us continue this month, after the completion of the symposium "Beyond my freedom? "Our conversation with Jean-Luc Giribone, which speaks of Zen and Tantra, Lacan Trungpa.
Nicolas Inca: I want to ask Jean-Luc Giribone your address at the symposium. "In search of me. Cross-reading of Jacques Lacan and Chogyam Trungpa. Why put these two authors in front of one another? Jean-Luc
Giribone: A question I ask myself is: Lacan, the critique of the ego is the name of a place of truth, the truth of the matter. She is unreachable in any case, upon which we see the effects every day. There's something deep in us that we do not have access. Lacan refers to the word of truth, very clearly, that word from Heidegger. This is the true subject, which he speaks in the Writings. The subjectivity of each is somehow irreducible. I feel that in the Buddhist tradition as Trungpa magnificently we address, to us Westerners, the critique of the ego as an illusion is not from a true place of the subject but a truth that involves a non-issue. There is probably something quite different that would cause us to reflect on the concept of "self."
What is interesting is to confront the fact that both are teachers facing the same problem. On one side of the Seminar Lacan, and the other seminarians, speeches of Trungpa which has hardly written books. To whom do they matter? A very nice people. In Seminar on the ego, Lacan quips about being surrounded by very smart people who want to show they are very intelligent ... One can not help thinking about the student who practices meditation Trungpa, knows texts, but that claim on the merits by the question to what fills the last remaining hole in his knowledge. This is exactly why the Zen master refuses, which constantly disappoints the request since it is that I am finally free of research at the lowest price possible. It's still heavy, we would want to do something else ... How not to issue another of his efforts but encourage? Another risk, and Trungpa is as always brilliantly purpose is not to see what to collect authentic in the student. The student brings everything he is, his question may be poorly worded, naive, in the prejudices of his era or culture, but his demand is strong, moving and pure. It reminds when Lacan speaks of the famous psychoanalytic transfer. This is something that moves him, as if the subject said his truth finally making this offer and the demand for love. What can he do more profound than that? We must find listening and even respect this fundamental respect that feeling very well to both Lacan's analysands and apprentices Trungpa. And at the same time, the master is not there to make you happy, but to help you get what eventually yourself to make you happy, to live differently. This is not the master who can fill. It is also necessary that this dissatisfaction is not discouraging, is not an end of inadmissibility, and it is appropriate. Again, when you look closely, Trungpa has an incredible way out of all the pitfalls that he might fall down if it met so flat at the request of students.
ND: The first page of the first seminar of Jacques Lacan begins with a reference to the Zen master, whom he compares himself "the master breaks the silence by anything, sarcasm, a kick." Lacan seems to have a very fine reading of Buddhism?
JLG: Absolutely, I am very sensitive to its report to Zen. Zen is itself a building, you could almost go in knowing very well what is Buddhism so it has its internal consistency. And at the same time, despite pressure or hostility that has surrounded by other currents, there has never been separated from Buddhism. There is another direction we may address is the relationship between Lacan, not globally with Buddhism or Trungpa, but with the Zen, exactly. It would be interesting is why I call already in another conference, because you're right, himself has been like that. It is not far with Lacan's Zen master who gives a blow. When you look at the extraordinary stories between master and disciple, and it often ends. The master strikes the disciple of a stick, that seizes and makes his move to the master, very happy: that's it, you have finally understood. There is another important element on which Lacan much emphasis is the fact that psychoanalysis is an anti-initiation, thinking that separates it radically from a certain analytical vision. Like Zen, an anti-initiation, this is not the mysteries of Eleusis. In one of these wonderful stories of acceding to the awakening, the disciple of a master we call Hei Chuang, reaches enlightenment, laughs and says to his master: "Finally there was no much in Buddhism Chuang Hei. That is the word that comes to the point of access to enlightenment is extraordinary compared to our Western emphasis bombastic. This is often something funny, simple, seemingly ordinary.
ND: Could you say a few words of Chogyam Trungpa, the leading figure in Tantric Buddhism in the West in the twentieth century?
JLG: There are two things, Trungpa and Tantra. I'm far from an expert on Tantra, I just point out in passing that in Tantra as in Trungpa, there is a dimension "strange" that is not far from the gay science Nietzschean. Trungpa had very strongly, which makes me reading a real source of wonder. It has these two things we are talking about extreme depth, devoid of any emphasis that usually accompanies it. Someone who reaches this level of depth can be more emphatic, for it is that the assignment of depth. He himself insisted on the sense of humor. His dialogues with his students are great. You see we struggle with issues fairly conventional Western goodwill. He knows that the big problem of the West is that he wants the job is done without having to do so. That back to Lacan, a relationship that exists between the two on the theme of truth. There is a passage where he speaks of Trungpa that, when we say the full truth is a truth as other people can think of something else. Lacan, there is even a practice and reflection on the issue of truth-telling. He has this famous formula: I always tell the truth, but I can only say mid. You can never tell the whole truth. It is even so that the truth lies in reality. In this symposium, "Beyond Me", none of the players knows the truth. One hopes that something new, neither Michel Cazenave, nor Fabrice Midal nor myself have thought, might appear that time, like a mandala. And then, the notion of conference is justified.
Interview by Nicolas Inca
Find the symposium "Beyond my freedom? Psychoanalysis, Philosophy and Meditation Video http://www.philosophies.tv/ For more information on editing the conference proceedings in 2011, refer to the site of Editions du Grand Est.
Nicolas Inca: I want to ask Jean-Luc Giribone your address at the symposium. "In search of me. Cross-reading of Jacques Lacan and Chogyam Trungpa. Why put these two authors in front of one another? Jean-Luc
Giribone: A question I ask myself is: Lacan, the critique of the ego is the name of a place of truth, the truth of the matter. She is unreachable in any case, upon which we see the effects every day. There's something deep in us that we do not have access. Lacan refers to the word of truth, very clearly, that word from Heidegger. This is the true subject, which he speaks in the Writings. The subjectivity of each is somehow irreducible. I feel that in the Buddhist tradition as Trungpa magnificently we address, to us Westerners, the critique of the ego as an illusion is not from a true place of the subject but a truth that involves a non-issue. There is probably something quite different that would cause us to reflect on the concept of "self."
What is interesting is to confront the fact that both are teachers facing the same problem. On one side of the Seminar Lacan, and the other seminarians, speeches of Trungpa which has hardly written books. To whom do they matter? A very nice people. In Seminar on the ego, Lacan quips about being surrounded by very smart people who want to show they are very intelligent ... One can not help thinking about the student who practices meditation Trungpa, knows texts, but that claim on the merits by the question to what fills the last remaining hole in his knowledge. This is exactly why the Zen master refuses, which constantly disappoints the request since it is that I am finally free of research at the lowest price possible. It's still heavy, we would want to do something else ... How not to issue another of his efforts but encourage? Another risk, and Trungpa is as always brilliantly purpose is not to see what to collect authentic in the student. The student brings everything he is, his question may be poorly worded, naive, in the prejudices of his era or culture, but his demand is strong, moving and pure. It reminds when Lacan speaks of the famous psychoanalytic transfer. This is something that moves him, as if the subject said his truth finally making this offer and the demand for love. What can he do more profound than that? We must find listening and even respect this fundamental respect that feeling very well to both Lacan's analysands and apprentices Trungpa. And at the same time, the master is not there to make you happy, but to help you get what eventually yourself to make you happy, to live differently. This is not the master who can fill. It is also necessary that this dissatisfaction is not discouraging, is not an end of inadmissibility, and it is appropriate. Again, when you look closely, Trungpa has an incredible way out of all the pitfalls that he might fall down if it met so flat at the request of students.
ND: The first page of the first seminar of Jacques Lacan begins with a reference to the Zen master, whom he compares himself "the master breaks the silence by anything, sarcasm, a kick." Lacan seems to have a very fine reading of Buddhism?
JLG: Absolutely, I am very sensitive to its report to Zen. Zen is itself a building, you could almost go in knowing very well what is Buddhism so it has its internal consistency. And at the same time, despite pressure or hostility that has surrounded by other currents, there has never been separated from Buddhism. There is another direction we may address is the relationship between Lacan, not globally with Buddhism or Trungpa, but with the Zen, exactly. It would be interesting is why I call already in another conference, because you're right, himself has been like that. It is not far with Lacan's Zen master who gives a blow. When you look at the extraordinary stories between master and disciple, and it often ends. The master strikes the disciple of a stick, that seizes and makes his move to the master, very happy: that's it, you have finally understood. There is another important element on which Lacan much emphasis is the fact that psychoanalysis is an anti-initiation, thinking that separates it radically from a certain analytical vision. Like Zen, an anti-initiation, this is not the mysteries of Eleusis. In one of these wonderful stories of acceding to the awakening, the disciple of a master we call Hei Chuang, reaches enlightenment, laughs and says to his master: "Finally there was no much in Buddhism Chuang Hei. That is the word that comes to the point of access to enlightenment is extraordinary compared to our Western emphasis bombastic. This is often something funny, simple, seemingly ordinary.
ND: Could you say a few words of Chogyam Trungpa, the leading figure in Tantric Buddhism in the West in the twentieth century?
JLG: There are two things, Trungpa and Tantra. I'm far from an expert on Tantra, I just point out in passing that in Tantra as in Trungpa, there is a dimension "strange" that is not far from the gay science Nietzschean. Trungpa had very strongly, which makes me reading a real source of wonder. It has these two things we are talking about extreme depth, devoid of any emphasis that usually accompanies it. Someone who reaches this level of depth can be more emphatic, for it is that the assignment of depth. He himself insisted on the sense of humor. His dialogues with his students are great. You see we struggle with issues fairly conventional Western goodwill. He knows that the big problem of the West is that he wants the job is done without having to do so. That back to Lacan, a relationship that exists between the two on the theme of truth. There is a passage where he speaks of Trungpa that, when we say the full truth is a truth as other people can think of something else. Lacan, there is even a practice and reflection on the issue of truth-telling. He has this famous formula: I always tell the truth, but I can only say mid. You can never tell the whole truth. It is even so that the truth lies in reality. In this symposium, "Beyond Me", none of the players knows the truth. One hopes that something new, neither Michel Cazenave, nor Fabrice Midal nor myself have thought, might appear that time, like a mandala. And then, the notion of conference is justified.
Interview by Nicolas Inca
Find the symposium "Beyond my freedom? Psychoanalysis, Philosophy and Meditation Video http://www.philosophies.tv/ For more information on editing the conference proceedings in 2011, refer to the site of Editions du Grand Est.
Reprinted Buddhism in News, N ° 130 December 2010
Photo © Laura Eddy
Photo © Laura Eddy
0 comments:
Post a Comment