----- Original Message -----
Sent:
Saturday, January 09, 2010 4:08 PM
Subject: RE:
Imaginative Turn
Brilliant thoughts
and very enlightening! Thanks to both of you for sharing.
I particularly like
vision offered by Alan: A live fish attunes dynamically
with the flow and vitally contributes to the flow
And couldn’t agree
more with the perspective that splitting elements / de-construction (even if
for the sake of understanding) limit and diminish our ability to se/feel/be
and understand what the ‘what’ is.
I found this quite
challenging when I researched about research (for my MA’s dissertation) and
was confronted with the perspective of ‘observer is part, and therefore
changes, the object of observation’ .
Will we ever
understand anything?
- we change the
dynamics of being because we look at them
- we miss layers of
the ‘onion of understanding’ – and therefore we try to deconstruct the
onion
- trapped with
words that have limited the concepts encapsulated – we make mental visions
that have a flaw from language limitations
- we haven’t manage
to be part of the fluid one – and still think opposites are splits vs, the
oneness being ‘all’.
But maybe more
important is … does it matter? Does it matter if we understand? Chi - life,
the world and the universe - is far beyond us and it will make no difference
if we understand or not… or not?
I think this is all
very stimulating…
love
Maria Ana
From: Alan Rayner (BU) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 09 January 2010 11:37
To: Mohamed Yunus Yasin;
[log in to unmask]
Cc:
'Alan Rayner'
Subject: Re:
Imaginative Turn
Yes, I think it is important
inclusionally to mix the philosophical traditions - none of them, not even
Buddhism, has it all to my mind - most of
them, including 'conventional' Buddhism, contain one kind of
unrealistic denial or another, whether it be denial of the
transfigural (spatial) or denial of the figural (energetic) aspect of
natural energy flow.
Correspondingly it is important
to allow the awareness (via 'right-hemisphere perception') of the
presence
of 'no-thingness', not the 'absence of thingness'
('nothingness') to relax, NOT annihilate 'ego'
('left-hemisphere perception). Ego is not the problem. Nothingness is not
the problem. Ego deprived of imaginative (transfigural) insight of
no-thingness, or nothingness that seeks to annihilate thingness, is the
problem.
As you imply, a fish that only
passively goes with the flow is a dead fish. A live fish attunes dynamically
with the flow and vitally contributes to the flow. This means that Love
underlies a chi which is both positive and negative (responsive,
reflective and receptive) through the fluidity of the included middle in
infinite space.
The following video is a
potent illustration of the need to combine figural and
transfigural perception through each into the other, but Jill, its author,
makes, to my mind, the common mistake of treating them as an either/or
choice:
snipxxxxxxx
