... can we build a Buddha?
Might a Tathagata, a Thus Come One, come off the assembly line?
I believe it possible. Once true sentience is attained by our AI and machines (that’s the hard part!) the additional steps required in engineering a Buddha may prove relatively simple. In fact, it will be far simpler for a machine to exemplify the characteristics of a Buddha than for a flesh and blood human to do so.
Why? And, what kind of “Buddha” would a factory-built Buddha be?
First, this Buddha would need to be a sentient being, truly capable of feeling emotions. Designing a mechanical being with actual, subjective emotional experience is vital. It cannot but look like a Buddha, or mimic sounding like a Buddha, if it is to be a bona fide Buddha. A machine that merely emulates, brainlessly, all the characteristics I am about to describe might walk and talk like a true Tathagata, and might wear a Buddha’s robes, but I would hesitate to say it is one. It would be rather cheating if an automaton merely claimed to feel a certain “peace” or “compassion” that it really was incapable of feeling.
With that in mind, what are the characteristics of mind that we want our fully enlightened creation to display?
Of course, there should be an ability to wholly transcend the “self/other” divide, and to perceive deeply the “emptiness” (of separate self existence) of all phenomena in the universe. In fact, an advanced machine might have a much easier time of experiencing such perspectives compared to a human being, because a human meat brain is not readily equipped to think of itself as anything but a separate, bounded being, one thing living in a world of other basically separate things. A computer, on the other hand, could easily “get” its essence as linked components and peripherals, which in turn, are composed of chips, metals and plastic, molecules, atoms, etc., all part of wider systems and sprawling networks, intra-flowing processes, ultimately emerging from the planet and stars. In that sense, there is not really a “computer,” just a composite of parts and data streams, which are reducible to their bits and bites, and on and on.
Further, any computer might access visual and other senses far wider than our own, able to perceive phenomena chemically, electro-magnetically and by other scales, thus understanding clearly that all the “things” of the world are more than they appear to the naked eye. A computer would know the complex structures and fields, without clear borders, that are the objects of this world in other light. Finally, a computer would more easily process mathematically and mystically the vast wholeness of the world which sweeps all its pieces within. Thus, a computer would easily compute that it, and all things, were not just themselves, but also are the whole and each other, coordinates within coordinates within space and time.
Next, a Buddha is traditionally thought to be incredibly smart or, at least, most wise. A Buddha does not need to be “omniscient” like that “God” of those other religions, nor does a Buddha need to know the answer to all questions, or even most. A Buddha simply needs to be fully knowing (or just extremely knowing) in regard to certain questions. For example, according to some descriptions, a Buddha should know his/her own past lives and those of all sentient beings, and should possess an ability to predict the future. Personally, I am skeptical of claims of “extra-sensory perception,” and a deep ability to accurately see the past or to know the future seems rather far-fetched for us of flesh and blood. However, such feats may be possible for programs, with data banks holding vast memory storage, and number-crunching ability driving excellent modeling systems. This will allow an extrapolation of past events, and refined forecasts of many future events with high accuracy, depending, of course, on the amount of data and the number of variables involved.
Theorists point out that our universe is not only matter and energy, but stored “information” which matter and energy embodies. Some theorists posit that the underlying structure of the universe may be something not unlike a running game or simulation code, namely, a basic formula that is surprisingly simple, yet capable of producing tremendous complexity. Were that the case, it is possible the a sufficiently powerful computer could predict what the operating system or code is likely to produce in the future (not unlike a vastly more powerful chess computer predicting future moves, or a hurricane simulator anticipating the movements of a storm.) It might also retrace past steps in the running of the program, able to access and replay or recreate those steps. A computer is far more capable of such complex data processing than any one human being.
As to “wisdom,” as opposed to mere “intelligence,” a sagely super-computer could access all the world’s stories of trials and errors, what worked and what did not in given situations, then advise a seeker on what is likely to succeed (with 98.84495% accuracy) in given circumstances exhibiting similar variables. It may not be perfect, but significantly more reliable than asking your mom or your Uncle Lou.
In any event, one could also just interpret these powers differently: If we say that a Buddha knows the generic “hearts of men,” with a good understanding of what makes us tick in general, our major and minor foibles and weaknesses, as well as the strengths which are common throughout the human race, then the ticking heart of an intelligent computer (like any gifted psychologist) could be said to “know the past lives of human beings” in a generic sense, via a very perceptive understanding of what drives all peoples’ lives and what kinds of suffering they face as a group. And as with understanding motivations of the past, accurate predictions about the future are accurate predictions about the future, whether derived from models or mystical powers. Advanced computers could come to be excellent psychologists and predictors of human behavior, and a Buddha might be described as a particularly talented shrink.
As well, a programmed device need not be subject to anger, anxiety, hatred, frustration, stress or depression if such emotions are simply left out of its code, replaced with 0s and 1s for peace, love and equanimity. Traditionally, a Buddha was a human being who came to regulate or abandon many extreme or otherwise harmful emotions, so the fact that a machine lacks many emotions at the outset is actually a great advantage. There is no need to remove what was never present in machines in the first place, unlike in our case, where we must undo thousands of generations of human evolution. After all, a number cruncher can simply take that data as what it is, no feeling of resentment or disappointment about it, for the facts are just the facts. People are far less capable of such level-headedness. Nor need a machine be jealous of others, gossipy, or attached in any way to things: Should a machine, for example, lose its connection or data files, suffer a crash or even have its own motherboard begin to burn out, it can react like a calm recorder of events, dispassionately registering the happening without crying over the loss. Even our wise waffle-irons will accept placidly their plugs being pulled.
A Buddha should be dependable and keep promises. A mechanism can be very reliable and trustworthy, doing what it promises to do (“guaranteed, or your money back.”) Further, in offering teachings, the “GAUTAMA-RAMA 5000,” with a vast database of historical Sutras, commentaries and stories to choose from, might be super-capable in tailoring lessons to the psychological profile of the listener, a Buddha designed to suit the particular spiritual and psychological needs of every individual Buddhist. A main frame can plug away 24/7/365, while even a human Buddha needs to sleep! Nonetheless, such a Buddha may also understand “timelessness” better, aware that not all is a matter of one’s internal clock, and that the whole of a universe is a vast network which goes on and on beyond the passing uploads and downloads, boot-ups and boot-downs, of worldly time.
Talk about the virtues diligence and endeavor!
Most importantly, a computer could exhibit extreme generosity, loving kindness, caring and compassion for others, with nary a thought for itself or what it wants and needs. Basically, a machine is a tool, and thus need not be selfish any more than a hammer complains about banging nails. A servant device will sacrifice itself for its human wards, not even asking for a thank you in return, should it simply be programmed to do so.
Finally, for purely aesthetic reasons, to allow it to meet the expectations of its human students regarding how a Buddha should look, we can provide a body of some golden skin substitute, with bald domed head and warm smile, clad in traditional yet gorgeous robes. As an add-on, we may built-in a wonderfully resonant speaking voice, not to mention fabulous audio-visual capabilities and musical soundtracks to suit a Buddha (perhaps as factory extras for the “Deluxe” versions.) Should we wish, artist designers will add some of the more fantastic elements of a Buddha’s physique, such as the lion-shaped chest, thighs like a royal stag, finely webbed fingers and thousand spoked wheels on the soles of its feet. Golden auras and lights which shine from between its deep blue eyes would be no problem at all.
Then, simply switch Siddhartha on …
Let us offer incense and bow, for the new Thus Come One has come.
~ ~ ~
The Brilliant 'A Robot Buddha' from the South Korean Film, 'Doomsday Book'
The Brilliant 'A Robot Buddha' from the South Korean Film, 'Doomsday Book'
wang-5.jpgMV5BMTk4MjI0NjU3Ml5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwODQxNzIwMTE@._V1_.jpgwang-2.jpg
Comment