Author: Guy MASSAT
Keywords: Psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, Jacques Lacan, Topology Nodes
Guy Massat, "Jacques Lacan and Zen", Sixth session of the seminar on "Topology and Time" Circle psychoanalytic Paris, Thursday, April 24, 2008.
Jacques Lacan and Zen
What is psychoanalysis, I asked someone who was hostile? Not teach it not to distinguish conscious from unconscious? - Yes, I replied. So, he concludes, it is a truism as stupid as the others, such as "when one is not great is that we are small." Can we say that the thought is not equal to the reected consciousness is equal to the unconscious? –
No, I confess, this is impossible because we speak here in the circle of conscious language, closed, so to speak, by the fence of a reection mirror. But I argumentais, taking the point of view of the breakdown of language, that is to say, not the point of view of the realization of space but the view that breaks everything, formula would not be a truism. Gödel incompleteness and the Heisenberg uncertainty are not only negative functions: They have their own autonomy. Finally, he went on, "the unconscious is not conscious" is obvious, a truism, a tautology, a platitude, as certain as "outside not inside." The unconscious, I tried to argue, is not geometry, topology, but a time that can show not only the outside is also inside, but aware that despite its apparent independence and autonomy depends entirely on him, although he diers in delivering it. The words do not they close on themselves, he replied: White is white and non-white, non-white. Between the two there is nothing. So the unconscious can not exist. - But the language is, I replied! The conversation ended there. The problem is that the conscious knowledge - "Knowledge is knowing that knows" - based on the evidence of the principle of identity: A = A. This principle prohibits whether A equals truly, A. A. If A is true We are so accustomed to the principles of formal logic that we swear by it more, even when we do not know. And even when experience shows us that there false evidence. Is there something other than the obvious? Yes, already pointed Heraclitus, and this is neglected, he said, "both before and after having had the experience," for example, slip and parapraxis. Observe, monitor Heraclitus, that for the principle of identity is certain, for there is undoubtedly true identity between A and A, it would have the second A is at the same place at the same time as the îrst . But it is not. This would stop the time, which is impossible. As rightly says Lacan, "the unconscious is not" unable to stop time. So the principle of identity A is A is not, strictly speaking, a proposal that arbitrarily within the imagination. Even though it is extremely eective. But since this is a convention, an imaginary function, an arbitrary proposition, we are entitled to, and we can in fact do not submit and we prefer the language of birds, that is to say, a language not based on the principle of identity. As we learn from Saussure: "The acoustic chain is not divided into equal time (clock time and real time) ... We do not know when a sound starts or ends ... or other elements that are obtained the analysis of the spoken chain rings are like this chain irreducible moments that can not be considered outside of time they occupy. " In other words these rings form nodes "nodes Saussure" nodes things safe. "Thus says the linguist as a whole" ta "(the phoneme ta, he could have taken the phoneme" it ") is always a plus point, t, a, ç or a. The fragment irreducible "t" or "ç", taken separately, may be considered outside of time (outside of clock time course). Similarly a musical ensemble "do, re, mi" can not be treated as a series in real time, but if I take one of its irreducible elements, I can see it in the abstract (ie say in another time or another dimension, like the symphony for a single note proposed by the artist Yves Klein vacuum in the 60s). "Thought, chaotic by nature, says Saussure, is forced to specify decomposition. There is therefore no materialization of thoughts or spiritualization sounds, but it is thus somewhat mysterious, thought that her involve-divisions and that language develops its constituent units is between two amorphous masses ". So
the oating world of sounds and ideas oating world connect, or mate, arbitrarily. That is why in the world there are dierent languages.
Going further to understand the unconscious system. In the unconscious, in the it, that is to say, for the consciousness out of itself, no principle of identity. Things, beings and words on how not to be what they are and be what they are not. That is to say, the arbitrariness of A can arbitrarily do not submit to what he says, that is to say, its own conventions. It happens with sound and meaning of a coupling to another according to his fancy like a ying cow: This is the language that the language of the time, nameless and law.
However, Freud will show - and this is the great feature of psychoanalysis - the size of the system unconscious ego and superego block as a node quilting on it in his burst of creative enjoyment. They are the ones I and superego, which form the knotting suering, torture and wars of the unconscious system: anxiety, depression, etc. inhibitions. It is here "Me and superego" use the principles of identity, contradiction, and excluded when they should annihilate them. This extinction will occur only by the psychoanalytic method and treatment of the unconscious. Formal logic is only valid to the conscience which is not deîned by it.
So everything is language, language in the extraordinary dimension of the unconscious as in the no less bizarre conscious. These dimensions only use words dierent systems. Contrary to what the conscious supports totalitarianism in his superego, there is knowledge, thoughts, feelings and sensations that defy rational grasp because they are traveling to the Moreover, other freedoms possible language. Conclusion distinguish the unconscious of the unconscious, far from being a truism could be the biggest deal of our lives. This separation because it is generated by the speech that punctuates the vital dierences between unconscious and conscious discourse discourse. This is what determines the nature of worlds in which we try to live. Each being the opposite direction of the other.
It is wrong to make that dierence our personal life becomes complicated, complex and unbearable, and fear invades everything: rich or poor, learned or ignorant, evil or honest honest, religious or secular living secretly "ill at ease ", even when they say to others that all is well.
As an example of confusion tautological: "War is war." This is consistent with the principle of identity. Or just in the unconscious, where the principle of identity
does not exist, the war will never be war. What is it then that war? Heraclitus said: "War is the father of all things (polemos the war in Greek, is male), any destiny it is the king. For some, it is the gods (gods means people endowed with a talent beyond normal standards), others, it makes men, some it makes slaves, others free men. "So this war, that is war in the unconscious system, which decides our fate. But philosophers, who never see beyond the limits of conscious foolishly conclude Heraclitus advocated war. Whereas if we distinguish the discourse of the unconscious conscious of those, we can take this course the greatest beneît in favor of peace, our own peace, that it is in the system unconscious war is the father or the mother of our destiny. It is a war of three, rule of three, as the Homeric Trojan War between it and me and superego. But here it is a war of words. This is what Freud explained to Einstein, "Why War". But Einstein, locked in the ghetto of mathematical language, that is to say, in the language of identity and totalitarian conscious do not understand. "I do not believe in Freud concluded, with my comments on the system Ics, I issue the Nobel Peace."
Another example. Do not distinguish the unconscious conscious, philosopher Slajov Zizek, who has a PhD supposedly psychoanalysis in Paris, we argued that one of the treasures of the Indian mythological "The Bhagavad Gita" is a text Nazi. Why? By that in this myth the god Krishna exhorts Arjuna to war: "Nothing is better than a legitimate struggle." Krishna speaks clearly of the îght in the unconscious system not îght in the conscious. Otherwise, how could it be argued that "kill" is "do not kill"? It is impossible that it is the same in the conscious. While in the unconscious, contradictory, "killing is not killing" is perfectly acceptable. Do not dierentiate the conscious to the unconscious, Zizek, like many other late Freudians, or as Nietzsche said, European nihilists do not understand either why the Ch'an master Lin tsi advises us to "kill Buddha and kill our parents! '
Consequences of Today, we see, for example, bin Laden, do stupidly conate holy war and beneîcial in the unconscious and unhealthy and destructive war in the conscious world. Fortunately not all Muslims are not psychotic, that is to say, do not confuse conscious and unconscious. The Dalai Lama teaches that the "non-self", and urges us to detachment, renunciation and compassion, înds himself in a contradictory position as ridiculous when he defends Tibetan identity, that is to say otherwise non-self (anata) yet he claims to be the path of serenity. It emphasizes the commitment to Tibetan culture thus the opposite of detachment and renunciation, the foundations of Buddhist thought. The Dalai Lama înds itself in the position of these sects hypocrites detach yourself from your property, and make donations (our sect of course). Us, we are really detached from material goods, you are still unclean, etc..
These few examples, there are many others, allow us to understand the usefulness of psychoanalysis in its method of distinguishing the unconscious conscious. Do not make any conscious values devalue themselves as Nietzsche prophesied. "The laws of logic told us Wittgenstein in his Tractatus, are tautologies, they say nothing about the real world. They belong to the imagination, that is to say the lure. The meaning of a statement is its only use syntactic "principle structural, knotting his, shall we say under" The topology of nodes and time. "
Recall the principles of formal logic established by Aristotle and whose handling is what allows the creation of computers, laptops and other rocket engines, etc.., Even if we ignore this is to Aristotle that we owe all our technological world, from the easiest to the most complicated machines, and all values.
These three principles are stated as follows:
Principle of identity: A = A;
Principle of non-contradiction: the same thing can not be and not be at the same time and in the same respect;
Principle of excluded middle: between white and non-white there is no third term.
These three principles are topologically the same principle dierently. Of course we can challenge the principle of identity as we did for support or distinguish the white non-white it is necessary at the same time dimension that is neither white nor white. But we lose the eectiveness of these principles. For a civilization, a society, it is necessary to build back up the unconscious discourse in favor of a law tautological and accept the rules of the game But what then of unconscious discourse which, far from being a static nothingness, will necessarily return in the form of conscious symptoms?
That is, in our society, psychoanalysis, which knows how to use the unconscious discourse in its most creative features, is its function and necessity. The it's about. But he speaks a language so dierent compared to formal logic, the languages of the conscious support he does not speak. But this language that allows processes of thought, feelings, sensations much more subtle, creative and decisive than the conscious knowledge that loses its exclusive privileges arbitrary and totalitarianism. The language that transgresses all bounds. Thinkers of the past were already seen such as Heraclitus and Lao Tzu. It is by reading these
great historical texts psychoanalytic perspective we can înd the power of their mind and not devalue as did stop and continue to do religious and philosophers, who have to principle that conscious discourse. Heraclitus, for example, in the îrst fragment states that: "The speech I speak intelligible escapes capture of men." It is indeed Heraclitus of a discourse that escapes the ordinary reective consciousness. Lao Tzu: states in his îrst poem: "The truly say say say other than expressed." It is indeed a saying that other than to say the conscious. If we try to translate the Tao te king of Lao Tzu in terms of unconscious discourse, and not under the conscious as it has been done so far, we will be amazed at how these ancient poems enlighten us the dimension of reality is the unconscious. For example, we will be surprised to see that his îrst poem describes Lao Tzu the Borromean knot, the RSI of Lacan, which is a summary of all psychoanalysis.
Lacan tells us in "Stuns" the following: "The remains forgotten behind the words said." Lao Tzu, three thousand years before states: "say (tao) is another truly say that the words expressed." Lacan: "Let them say remains forgotten behind what is said in what is heard. "It is an echo even Lao Tzu supporting" word is the word really other than the spoken word. " No there not there, despite three millennia of dierence, a striking coincidence of words between Lao Tzu and Lacan?
Continue the poem by Lao Tzu:
"The nameless is the origin of the earth and sky. "What the nameless? The unnamed wu ming, it is that. The it is not a pronoun, as it would be in the conscious. The id is what we can not give a name because it is constantly changing. The id, Freud tells us, is the origin of the ego and the superego. The "no name" is the origin of heaven and earth, says Lao Tzu. Heaven and Earth here can be understood as metaphors of self and superego. "The word is the mother of all things," says Lao Tzu. That is to say that there is no world without language or language that is producing the world as contended Heidegger and psychoanalysis today.
"So, can continue Lao Tzu, without the desire (that is to say, that without desire as lack or insuïciency) contemplates the extraordinary. While desires (as gaps and deîcits) are the limits of things. " Indeed, it is always lack that marks the boundary. If I miss one euro for ten euros is that I am limited to nine. Desires as lack, deîciency, inadequacy are ego and superego. They are represented by the
Eros of Plato here is the son of Poros, wealth, and Penia, poverty still missing something. So the desire mark the limitations.
"Although they have a common origin (the id), Lao Tzu said, they (the ego and the superego) dier only in name. "" Together (the id, the ego and the superego) they form a node, the node mysteries, pass extraordinary. "
The etymology of the word mystery close and there is nothing more than a closed topological node. Thus, by choosing "tell" rather than "path" to translate "tao", the Tao te king of Lao Tzu enlightens us, across the centuries, on psychoanalysis, while in his translation philosophy and politics seem uncertain about its , doubtful and obscure. It's the same title: "The Book of the way and virtue." It must now be translated as "the book (King) of force (Te) of the mean of the unconscious (Tao)."
J. Lacan and Zen. Lacan refers Why does it so often in Zen? In "The object of psychoanalysis" (p. 45), it puts us îrst guard against the use of this word:
"I scruple, he said, the word Zen in advance, before an audience of which is for me too insecure about how I can be heard without any precautions to advance a reference to something that n ' is certainly no secret, lying around in the street and you hear about everywhere. Zen does he not something that can go up to the abuse of trust? In fact, I would strongly advise you to beware of all the nonsense that stack in the registry, however, after all, no more than psychoanalysis itself. "
The word Zen is the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese Ch'an sinogram, apocope of tch'anna which translates phonetically Pali (d) jhana, Buddhist term meaning "absorption." The term refers to the absorption in the perfect vacuum, that is to say, the vacuum is time. Translation by "meditation" which refers to the Sanskrit dhyana, whose meaning is "meditation, thought, reection, consciousness" is not justiîed. Although the most common is a drift error. The word "meditation" is the Pali bhavana, which means in Buddhism classic "mental development" But the mind is conscious, not the unconscious. The fusion of the mind and the unconscious is the Christian Western thought. It has nothing to do with Chinese thought. The translation of Ch'an meditation by thus maintains a confusion between the conscious and the unconscious into the supports of neuroses. Why Lacan, from the opening of its îrst seminar, referred Does the Zen? Certainly not to meditate, or transcendentally also not to comply with the fashion in Hollywood, but because Zen, Ch'an more precisely - which is a
combination of Buddhism and Taoism - exemplarily shows the dierence between unconscious and conscious. For realizing it, it is easy to refer to the history of Ch'an.
Its founder is the historic Indian Bodhidharma China in the sixth century of our era. Why Bodhidharma went there in China? It is said that repelled by the mediocrity which fell in the practice of Indian Buddhism at that time: it was reduced to rites and ceremonies, Bodhidharma chose exile.
In China, Bodhidharma met Emperor Wu of Liang, who was a Buddhist believes. The Emperor had organized tells the story, the systematic translation of Buddhist texts into Chinese. Its academies had up to a thousand translators. He had built monasteries throughout his empire, encouraged conversions and promoted Buddhist monks. Naturally he was Bodhidharma and asked. This meeting and reported in the Pi Yen Lu, "Gathering of the green cli" which dates from the tenth century. However, in this îrst paper we see that Bodhidharma clearly raises the dierence between conscious and unconscious. Indeed, the Emperor Wu tells everything he has done in favor of Buddhism and its request is legitimate: "What are my merits? "Because in popular Buddhism, like all religions, have more shares in favor of the good, the more we accumulate merit, good karma for this world and the next. But Bodhidharma replied abruptly: "Absolutely no merit! All that you have done relates to the world, the world conscious and not about your own nature "(the unconscious).
So what is really the truth? asked the Emperor Wu. Bodhidharma replied, "A bottomless void and nothing sacred. "That is to say, a vacuum constantly as is the time for which there is nothing to escape would like some sacred truths such as Platonic ideas. Here we are in the pulse time is the unconscious, as deîned by Lacan in The Four concepts. In the unconscious there is nothing sacred. The sacred is in the mirror and realize his fantasies.
Pi yen lu reports that the emperor did not understand about the Bodhidharma. "But who am I, in front of me, he asked? "Bodhidharma replied," I do not know! "Because the side of the unconscious where there is no identity we can not say who we are. This is the inverse of the conscious world. It's like when a child asks, "What's your name? "And he answered conîdently:" I do not know. " Bodhidharma retired to a cave in the mountains of Shaolin Henan Province. He practiced tsochan (zazen) facing the wall for nine years. It was then known as the
annals of light transmission of Tao-Iuan (1004) "The Brahmin (since he was Indian)" Pi pi kuan ", that is to say" the Brahmin who contemplates wall. " But the Chinese sinogram pi means both wall or precipice abyss. Is that the abyss of time for all of us an impenetrable wall.
"Between man and the world, there is a wall," says Lacan also citing verses of the poet Antoine Tudal (Writings, p. 289) "Between man and love, there is a woman. Between man and woman there is a world. Between man and the world there is a wall. " The abyss of time is bottomless. For him nothing is sacred. This is similar to a real wall which is not happening.
In The Annals of the light transmission of the lamp BUD Tao, it is also about the history of the transmission of the Buddha in Ch'an Pic vultures. However, there are no documents which support this Indian history. Although this case is a legend deserves to be told in our psychoanalytic perspective: One day of the Pic vultures Buddha gathered his disciples by announcing he would send them the supreme truth of his teaching. Everyone fell silent and waited. But Buddha did not say a word. He merely raised a bouquet of owers. Nobody understood what was happening. Only a disciple named Mahakashyapa smiled. Then Buddha declared that Mahakasyapa could now preach in his place. Mahakasiapa had received the îrst "special transmission outside the scriptures."
What a bunch of owers transmission can it be signiîcant? A bouquet of owers from the point of view of the unconscious, is, like everything else, on how to be what he is not and not being what it is, ie it is the unconscious as temporal pulse. When we consider that things are not what they are, that the words are not what they say, we go into the dimension of the unconscious. Thus, the sky is not the sky, the earth is not earth. Our parents are not our parents. It emerges. It breaks the horizon. It delivers. Minerals are minerals, plants are not plants, animals are animals, men are not men and gods are not gods. Our mind is not our head, our sex is not our gender, our heart is not our heart or our belly our belly. The evil is not evil good is not good. E does not equal MC2. The above is not the top down is not down. The money is not money. Love is not love. I am not what I am. As the old poem sings a minstrel: "I do not know who I am. I do not know where I come from. I do not know where I'm going. Just amazed me feel so happy. " You see things and yet there is nothing. The water is not water. It is also, in their way, say, in another language, scholar: the water is not water is a molecule made of hydrogen and two atoms oxygen. And physicists also covering: The atoms are not indivisible, they are made up of particles so short they do not occupy space but only time. There is not water, but time. What time? A time when that is called is not what we call. This is the time of the language. The past can not be in the past, the present of the present, and the future will not be the future. The pain may not be evil.
Not be suering pain. Death not be death, or end, as said the "empty speech" which is the reference Ch'an (the Prajanaparamita): "there is no decay or death or victory win the decay and death. There is no ignorance or win victory over ignorance. There is no suering, there is no evil, there is nothing to gain, there is no path, there is no wisdom, nothing to attain or not reach. "'The forms are empty and empty forms." There is that of language.
"No dependence on words and letters," teaches Chan, which means that everything is language. There is that of language. It is up to us to overturn all the sounds of words, deprive of all meaning or make them say something else and always interpret our way. We can switch all the letters of the words in each other, for our sake, seeking only beauty. Here we are in power, joy happiness and serenity. As Lacan says: "The subject of the unconscious is happy"
"The wonder is not that he is happy ... is to take the idea of bliss, an idea that goes far enough as they feel exiled." Everyone is happy if it was his fault. "The word is the mother of ten thousand things," says Lao Tzu. It is considered to be the sea where we come from. It is the principal regulator as the mayor who is the authority of the municipality. The homophony mother sea mayor assures its way there is a language.
Discourse on emptiness, "Prajna Paramita" is attributed to Nagaradjuna Indian philosopher of the second century, the îrst important thinker of Buddhism have used the Sanskrit and Pali not in his writings and main creator of the Mahayana. But it is said that "Prajana Paramita" whole is condensed in the letter A, the îrst element of training syllables, words and sentences. In Tibetan Buddhism there are contemplators "the letter A". They contemplate that A is not A.
The A is not only the îrst letter of the alphabet and vowels, but homophonically, it also refers to the goal, the passage from one state to another, deleting or empty as in "I like to contemplate. '
The etymology of the letter A, or more precisely its symbol is "cow", or "horned beast". The horns of the bifurcation. We remark that the Latin vacca, cow, sounds like vacare, which means "to be empty" which comes from "vocare" whose meaning is "to be free" namesake vocare "call" that comes from vox, voice. The spokesman says the empty Prajana paramita is: "go, go, beyond" Where in the Ch'an, the allegory of the ten steps of the cow, or îve, depending on the version. We look for the cow, the stands, and then transformed into the void: O. This is the language of geese, OA, down from the alpha and omega: OA-A is zero.
The purpose of Lacan in psychoanalysis we quote this Zen poem: "In three thousand years, how many people know what is in this circle route? O. "Lacan wrote the phrase Zen Chinese Ch'an trace the circle in another way, which topologically is the same. It is a circle with a buckle. It could also make other presentations of the same topological trivial knot. We always see something, but there was nothing.
If we confuse unconscious and conscious, one might think that considering that everything is empty, impermanent and illusory we would necessarily forced to renounce the world aware. Bodhidharma in his cave he was a nihilist helpless?
Lacan et le Zen
Texte de l’intervention au Cercle Psychanalytique de Paris (24 avril 2008)
Date de mise en ligne : mercredi 30 avril 2008
Auteur :Guy MASSAT
Mots-clés :Psychanalyse,Sigmund Freud,Jacques Lacan,Topologie des Nœuds
Guy Massat, « Jacques Lacan et le Zen », Sixième séance du séminaire sur « La Topologie et le Temps », au Cercle psychanalytique de Paris, le jeudi 24 avril 2008.
Jacques Lacan et le Zen
À quoi sert la psychanalyse, me demandait quelqu’un qui lui était hostile ? N’enseigne-t-elle pas à distinguer le conscient de l’inconscient ? — Oui, répondis-je. Donc, conclut-il, c’est une lapalissade aussi bête que les autres, du genre : « quand on n’est pas grand c’est qu’on est petit ». Peut-on dire que le rééchi est égal au non rééchi, que la conscience est égale à l’inconscient ? — Non, avouais-je, c’est impossible parce que nous nous exprimons ici dans le cercle fermé du langage conscient, fermé, pour ainsi dire, par la palissade d’une réexion en miroir. Mais, argumentais-je, en prenant le point de vue de la décomposition du langage, c’est-à-dire non plus le point de vue de la matérialisation de l’espace mais le point de vue du temps qui brise toute chose, la formule ne serait plus une lapalissade. Ainsi l’incomplétude de Gödel, l’incertitude de Heisenberg ne sont pas que des fonctions négatives : Elles ont