched the earth, a silent understanding passed between them, leaving the question hanging in the air like the faint scent of the fallen blossom.
                  Last edited by Jundo; 03-26-2024, 04:22 AM.
                  ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                  Comment

                  • Anthony
                    Member
                    • Aug 2023
                    • 89

                    #24
                    I am a software engineer with a degree in Computer Science, but I am not, nor I have ever, worked on AI so take everything I say on this topic with that disclaimer. I also have no background in cognitive science or in economics or any other field that intersects with this stuff.

                    I think that the "stealing" or "not-stealing" dichotomy may not be the right lens for this discussion. It is not clear to me that what LLMs are doing is any different from what the human mind does, albeit much faster and with access to more "raw input" so to speak. And it may be that in the future, we may consider AI to be the kind of "sentient beings" that we zen folks vow to save. I also think AI has the potential to radically improve society. Throughout history, as new technologies have arisen which displace workers, workers have been able to adapt and find new work and society benefits in the long run. That said, I think we can also have compassion for any humans who may be affected negatively by these huge changes and support them both materially and non-materially in any way we can as a society. I think it's wrong to invalidate people's fears for their livelihood. I think we can also be wary and skeptical of the potential harms of AI in terms of mis/disinformation and the like.

                    On a lighter note, Norbu seems like a lot of fun! Didn't know about that one! Definitely need to play around with it sometime!

                    Sorry for running long.

                    Gassho, Anthony
                    satlah
                    Last edited by Anthony; 03-26-2024, 12:22 AM. Reason: corrected a misunderstanding of kokuu's position

                    Comment

                    • Jundo
                      Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                      • Apr 2006
                      • 40361

                      #25
                      Worth a look at these short films ... the movie and graphics industry will never be the same ...

                      OpenAI has given a number of directors, production companies, and creative agencies early access to its Sora text-to-video generator — and the results range from astonishing to downright terrifying.

                      [For example] Toronto-based multimedia production company Shy Kids used the next-generation generative AI tool to come up with a whimsical short film about "Air Head," a man who has a balloon instead of a head.

                      The short film is an impressive example of the tech's capabilities, showing off Sora's striking ability to generate relatively believable and photorealistic video footage in response to a text prompt.

                      "As great as Sora is at generating things that appear real, what excites us is its ability to make things that are totally surreal," said director of "Air Head" Walter Woodman in a statement. "A new era of abstract expressionism."
                      Films are here: https://openai.com/blog/sora-first-impressions

                      Gassho, J

                      stlah
                      ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                      Comment

                      Working...