Introduction
I was thinking of calling this "Zen and the Art of Imagination" but then it became clear to me why I don't like that formulation. They are not two. Zen "and" the "Art of this or that" creates an artificial duality of Zen and whatever "Art" is mentioned. However, Zen is the Art of Imagination because the Art of Imagination is life and Zen is life.
I was thinking of calling this "Zen and the Art of Imagination" but then it became clear to me why I don't like that formulation. They are not two. Zen "and" the "Art of this or that" creates an artificial duality of Zen and whatever "Art" is mentioned. However, Zen is the Art of Imagination because the Art of Imagination is life and Zen is life.
Imagination is
the function of the mind that we call mental activity. Fantasy and scientific
conceptualization are both activities of imagining. Memory and hallucinations
are both activities of imagining. In modern terms, the central nervous system’s
biological activity of recognizing and identifying any aspect of our peripheral
nervous system is the psychological activity of imagination. There is no
"red rose" except that by our imagination we have designated
"red" and "rose." Analyzing the central psychological
activity of imagination has been one of the main features of Buddha Dharma for
over two millennia.
I have recently
heard talks by two American Zen teachers emphasizing the importance of having a
clear understanding of imagination when approaching Zen and Buddhism. One is by Zoketsu Norman Fischer of Everyday
Zen Foundation in the S.F. Bay Area, California, who has given talks on the
theme of Zen and Imagination before, but in a Zen retreat on 12/07/2016, he
gave a particularly important talk on imagination and its central role in
consciousness from religion to art and science.
In this talk Fischer refers to Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Coleridge’s
use of the distinguishable terms imagination and fancy, which is a differentiation
that is central to this discussion.
The other notable
talk is by Ejo McMullen of Buddha
Eye Temple
in Eugene Oregon, given on 11/10/2016 for the first in a series of classes on the Lotus Sutra. In this
talk, McMullen emphasizes the importance of understanding imagination when
reading Mahayana Sutras such as the Lotus Sutra. As one anchor to the
discussion, he refers to a chapter in the book “Stages of Faith: The Psychology
of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning” by James W. Fowler, to present
the view of imagination as the deep activity underlying religious faith.
Both of these
talks circled around the Jungian view of imagination as imaginal psychology and
brought to the fore in my mind how images form and shape our entire worldview
and self-identity. “Imaginal psychology stands alongside other major
orientations to psychology- cognitive behavioral, depth, humanistic and
transpersonal. What is distinctive to imaginal psychology is its care of the
soul. The soul expresses itself primarily in images, from whence this
orientation derives its name.”
The connection of
the central importance of imagination with Buddhism is found in the teaching
known in Sanskrit as "trisvabhava," which can
be translated as the "three own-beings" or "three
own-natures." This teaching was
promoted and popularized by Vasubandhu and his half-brother Asanga during the 4th
century C.E. Zen incorporates this
teaching, as it also incorporates Vasubandhu in its teaching lineage legend. On
the one hand, Zen does not emphasize or make a big deal about the formal
teaching of the three own-natures as a doctrine, but on the other hand, we find
it frequently acting as an unannounced framework for the direct style of Zen
teachings. For example we can see the three own-natures in the framing of the three levels of the teaching, elementary, intermediate, and complete as taught by 8th century Zen Master Baizhang and in the three statements of Baizhang's grandson in the Dharma, Zen Master Linji.
The technical
terms for the three own-natures are parikalpita-svabhāva
(the fully-contrived own-nature),
paratantra-svabhāva (the relatively-dependent own-nature), and pariniṣpanna-svabhāva (the fully-complete own-nature), and these
Sanskrit terms naturally result in different English translations of each. In
our naïve view as humans, every thing (dharma),
as a quantum of identifiable pattern, has these there aspects of its
own-being. So when we perceive any
particular thing, our imaging of its own-nature can always be categorized in
one or more of these three ways.
The practice (yoga)
of Buddhism as therapy for what ails (dukkha) us can be understood as comprised
of learning the distinctions between these three own-natures and how we confuse
ourselves and generate our own mental vexations and emotional afflictions out
of this confusion by mistaking our imagination of one own-nature for another. This is a most intimate process as no one else can do it for us. When we can’t tell what is contrived fantasy
from practical relative truths, then on the personal level we become anxious about
things we can have no control over and do not change the things we do have
control over, and on the social level we go to war over political fantasies.
While no one can cure our delusions for us, we have to practice in relationship with a teacher or other friends in the Dharma to develop our awareness of how we confuse ourselves.
[slightly edited 2/9/2017]
Connected blogs:
The Unconscious in Buddha Dharma
The Unconscious in Buddha Dharma
No comments:
Post a Comment