are nirmanakayas, "philosophical zombies"?

[klqv]

i think we are sentient. though obviously quale is quite a novel term.

[Jnana]

Here is a brief description of buddhahood from a dzogchen perspective. (Translated from Chig chod kun grol gyi rtags tshad kyi yi ge in Nyang Ral Nyima Özer. Martri, in the Rinchen Terdzö, voL 88, pp. 353ff.)

If you sustain this, in one year the material body will vanish and you awaken to the state of dharmakaya without remainder. Then, the sign that this self-liberation is brought to consummation, the fruition of spontaneous presence, appears only in others' perception, whereas in your personal perception, all kinds of signs and indications of progress on the path have ceased. This state, known as the vision of exhaustion in dharmata, means that the moving force of appearances has ceased, while the still quality of emptiness is no longer. Thus, the nondual nature of appearance and emptiness neither fluctuates nor changes in any way whatsoever. Instead there is a naturally awake quality that transcends meeting and separation -- an unfabricated presence, an absence without any dismantling -- which is an utterly naked state of aware emptiness free of clinging. In others' perceptions, since an unobstructed knowledge -- original wakefulness as an all-pervasive capacity -- is also present, there is an effortless unfolding of form-bodies (rupakayas) for the welfare of beings.

[Tewi]

Some reactions:

(1) From a Buddhist perspective, maybe WE are the p-zombies!

(2) Do we say that our ordinary physical bodies are p-zombies? If not, then why would a nirmanakaya be one?

(3) There is a tradition to the effect that Buddhas lack discursive thought, but act spontaneously. Does "consciousness" imply discursive thought?

[Indrajala]

(1) From a Buddhist perspective, maybe WE are the p-zombies!

I am a sentient being. I am well aware of this. I cannot speak for others in this regard.

(2) Do we say that our ordinary physical bodies are p-zombies? If not, then why would a nirmanakaya be one?

Our bodies are brought about due to karma. A nirmanakaya is not dependent on karma. It is best described as a reaction rather than as the ripening of willed action (karma).

(3) There is a tradition to the effect that Buddhas lack discursive thought, but act spontaneously. Does "consciousness" imply discursive thought?

Consciousness is a reaction between the sense faculty and object. If a nirmanakaya is an illusory body, then it lacks actual sense faculties, hence no objects are perceived.

Buddhas and bodhisattvas on higher levels are said not to perceive sentient beings. If they did perceive sentient beings, this would not be true wisdom where objects are not perceived.