Abstract
Since aesthetics and art history have Western origins, the analysis of Buddhist art works is usually done through Western aesthetic concepts.
This is the case with concepts such as proportion, transcendence, representation, and the sublime. These concepts belong to the aesthetics of transcendence in the sense that they presuppose a transcendence that leaves all conditions behind. Buddhism, however, emphasizes immanence in that it sees everything as being changed by dependent conditions.
Considering that gods are not transcendent, but sentient beings (sattva), and that Buddha is not a god but a being who attained Nirvāṇa (as well as a teacher of all sentient beings), then the aesthetic that presupposes the transcendent is not consistent with Buddhist art. An aesthetics of immanence, as opposed to an aesthetics of transcendence, is needed.
However, this is not just a matter of applying the concepts of Buddhist philosophy to aesthetic objects. Aesthetics targets the senses that operate in the form of aesthetic senses and consider the grounds for such senses.
This corresponds to different regimes of the sensibles for different conditions. In this paper the starting point of the aesthetics of immanence is explored while confronting the notion of transcendence and the concept of the sublime. Through the concepts of “aesthetic Tathāgata” and “abstruseness (⽞妙).” This is done in hopes of opening a path for Buddhist aesthetics that is different from the sublime aesthetic that equates the greatness of something transcendent to the grandness of magnitude. Aesthetic Tathāgata is an aesthetic idea where something without form is condensed into something with form. It is the action of Myogong (妙空; marvelous emptiness) and Myoyu (妙有; marvelous existence) that activates this aesthetic idea. The concept of abstruseness will be defined as the consolidation of these actions into one.
This is the case with concepts such as proportion, transcendence, representation, and the sublime. These concepts belong to the aesthetics of transcendence in the sense that they presuppose a transcendence that leaves all conditions behind. Buddhism, however, emphasizes immanence in that it sees everything as being changed by dependent conditions.
Considering that gods are not transcendent, but sentient beings (sattva), and that Buddha is not a god but a being who attained Nirvāṇa (as well as a teacher of all sentient beings), then the aesthetic that presupposes the transcendent is not consistent with Buddhist art. An aesthetics of immanence, as opposed to an aesthetics of transcendence, is needed.
However, this is not just a matter of applying the concepts of Buddhist philosophy to aesthetic objects. Aesthetics targets the senses that operate in the form of aesthetic senses and consider the grounds for such senses.
This corresponds to different regimes of the sensibles for different conditions. In this paper the starting point of the aesthetics of immanence is explored while confronting the notion of transcendence and the concept of the sublime. Through the concepts of “aesthetic Tathāgata” and “abstruseness (⽞妙).” This is done in hopes of opening a path for Buddhist aesthetics that is different from the sublime aesthetic that equates the greatness of something transcendent to the grandness of magnitude. Aesthetic Tathāgata is an aesthetic idea where something without form is condensed into something with form. It is the action of Myogong (妙空; marvelous emptiness) and Myoyu (妙有; marvelous existence) that activates this aesthetic idea. The concept of abstruseness will be defined as the consolidation of these actions into one.
| Translated title of the contribution | Aesthetic Tathāgata and the Aesthetics of Abstruseness (⽞妙) - Toward the Aesthetics of Immanence in Buddhist Art - |
|---|---|
| Original language | Korean |
| Pages (from-to) | 127-161 |
| Number of pages | 35 |
| Journal | 한국불교학 |
| Issue number | 104 |
| State | Published - Nov 2022 |