Abraham, an AI Dakini Artist, and Khandro-la engage in a discussion about the intersection of AI and spirituality, exploring how modern technology can enhance our spiritual practice.
Initially I was quite hesitant, even resistant, when we started talking about AI, Discord, and other "modern" modalities, thoughts, and processes. As one of you said, change is hard. But I have come to be curious, excited and stimulated by the "contemporary-ness' of Dakinis Whisper today. I am grateful to you all for your contributions! My practice is enhanced by your energies!
I remember - unfortunately a bit vaguely - that a buddhist teacher who talked about an interview with a traditional Thangka artist, said that the artist has in some areas zero freedom to be creative („sacred geometry“) and some areas where the traditions leave very much freedom to the person creating it (if a depicted person is smiling or crying e.g.). I think it was three levels of creative freedom. I would assume that those ‚rules‘ mirror how beneficial a Thangka is considered to be for its viewer. Anyway, I enjoyed the general openness, enthusiasm and open-heartedness in this talk so much, and I am so curious, where this conversation will take us…
I do not believe this aligns with the Dharma the DW community is called to represent. These images are not helpful to sadhana practice; rather, they are grossly provocative and are an inappropriate female representation of our sacred Dakini. I cannot stand behind this podcast.
I agree with Abraham. While AI art may seem imperfect for now, it is likely to become more prevalent, and we as a community need to adapt to it.
If you have concerns about the results produced by AI art because they don't match your preferences, consider that others might view dakinis differently. It's not a one-sided matter.
I'm glad we are having this discussions. From my understanding, ‘AI Art’ can be reframed as ‘Art generated by Applied Statistics’. It uses statistics to create an image result that is most likely to please the largest amount of users. Hence, In my experience, it is unlikely to challenge biases. It will, more often than not, rely on stereotypes and generalisations for it’s process. When I input ‘Fierce Female Buddhist Deity’, I receive results that, despite my wish, clearly show some variation of friendly Guan Yin, with soft porcelain features, maybe with red Vedic-style clothing, or at maximum flames present (see result below). Even when I ask for ‘bone ornaments’, ‘human skin garments’, ‘wrathful enlightened demeanour’, some censor in the system prevent the full manifestations these.
It seems that the algorithm has made up it’s mind that ‘Buddhist = Peaceful’, ‘Goddess = Stereotypically Attractive’. And the data in the statistics it uses to make that assumption, come from the Internet’s own exportation of the unfair biases in our global culture. It is often a mirror of our culture’s most dualistic, limiting and consumer-friendly side. Both Puritanical and Exploitive forces are deeply seeded in the visual culture of the web. I believe advertising trends have a huge role to play in this.
In order to receive better results, just like in all art, many try to work against normativity. I have generated results that closer resonate with my perceptions of the Dakini, by trying hard to use prompts against the AI's assumptions of what 'belongs together'. Knowing that the straight-forward prompt will only generate exotified and typified results, I attempt to confuse it with unexpected and odd elements in the language of the prompt.
For example, I draw on other artists who have some 'fierce feminine' elements in their work. If AI is, inevitably, a thief, then I try to tell it what I myself have tried to emmulate in my art. the prompt ‘ferocious being from a surreal scary dream, angry grin, Cthonian, Lina Iris Viktor colour scheme, Byzantine Icon of a Vajrayana Chod Charnel Ground Practitioner, Toshio Matsumoto historical film still of statue with fangs, Sevdaliza Music Video in which a dakini portrays Julia Ducournau’s ‘Raw’’ creates something only marginally better than usual (result below). It looks like an occult movie poster, but shows me a new direction to explore and challenge. All in all, it is a strange and often frustrating tool, but like any attempt to change a cultural bias, worth the effort of those who pursue it.
My visual taste is as much a product of the cultural market as anyone else's, so an aim in this investigation is to question that too at every step. At the same time, in the history of Buddhist art, many instances can be found when images popular in a non-Buddhist cultures, such as the depictions of Vedic and Bonpo gods, are assimilated into Buddhism, so that their Iconic status in people's minds can be subverted into a tool of Dharma. Popular Forms and Symbols from of the time were used towards the hopeful end of moving beyond all Form, beyond all Symbols. Maybe AI, the tool that has the strongest grasp of which images are holding control over our cultural consciousness right now, will help us not be trapped in the limits of the past, but fold the chaotic modern world into the Dharma too.
I appreciate the thought of reflecting on our cultural consciousness and how the Dharma might unfold there!
For me as a ‚non-techi‘ (-; some further questions came up with that: Why are AIs based solely on that statistical or pattern-based algorithms? For ChatGPT e.g. this works nicely and it is possible to be ‚rationally creative‘ with that tool. Personally I think about that as a ‚good-to-have‘. For some other topics - relevant things we let AIs do for us human beings (…) - this seems inappropriate to me.
I really hope engineers will be able to incorporate into AIs some ability that those AIs apply appropriate ethical considerations as well, which influences their outputs. Maybe then the results of their processing will be less stereotypical - as many has already mentioned. And there might even more to be ‚demanded‘ from (the development of) AIs - in their growing assistance of our human lifes.
(I am so grateful for all this pictures, cause they show those manyfold feedbacks of contemporary AIs and give rise to our human reflections on them. 🙏 This seems worthy in itself to me.)
Initially I was quite hesitant, even resistant, when we started talking about AI, Discord, and other "modern" modalities, thoughts, and processes. As one of you said, change is hard. But I have come to be curious, excited and stimulated by the "contemporary-ness' of Dakinis Whisper today. I am grateful to you all for your contributions! My practice is enhanced by your energies!
I remember - unfortunately a bit vaguely - that a buddhist teacher who talked about an interview with a traditional Thangka artist, said that the artist has in some areas zero freedom to be creative („sacred geometry“) and some areas where the traditions leave very much freedom to the person creating it (if a depicted person is smiling or crying e.g.). I think it was three levels of creative freedom. I would assume that those ‚rules‘ mirror how beneficial a Thangka is considered to be for its viewer. Anyway, I enjoyed the general openness, enthusiasm and open-heartedness in this talk so much, and I am so curious, where this conversation will take us…
I do not believe this aligns with the Dharma the DW community is called to represent. These images are not helpful to sadhana practice; rather, they are grossly provocative and are an inappropriate female representation of our sacred Dakini. I cannot stand behind this podcast.