PeteFree.comZen Points to the Reality-Defying Prison that Conceptual Thinking often Traps Us in — an Illustration of this Spiritual Perspective via Debra Ollivier’s Outstanding Essay, “The French Philosophy On Love And Sex”
© 2012 Peter Free
15 February 2012
Concepts block out as much as they fence in — and most of us lose the ability to recognize what non-conceptual Reality is telling us
In teaching direct experience, Zen sweeps concepts away.
The majority of Americans share this philosophical inclination on a smaller scale. We refer to the weaknesses of “in-the-box thinking.”
The difference between Zen practice and its American popularization is that Americans generally continue to think that a larger or competing concept can get us out of the box.
In contrast, Zen practice is focused on eliminating the obstacles to accurate perception that all concepts pose.
This distinction (between Zen and American ideas about conceptual prisons) is difficult to illustrate. Especially because even Zen acknowledges that concepts are vital in the majority human intellectual endeavors, like science and going to the grocery store.
One route to understanding the Zen-American distinction combines (usually years of) meditation and cultivated awareness. That is asking a bit much of readers — especially in illustrating an argument they might consider meritless.
In order to quickly (but only superficially) illustrate how conceptual prisons are built — and how they negatively affect some pretty important “stuff” — I draw on Debra Ollivier’s outstanding essay about the difference between French and American perceptions of romantic love.
I chose her essay because most of us, at some level, understand that Love draws us to Spirit.
Historically, some of the planet’s wisest spiritual teachers have emphasized the utility of interpersonal love — with its accompanying inevitable conflicts between Self and Other — as a doorway to a deeper understanding of spiritual meaning.
How we think about romantic love matters. Probably more than most people recognize.
Debra Ollivier’s essay distinguishes between French and American love. It illustrates the comparatively more confining prison that black-and-white American concepts of romantic perfection pose for the soul’s nuanced development.
In something so meaningful as love is, concepts regarding “how it should be” imprison us
Debra Ollivier wrote (based on years of experience in France):
[Sandrine] picked a flower and started pulling off its petals, but rather than the familiar refrain "He loves me, he loves me not," she carefully intoned: "He loves me a little, a lot, passionately, madly, not at all."
This is how the French are groomed to think about love from an early age: not in the absolutes of total love or utter rejection, but in nuances and a range of possibilities.
It dawned on me at that moment that while we Americans are groomed to seek happy endings and closure, the French are more comfortable with emotional subtleties and ambiguity. While we grow up thinking about love in black and white, they grow up inscrutably grey.
God knows we've lived long enough to question some of our more tenacious love clichés. Still, some of them persist, like the idea that finding enduring happiness is possible with a soul mate or perfect partner, if only we look hard enough and consider the right variables.
© 2012 Debra Ollivier, The French Philosophy On Love And Sex, Huffington Post (15 February 2012)
What the difference (between French versus American ideas about love) shows us about concepts’ power to distort reality
Living is our teacher, if we are paying attention.
My guess is that self-aware and relationship-experienced older readers will recognize that the ambiguity-embracing French are closer to the truth about romantic love, than dualistically-inclined Americans are.
If the French are correct, that means that Americans are chasing a perfection that does not exist.
Psychology being what it is, by engaging in Illusion’s Quest, we miss the spiritually enriching nuances of the relationships that we are in or, if unattached, the worth of the imperfect ones that might come our way.
The paradox of commitment — the arguable superiority of the French perception of love
A tolerance for ambiguity and imperfection, paradoxically, permits us to more easily commit to relationship.
Not having falsely high expectations allows us to work with what is in front of us, rather than waiting or seeking an illusion down the road.
Similarly, a tolerance for ambiguity and emotional nuance allows us to end relationships that are not working well. Without the false measure of illusory perfection as a guide, we are more likely to consider and realistically balance down-to-earth factors in our decision to part.
Ambiguity’s embrace also means that it is potentially possible to end or modify relationships, without the emotional histrionics that concepts of good-and-evil and black-and-white bring with them.
Full circle — concepts bind us
Though the French-American love dichotomy is a superficial illustration of Zen’s wisdom, regarding the enslaving and distorting power of concepts — it is close enough to make us more aware of how our ideas about things distort the lens of direct seeing.
The moral? — Pay attention to hidden concepts and to the confining role they play in limiting Life’s potential
And remember that perfection is impossible, even in this.