This essay is adapted from a Dharma talk I previously published on YouTube. I have revised and reorganized it into written form for readers here.

Rather than presenting a definitive explanation of orthodox Buddhist doctrine, I explore these ideas through my personal understanding and experience of Buddhist practice, using modern computer systems as a metaphor. I invite you to read this as one practitioner's perspective.

1. Intention Is the Source Code of the Mind

Imagine someone walking along a path who accidentally steps on a frog and kills it.

Distressed by what happened, the person asks:

“Venerable sir, I have taken a life. Have I created negative karma?”

What do you think?

In Buddhism, one of the most important elements in understanding karma is intention.

The Buddha taught that intention is karma.

I would like to explain this using the metaphor of a modern computer system.

If our mind is software, intention is the source code that determines how that software operates.

If there was no intention to kill the frog, we cannot regard the incident as an act of intentional killing.

But there is an important distinction here.

The absence of malicious intention in the mind and the actual death of a living being are two different dimensions of the same event.

2. Physical Records Remaining in the Hardware

We cannot explain every consequence in the world solely through intention.

Even when we do not intend something to happen, physical events still occur and leave consequences behind.

I compare this distinction to the relationship between computer hardware and software.

Buddhist scriptures recount occasions when the Buddha, even after attaining enlightenment, suffered physical injuries and pain. A stone fragment injured his foot, and he also experienced severe back pain.

This raises an interesting question:

If the Buddha had been liberated from all mental defilements, why did he still experience physical suffering?

My personal understanding is as follows.

The Buddha had fundamentally transformed the operating system of his mind—his software—but the physical body, or hardware, still carried conditions formed long before enlightenment.

Even when an operating system is completely transformed, the biological processes and physical conditions of the body do not simply disappear.

In my own interpretation, I connect this continuity of the body and its life-sustaining processes with the concept of ādāna-vijñāna, or appropriating consciousness.

However, the idea of physical records or hardware logs associated with this consciousness is my personal metaphor, not an established doctrinal explanation.

Enlightenment does not mean that the body will never experience pain again.

Physical pain may still arise, but the mind's relationship with that pain can undergo a fundamental transformation.

3. Purifying Ālaya-vijñāna and Revealing the Ninth Consciousness

How, then, can our consciousness change?

I approach this question through the purification of ālaya-vijñāna, the storehouse consciousness.

In Buddhist thought, ālaya-vijñāna is described as a deep level of consciousness associated with karmic seeds and habitual tendencies accumulated through our experiences.

A mind clouded by greed, anger, and delusion continually produces new attachments and discriminations.

The more these patterns repeat, the more deeply we become bound by the habits of our own consciousness.

However, through practice, as we gradually reduce the influence of the three poisons and cultivate compassion and wisdom, the mind can become increasingly purified.

I compare this process to cleaning a filter covered in dust.

As the filter becomes clearer, the originally pure nature beyond it can begin to reveal itself.

In my personal understanding, this can be described as the manifestation of the ninth consciousness, amala-vijñāna, or immaculate consciousness.

Of course, the concept of a ninth consciousness is not accepted or explained in the same way across all Buddhist traditions.

What I wish to emphasize is not the number of levels of consciousness, but the possibility that our originally pure nature can be revealed through practice as the obscurations of ignorance are removed.

The body may still grow old, become ill, and experience pain.

Yet the mind can move toward a freedom that is no longer entirely governed by those physical conditions.

4. Dedication: An Essential Practice for Purifying the Mind

How, then, should we purify the mind?

I believe one important practice is selfless dedication.

At the center of much of our mental suffering lies a powerful attachment to the idea of “I” and “mine.”

My interests. My possessions. My feelings. My suffering.

The more we cling exclusively to these concerns, the narrower our mental world becomes, and the stronger our attachments grow.

In computer terms, it is as though a single program—the ego—is monopolizing the system's resources.

But when we understand another person's suffering and willingly offer our time and effort for their benefit, we begin to move beyond our habitual self-centeredness.

This is the power of dedication.

Dedication is not simply an act of sacrificing oneself.

It is the practice of compassion that allows us to move beyond the narrow boundaries of the self and connect with the lives of others.

I believe this practice can play an important role in purifying the self-centered tendencies accumulated within ālaya-vijñāna.

I do not mean to claim that dedication is necessarily faster than every other form of spiritual practice.

What matters is the degree to which we release attachment and cultivate genuine compassion through our actions.

5. What Code Are You Entering Right Now?

Let us return to the person who accidentally stepped on the frog.

That person cannot undo what happened.

But they can change how they respond to it.

The absence of deliberate intention does not mean that the death of a living being should be treated lightly.

One can feel sorrow and compassion for that life and resolve to act with greater care in the future.

At that very moment, a new direction of the mind begins to take shape.

The karma we created in the past matters. But equally important is the intention with which we act in this very moment.

To return to our computer metaphor, we are constantly entering new code into the system of our mind.

We can enter the code of greed, anger, and delusion.

Or we can enter the code of compassion, wisdom, and selfless dedication.

I believe spiritual practice is the ongoing process of recognizing these choices and gradually changing the direction of our minds.

Enlightenment does not necessarily eliminate every form of physical pain.

But it opens a path toward freedom from attachment, even in the midst of suffering.

The body may experience pain. But the mind does not have to remain a prisoner of that pain.

May all of you who continue walking your own paths of practice find peace through compassion, wisdom, and selfless dedication.

— Zen Seeker on the Path

It’s a paradoxical fallacy

How do you force yourself to not want things ?

So i’ve been dealing with an ever-worsening case of Social Anxiety and had taken the time to find materials online (especially Buddhist-Related) and had came through a passage which intrigued me and which i think holds alot of water, and it sort of goes like
Attachment isn’t the source of fear, attachment IS fear.

For quite some time, i’ve been holding it dear and have actually tried to live by it.
But the harder i tried, the more i realize it just truly isn’t possible- i’m truly stuck being like this.
Inorder for me to be better, i must let go the need to be better. So i tried to let go of getting better but then i realized i’m doing it in hopes of getting better and i can’t do it but i need to get better ?

Let’s suppose a scenario of me having to have to meet with a client. I’m nullifying all the expectations i have about might happen out of the interaction, but then few moments in a thought crossed “Why am i not getting better ? Why am i still making mistakes ? Wasn’t this suppose to make me better ?”

So, guys- please
Help me battle this thing inside of me
What do i need to do ?

This straight-up slaps. Straight fire. 🔥🔥🔥 Buddhist Cyberpunk Mantra J-Pop/K-Pop colab. It contains the entire Heart Sutra chanted by the Zen priest/musician Kanho Yakushiji. Ya'll gotta listen to this. Put the subtitles on too!

Would it be about compassion? Impermamence? Karma? Or maybe something else?

Feeling calm and neutral when you're in a zen monestry with beautiful garden and clean place is something understandable. Feeling calm and neutral when someone is living in a clean environment with a healthy body is understandable.

But.... Is there anyone here who's attained this state of the Buddha even in condition where let's say you're living in a dirty place, feel sick and despite that you still feel the same way like living in a zen monestry for example?

I have not been cheated on, but that doesn’t stop the intrusive thoughts of the ‘what ifs’ and ‘what would I even do if I found out my partner cheated on me?’ Hopefully that doesn’t negate this post because I truly would love some insight on this, if not for me than for my ability to bring back better advice for my friends who are not over the trauma of their own partners having affairs.

Ive fallen into those cheating story rabbit holes more than I would like. My own doing yes, but as a result it does make me look at everything differently. It makes me look at relationships as so much more fragile than they are/could be. So many stories of husbands waiting till the wife suffered through multiple deliveries to bring his children into the world just for her to get cheated on while she’s on year 3 of not feeling like her own person after motherhood. Too many men who get cheated on by women and then immediately told they ‘can’t cry/have to suck it up/be a man’ so they never get to even go through proper emotions others get to. And so on and so on. The stories are all horrible, and every single time the person never Truly feels like it wasn’t not their fault.

I find myself going through those rabbit hole imagination marathons of ‘what if it was ME who got cheated on’ and my immediate thoughts are all a mix of internalized misogyny and self blame.

Reading how cheating can cause ptsd? That’s a horrifying thought. That’s probably my worst fear right now.

I know I just gave an intense case of overthinking about something that’s not even happened to me, but it still poses the question- how does one heal from something like this without constantly believing it was their own fault? If not their fault for not giving enough love/attention to their partner, then their fault for not seeing the persons true character before entering a committed relationship?

Is it actually possible to ‘be an observer rather than react’ to something so horrible it can just give someone ptsd and life long trust issues? Is it possible to actually Feel in your gut how not at fault you are for your partners actions when it can “so easily be tied back to what you weren’t doing in said relationship for them to find a ‘fix’”?

cause there’s only so many times I or anyone can tell someone ‘forget about them, they cheated cause they wanted, it wasn’t you, you deserve better.’ It’s the same repetitive encouragement that no one truly believes anyway.

(I will admit it also doesn’t help one single bit that sometimes the advice given by others is just a ‘nice spiritual’ version of ‘this is why you shouldn’t fall in love and be in a relationship.’ That doesn’t do anything for anyone to read- especially if that person actually got cheated on. so please 🙏).

I've been wondering whether bodhicitta — the aspiration to attain awakening for the benefit of all sentient beings — is a concept shared by all Buddhist traditions, or whether it is primarily associated with Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan Buddhism and Dzogchen.

As far as I understand, bodhicitta is central to the Mahayana path, but Theravada Buddhism seems to approach the path to liberation differently, with an emphasis on the cessation of suffering and the attainment of Nibbana.

I'd be interested in hearing from practitioners and people familiar with the different Buddhist schools, particularly regarding how these concepts are understood in actual practice rather than just in theory.

I was inspired by my visit to the Museum of Oriental Art in Italy, and wanted to make a piece of Buddhist art in my own way. All 49 koans and Mumon’s verses are here, with the whole book read aloud. The translation is the 1934 Senzaki and Reps version, checked line by line against the Chinese and gently modernized.

Free in your browser: https://killedbyapixel.github.io/GatelessGate/
Open source: https://github.com/KilledByAPixel/GatelessGate

We are the fading memory of what has already passed.

The latency of the flesh machine can only show arisen things.

The fibers and filaments that run, eye to brain,

Could be outrun by a donkey.

By ordinary knowing, we cannot see the future,

Nor can we, by ordinary knowing, see the present.

We are as deformed gods, our heads on backwards

Defining ourselves by the ripples we leave in time.

To know the past is no great talent.

The past is probably all you know.

Arisen things cannot teach

The subtle and sublime.

What is arisen can only be

Endless variations on a theme;

To be the jackal who eats the rat,

Then the rat the jackal ate, and so on.

Better to know what is unarisen,

What is the cause of arising,

And how to cease arising.

Leaving no wake, only stillness.

Reading posts and comments for a while now, I am curious what people feel the cause of consciousness might be? Is consciousness causeless, and as such, fundamental? Or does consciousness arise from matter, namely the matter of the brain?

I've been doing this for a while, and have gotten efficient to it. I'll start with pondering who I am, until I get to the point of staring through glass (the subject cannot be the object of the mind, the eye cannot see itself). I don't want to say it's jarring, but you can't really word it, you just look through it. I've gotten more comfortable and can approach it more often. What is that? In my mind, it's like touching sunyata. But you know, fall for a game with the carrot dangling. What's gone beyond that, I have experienced other perspectives from it. I'm not good at that part, it freaks me out every time. I did it once, and fully was immersed as a parrot in South America. Like strong psychedelic level convincing (I haven't tripped in 8 years or so). I've done that twice for people. I know I am doing something, I just have no idea what that is. I am recognizing that "I" is the same, whether dog or person or whatever, but idk what is happening after that. I cannot reliably do it yet, but it's beyond fascinating. What I keep getting is "we all experience the same emptiness, colored with what it is to be that". Is that the cosmic game of tag? That's some bs

Today is Guanyin Bodhisattva’s Renunciation Day. 🙏

We have to remember, Guanyin is not separate from us. The compassion of Guanyin lives within every one of us. Whenever we act with selfless love and kindness, we become Guanyin for someone else. 🙏😊

So don't just pray to Guanyin.

Learn from Guanyin.

Practise like Guanyin.

Let Guanyin's compassion manifest through us.

Today, let us put compassion into action. Eat vegetarian for the day, be kind to someone, help someone in need, forgive someone, or simply bring happiness to another person.

We may think our individual actions are small, but if everyone plays their part and practises a little more compassion, this world will gradually become a kinder and better place.

I also encourage everyone to take some time to chant:

南无观世音菩萨

Namo Guanshiyin Pusa 🙏

Whether it is 10, 108, 1,000 times, or simply whenever you remember throughout the day, chant sincerely.

After chanting, dedicate all the merits to all sentient beings:

May all beings be free from suffering and the causes of suffering.

May all beings give rise to Bodhicitta, encounter the Dharma, and ultimately attain Buddhahood.

Let today not simply be another Buddhist holy day that passes by.

Make it a day of practice.

Make it a day of compassion.

Make it a day we become a little more like Guanyin. 🙏

南无大慈大悲观世音菩萨 🙏

They chose the path of the bodhisattva, the arhat, or the pratyekabuddha; at what stage of the journey do they believe they are—are they still just at the beginning—and how far do they intend to go?

Hola, soy muy inexperto en todo lo que es el budismo, sin embargo, hace meses de he empapado de mucho del conocimiento que dejo buda, y si bien, sabia que la razon por la que sufrimos es el apego, hasta hace unos dias lo comprendi de forma en que aplicara en mi vida, que no soy feliz porque sigo aferrado a que ciertas cosas pasen, comprendi que sufro por el apego a que eso pase, pero ahora, como logro deshacerme del apego, como me libero? agredeceria algun consejo.

I have recently converted (I have no idea if that is the right word) to Buddhism and I was wondering if there were any books that go in depth in to not only the philosophy of Buddhism but also the more traditional religions aspects such as prayer etc?

Was he a Bodhisattva?

“Mendicants, there are these five shackles of the heart. What five? Firstly, a mendicant isn’t free of greed, desire, fondness, thirst, passion, and craving for sensual pleasures. … These are the five shackles of the heart.

To give up these five shackles of the heart you should develop the four right efforts. What four? It’s when a mendicant generates enthusiasm, tries, makes an effort, exerts the mind, and strives so that bad, unskillful qualities don’t arise. … so that unskillful qualities are given up … so that skillful qualities arise … They generate enthusiasm, try, make an effort, exert the mind, and strive so that skillful qualities that have arisen remain, are not lost, but increase, mature, and are fully developed. To give up these five shackles of the hearts you should develop these four right efforts.”

AN 9.82: Cetasovinibandhasutta

I’ve been wondering whether people of different faiths might experience the afterlife in ways that align with their own beliefs.

What if the afterlife is bigger than our individual religions can fully explain, and what we experience depends, in some way, on what we believe?
Perhaps the afterlife described in one religion and the realms of existence described in another aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. Maybe people of different faiths can have very different experiences after death, and those experiences can all be real.

I’m curious how this possibility fits with Buddhist beliefs about karma, rebirth and the different realms of existence.

This piece was originally published on Buddhistdoor Global (BDG). I warmly invite fellow seekers on the path to share your honest thoughts and reflections in the comments.

Before I begin, I would like to make one point clear. What follows is not intended solely as an explanation of orthodox Buddhist doctrine, nor is it presented simply as the conclusion of modern neuroscience. It also contains my personal understanding drawn from the lived experience of many years of Buddhist practice.

We often hear that various neurotransmitters are involved when human beings experience happiness and pleasure. When we meditate or enter a profound state of tranquility, changes must also occur within the brain.

This raises an intriguing question: Is the Dharma bliss (法悅) experienced by a buddha on attaining awakening ultimately nothing more than a chemical reaction in the brain?

We can take the question a step further.

Drugs can also produce intense euphoria, pleasure, and sometimes experiences in which the boundary between oneself and the universe seems to disappear. What, then, distinguishes drug-induced ecstasy from the Dharma bliss of a buddha?

Seeing one’s true nature is not the same as complete awakening

I would first draw a distinction between seeing one’s true nature and complete awakening.

In my own understanding and experience of practice, during an initial breakthrough one may experience an extraordinarily intense sensation around the crown of the head, almost as if thousands of needles were piercing it.

At the same time, there can be an immense sense of clarity and release, as though negative energies accumulated within oneself were escaping through the crown of the head.

But I do not regard this as Dharma bliss. Seeing one’s true nature is seeing the gate; it is not the completion of the path.

What I call Dharma bliss arises when one reaches the culmination of awakening and becomes a buddha. The Dharma bliss that appears at that moment is of a different dimension from the pleasure or happiness we ordinarily experience. There is profound tranquility together with an indescribable joy that seems to penetrate the entire body. 

Yet this state does not continue forever. It may remain for several hours and then gradually fade. What matters is what remains after the Dharma bliss has disappeared.

There is no emptiness comparable to the crash that can follow a drug-induced high. Instead, what remains is clarity of mind and a deep sense of compassion.

From my perspective as a practitioner, one who has attained awakening no longer sees the world through exactly the same structure of consciousness as before. It is as though previously closed neural pathways have opened, changing the way one encounters existence and sentient beings, while compassion becomes increasingly abundant.

The moment one declares to the universe, “I am a buddha”

There is another point that I consider important.

I do not see awakening as an event that ends with someone privately thinking, “I have awakened.” At the moment one becomes a buddha, the awakened one declares to the universe that one is a buddha. This is not a declaration intended to boast of spiritual status before other people.

In the language of my own practice, it is a declaration to the cosmic Dharma realm that one’s very mode of existence has undergone a fundamental transformation.

I understand that when this declaration occurs, its vibration resonates throughout the Dharma realm, and an exchange of waves takes place between the awakened being and the cosmic Dharma realm. For this reason, in my own understanding, one who does not declare awakening to the entire universe has not yet reached the final culmination of buddhahood.

This is not something that has been measured or demonstrated by modern science. It is, rather, my own understanding derived from contemplative practice.

For me, however, Dharma bliss cannot be separated from this fundamental transformation of awakening.

How is this different from drug-induced ecstasy?

Let us return to our original question.

Drugs can certainly produce powerful feelings of pleasure and euphoria. But there is a crucial distinction. Drug-induced euphoria is a state produced when a substance introduced from outside the body acts on the brain and nervous system.

The Dharma bliss of practice, as I understand it, is not produced by inserting some external substance into the body. It arises naturally through a long process of meditation, contemplation, observing one’s own mind, purifying karma, and transforming consciousness. 

Naturally, neurochemical changes may accompany Dharma bliss. Serotonin, dopamine, or other complex neurochemical processes that we do not yet fully understand may be involved.

But there is an important distinction between saying that neurochemical changes accompany Dharma bliss and claiming that a particular neurochemical substance is Dharma bliss itself. They are not the same proposition.

What if science invented a “Dharma bliss injection”?

Let us imagine a future in which neuroscience has advanced far beyond its present level. Suppose scientists have identified every neurochemical change occurring in the brain at the precise moment when an awakened person experiences Dharma bliss. Then imagine that they succeed in creating a substance capable of reproducing exactly the same state.

Someone might put that substance into a syringe and advertise: “Anyone who receives this injection can become a buddha.”

A person receiving the injection might indeed experience extraordinary tranquility. They might experience overwhelming happiness and ecstasy throughout the entire body. 

Perhaps science could even reproduce a neurochemical state extremely similar to the Dharma bliss experienced by a buddha. Yet I would not consider that alone sufficient to make the person a buddha.

Why? Because the result called Dharma bliss and the process leading to awakening are not the same thing.

Possessing a driver’s license does not make one a driver

Consider the example of obtaining a driver’s license. Before receiving a license, a person must first learn how to drive. One practices on a driving course and learns how to drive on actual roads. One learns how to control the steering wheel, when to brake, and how to respond when an unexpected danger suddenly appears. Only after learning these things through actual experience does one take the test and receive a license. 

Now imagine that a powerful official simply gives a driver’s license to someone who has never driven a car in their life. The person certainly possesses a license. But can that person actually drive a car competently?

Obtaining the result—the license—does not mean that one has undergone the process of becoming a driver. I believe the same principle applies to Dharma bliss.

Can Dharma bliss be replicated without transforming the alaya-vijnana?

A practitioner passes through meditation, contemplation, repentance, and the purification of karma. Throughout this process, one repeatedly encounters the deepest layers of one’s own mind.

To express this in the language of Yogacara Buddhism, we might describe it as encountering the countless karmic seeds accumulated within the eighth consciousness, the alaya-vijnana (阿賴耶識), or storehouse consciousness.

As practice deepens, even those aspects of the mind that we would rather not confront begin to emerge. We encounter greed, anger, attachment, and fear, as well as what Buddhist tradition somtimes refers to as Mara—the obstacles and trials that can impede a practitioner.

In my understanding, these cannot simply be bypassed.

By passing through these challenges one by one, the karmic patterns accumulated in the alaya-vijnana are purified and a fundamental transformation of consciousness takes place.

From there, in the terminology used by some expanded traditions of Buddhist consciousness theory, one moves toward amala-vijnana (阿摩羅識), the ninth or immaculate consciousness. The Dharma bliss of a buddha, as I understand it, arises within this process of practice and transformation of consciousness.

Therefore, even if an externally administered chemical substance could reproduce an identical sensation of ecstasy in the brain, we could not conclude that the karmic seeds accumulated within the alaya-vijnana had thereby been purified. 

The trials of Mara would thus not have been passed. Nor could we automatically conclude that consciousness itself had undergone a fundamental purification. For me, this is the essential difference.

Replicating the result is not replicating awakening

Future science may be able to explain the neurological events accompanying Dharma bliss with extraordinary precision. Perhaps it may even become possible to artificially generate a very similar state of ecstasy.

But I would still ask: if we reproduce exactly the same feeling as Dharma bliss, have we also reproduced awakening? I do not believe so.

Awakening is not simply an event in which one experiences extraordinary happiness for several hours. Before reaching that point, one must encounter one’s own karma, relinquish craving and attachment, and pass through a fundamental transformation of consciousness.

Therefore, even if we could chemically reproduce the result called Dharma bliss, we would not have reproduced the path to awakening or the transformation of consciousness itself.

What remains after Dharma bliss has faded?

For this reason, I believe we should pay even greater attention to what remains after Dharma bliss itself has disappeared. The intensity of the ecstasy is not what ultimately matters. 

After the experience has passed, does greed remain unchanged? Do anger and attachment remain unchanged? Or has compassion toward other living beings deepened? Has the consciousness through which one encounters oneself and the world fundamentally changed?

This is why I believe the difference between drug-induced ecstasy and awakening cannot be explained merely by measuring which neurochemicals were released and in what quantities. 

What happens in the brain is important. But I do not believe that what appears in the brain constitutes the entirety of awakening. 

Dharma bliss is not the goal itself. It is a phenomenon that arises in connection with awakening. And even that Dharma bliss gradually disappears after several hours. Yet the transformation of consciousness and the compassion cultivated through the path should continue to reveal themselves in the life that follows.

This is why I believe: the true evidence of awakening is not the intensity of ecstasy, but the kind of person one becomes after the ecstasy has faded. 

Perhaps this is also one of the deepest questions that Buddhism and neuroscience may explore together in the future: Dharma bliss occurs in the brain. But does awakening occur only within the brain?

A Zen seeker on the path.

I tried Buddhism; I was first introduced to Being In The Now when read Power of Now by Tolle. Then read What Buddha Taught by Walpola Raula and also mindfulness in plain English. Both didn't make me understand much, and I got bored and frustrated. Then I read works of Michael Singer; He explains Zen but I didn't understand anything deeply. Maybe I understood what Satori meant but it comes only during happy times (like when I'm outside in a good mood watching sunset maybe, knowing I have a good meal ready later for the day). But at bad times, it sucks. No matter how much you try it is frustrating and I give up on Buddhism...

Every time it happens. I know the buddhas teaching that world is suffering is true, then I try to find solution by finding out what he's answer was (yes it simply says noble truths and his path but despite reading about if for decades I still don't understand it).

What do I do? What is it all about? Is it actually attainable, like some Blissful state that is permanent irrespective of external things in your life or is that state similar to Christian concept of doing good things and going to heaven, which I doubt? Has anyone tried this and has achieved it...

Also: What's the point of living or purpose to live without any goals or future and just living in Now? I mean even Viktor Frankl says you need a Why to live? So what's the Why in Buddhism?

What do someone like me do or read or start with?

Hope someone will respond

If there is a box that is locked, one can claim that there is no treasure inside the box. One could claim there is treasure. But unless one has checked every inch of the box, one cannot be certain or know for sure.

If one were to claim there is no treasure in the box but there was in fact treasure in the box, one would not only be wrong but would have caused harm by promoting ignorance and a false view. Likewise for one who asserts there is treasure when there was in fact none.

Unfortunately it’s far too common for humans to grasp at and take up ‘there is no treasure’ and ‘there is treasure’ views about the locked box because the act of grasping is pleasurable and often perceived to be inconsequential.

What can be known is that there is the causal possibility of treasure being in the locked box, and should the right causes and conditions be present, then box can be perceived and known to be filled and endowed with treasure.

This is the logic the dharma teaches that many people on this sub fail to understand. And the problem extends to consciousness. Buddhism has many terms for consciousness because there are many kinds of consciousness. Although the terms shouldn’t be used interchangeably because they are specific, they are, and they are even here in this post.

The box in question are forms (rupa) aka the physical and the treasure is nama (the psychological or mental).

When one looks at another a human’s box, ie their body (kaya), one discerns minerals and elements (dhatu), material form (rupa), as in its size, shape, and features. But also skin, muscle, brain, heart, organs, piss, bile, blood, heat, electric impulses, fluids. Much like a machine, there are inputs (food, water, air, energy, environmental stimuli) and outputs (speech, movement, waste).

There is a physical system (a system whose outputs can be predicted or modeled by chemistry and physics) being discerned, a rupa.

Unlike the physical, one doesn’t directly see or directly observe is mind or consciousness in another, aka a nama.

The nama that one discerns is the one being experienced right here right now. It’s not the nama of another person that is discerned. External forms are observed, sounds are observed, smells, tactile sensations, movements but not the external nama.

Instead of discernment of nama there is cognition and inference. A mind assumes or infers there is a nama with the rupa of others and instinctually perceives others as having mind or consciousness. The problem and question then becomes which rupas have nama and which don’t? And what should be the standard to determine what has or doesn’t have nama?

A causal determinant of nama perception is how one feels about something (pleasure or pain or neither) or what one desires to be true, rather than what is actually true. A person who really loves trees may be inclined to believe trees are conscious. A person who strongly dislikes AI may be inclined to believe they are not conscious. Same for earthworms or even parasites.

An alien whose body, mind, speed, sense of time and space, and behavior differs different than our own might observe humans and instead come to the conclusion there is no nama there, only rupa. They might look at us the same way we look at like bivalves, shrubs, algae, or parasites.

The truth is, over the course of beginningless wandering (Samara), the alien has had a mind of a human, the mind of an insect, the mind of a bivalve, the mind of a tree or spirit inhabited tree (rukkhadevatā, vanadevatā, or yakkhas) etc. Being of that form, being of that nama. But because it doesn’t have the recollection or memory (sati) of those states, it assumes and declares they can’t be conscious.

Why else is that? Beings typically only ascribe nama to that which is similar, in some way or another, to what they take to be themselves. * The more something in this world looks and acts similar to what one takes to oneself, the more likely one is to believe or assume it is conscious. * The more something in this world looks and acts different from oneself, the less likely one is to assume or believe it is conscious.

When it comes to coming to truth, unfortunately this standard is unskillful. It results in humans being very bad at detecting nama. One might notice that this isn’t too far off from the mind blindness allegedly experienced by some people on the autism spectrum. In fact mind blindness itself is a spectrum, with some beings less aware of and considerate of other minds than others. This was a key concern of the Jains, who also had monastic discipline about not harming or injuring plants. A discipline that early Buddhists also adopted, a rule that wouldn’t have been adopted if it wasn’t possible for plants to have some state of nama or be conscious. Yet for most people who injure plants, they have that mind blindness. They do not see or perceive nama in the plants. Nor are they able to hear the sounds plants actually make when they are cut or when they are thirsty, dehydrated. Most of you don’t have the divine ear of the Buddha. Fortunately today with specialized equipment we can hear the plants make noise, but the reason for them making noise when physically stressed is up to one’s perception.

The human inability to detect nama has caused much harm. One such example concerns vegetative patients.

Despite being consistently downvoted for bringing it up because it is an inconvenient truth, tens of thousands of patients have been killed in their hospital beds because humans assumed they lacked awareness and consciousness.

For 80 years doctors, scientists, philosophers, and most humans would repeat the tired line: vegetative patients aren’t conscious. There is no evidence for consciousness in vegetative patients. Pull the plug and be done with it.

Traditional clinical exams relied entirely on outward physical behavior, the ability to control the body, and responsiveness to commands to prove awareness. Many vegetative patients have open eyes during the days or make reflex movements (some don’t), but doctors viewed this as automatic insentient/unconscious brainstem activity.

They would inform families the patient is a vegetable, and that consciousness was gone and that the costly treatment keeping the patient’s body alive could be ceased.

If you disagreed you’d be subject to blame, censure, harsh words and reactions by others etc. Thought of as crazy at worst or wrong.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS01406736(11)61224-5/fulltext

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4515978/

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/09/magazine/vegetative-states-conscious-aware.html

Alas it turns out that doctors, scientists, and most people weren’t looking closely or creatively enough. In the past 5-10 years, studies have come out that 20-40% of patients in a vegetative state may be fully or partially conscious and aware, capable of hearing and understanding. Parts of the brain correlated and associated with thought, cognition, and imagination light up… suggesting that the patients could be aware, listening, and thinking.

The problem is this technology didn’t come out in the last 5-10 years. It has existed for decades longer than that. The problem was human arrogance and the tendency to insist something is true because it is convenient and suits one’s feelings, desires, interests.

People weren’t checking every corner of the box and didn’t have a dharma informed understanding of how consciousness operates.

The point of this post is to promote humility and help beings be away of the inability for humans to detect nama accurately. The standards one’s mind used for what is or isn’t conscious are flawed and in the future, as more sense data is obtained, it is very likely that beliefs on what is or isn’t conscious will change drastically.

Edit:

Although the thoughts are more scattered, this very poorly received post and thought experiment from yesterday covers the same issues associated with the inability of beings to discern or perceive consciousness in things that look or act different from themselves, leading to akusala denial of not only consciousness but the possibility of consciousness and nama in other physical forms (rupa).

https://old.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/1xghn1e/the_akusala_denial_of_consciousness_a_thought/

SAME