The Mahāyāna path is aimed at a buddha’s complete awakening. But what is the awakened mind of a buddha like? Is a buddha conscious—and, if so, of what is a buddha conscious? A buddha appears to act, but does any thought precede that action? Some Buddhist philosophers argue that a buddha’s awakening consists in a complete cessation of thought, a state of unconscious automaticity that Mark Siderits has characterized as “robo-Buddha.” At the other end of the spectrum, some say that a buddha’s awakening consists in total omniscience, the simultaneous awareness of every knowable object in the universe, past, present, and future, together with the capacity to respond appropriately to every situation. There are many other positions in between. This panel will explore some of the different positions on this spectrum in an effort to better understand how a buddha’s mind works.
Does the Buddha possess a mind? Does the notion that the Buddha acts spontaneously imply that the Buddha lacks a mind? This paper posits that the Buddha can maintain cognitive faculties while interacting with sentient beings without the need for deliberation. This is attributed to the Buddha's mind consisting of two layers. At the foundational layer of the dharma-body, anchored by mirror cognition, the Buddha continuously perceives both emptiness and the specific characteristics of all phenomena. At the upper layer of the enjoyment-body and the transformation-body, the Buddha engages with sentient beings without deliberate thought because, along the path of cultivation, a bodhisattva has mastered and internalized all the essential skills for interacting with sentient beings. Thus, the Buddha's mind resembles that of a person deeply immersed in perpetual meditation on the same content, fortified with an armor that effortlessly deflects any external disturbances.
In classical Buddhist philosophy and contemporary scholarship alike, it’s said that a buddha’s awakening is a “non-conceptual gnosis” (nirvikalpakajñāna). In this paper, I’ll offer a challenge to this assumption based on *Śāntarakṣita’s Tattvasiddhi. *Śāntarakṣita claims here that a buddha’s omniscience (sarvajña) must involve mental constructions; that is, it must be savikalpakajñāna. Against Dharmakīrtian orthodoxy, he argues that any cultivation that involves mental constructions will per force result in an awareness-event that involves mental constructions. I’ll explicate *Śāntarakṣita’s defense of this, showing that it crucially depends on our interpretation of the “vividness” (spaṣṭatā) of awareness-events that result from long-practiced cultivation. Vivid awareness-events, he argues, are devoid of conceptual content, but nevertheless involve distinctions and mental constructions that make the skillful immersion in practical undertakings possible. Finally, despite the heterodox nature of the claim, I’ll suggest ways it might help us understand the relation between habituation and buddhahood more generally.
This presentation explores the ways in which the two, late Indian commentators on the Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti, Raviśrījñāna (the 12th -13th centuries) and Vibhūticandra (the 13th century) sought to explicate the ultimate nature of the Vajrasattva’s mind by exhibiting the multiple interpretative approaches to a comprehensive understanding of the meaning of 812 names and attributes of Mañjuśrī lauded in the Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti. Being the masters of the Kālacakra tantric tradition in India, which sees the ultimate nature of the Buddha’s mind as the cause, path, and result, those two interpreters structured their explanations and exegesis of the Vajrasattva’s mind in terms of the three, aforementioned ways in which it expresses itself as well as in accordance with their own understanding of the purpose and function of both, the nature of the Vajrasattva’s mind and the essence of the Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti.
The Buddhist path is aimed at awakening, and the mind of a buddha is often characterized as omniscient. So, the Buddhist path is a path to omniscience. But what is that omniscience like? There is no consensus. Some say that this omniscience consists in a complete cessation of thought, in a state of insentient automaticity. Others say that it involves the simultaneous awareness of every detail of the universe, past, present and future. And some simply affirm that a buddha's mind is inconceivable. I will address the question from the standpoint of those who would take the Buddhist path seriously in the context of contemporary Western culture: "What would any omniscience to which we could rationally aspire be like?" I will argue that we can develop a recognizably Buddhist account of that omniscience that is consistent with what we know about human beings, but that is soteriologically non-trivial.
| Sara L. McClintock | slmccli@emory.edu | View |