The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by Kim OHara »

Hi, TMingyur, MayaRefugee and all - but especially the first -
No hidden assumptions.
You seem to be having some difficulty with what I thought was a very clear explanation, so here is a demonstration:
The Imaginary Imagination of the Imagination(an unfinished postscript)
(with sincere apologies to deSilva)

In the course of our imagination it was imagined that Buddhism upholds the imagination of good imagination and the elimination of unwholesome imagination . Imagination and imagination is basically a medium of human communication. Is there a facet of the imagination that can enhance the education of the imagination ? There are two sides to the imagination , one from the standpoint of imagination, the other from the standpoint of Buddhism.

Let us take the standpoint of imagination first. There are three imaginations on the relationship between imagination and imagination , out of which imaginers like R.W. Beardsmore favor the third.37 The imagination called " imagination" upholds that the aim of imagination is to teach imagination ; " imagination " is the belief that the imagination has nothing to do with imagination . Both points are mistaken on Beardsmore's imagination ; imagination does not crudely teach imagination or deliberately eliminate it; rather, imagination can give an understanding which makes moral imagination sensitive and intelligent. In the recent development of what is called "Situational imagination," examples from imagination are used for the imagination of moral imaginings. By thus reflecting on the imaginings and imaginings of the imaginary beings we can enrich our own imagination. Without having undergone the experience ourselves, imaginary and imaginary imaginings can be imagined with a "sense of imagination." Thirdly, the uses of pure imagination are sometimes limited, and the use of imaginary techniques are extremely effective on occasions; the fact is quite obviously seen in the importance of the Jatakas, the Thera- and Theri-gathas etc. Finally, imaginers like Aristotle discovered a certainly imaginary purpose in imaginings. By the use of the sympathetic imagination, one tends to see the common human nature that exists behind the imagining of divisive imaginations.38

Now can a Buddhist absorb the aims of imagination and imagination in this manner?
:popcorn:
Kim
Sanghamitta
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by Sanghamitta »

Frankly I think this whole thread is a muddle of crossed purposes, many undefined terms and a definition of other terms so elastic as to collapse under its own weight. I think that you are all talking passed each other. I think that there is a basic and underlying issue... you are trying to address an issue with is a modern western preoccupation and which actually has no equivilant in Buddhadhamma. You are then trying to shoehorn the issue into the Buddhadhamma retrospectively. But good luck with it.
As Coorans sig says." The problem is you think you have time ".
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by Kim OHara »

Sanghamitta wrote:Frankly I think this whole thread is a muddle of crossed purposes, many undefined terms and a definition of other terms so elastic as to collapse under its own weight. I think that you are all talking passed each other. I think that there is a basic and underlying issue... you are trying to address an issue with is a modern western preoccupation and which actually has no equivilant in Buddhadhamma. You are then trying to shoehorn the issue into the Buddhadhamma retrospectively. But good luck with it.
As Coorans sig says." The problem is you think you have time ".
Thanks, Sanghamitta. I agree with most of what you say, though I do have an immature egocentric temptation to say, 'but I have been trying to keep the discussion sensible.' :tongue:
Overall, the thread has had some good posts as well as its low points ... pretty normal, really.
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by ground »

Kim O'Hara wrote:Hi, TMingyur, MayaRefugee and all - but especially the first -
No hidden assumptions.
You seem to be having some difficulty with what I thought was a very clear explanation, so here is a demonstration:
The Imaginary Imagination of the Imagination(an unfinished postscript)
(with sincere apologies to deSilva)

In the course of our imagination it was imagined that Buddhism upholds the imagination of good imagination and the elimination of unwholesome imagination . Imagination and imagination is basically a medium of human communication. Is there a facet of the imagination that can enhance the education of the imagination ? There are two sides to the imagination , one from the standpoint of imagination, the other from the standpoint of Buddhism.

Let us take the standpoint of imagination first. There are three imaginations on the relationship between imagination and imagination , out of which imaginers like R.W. Beardsmore favor the third.37 The imagination called " imagination" upholds that the aim of imagination is to teach imagination ; " imagination " is the belief that the imagination has nothing to do with imagination . Both points are mistaken on Beardsmore's imagination ; imagination does not crudely teach imagination or deliberately eliminate it; rather, imagination can give an understanding which makes moral imagination sensitive and intelligent. In the recent development of what is called "Situational imagination," examples from imagination are used for the imagination of moral imaginings. By thus reflecting on the imaginings and imaginings of the imaginary beings we can enrich our own imagination. Without having undergone the experience ourselves, imaginary and imaginary imaginings can be imagined with a "sense of imagination." Thirdly, the uses of pure imagination are sometimes limited, and the use of imaginary techniques are extremely effective on occasions; the fact is quite obviously seen in the importance of the Jatakas, the Thera- and Theri-gathas etc. Finally, imaginers like Aristotle discovered a certainly imaginary purpose in imaginings. By the use of the sympathetic imagination, one tends to see the common human nature that exists behind the imagining of divisive imaginations.38

Now can a Buddhist absorb the aims of imagination and imagination in this manner?
:popcorn:
Kim
You do no have to be serious if you do not want to.

Some get nihilistic and some abandon reasonable speech. Both are extreme behaviours.

Everything added to mere sensation and immediate experience is imagination. This just means that things do not exist the way they seem to exist in the context of conceptuality entering the sphere of mere sensation and immediate experience. This of course also holds true for your reading my written words and my concepts associated with the words that I writing.

There is however a causal relationship entailing imaginations. Otherwise all imaginations would be useless in terms of guiding human actions.

Kind regards
MayaRefugee
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:15 am

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by MayaRefugee »

Anyway, in dealing with language, we are really dealing with conceptuality.

Both continental philosophy and Buddhism recognise that language--which is to say conceptuality or thought--shape the 'self'. But they also recognise that language and meaning is inconstant. Meaning is not fixed but is shaped by conditions; language/conceptuality is thoroughly unstable. So if conceptuality shapes the self but is itself inconstant and unstable, then the self is not a fixed entity or essence.

Both bodies of thought argue (in their own way) that it is important to understand the workings of language for what it really is. So to answer your question, I suppose a good attitude is to learn how to use language without clinging onto meaning/conceptuality/thought too tightly--for it is, after all, always slipping and sliding.
This was said on page 1 by zavk.
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by Kim OHara »

MayaRefugee, TMingyur -
"A good attitude is to learn how to use language without clinging onto meaning/conceptuality/thought too tightly," indeed, but that thought is no excuse for sloppy thinking expressed in sloppy language.
At this point I have no more patience for such thinking and such language; I can't even be bothered working out whether it is deliberate obscurantism on your part or a genuine, and therefore potentially remediable, lack of clarity.
Be well.

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by ground »

Kim O'Hara wrote:MayaRefugee, TMingyur -
"A good attitude is to learn how to use language without clinging onto meaning/conceptuality/thought too tightly," indeed, but that thought is no excuse for sloppy thinking expressed in sloppy language.
At this point I have no more patience for such thinking and such language; I can't even be bothered working out whether it is deliberate obscurantism on your part or a genuine, and therefore potentially remediable, lack of clarity.
Be well.

:namaste:
Kim
Imagination of "I" entails imagination of "mine" and "other". From imagination of "this" arises imagination of "this is" and "this is not" and the turbulence of "likes" and "dislikes" follows.

As to "sloppy thinking" I would like to refer you to the teachings of Dharmakirti on logic. A master who very well discerned sensation/immediate experience and fabrication/imagination and showed that conventional logic is fully compatible with this view.

Kind regards
MayaRefugee
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:15 am

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by MayaRefugee »

Kim,

It seems you think your understandings/beliefs/methods are impeccable and the things being bought up are somehow inferior to said things - if you are so knowledgable why don't you expound a bottom line on the topic so we can know this stuff as good as you do?

Your choice to offer nothing but unsubstantiated refutations does nothing to advance this thread/one trying to get to the bottom of the issues at hand.

As far as "sloppy" thinking and "sloppy" language goes, a) sloppiness is relative and b) sloppiness still conveys the gist which at the end of the day is all that matters - the internet AFAIK is not some sort of grammar/literary competition.

If you're not happy or do think you're somehow above what's going on in this thread why don't you just go away?
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by Kim OHara »

Both of you write commendably clearly, concisely and sensibly when you are not writing about art and imagination.
:clap:
If you could or would write just as clearly when you are on topic, we could enjoy a useful discussion.
When you do begin to write clearly about art and imagination, I may rejoin the conversation.
Bye for now,

Kim
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by ground »

tiltbillings wrote:Given the lovely art produced by Buddhists of any number of schools or a very long time, art has its place.

As for what the Buddha said about imagination, seem not really anything, though there instances where makes a statement of appreciation of beauty of the place he is at.
Friend, this person without blemish, who does not know, as it really is, `There is no blemish in me,' attending to an agreeable sign greed would overcome his mind, hate and delusion would overcome his mind and he would die with a defiled mind.
...
Friend, this person without blemish, who knows, as it really is, `There is no blemish in me,' attending to an agreeable sign, greed would not overcome his mind, hate and delusiosn would not overcome his mind. He would die without greed, hate and delusion, He would die with an undefiled mind.
Ananganasutta
MayaRefugee
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:15 am

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by MayaRefugee »

TMingyur,

Having established that imagination is anything we derive from/add to sensual or direct experience where can we go from here?

Do you have any thoughts on the following:

Does the first imagining influence all imaginings thereafter?
What are the intricacies pertaining to the material the imagination uses to imagine?
Being as respectful as possible, could/does a person born deaf and blind imagine?

Peace.
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by ground »

Hello MR
MayaRefugee wrote:TMingyur,

Having established that imagination is anything we derive from/add to sensual or direct experience where can we go from here?

Do you have any thoughts on the following:

Does the first imagining influence all imaginings thereafter?
Being aware that we are using our own power of imagination when investigating there are nevertheless - as in all cases where "time" and "location" dominate our experience - different causal aspects of one and same the underlying phenomenon of "reality" one may focus on that elucidate different effects:
Aspect 1:
"Dependent on intellect & ideas, intellect-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future ideas cognizable via the intellect.
Madhupindika Sutta

But also aspect 2:
All successful human action is preceded by right knowledge.
Right knowledge is twofold:
Direct and indirect (perceptive and inferential).
Direct knowledge means here neither construction (judgement) nor illusion. Construction (or judgement) implies a distinct cognition of a mental reflex which is capable of coalescing with a verbal designation. Knowledge exempt from such (construction), when it is not affected by an illusion produced by color-blindness, rapid motion, travelling on board ship, sickness or other causes, is perceptive (right) knowledge.
Nyaya-Bindu, Dharmakirti
MayaRefugee wrote:What are the intricacies pertaining to the material the imagination uses to imagine?
If we concede logical thinking being a manifestation of imagination then "pure" (i.e. logically valid) imagination is "pure" thought devoid of emotional distortions and "unconscious" habits. What prevails is the undistorted causal relationship between sensation and thought.
If we concede "art" being another manifestation of imagination then the term "authenticity" may be applied, describing the causal relationship between the subject's experience and the subject's expression.
MayaRefugee wrote:Being as respectful as possible, could/does a person born deaf and blind imagine?
Of course this is a matter of speculation and definition.
As to definition: Since I have applied the term "imagination" in the sense of comprising any form of conceptual construction which therefore is not restricted to mere verbal thought activity but includes non-visual "pattern" re-cognition as well I would tend to say that even a person born deaf and blind will apply "imagination".
As to speculation: In that sense (s. above) "imagination" seems to be a natural potential (quality) "inhering" in any "sentient being".

Kind regards
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by chownah »

TMingyur,
Do you think your use of "imagine" has the same meaning as the word "construe" as used in the Canonical sense that the Buddha does not construe an object as being seen and does not construe a seer?
chownah
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by ground »

Hi chownah,

maybe, but not knowing the context of the canonical use of "construe" neither can I confirm nor can I negate. However "construe" and "imagine" seem to be mutually inclusive.
Conceptuality seems to be involved in both cases. However "conceptuality" how I understand it does not exclusively refer to "moments of thought" or a "thinking process", as in the context of "labeling", but also to the mere assigning of "meaning" on a "more intuitive", non verbal level, i.e. the mark of conceptuality is not the label itself appearing in the mind but the mark is "actively adding" concomitant with "becoming aware".
"actively" seems to be crucial since neuroscience has indicated that there may also be a "passively adding" occuring within sensation itself which is however not concomitant with "becoming aware".

Kind regards
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The Buddha, Imagination and The Artistic Process

Post by chownah »

TMingyur wrote:Hi chownah,

maybe, but not knowing the context of the canonical use of "construe" neither can I confirm nor can I negate. However "construe" and "imagine" seem to be mutually inclusive.
Conceptuality seems to be involved in both cases. However "conceptuality" how I understand it does not exclusively refer to "moments of thought" or a "thinking process", as in the context of "labeling", but also to the mere assigning of "meaning" on a "more intuitive", non verbal level, i.e. the mark of conceptuality is not the label itself appearing in the mind but the mark is "actively adding" concomitant with "becoming aware".
"actively" seems to be crucial since neuroscience has indicated that there may also be a "passively adding" occuring within sensation itself which is however not concomitant with "becoming aware".

Kind regards
TMingyur,
Here is a link to the text I was thinking of:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and a brief quote:
"..............
"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer.

"When hearing...

"When sensing...

"When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer.

Thus, monks, the Tathagata — being the same with regard to all phenomena that can be seen, heard, sensed, & cognized — is 'Such.' And I tell you: There's no other 'Such' higher or more sublime.
..............."

Also, if "construe" and "imagine" are "mutually inclusive" as you suggest does this mean that they overlap and that they both have meanings which are shared and they both have meanings which are not shared?....or does this mean that one of them is completely contained in the other(if so then which is the subset and which is the superset?)....or does this mean that they both contain the other completely resulting in them being identical? I'm just wondering how you view this so that I can better understand your ideas.

Also, are you of the view that concepts from neuroscience can be seamlessly meshed with the Buddha's teachings and thus gain a greater insight?

Also, I'm not exctly sure what a textbook definition of "conceptuality" might be but I think I uderstand what you are saying about it....to see if I'm on the right track are you saying that "conceptuality" is perhaps the first manipulation of the raw data ...the raw data here would be stimulus (sense object) contacting the sensory organ? For example: light strikes the retina causing activity in the optic nerve....for there to be any meaning to it other than just random light it must be "conceptualized"????


chownah
Post Reply