Psychology & Buddhism.pdf

Gestalt Psychology and Mahayana Buddhism 83
mean the non-existence of things, that is to say, an emptiness of capacity to perform
functions. (as cited in Napper, 1989, pp. 182–83)
Likewise, dependent arising reveals the Buddhist middle way between the two
extremes, as the Western scholar Jeffrey Hopkins (1987) notes: “Dependentarising
itself refutes both extremes at the same time. Things are dependent-arisings;
that things are dependent refutes that they inherently exist; that they arise refutes
that they are utterly non-existent” (p. 154).
As Napper (1989) points out, the mutuality of emptiness and dependent arising
parallels and confirms the congruity of conventional and ultimate truth: “The
compatibility of dependent-arising and emptiness is, in fact, a compatibility of the
two truths, conventional truths and ultimate truths – the dependent-arisings of
things such as sprouts, tables, persons and so forth being conventional truths and
their emptiness of inherent existence being ultimate truths” (p. 40).
So what has any of this to do with ethics and social value? In fact, these twin
compatibilities represent a sweeping conceptual condensation of an ultimately
trans-conceptual understanding uniting mind and heart in unconditional compassion
and ceaseless devotion to all beings. This transformation in consciousness
that joins compassion with insight into emptiness entails profound change in
moral understanding. Let us try to catch a glimmer of this moral view, and its difference
from obstructed modes of consciousness. We may begin with the afflictive
emotions and their source in our reifying ignorance.
We have seen that normal commonsense reality is trapped within the illusion
of inherent existence. For such is the nature of our naive realism that all things
appear to exist as independent, self-existent things. Buddhism teaches that this
fundamental ignorance of authentic reality spawns the afflictions of hatred and
selfish desire. Those three – hatred, desire, and ignorance – comprise the Three
Poisons (Dalai Lama XIV, 1993). Each poison involves an absolutization of experience,
based upon a similarly reified perception of the underlying situation.
It is worth noting that even before this desire takes shape, there is already an
implicit attribution of inherent existence to the object, which is the basis for further
absolutization around one’s conscious desire for it (Dalai Lama XIV, 1993,
p. 17). As desire takes hold, one’s experience of the object may narrow to the
terms of the desire. One understands it in the context of one’s sense of need for
it. Its meaning and valuation are frozen and absolutized within that fixed context.
Persons as objects of desire may thus become objectified. Others who are seen to
impede attainment may be reduced to mere obstacles. Moreover one may become
possessive of the object. The “me” begets the “mine.” This sense of entitlement
is a breeding ground for conflict. The question also arises whether acquisition
actually brings satisfaction. The incapacity of the object to fulfill one’s felt
demands leads to further cycles of craving, where too much is continually not
enough.