In essence, we do not see with our eyes; consciousness cognition uses the eyes as a tool for vision. This is analogous to the Alayavijnana utilizing the parents’ sperm and egg to create our next physical form. Consciousness cognition does not perceive through the eyes but through the mind. Materialism, on the other hand, attributes perception to the brain.
Consciousness cognition also depends on the brain and the eyes. Although it offers a compelling philosophical perspective, realizing the ultimate cognition that consciousness cognition aspires to—seeing the world entirely with the mind—requires dedicated practice.
Practice involves ceasing to observe through the eyes and ears and truly perceiving with the mind, for all that is seen and thought through the six senses is mistaken. As the saying goes, ‘If the six senses are valid, who would benefit from the sublime path?’ Stephen Chow’s notion of seeing with the mind is easier said than done. People may practice for centuries and still not fully achieve this. Who is chanting the Buddha? The mind! What is the mind? That’s where you’re stumped!
Utilizing an event that demands proof as evidence is precisely what the syllogism of “the similarity of probative reason and probandum” aims to refute.
Consciousness cognition suggests that the union of sperm and egg represents consciousness utilizing the parents’ gametes as a manifestation for rebirth, rather than asserting that consciousness originates from the gametes themselves. Materialism must substantiate whether consciousness can genuinely give rise to consciousness. One approach would involve constructing a brain from matter and animating it with life. If successful, this would demonstrate that matter can indeed coalesce to create life.”
This assertion requires validation, and without evidence, employing it as proof aligns with the concept of ‘the similarity of probative reason and probandum’ within the Prasangika doctrine. Specifically, the notions of ‘matter combining to produce consciousness’ and ‘the union of sperm and egg producing consciousness’ remain unproven and are currently treated as outcomes rather than established facts.
Some argue that it can be proven that matter combines to give rise to consciousness. For instance, during pregnancy, the fetus—a product of the union between sperm and egg—is believed to generate spirit. However, this cannot be accepted as conclusive evidence. Treating it as such aligns with what the Prasangika doctrine terms “the similarity of probative reason and probandum.”
Now, consider the analogy with artificial intelligence (AI). While some claim that AI can produce cognition, we assert that it cannot truly possess cognition. Why? Because AI can produce cognition that remains unproven; it merely exhibits computational abilities. Similarly, the evidence supporting the idea that the union of sperm and egg produces an embryo and cognition does not substantiate the broader claim that matter alone can create life.
Therefore, this syllogism is termed the ‘argument from the parallelism of similar reasons,’ and we must refute it by engaging in critical examination. Feeling a bit confused? Those well-versed in the four unique syllogisms of Prasangika won’t share your confusion, but those unacquainted with these principles might find themselves puzzled. Remember this succinctly: the combination of matter to produce cognitive power remains unproven by both theory and experiment to date. It stands not as established science but rather as speculation. Curiously, we now treat it as if it were scientific, even embodying it within our philosophical discourse.
Philosophically, how does this viewpoint play out? Imagine middle school textbooks teaching us that the material world is always in motion. According to this perspective, spirit emerges as a result of this dynamic matter. But here’s the catch: this philosophical stance can be quite unsettling—it’s essentially considered the root of all evil! Many consequences flow from this idea, some of which I won’t delve into. If you find it hard to grasp, it might signal a genuine challenge in how your brain processes information. Can you see the implications? And why are Buddhists so remarkably mature?
Excerpted from: Cognition and Expression Part Three
