cool could you really like this question will be art or a good one against this one art I don't know I don't I I'm how are you interpreted in with it for me are is a subjective manifestation cell what about are people with you yeah I wish that said shit all right well that's it you ask it all into it go ahead ask again okay lonely and carefully
How art... I'm going to use this same question.
That's the idea.
Go for it.
How art is interpreted in Buddhism?
For me, art is a subjective manifestation of the self.
But what about art in Buddhism?
Okay, and one more question.
There is no self, right?
I don't know.
It doesn't really apply.
It's not a very good question, that's all.
You know, experience is not self, and everything that arises is not self, so you could say.
But, you know, there is no anything.
Entities are not a part of reality.
Something arises, therefore it exists, or therefore it's real.
Well, I know what the author meant, really, because you have your personality, and you have your expressions.
your work become your expression.
Yeah, so it's a manifestation of one's self in that sense, one's being or one's state at that time.
And it can be, in that sense, it can show you things about yourself that you didn't know.
And it can show people things that are far more profound than just, say, looking in someone's eyes or watching someone's superficial behavior, especially since we put on such airs, right?
we all look like ordinary people but who knows what's going on oh and can be a serial killer for all we know on the buddha right can be a buddha for all we know we don't know what's going on inside people's minds depends on what you think art is of course art can bring out some of these inner workings so certainly i would i would give it that
expression music as well but you know there's that other aspect of it that is the addiction aspect or the attraction aspect so you become addicted to these states the work itself is interesting especially from the point of view of a Buddhist or someone who's looking objectively at it to see what's going on in someone's mind for example psychologists use art
art therapy.
My aunt is a leader in art therapy in the world, apparently.
She's a PhD at Loyola Marymount and she was one of the pioneers in art therapy.
And so you can use it in that way, but the act of making art, on the other hand,
making music, for example, but art in general, even if it's not just the addiction to pleasure as it is generally in music, or the addiction to these strong emotions, it's addiction to the states, addiction to self, to whatever it is that makes up yourself.
Whatever is going on inside, you become intoxicated by it quite easily.
And so artists can be fairly egotistical and self-absorbed
not necessarily in the way you think of it, but very much interested in the self, and interested in who they are, and I am this sort of person, and I am that sort of person.
Maybe that's a gross generalization, but... Well, because all artists looking for the answer, who am I, they want to define themselves through this.
And so, for this person to clarify, because...
This is not the work you see.
It's a mirror of your mind.
It's not yourself.
There's no such thing as self.
It's just what you think, really.
So there's nothing wrong with the art itself, and it can be interesting for other people, but the act of creating art is suspect.
Oh, yeah.
So the act of creating, it's negative, is it?
Well, it's dangerous.
It's subject to problems.
I mean, obviously, taking a paintbrush, an elephant can paint them.
In Thailand, the elephants make pictures of flowers with their trunks.
So there's nothing intrinsically wrong with making art.
But when it becomes art, there's something there, right?
You're putting something into it.
You're putting in
emotive state into it, or something into it, which is generally based on addiction, attachment to either self or emotion, and so on.
There's the danger there.
The other thing you might say is it's an inexact science.
Art is not an objective.
It's very, very subjective, right?
What do you think about using art as a tool and use reality as a subject for your art to investigate reality?
I understand that.
I just think it's inexact.
I mean, why not use mindfulness?
Much more reliable.
That's what I was trying to get at just now, is that the inexactitude of it is...
means that it's very easy to get off track.
You don't really know where it's leading you.
You can be all touchy-feely about it, but you don't really know what it's... And you get a sense of what it's doing to you, but it's... You know, the word art is loaded with subjectivity and inexactitude.
So to get some... To get into going in a specific direction, it's like driving...
driving a car with poor alignment or something.
No, it's like driving a car without touching the steering wheel.
If you are driving a car with your knees or something, it's not very easy to stay on the road.
Yeah, I understand that.
We don't have many examples of art which is quite, no seriously, we don't have much example that we could say it's actually beneficial.
Well, they do use it.
Psychologists use it, and therapists use it, and they seem to have good results.
But good results is subjective as well.
What do you mean by good results?
Do people become enlightened making art?
I would say no, or rarely if they do.
I haven't heard of it.
But the results they get is they come to in tune with themselves and become, you know, if anything, become more self, more... Centered.
Not centered, but self-assured, more... You know, people are all on about being confident and so on.
Confident can be very dangerous, as we were talking about earlier.
Sometimes it's better to not be sure of yourself, like Socrates, for example.
Yeah.
Yeah, that's right, yeah.
Someone says, art is the root of artificial, which from Buddha's point is not a very beneficial thing.
No, art is actually creating an illusion, right?
I would say art has got much more to do.
Not necessarily.
It's like writing a letter, for example.
If I write a paper, I could be talking about ultimate reality.
If I make a piece of art, I could be expressing a feeling or a part of myself with it.
It's a communication, really.
Art is communication.
It's a medium.
Yeah, but expression is a matter of your personal feelings, what you're going to express you.
Is satisfaction going to express yourself?
Because if you're looking for satisfaction,
then that's the one part of expression the other is like just to show your emotions like anger that's another thing like you know if you're angry or something you draw you express yourself someone says you can show a manifestation of the Buddha in art you can show a manifestation of Buddha to help someone realize something
Yeah, I think that's the point I was making.
It is a communication, but I'm skeptical because it's not really just a communication.
The medium is so overwhelming because you've defined it as art.
If you write, you know, why aren't you using letters, something that is very exact and is communicating a meaning?
art, the whole definition of art is to evoke something beyond just an understanding of what you're trying to say.
If you want to get the point across, I'm suspicious that inherent in art is some emotive
intent to evoke a response which I would tend to think is a negative thing as opposed to just evoke understanding I'm skeptical that you could look at a painting and realize wow that's what the Buddha meant or I would say it could no longer be called art it would have to be called simply communication
I don't think art is capable, in my meaning of the word, of objective communication.
But I'm sure many people disagree with that.
Yeah.
I don't know what kind of art this person is talking about in question.
But it really is art.
It wouldn't be art if it was really a communication.
No, I think it's everything but not communication, really.
If you've got something to say, just say it.
Why are you going to draw?
I think the fact that it becomes art is not a positive thing from a Buddhist point of view.
But if you study reality, like anatomy... From an insight meditation point of view, what you might say is that when you're dealing with complex individuals who aren't meditating yet,
then sure, it can be incredibly beneficial on a worldly level.
Dealing with kids, for example, who have been abused, using art to help them to cope with their emotions is great.
It's very helpful, very useful.
So I'm just thinking technically, deep, deep down, it's got some problem to it.
But I think you'd have to admit that
even in the example of the Buddha image, Buddha images could be considered to be a type of art, or they're very closely related to, I think, what we're talking about as art.
And when you see a Buddha image, when a meditator, for example, sees a Buddha image, it can be incredibly inspiring.
Maybe that's not such a good example.
Yeah, I wouldn't talk about how people...
react to art.
It's just not about what art is, how it relates to his art.
The people doesn't matter, really.
It's just not... Oh, be careful.
I mean, yeah, it's just... It's a marketing thing that you go to museum... Exactly, yes.
Be careful.
There's artists out there who are going to tear you apart.
Of course.
Everybody who knows history of art
They know that the Catholic Church funded most of the artists.
They were making the art for money.
So that was just a marketing thing, really.
An artist will tell you they don't do it for the money, or they do it... We're talking about Buddhist artists here.
We're asking the question of whether a Buddhist artist is actually...
capable of teaching Buddhism through art, basically.
No, I think it's just a really bad concept.
Yeah, I think it's a bad idea.
But what about for kids?
What about kids who have been abused?
How do you bring them to Buddhism?
Oh, maybe by cartoons, right?
Well, what's better about cartoons than art?
Why isn't art a valid form of communication as well?
Yeah, I noticed the clocks downstairs were different.
Especially for the kids themselves.
If they create art, sometimes it helps them to recognize what it's like.
I mean, that's another thing.
It can help you to recognize.
I remember writing poetry as a means of understanding my feelings on something.
I just don't think that in the long term,
you know, on the path to enlightenment, I think it is something that you have to give up eventually.
But in the beginning, there's some, you know, it can still be used, especially for people who are addicted to that, who are, you know, like children, who are attracted to that sort of thing, and who would react to it and would be engaged in it.
Like, if you've got kids to just sit down and practice meditation, very difficult most of the time.
But if you have them paint a picture about
their feelings, for example, or whatever art therapists do, you probably have to go a lot further to help them to understand their feelings.
So I think... One thing, when you are, if you are kind of like creating art, let's say painting or drawing, and you kind of like, your mind comes into state of sort of concentration
and freedom.
So how you... is it delusion?
Is it actually, like, is it bad?
Is it positive?
How do you think?
Sorry, is what possible?
Yeah, it's like people... Well, you can describe the state when you're creating your mind.
Creating... If you are creating an art...
that you are in sort of the state of freedom, like you can express yourself, right?
So do you think that's... Expressing yourself is not the path.
This is a fallacy of modern psychology that we don't agree with.
Think of the basic principle of quantum physics, or of the Heisenberg... Let's say quantum physics or the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
When you act, you're already changing it.
When you express your feeling, you're already changing that feeling, or you're creating that feeling.
How do we know that when we put together this piece of art based on our feelings, we're not actually augmenting and reinforcing and actually even molding and shaping that feeling?
How do we know that that's really there?
We don't, because it's not an exact investigation.
It's art.
I mean, the word says it all, really.
Yeah, I say the wrong question.
It's like, maybe not expression.
Because expression is something like you creating your mind.
But what I meant is that you are in sort of harmony.
You know what I mean?
Like, you feel like you're in harmony.
And what is it?
Is it delusion?
I mean, I heard, I experienced it myself.
I heard about other people, like, if you kind of like, what do they call it?
They call it some sort of, you know, that you have to find a point in your life that's going to give you some sort of happiness or something like that.
What do you think about it?
You're talking about the harmony that comes from art?
Do people feel like they get something out of it?
Yeah, like the process of making art.
The output is not really important.
The process is important.
Well, but see, that's the thing.
As soon as you say that, you're placing a value judgment on an experience.
To me, that's the whole problem with art.
The word art to me is so loaded with value judgment and subjectivity as opposed to seeing experiences for what they are that I can't help but feel like it's got its inherent problems.
If you say it can be useful as a tool, well, fine.
There can be benefit to it, but that's how it is.
Karma is not always white or black.
Sometimes it's white and black.
So someone asks, do you think we should all give up all forms of art and music?
I mean, on a level of 1 to 10, art and music are not very high on the list of things that you have to give up.
But if you can, power to you.
It's a wonderful, liberating experience.
It's an empowering thing to be free, to not need such crutches.
Most people, even when they hear that,
that the kind of things that we're saying become quite upset as a result.
Their idea of what is important is offended.
The idea that music might be unbeneficial can make people quite upset, which of course is a sign that there is attachment there, that there is a
a limiting factor there or a crippling factor there.
Because when someone talks against the things that you like, you become upset.
Now, for a person who doesn't need music to make them happy, it doesn't really matter what people say about music.
People can say it's great or it's horrible.
It doesn't bother them.
If you've given up music and someone says music is a horrible, horrible thing, it's the work of Satan.
It doesn't bother you because you don't have anything to do with it anymore, as with everything else.
So if you can do it, it's great.
When I finished my first meditation course, one of the hardest things I did was give up music.
I had to stop playing the piano.
No more classical guitar.
I had to give away my Led Zeppelin CD collection.
But I did it, and it was empowering.
But certainly, you know,
Ask more important things.
Can you give up sex?
Can you give up killing mosquitoes and insects?
Can you give up drinking alcohol and taking drugs?
These are more important questions.
Art and music are not such... Go for it.
Not a big deal.