The Imagination which Liveth Forever LO24735

From: AM de Lange (amdelange@gold.up.ac.za)
Date: 06/02/00


Replying to LO24705 --

Dear Organlearners,

Andrew Cambell < ACampnona@aol.com > writes:

>At you ask me,
>>What is your vision for me? Where has all the singing gone?
>
>At' how many are 'waiting the day' and how many are 'making the day'?

Andrew, the beings 'wait' and the becomings 'make'. Should you want to
waste time, start counting them yourself.

>At' do you 'dream' of setting people free?

Day and night.

Andrew, what will become of Bucket should he stop imagining? (Dear fellow
learners, do you still remember the name of his dog?)

Andrew, what will become of our parrot Caru if "she" should stop
imagining? Last night my brother Conrad and his wife Esta visited us.
Eventually he had to give in with his peculiar delightful laugh: "You are
not imagining that Caru is imagining because I do not have to imagine it
any more."

>Do you have 'nightmares' of people who enslave people one
>way or another?

Day and night.

>At' maybe you did not know that William Blake was often
>visited, variously by bards, muses or angels?

Yes. Hearing voices and seeing images from the past. This is why a person
was called in those days a mystic. Nowadays some psychotherapists try to
remove all schizofrenies from any possible mystic.

Meanwhile the authentic artists become less and less.

>"All life is holy." Blake wrote of "A vision of the eternal Now"
>Mmmm.

Life? Evolution? Complexification? Constructive creativity? Entropy
Production? One-to-many-love?

What is not sacred?
Even more seriously -- Is it sacred to ask what is not sacred?

>How to reveal the holy (whole) in 'everyman' as 'everyperson'?

By Personal Mastery which reveals the "singularity of complexity".

>Authentic Art in my comprehension undertakes this expressive
>task very well. It sort of lives on in it's collective collected
>history.
>' There is a great part of us which cannot be explained by what
>simply is present.' (Jeanette Winterson of Dante's visionary song.)

Andrew, I want to ask you three questions. You will be able to answer the
first one exactly. The second answer will depend on the culmination of
your personal studies on other artists. But what will the third answer
depend on?

(1) Have you ever created even one painting without imagination?
(2) Do you know of any artifact of any kind of art which was created
     without prior imagination by the artist?
(3) What is the difference between an authentic learner and an
     authentic artist?

>"All Religions are One." He proclaimed toward the end of his life.
>"He who sees the infinite in all things sees God. He who sees
>the Ratio sees only himself."

Dear Andrew, the issue is in my opinion very complex. Thus we need the
seven essentialities to go deeper into it. Perhaps all religions are one
when we see the becoming in them -- the act of believing.

It is the easiest thing to do when judging another peron's beliefs.

But let me nudge you again: How does a person believe?
(Obviously, I do include rote believing too ;-)

Let me kick you slightly gentler in the butt ;-) Is the act of believing
possible without wholeness?

Let me crash you in the gentlest manner ;-) Try believing without
openness!

>I have learned that so called scientists are working on mixing
>the genes of a goat with those of a spider in order that the
>complex outcome will be a living spider that spins yarn ten times
>more powerful than kevlar. How is that for linear thinking?

I will ask Winfried Dressler a question on the same topic: How is that
topic for rote mental behaviour?

>So from already acquired knowledge Man could not acquire
>more. Therefore an Universal Poetic Genius exists." My chosen
>'way' is to uncover that 'Universal Poetic Genius' I happen to
>know resides in every person. There is an amazing indifference
>to that notion At'. It is a hard one to 'sell' to the 'punters'. You
>will understand! I find getting past the gate most difficult. You
>will know what I mean!

Dear Andrew, it just occured to me that many, many fellow learners on this
list may think that I am a 'punter" trying to 'sell' them something since
I work so hard, seemingly trying to do it. Obviously, my assurance is
worth nothing. But, still, I assure you all that I know all too well for
my own health that authentic learning cannot be sold to rote learners.

Can we sell anything authentic so that after the transaction it still
remains authentic?

>Blake reckoned everything upon the earth had a spiritual
>correspondence. He reckoned not unlike Maturana and most
>leading thinkers of mankind today that, "- the world itself is
>inspired with the breath of a divine humanity."

Andrew, divine humanity is one thing. Let us focus on its dual!

How does any person becomes godly?
I do not ask -- How does any person becomes God?

(I wonder how many times a question has to be repeated before
it strucks someone that it may be truely be a question ;-)

>Remember his friend who upon Blake's passing away kissed
>him and closed his eyes, 'to keep the vision in.'
>
>PRISTINE

No, but it makes sense.

But the imagination -- is it not within forever? Why do we want to close a
person's eyes? Do we fear the flicker of imagination in the eyes of an
authentic learner? Do we fear that elementary quantum leap of the brain?

My greatest frustration on this list in cyberspace is that I cannot
observe the flickers in the eyes of a fellow learner. My greatest
frustration in airspace is that too many learners have shut off the
flickers in their eyes so as to commence with rote learning.

What role does imagination play in rote learning?

With what will you associate Personal Mastery and Team Learning -- with
authentic learning or with rote learning?

With care and best wishes,

-- 

At de Lange <amdelange@gold.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>


"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.