On the nature of Beauty

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by tiltbillings »

daverupa wrote:I'm away from my books, but there's a sutta which declares that the same contact can be pleasant or unpleasant for different people; so, there's no objective pleasant or unpleasant stimulus which can be parsed apart from the experiencing of it.
It is starting to sound like Yogacharins here.

Did not the Buddha comment of the beauty of natural scenes. Also, given the beauty of Buddhist art and architecture, it seems that beauty was certainly prized among Buddhist historically.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by daverupa »

tiltbillings wrote:Did not the Buddha comment of the beauty of natural scenes.
Actually... where might this have happened? Because all I can think of is that if the underlying tendency to lust is not abandoned, then pleasant feeling can be fixated on and clung to. Basically, inappropriately attending to objects to be taken as beautiful causes lust to arise and aggrandize, and this goes for any sense input involving natural scenes...
Snp 2.11 wrote:"Practice mindfulness of the body and continually develop dispassion (towards it). Avoid the sign of the beautiful connected with passion; by meditating on the foul cultivate a mind that is concentrated and collected.
AN 5.57 wrote:"Now, based on what line of reasoning should one often reflect... that 'I will grow different, separate from all that is dear and appealing to me'?
..presumably including beautiful nature scenes...
AN 5.144 wrote:Now, with what purpose should a monk remain percipient of loathsomeness in the presence of what is not loathsome? 'Don't let passion arise within me in the presence of things that excite passion.' With this purpose should a monk remain percipient of loathsomeness in the presence of what is not loathsome.
&tc.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by tiltbillings »

daverupa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Did not the Buddha comment of the beauty of natural scenes.
Actually... where might this have happened?
Vague recollections of that; however, the Buddha very directly told Ananda, as they were looking down upon rice paddies to have the monks cut and sew their robes to look like that. Vin Mv Kh 8 (The Life of the Buddha, 168) He did not say to Ananda that that the rice paddies were beautiful, but they so often are.
Snp 2.11 wrote:"Practice mindfulness of the body and continually develop dispassion (towards it). Avoid the sign of the beautiful connected with passion; by meditating on the foul cultivate a mind that is concentrated and collected.
AN 5.57 wrote:"Now, based on what line of reasoning should one often reflect... that 'I will grow different, separate from all that is dear and appealing to me'?
..presumably including beautiful nature scenes...
AN 5.144 wrote:Now, with what purpose should a monk remain percipient of loathsomeness in the presence of what is not loathsome? 'Don't let passion arise within me in the presence of things that excite passion.' With this purpose should a monk remain percipient of loathsomeness in the presence of what is not loathsome.
It would also seem that context, as always, is key here. As I said, the history of Buddhist art and architecture is one of producing great beauty. My guess is that the Buddha statue on you altar (assuming you have one) is not ugly.
Image
Image
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by Sylvester »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi Sylvester,

That is an interesting sutta in the context of this discussion:
"Dependent on a sense-impression that is liable to be felt as pleasurable, there arises a pleasant feeling. When that very sense-impression liable to be felt as pleasurable has ceased, then the sensation born from it[Tajjam vedayitam] — namely the pleasant feeling that arose dependent on that sense-impression — also ceases and is stilled.
...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nypo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks Mike.

I have to confess that I was a bit puzzled by Ven Nyanaponika's translation of tajja as "born from it", as that would entail parsing the word as if it were a compound of ta and ja. Elsewhere, tajja crops up in MN 28's discussion of tajja samannāhāra as a condition for the arising of tajja viññāṇabhāga (tajja type of consciousness). What would be the "it" that engagement (samannāhāra) and type of consciousness (viññāṇabhāga) be born from, if "it" as a pronoun had not been referenced earlier so that "it" can be identified?[/quote]
Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation makes it sound less "likely":
“In dependence on a contact to be experienced as pleasant, bhikkhus, a pleasant feeling arises. With the cessation of that contact to be experienced as pleasant, the corresponding feeling—the pleasant feeling that arose in dependence on that contact to be experienced as pleasant—ceases and subsides.

Though his translation ends with:
In dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; with the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.”
Do I understand you to read BB's translation as being probabilistic, rather than deterministic? Hope I've not misunderstood you. I'm still vacillating on the issue of whether the forward order of Dependant Origination ought to be read as a sequence of mere necessary conditions (ie probabilistic) , or if it should be read as a sequence of sufficient conditions (ie deterministic), or as suggested by Ajahn Brahm - somewhere in between.
Last edited by Sylvester on Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:31 am, edited 2 times in total.
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by Sylvester »

daverupa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Did not the Buddha comment of the beauty of natural scenes.
Actually... where might this have happened? Because all I can think of is that if the underlying tendency to lust is not abandoned, then pleasant feeling can be fixated on and clung to. Basically, inappropriately attending to objects to be taken as beautiful causes lust to arise and aggrandize, and this goes for any sense input involving natural scenes...

Hi Dave

The pleasant feeling as hedonic tone would fall within the kāyika (bodily) feelings. How one reacts to it as a result of a particular anusaya appears to be the sequel to the cetasika (mental) feeling. I think the problem here is the grasping of the sign (nimittaggāhī), but it does not suggest that the sign (nimitta) is a subjective experience.

We probably need to dive into that formulaic phrase "to be experience/felt as" (vedanīya). It's all over the suttas, and here's an interesting take on it -
"Monks, for anyone who says, 'In whatever way a person makes kamma, that is how it is experienced,' there is no living of the holy life, there is no opportunity for the right ending of stress.

But for anyone who says, 'When a person makes kamma to be felt in such & such a way, that is how its result is experienced,' there is the living of the holy life, there is the opportunity for the right ending of stress.

Yo bhikkhave evaṃ vadeyya: yathā yathā'yaṃ puriso kammaṃ karoti, tathā tathā naṃ paṭisaṃvediyatī'ti. Evaṃ santaṃ bhikkhave brahmacariyavāso na hoti. Okāso na paññāyati sammā dukkhassa antakiriyāya.

Yo ca kho bhikkhave evaṃ vadeyya: yathā yathā vedanīyaṃ ayaṃ puriso kammaṃ karoti, tathā tathāssa vipākaṃ paṭisaṃvediyatī'ti. Evaṃ santaṃ bhikkhave brahmacariyavāso hoti, okāso paññāyati sammādukkhassa antakiriyāya.

AN 3.99
There's still that mysterious and unbridgeable process which should account for how kamma ripens in particular ways...

Perhaps you are right that nimittas will be subjective, in the sense that different people may experience the same sense object but not perceive the nimitta uniformly. But I suspect that what makes nimittas also objectively "encoded" into each contact is the fact that the suttas resort to the vedanīya and tajja vedayita concepts. This objective potentiality for one's future enjoyment of a sense object might come from the mental state accompanying the kamma - see SN 3.20.
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by alan »

Beauty awakens the mind, and develops it. Certainly no one would argue against a mind open to the subtle joys of life? In my opinion, anything that inclines the mind to thoughtful contemplation is a good, and should be celebrated.
http://www.facebook.com/alan.hoelzle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
alan...
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:37 pm

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by alan... »

i would say it's more of a psychological question than a philosophical one.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by tiltbillings »

alan wrote:Beauty awakens the mind, and develops it. Certainly no one would argue against a mind open to the subtle joys of life? In my opinion, anything that inclines the mind to thoughtful contemplation is a good, and should be celebrated.
http://www.facebook.com/alan.hoelzle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You do not subscribe to Puritan Buddhism?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by alan »

Guess I'm not a puritan, because I think there is value in contemplating beauty. Even more so in creating it.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by tiltbillings »

alan wrote:Guess I'm not a puritan, because I think there is value in contemplating beauty. Even more so in creating it.
You won't get an argument out of me on that.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Jeffrey
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:08 am

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by Jeffrey »

Hello, gentlemen, and best wishes for a happy, healthy 2013. Just got caught up with everything that remained undone after a year-end vacation and would like to thank you for all your comments. Unfortunately, I don't have the background to follow some of the points being made here and I remain as confused as when I first started this thread several weeks ago. How is it, if beauty is part of the object, that two people can see the same object as both beautiful and ugly? This is true within cultures, and perhaps even more so across them, suggesting many (but perhaps not all) aesthetic properties are socially constructed.

My apologies in advance for my thick-headedness.
gendun
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 10:49 am
Location: Guildford UK

Re: On the nature of Beauty

Post by gendun »

According to Aquinas beauty lies in perception.
Specifically " That which, the perception of, pleases "

:anjali:
Gendun P. Brownlow.
Karma Kagyu student.
Post Reply