"Take Miksang photography for example."
"Miksang is photography in which we use the camera to express our visual perceptions exactly as we experience them. Because we know how to prepare ourselves to receive perceptions when we see them, and we know how to understand exactly what we have seen, we then know exactly how to express what we have seen with our camera. The resulting image is an exact expression of our eye, mind, and heart as it connects with the perception."
I could never agree with the above quotation from within the Miksang one.
Speaking, modestly, only for myself, I have to admit that I am not at all sure about some of the things that I see, and especially about any intrinsic meaning that they may or may not hold, clutched oh so closly to their heart.
That there can be an exact understanding about something we see is a bit optimistic; there could be as many valid perceptions based upon something seen as invalid ones; how are we to know unless they are things that we, ourselves, have arranged?
As for any photograph ever being "an exact expression of our eye, mind, and heart as it connects with the perception." requires a photographic skill beyond anyone I know. And I'm afraid I have to be modest here, too.
In short, this is nonsense.
Referring to Graham's first quotation: I bet Jeanloup knew that dictum too!
Rob