Archive for November, 2014

Aion VII

November 30, 2014

Aion VII

Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格


267 “Mater Alchimia” could serve as the name of a whole epoch.
Beginning, roughly, with Christianity, it gave birth in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries to the age of science, only to
perish, unrecognized and misunderstood, and sink from sight in
the stream of the centuries as an age that had been outlived.


But, just as every mother was once a daughter, so too was alchemy.
It owes its real beginnings to the Gnostic systems, which Hippolytus
rightly regarded as philosophic, and which, with the
help of Greek philosophy and the mythologies of the Near and
Middle East, together with Christian dogmatics and Jewish
cabalism, made extremely interesting attempts, from the modern
point of view, to synthetize a unitary vision of the world in
which the physical and the mystical aspects played equal parts.


Had this attempt succeeded, we would not be witnessing today
the curious spectacle of two parallel world-views neither of
which knows, or wishes to know, anything about the other.
Hippolytus was in the enviable position of being able to see
Christian doctrine side by side with its pagan sisters, and similar
comparisons had also been attempted by Justin Martyr.

假如这个企图当时成功,我们今天将不会见证到这个耐人寻味的景象,两个并列的世界观的景象。其中没有一个世界观知道,或希望知道关于另外一个世界观的任何事情。海普利塔斯所处的立场让人羡慕,因为他能够看见基督教的信条,跟它的异教徒的姐妹们相提并论。贾斯丁 马泰尔也曾经企图做这些的比较。

To the honour of Christian thinking it must be said that up till the
time of Kepler there was no lack of praiseworthy attempts to
interpret and understand Nature, in the broadest sense, on the
basis of Christian dogma.


268 These attempts, however, inevitably came to grief for lack
of any adequate knowledge of natural processes. Thus, in the
course of the eighteenth century, there arose that notorious rift
between faith and knowledge.


Faith lacked experience and science
missed out the soul. Instead, science believed fervently in
absolute objectivity and assiduously overlooked the fundamental
difficulty that the real vehicle and begetter of all knowledge is
the psyche, the very thing that scientists knew the least about
for the longest time.


It was regarded as a symptom of chemical
reactions, an epiphenomenon of biological processes in the
brain-cells—indeed, for some time it did not exist at all. Yet all
the while scientists remained totally unaware of the fact that
they were using for their observations a photographic apparatus
of whose nature and structure they knew practically nothing,
and whose very existence many of them were unwilling to admit.


It is only quite recently that they have been obliged to take into
their calculations the objective reality of this psychic factor. Significantly
enough, it is microphysics that has come up against
the psyche in the most tangible and unexpected way. Obviously,
we must disregard the psychology of the unconscious in this connection,
since its working hypothesis consists precisely in the
reality of the psyche. What is significant here is the exact opposite,
namely the psyche’s collision with physics. 1


269 Now for the Gnostics—and this is their real secret—the
psyche existed as a source of knowledge just as much as it did for
the alchemists. Aside from the psychology of the unconscious,
contemporary science and philosophy know only of what is outside,
while faith knows only of the inside, and then only in the
Christian form imparted to it by the passage of the centuries,
beginning with St. Paul and the gospel of St. John. Faith, quite
as much as science with its traditional objectivity, is absolute,
which is why faith and knowledge can no more agree than
Christians can with one another.


27° Our Christian doctrine is a highly differentiated symbol that
expresses the transcendent psychic—the God-image and its properties,
to speak with Dorn. The Creed is a “symbolum.”


This comprises practically everything of importance that can be ascertained
about the manifestations of the psyche in the field of
inner experience, but it does not include Nature, at least not in
any recognizable form.


Consequently, at every period of Christianity
there have been subsidiary currents or undercurrents
that have sought to investigate the empirical aspect of Nature
not only from the outside but also from the inside.


27 1 Although dogma, like mythology in general, expresses the
quintessence of inner experience and thus formulates the operative
principles of the objective psyche, i.e., the collective uncon-
scious, it does so by making use of a language and outlook that
have become alien to our present way of thinking.


The word “dogma” has even acquired a somewhat unpleasant sound and
frequently serves merely to emphasize the rigidity of a prejudice.
For most people living in the West, it has lost its meaning as a
symbol for a virtually unknowable and yet “actual”—i.e., operative—


Even in theological circles any real discussion of
dogma had as good as ceased until the recent papal declarations,
a sign that the symbol has begun to fade, if it is not already


This is a dangerous development for our psychic
health, as we know of no other symbol that better expresses the
world of the unconscious. More and more people then begin
looking round for exotic ideas in the hope of finding a substitute,
for example in India.


This hope is delusory, for though
the Indian symbols formulate the unconscious just as well as
the Christian ones do, they each exemplify their own spiritual
past. The Indian teachings constitute the essence of several
thousand years of experience of Indian life.


Though we can
learn a lot from Indian thought, it can never express the past
that is stored up within us. The premise we start from is and
remains Christianity, which covers anything from eleven to nineteen
centuries of Western life. Before that, there was for most
Western peoples a considerably longer period of polytheism and


In certain parts of Europe Christianity goes back
not much more than five hundred years—a mere sixteen generations.
The last witch was burnt in Europe the year my grandfather
was born, and barbarism with its degradation of human
nature has broken out again in the twentieth century.



个人梦的象征 8

November 30, 2014

个人梦的象征 8

Individual Dream Symbolism in Relation to Alchemy : 359

卡尔 荣格

3. The Symbolism of the Mandala

14. Dream:

The dreamer goes into a chemist’s shop with his father.
Valuable things can be got there quite cheap, above all a
special water. His father tells him about the country the
water comes from. Afterwards he crosses the Rubicon by


The traditional apothecary’s shop, with its carboys and
gallipots, its waters, its lapis divinus and infemalis and its
magisteries, is the last visible remnant of the kitchen paraphernalia
of those alchemists who saw in the donum spiritus
sancti—the precious gift—nothing beyond the chimera of


The ”special water” is literally the aqua nostra
non vulgi. bi It is easy to understand why it is his father
who leads the dreamer to the source of life, since he is
the natural source of the latter’s life. We could say that
the father represents the country or soil from which that
life sprang.


But figuratively speaking, he is the “informing
spirit” who initiates the dreamer into the meaning of life
and explains its secrets according to the teachings of old.
He is a transmitter of the traditional wisdom. But now,
the fatherly pedagogue fulfils this function only in the
dreams of his son, where he appears as the archetypal
father figure, the “wise old man.”


The water of life is easily had: everybody possesses it,
though without knowing its value. “Spernitur a stultis”—it
is despised by the stupid, because they assume that every
good thing is always outside and somewhere else, and that
the source in their own souls is a “nothing but.”


Like the lapis, it is “pretio quoque vilis,” of little price, and therefore,
like the jewel in Spitteler’s Prometheus, it is rejected
by everyone from the high priest and the academicians
down to the very peasants, and “in viam eiectus,” flung out
into the street, where Ahasucrus picks it up and puts it
into his pocket. The treasure has sunk down again into the


But the dreamer has noticed something and with vigorous
determination crosses the Rubicon. He has realized that
the flux and fire of life are not to be underrated and are
absolutely necessary for the achievement of wholeness. But
there is no recrossing the Rubicon.


15. Dream:

Four people are going down a river: the dreamer, his
father, a certain friend, and the unknown woman.
In so far as the “friend” is a definite person well known
to the dreamer, he belongs, like the father, to the conscious
world of the ego. Hence something very important has
happened: in dream 11 the unconscious was three against
one, but now the situation is reversed and it is the dreamer
who is three against one (the latter being the unknown


The unconscious has been depotentiated. The
reason for this is that by “taking the plunge” the dreamer
has connected the upper and the lower regions—that is to
say, he has decided not to live only as a bodiless abstract
being but to accept the body and the world of instinct,
the reality of the problems posed by love and life, and to
act accordingly. *~> This was the Rubicon that was crossed.
Individuation, becoming a self, is not only a spiritual
problem, it is the problem of all life.

无意识已经被除掉生命力。这样的理由是, 凭借「孤注一掷」,作梦者已经连接上边与下边的地区。也就是说,他已经决定不要仅是生活,作为没有身体的抽象的存在。而是要接受身体与本能的世界,爱与生命提出的难题的现实,然后依照这个而行动。这就是被跨越过的鲁宾河。个体化成为自性,不但是精神的难题,它也是所有的生命的难题。


Identification 48

November 30, 2014

Identification 48

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

24.1.62 IX 5

It is in the very syncopes of this ceaselessly turning
articulation of the play of language that we have to locate the
(8) subject in its diverse functions. My illustrations are never
a bad way of adapting a mental eye in which the imaginary plays a
great part. It is for this reason that, even if it is a detour,
I do not think its a bad thing to rapidly sketch out for you a
little remark simply because I find it at this point in my notes.


I have spoken to you more than once, in connection with the
signifier, about the Chinese character, and I am very keen to
dispel for you the idea that its original is an imitative figure.


There is an example of it which I only took because it is the one
which was of most use to me, I took the first of those which are
articulated in these examples, these archaic forms in the work of
Karlgren which is called Grammata Serica, which means exactly
“Chinese signifiers”.

有一个例子,我仅是採用它,因为它对我的用途非常大。我採用在这些例子里被表达的第一个例子。那些过时的形式,在卡格林的著作里,被称为是Grammata Serica。它的意思是「中文的能指」。

The first one that he makes use of in its modern form is the
it is the character Kho which means power. In
the Tch ouen which is an erudite work, precious for us both
because its relatively ancient character and the fact that it is
already very erudite, that is to say well furnished with
interpretations which we may have to come back to. It seems that
we would have good reason to trust the root that the commentator
gives of it which is a very nice one, namely that it is a
question of a schématisation of the shock of the column of
air which it has just expelled in the guttural
occlusive against the obstacle which the back of the
tongue against the palate opposes to it.


This is all following, the more seductive in that, if you open a book on phonetics, you (9) will find an image which is more or less that in order to
express for you the functioning of the occlusive:


And you must admit that it is not a bad thing that it should be
that which was chosen in order to depict the word to see the
possibility, the axial function introduced into the world by the
advent of the subject right in the middle of the real.


The ambiguity is complete. For a very great number of words are
articulated as kho in Chinese, in which this would act for us as
a phonetic, except for the fact that the complete outfit (les
completes) presentifying the subject with its signifying
framework, and this without any ambiguity and in all the
characters, is the representation of the mouth:


Put this sign on top, it is the sign Ka which means
big. It has obviously some relationship with the small human
form, generally deprived of arms. Here, since it is a big person
that is in question, there are arms. This has nothing to do with
what happens when you have added this sign ta to the preceding


Henceforth this is read as i, but this preserves the
trace of an ancient pronunciation of which we have attestations
thanks to the usage of this term in rhymes in the ancient poems,
specifically those of Che King who is one of the most
extraordinary examples of literary misadventure because destiny
made him become the support of all sorts of moralising
lucubrations, to be the foundation of a whole very twisted
teaching of the mandarins on the duties of the sovereign, of the
(10) people and of everybody and anybody, even though what we
have are obviously love songs which have a peasant origin.

因此,这被阅读为 i, 但是这保留我们曾经测试过的古代发音的痕迹。由于这个术语在古代诗里的韵律的用途。明确地说,就是「Che King诗经」的那些诗。他是文学的错误冒险的特殊例子。因为命运让他成为各种的道德化的润色,成为中文普通话的扭曲教学的基础,在统治的责任里,在人们,每个人,任何人的责任。即使我们所拥有的东西,显而易见地,是起于农夫的情歌。

A little experience of Chinese literature – I am not trying to make
you believe that mine is very great, I am not confusing myself
with …………. who, when he makes an allusion to his
experience of China, gives us a paragraph that you can find in
the books of Pere Wieger which are available to everybody.
In any case, others besides myself have lit up this path
specifically Marcel Granet, whose beautiful book on the dances
and legends and the ancient feasts of China you will lose nothing
by opening.

中文文学的一个小经验—我并不尝试让你们相信:我的经验是伟大的。我并没有将我自己混淆跟、、、当他提到他在中国的经验时,他给我一个段落,你们在皮尔 伟基的书里能够找到,那些书,每个人很容易得到。无论如何,除了我自己外,还有其他人们曾经启明这个途径。明确地说,就是马赛尔 格兰尼,他探讨跳舞与传说,以及中国的古代的庆宴的的美丽的书,你们不妨去读看看。

With a little effort you will be able to familiarise
yourself with this really extraordinary dimension which appears
of what one can do with something which reposes on the most
elementary forms of signifying articulation. By chance, in this
tongue, words are monosyllabic: they are superb, invariable,
cubic, you cannot make a mistake in them.


They are identified to
the signifier it has to be said. You have groups of four verses,
each one composed of four syllables, the situation is simple. If
you see them and think that from that one can extract everything
even a metaphysical doctrine which has no relationship with the
original signification, it will begin, for those who have not got
there yet to open your spirit. That is nevertheless the way it
is: for centuries the teaching of morality and of politics was
carried out on the basis of jingles which signify on the whole “I
would really like to have sex with you”, I am not exaggerating at
all, go and see.



Aion 170

November 29, 2014

Aion 170


Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格




263 We see here how Dorn gets round his paradox: no one can
produce anything without an object that is like him. But it is
like him because it comes from the same source. If he wants to
produce the incorrupt medicament, he can only do so in something
that is akin to his own centre, and this is the centre in the
earth and in all creatures. It comes, like his own, from the same
fountainhead, which is God.


Separation into apparently dissimilar
things, such as heaven, the elements, man, etc., was necessary
only for the work of generation. Everything separated must
be united again in the production of the stone, so that the original
state of unity shall be restored.


But, says Dorn, “thou wilt
never make from others the One which thou seekest, except first
there be made one thing of thyself. . . . For so is the will of
God, that the pious shall pursue the pious work which they seek,
and the perfect shall perfect the other on which they were intent.
. . . See therefore that thou goest forth such as thou desirest
the work to be which thou seekest.” 58


264 The union of opposites in the stone is possible only when the
adept has become One himself. The unity of the stone is the
equivalent of individuation, by which man is made one; we
would say that the stone is a projection of the unified self. This
formulation is psychologically correct. It does not, however,
take sufficient account of the fact that the stone is a transcendent


We must therefore emphasize that though the self can
become a symbolic content of consciousness, it is, as a supraordinate
totality, necessarily transcendental as well.


Dorn recognized
the identity of the stone with the transformed man when
he exclaimed: “Transmute yourselves from dead stones into
living philosophical stones!” 59 But he lacked the concept of an
unconscious existence which would have enabled him to express
the identity of the subjective psychic centre and the objective
alchemical centre in a satisfactory formula.


Nevertheless, he
succeeded in explaining the magnetic attraction between the
imagined symbol—the “theoria”—and the “centre” hidden in
matter, or in the interior of the earth or in the North Pole, as
the identity of two extremes. That is why the theoria and the
arcanum in matter are both called Veritas. This truth “shines”
in us, but it is not of us: it “is to be sought not in us, but in the
image of God which is in us.” 60


265 Dorn thus equates the transcendent centre in man with the
God-image. This identification makes it clear why the alchemical
symbols for wholeness apply as much to the arcanum in man as
to the Deity, and why substances like mercury and sulphur, or
the elements fire and water, could refer to God, Christ, and the
Holy Ghost.


Indeed, Dorn goes even further and allows the
predicate of being to this truth, and to this truth alone: “Further,
that we may give a satisfactory definition of the truth, we
say it is, but nothing can be added to it; for what, pray, can be
added to the One, what is lacking to it, or on what can it be supported?
For in truth nothing exists beside that One.” 61 The
only thing that truly exists for him is the transcendental self,
which is identical with God.


266 Dorn was probably the first alchemist to sum up the results
of all the symbolical terms and to state clearly what had been
the impelling motive of alchemy from the very beginning. It is
remarkable that this thinker, who is far more lucid in his formulations
than his successor Jakob Bohme, has remained completely
unknown to historians of philosophy until today.

敦恩很可能是总结所有炼金术术语的这些结果的第一位炼金术师。他清楚地陈述从一开始作为炼金术的驱动的动机的东西。引人注意的是,这位思想家,他的阐释比起他的前辈杰寇 博梅,更加清楚。哲学的历史家直到今天,才完整地认识他。

He thus shares the fate of Hermetic philosophy in general, which,
for those unacquainted with modern psychology, remains a
closed book sealed with seven seals. But this book has to be
opened sometime if we wish to understand the mentality of the
present day; for alchemy is the mother of the essential substance
as well as the concreteness of modern scientific thinking, and not
scholasticism, which was responsible in the main only for the
discipline and training o£ the intellect.



Aion 168

November 29, 2014

Aion 168


Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格




258 The treatise of Rosinus contains a parallel to Morienus: 5S
“This stone is something which is fixed more in thee [than elsewhere],
created of God, and thou art its ore, and it is extracted
from thee, and wheresoever thou art it remains inseparably with
thee. . . .


And as man is made up of four elements, so also is
the stone, and so it is [dug] out of man, and thou art its ore,
namely by working; and from thee it is extracted, that is by division;
and in thee it remains inseparably, namely by knowledge.


[To express it] otherwise, fixed in thee: namely in the Mercurius
of the wise; thou art its ore: that is, it is enclosed in thee and
thou holdest it secretly; and from thee it is extracted when it
is reduced [to its essence] by thee and dissolved; for without thee
it cannot be fulfilled, and without it canst thou not live, and so
the end looks to the beginning, and contrariwise/’ 55


259 This looks like a commentary on Morienus. We learn from
it that the stone is implanted in man by God, that the laborant
is its prima materia, that the extraction corresponds to the socalled
divisio or separatio of the alchemical procedure, and that
through his knowledge of the stone man remains inseparably
bound to the self. The procedure here described could easily be
understood as the realization of an unconscious content.


Fixation in the Mercurius of the wise would then correspond to the
traditional Hermetic knowledge, since Mercurius symbolizes
the Nous; 56 through this knowledge the self, as a content of the
unconscious, is made conscious and “fixed” in the mind. For
without the existence of conscious concepts apperception is, as
wc know, impossible.


This explains numerous neurotic disturbances
which arise from the fact that certain contents are
constellated in the unconscious but cannot be assimilated owing
to the lack of apperceptive concepts that would “grasp” them.


That is why it is so extremely important to tell children fairytales
and legends, and to inculcate religious ideas (dogmas) into
grown-ups, because these things are instrumental symbols with
whose help unconscious contents can be canalized into consciousness,
interpreted, and integrated. Failing this, their energy
flows off into conscious contents which, normally, are not much
emphasized, and intensifies them to pathological proportions.


We then get apparently groundless phobias and obsessionscrazes,
idiosyncrasies, hypochondriac ideas, and intellectual perversions
suitably camouflaged in social, religious, or political


260 The old master saw the alchemical opus as a kind of apocatastasis,
the restoring of an initial state in an “eschatological”
one (“the end looks to the beginning, and contrariwise”). This
is exactly what happens in the individuation process, whether it
take the form of a Christian transformation (“Except ye become
as little children”), or a satori experience in Zen (“show me
your original face”), or a psychological process of development
in which the original propensity to wholeness becomes a conscious


261 For the alchemist it was clear that the “centre,” or what we
would call the self, does not lie in the ego but is outside it, “in
us” yet not “in our mind,” being located rather in that which we
unconsciously are, the “quid” which we still have to recognize.


Today we would call it the unconscious, and we distinguish between
a personal unconscious which enables us to recognize the
shadow and an impersonal unconscious which enables us to
recognize the archetypal symbol of the self. Such a point of view
was inaccessible to the alchemist, and having no idea of the
theory of knowledge, he had to exteriorize his archetype in the
traditional way and lodge it in matter, even though he felt, as
Dorn and others undoubtedly did, that the centre was paradoxically
in man and yet at the same time outside him.


109262 The “incorrupt medicament,” the lapis, says Dorn, can be
found nowhere save in heaven, for heaven “pervades all the elements
with invisible rays meeting together from all parts at the
centre of the earth, and generates and hatches forth all creatures.”
“No man can generate in himself, but [only] in that
which is like him, which is from the same [heaven].” 57




November 28, 2014


梅洛龐蒂(Maurice Merleau-Ponty) 著
龔 卓 軍 譯

Cézanne’s Doubt
It took him one hundred working sessions for a still life, one hundred fifty
sittings for a portrait.


One hundred fifty sittings 一百五十次的坐画姿态

What we call his work was, for him, only the attempt and the approach of his painting.


In September of 1906, at the age of sixty seven—
one month before his death—he wrote: “I was in such a state of mental agitation, in such great confusion that for a time I feared my weak reason would not survive. . . . Now it seems I am better and that I see more
clearly the direction my studies are taking. Will I ever arrive at the goal, so
intensely sought and so long pursued? I am still working from nature, and
it seems to me I am making slow progress.”


Painting was his world and his
mode of existence.


He worked alone, without students, without admiration
from his family, without encouragement from the critics.


He painted on the afternoon of the day his mother died. In 1870 he was painting at
L’Estaque while the police were after him for dodging the draft. And still
he had moments of doubt about this vocation.

母親逝世的當天下午,他在畫畫。一八七○年,列斯塔克(l’Estaque) 地方警方以逃避兵役罪名緝捕他時,他也在畫畫。然而,他仍不時對其繪畫的志業充滿疑惑。

As he grew old, he wondered
whether the novelty of his painting might not come from trouble
with his eyes, whether his whole life had not been based upon an accident
of his body.


The hesitation or muddle-headedness of his contemporaries
equaled this strain and self-doubt.



“The painting of a drunken privy
cleaner,” said a critic in 1905. Even today, C. Mauclair finds Cézanne’s admissions
of powerlessness an argument against him.


Meanwhile, Cézanne’s
paintings have spread throughout the world.


Why so much uncertainty, so
much labor, so many failures, and, suddenly, the greatest success?


Zola, Cézanne’s friend from childhood, was the first to find genius
in him and the first to speak of him as a “genius gone wrong.”


An observer
of Cézanne’s life such as Zola was, more concerned with his character than
with the sense of his painting, might well consider it a manifestation of
ill health.


For as far back as 1852, upon entering the Collège Bourbon at Aix,
Cézanne worried his friends with his fits of temper and depression.

遠溯一八五二年,塞尚在艾克斯(Aix)進入波旁學院(College Bourbon)求學時,就因為忽而暴怒忽而沮喪的性情困擾著他周遭的朋友。

years later, having decided to become an artist, he doubted his talent and
did not dare to ask his father—a hatter and later a banker—to send him
to Paris.


Zola’s letters reproach him for his instability, his weakness, and
his indecision. When finally he came to Paris, he wrote: “The only thing I
have changed is my location: my ennui has followed me.”


He could not
tolerate discussions, because they wore him out and he could never give
his reasoning. His nature was basically anxious.


Thinking that he would
die young, he made his will at the age of forty-two; at forty-six he was for
six months the victim of a violent, tormented, overwhelming passion of
which no one knows the outcome and to which he would never refer.


fifty-one he withdrew to Aix, in order to find the nature best suited to his
genius but where also he returned to the milieu of his childhood, his
mother and his sister.


After the death of his mother, Cézanne turned to
his son for support. “Life is terrifying,” he would often say. Religion, which
he then set about practicing for the first time, began for him in the fear
of life and the fear of death.


“It is fear,” he explained to a friend; “I feel I
will be on earth for another four days—what then? I believe in life after
death, and I don’t want to risk roasting in aeternum.”


Although his religion
later deepened, its original motivation was the need to put his life in order
and be relieved of it.


He became more and more timid, mistrustful, and
sensitive. Occasionally he would visit Paris, but when he ran into friends
he would motion to them from a distance not to approach him.


In 1903,
after his pictures had begun to sell in Paris at twice the price of Monet’s
and when young men like Joachim Gasquet and Émile Bernard came to
see him and ask him questions, he relaxed a little. But his fits of anger continued.

一九○三年,當他的畫作在巴黎開始以莫內(Monet)畫作的兩倍價碼賣出,而加斯奎(Joachim Gasquet)和勃納爾(Emile Bernard)這些年輕人開始來拜訪他之際,他的脾氣緩和了些。不過,他那忽爾發作的暴怒卻絲毫未改。

In Aix a child once hit him as he passed by; after that he could not
bear any contact. One day when Cézanne was quite old, Émile Bernard
steadied him as he stumbled. Cézanne flew into a rage.
He could be heard
striding around his studio and shouting that he wouldn’t let anybody “get
his hooks into me.”


Because of these “hooks” he pushed women who could
have modeled for him out of his studio, priests, whom he called “pests,”
out of his life, and Émile Bernard’s theories out of his mind, when they
became too insistent.


This loss of flexible human contact; this inability to master new situations;
this flight into established habits, in a milieu which presented no
problems; this rigid opposition between theory and practice, between the
“hook” and the freedom of a recluse—all these symptoms permit one to
speak of a morbid constitution and more precisely, as, for example, in the
case of El Greco, of schizothymia.

喪失活絡的人際接觸;沒有面對新情境的能力;遁入一個牢固不化的習慣,對任何事都抱著不成問題的態度;堅決反對理論和實際中的「圈套」,以維持隱遁者的自由--以上所有癥兆,我們都可以用一條病理學的規定來說明,就像葛列果(El Greco)的狀況一樣,這些是精神分裂症(schizophrenia)的病兆。

Milieu 环境
This rigid opposition between theory and practice,理论与实践的强烈对立
between the
the rigid opposition between “hook” and the freedom of a recluse 「圈套」与隐居者的自由的强烈对立
a morbid constitution 病态的生理行为

The notion of painting “from nature”
could be said to arise from the same weakness.


His extremely close attention
to nature and to color, the inhuman character of his paintings (he
said that a face should be painted as an object), his devotion to the visible
world: all of these would then only represent a flight from the human
world, the alienation of his humanity.


These conjectures nevertheless do not give any idea of the positive
sense of his work; one cannot thereby conclude that his painting is a phenomenon
of decadence and of what Nietzsche called “impoverished” life
or that it has nothing to say to the educated person.



Zola’s and Émile
Bernard’s belief in Cézanne’s failure probably arise from their having
put too much emphasis on psychology and their personal knowledge of


It is nonetheless possible that Cézanne conceived a form of art
which, while occasioned by his nervous condition, is valid for everyone.



Left to himself, he was able to look at nature as only a human being knows
how to do it.



(跟前面所说的inhuman character 非人文的特性对照起来,耐人寻味:是谁inhuman?塞尚?还是我们自己?)

The sense of his work cannot be determined from his life.


This sense will not become any clearer in the light of art history—
that is, by considering influences (the Italian school and Tintoretto, Delacroix,
Courbet, and the impressionists), Cézanne’s technique, or even his
own pronouncements on his work.


即使从艺术史的观点 ,也就是,考虑到各种影响 (義大利畫派、丁多瑞多Tintoretto、德拉克瓦Delacroix、辜爾貝Courbet、和印象派畫家),塞尚的技法,或甚至从他对自己作品的论断来看,这个意义并未获得任何澄清。

His first pictures—up to about 1870—are painted fantasies: a rape,
a murder.


to the impressionists, he abandoned the baroque technique, which seeks
first to capture movement, for small dabs placed close together and for
patient hatchings.


which 指的是the baroque technique 巴洛克技法,而非印象派画家,后面的动词seeks是单数动词。

It is thanks to the impressionists, and particularly to Pissarro, that Cézanne later conceived painting not as the incarnation of imagined scenes, the projection of dreams outward, but as the exact study of appearances:
less a work of the studio than a working from nature.

由於受到印象派畫家--特別是畢沙羅 (Pissarro) 的影響,塞尚後來認為繪畫並不是想像場景的具象化、或夢幻外顯的結果,而應是表象的精細研究,繪事不僅止於畫室,更應該根據自然。

He quickly parted ways with the impressionists, however. Impressionism
was trying to capture, in the painting, the very way in which objects
strike our eyes and attack our senses. They are therefore almost always executed in broad strokes and
present the moral physiognomy of the actions rather than their visible aspect.


Impressionism represented
them in the atmosphere through which instantaneous perception gives
them to us, without absolute contours, bound together by light and air.

To capture this envelope of light, one had to exclude siennas, ochres, and
black and use only the seven colors of the spectrum.


In order to represent
the color of objects, it was not enough to put their local tone on the canvas,
that is, the color they take on isolated from their surroundings; one
also had to pay attention to the phenomena of contrast which modify local
colors in nature.


Furthermore, by a sort of reversal, every color we see
in nature elicits the vision of its complement; and these complementaries
heighten one another.


To achieve sunlit colors in a picture which will be
seen in the dim light of apartments, not only must there be a green—if
you are painting grass—but also the complementary red which will make
it vibrate.


Finally, the impressionists break down the local tone itself. One
can generally obtain any color by juxtaposing rather than mixing the colors
which make it up, thereby achieving a more vibrant tone.


The result
of these procedures was that the canvas—which no longer corresponded
point by point to nature—restored a general truth of the impression
through the action of the separate parts upon one another.


But at the same
time, depicting the atmosphere and breaking up the tones submerged
the object and caused it to lose its proper weight.

The composition of
Cézanne’s palette leads one to suppose that he had another aim. Instead
of the seven colors of the spectrum, one finds eighteen colors—six reds,
five yellows, three blues, three greens, and one black.


The use of warm colors
and black shows that Cézanne wants to represent the object, to find it
again behind the atmosphere.


Likewise, he does not break up the tone;
rather, he replaces this technique with graduated mixtures, with a progression
of chromatic nuances across the object, with a modulation of colors
which stays close to the object’s form and to the light it receives.


The suppression
of exact contours in certain cases and giving color priority over
the outline obviously do not have the same sense in Cézanne and in impressionism.


The object is no longer covered by reflections and lost in
its relationships to the air and to other objects: it seems subtly illuminated
from within, light emanates from it, and the result is an impression of solidity
and material substance.


lost 在此是过去分词,与前面的covered 对等,no longer covered and lost

Moreover, Cézanne does not give up making
the warm colors vibrate, but achieves this chromatic sensation through
the use of blue.


One must therefore say that Cézanne wished to return to the object
without abandoning the impressionist aesthetic which takes nature as its


Émile Bernard reminded him that, for the classical artists, painting
demanded outline, composition, and distribution of light.


replied: “They created pictures; we are attempting a piece of nature.”


said of the old masters that they “replaced reality with imagination and by
the abstraction which accompanies it.” Of nature, he said, “the artist must
conform to this perfect work of art.


Everything comes to us from nature;
we exist through it; let us forget everything else.” He stated that he wanted
to turn impressionism into “something solid, like the art in the museums.”

His painting would be a paradox: investigate reality without departing
from sensations, with no other guide than the immediate impression of
nature, without following the contours, with no outline to enclose the
color, with no perspectival or pictorial composition.


This is what Bernard
called Cézanne’s suicide: aiming for reality while denying himself the
means to attain it.


This is the reason for his difficulties and for the distortions
one finds in his pictures between 1870 and 1890. Cups and saucers
on a table seen from the side should be elliptical, but Cézanne paints the
two ends of the ellipse swollen and expanded.


The work table in his portrait
of Gustave Geffroy stretches, contrary to the laws of perspective, into
the lower part of the picture.

在古斯塔夫‧喬弗瑞(Gustave Geoffrey)的肖像畫中,那張工作檯拉得非常長,直伸向此畫的底部,這顯然違反了視點法則。

By departing from the outline, Cézanne
would be handing himself over to the chaos of the sensations. Now, the
sensations would capsize the objects and constantly suggest illusions—for
example, the illusion we have when we move our heads that objects themselves
are moving—if our judgment did not constantly set these appearances straight.

According to Bernard, Cézanne engulfed “the painting in
ignorance and his mind in shadows.”


In fact, one can judge his painting in this way only by letting half of
what he said drop away and only by closing one’s eyes to what he painted.


It is clear from his conversations with Émile Bernard that Cézanne
was always seeking to avoid the ready-made alternatives suggested to him:
the senses versus intelligence; the painter who sees versus the painter who
thinks; nature versus composition; primitivism versus tradition.


“We have
to develop an optics,” Cézanne said, “by which I mean a logical vision—
that is, one with nothing absurd.”


“Are you speaking of our nature?” asked
Bernard. Cézanne: “It has to do with both.” “But aren’t nature and art different?”


“I want to unite them. Art is a personal apperception. I place this
apperception in the sensations and I ask intelligence to organize them
into a work.”1


But even these formulas put too much emphasis on the ordinary
notions of “sensibility” or “sensations” and “intelligence”—which
is why Cézanne could not persuade and this is why he liked to paint better.


Rather than apply to his work dichotomies, which moreover belong
more to the scholarly traditions than to the founders—philosophers or
painters—of these traditions, we would do better to let ourselves be persuaded
to the proper sense of his painting, which is to challenge those dichotomies.


Cézanne did not think he had to choose between sensation
and thought, as if he were deciding between chaos and order. He did not
want to separate the stable things which appear before our gaze and their
fleeting way of appearing.


He wanted to paint matter as it takes on form,
the birth of order through spontaneous organization. He makes a basic
distinction not between “the senses” and “intelligence” but rather between
the spontaneous order of perceived things and the human order of
ideas and sciences.

We perceive things; we agree about them; we are anchored
in them; and it is with “nature” as our base that we construct the


Cézanne wanted to paint this primordial world, and this is why
his pictures give us the impression of nature at its origin, while photographs
of the same landscapes suggest man’s works, conveniences, and
imminent presence.

塞尚想要畫出這個原初世界(primordial world),他的畫似乎因此將自然表現得素淨純粹,相對於同樣的風景照片來看,照片本身提示了人工、便捷而急迫的呈現。

Cézanne never wished to “paint like a savage.” He
wanted to put intelligence, ideas, sciences, perspective, and tradition back
in touch with the world of nature which they were intended to comprehend.
He wished, as he said, to confront the sciences with the nature
“from which they came.”


By remaining faithful to the phenomena in his investigations of perspective,
Cézanne discovered what recent psychologists have come to formulate:
the lived perspective, that of our perception, is not a geometric
or photographic one.

由於塞尚一直忠實於現象本身,在他對視點的探究中,他發現了晚近心理學家所發掘出來的--生活的視點(lived perspective)。這是我們日常知覺的真正狀態,它不同於幾何式和攝影式的視點。

In perception, the objects that are near appear
smaller, those far away larger, than they do in a photograph, as we see in
the cinema when an approaching train gets bigger much faster than a
real train would under the same circumstances.


To say that a circle seen
obliquely is seen as an ellipse is to substitute for our actual perception the
schema of what we would have to see if we were cameras. In fact, we see a
form which oscillates around the ellipse without being an ellipse.




In a portrait of Mme Cézanne, the border of the wallpaper on one side of her
body does not form a straight line with that on the other: and indeed it is
known that if a line passes beneath a wide strip of paper, the two visible
segments appear dislocated.



Gustave Geffroy’s table stretches into the bottom
of the picture, and indeed, when our eye runs over a large surface,
the images it successively receives are taken from different points of view,
and the whole surface is warped.



It is true that I freeze these distortions
in repainting them on the canvas; I stop the spontaneous movement in
which they pile up in perception and tend toward the geometric perspective.



This is also what happens with colors. Pink upon gray paper colors
the background green.


Colors 在此是动词,作「改变颜色」解释,而非名词「颜色」,

Academic painting shows the background as gray,
assuming that the picture will produce the same effect of contrast as the
real object.



Impressionist painting uses green in the background in order
to achieve a contrast as brilliant as that of objects in nature. Doesn’t this
falsify the color relationship?


It would if it stopped there, but the painter’s
task is to modify all the other colors in the picture so that they take away
from the green background its characteristics of a real color.



Similarly, it is Cézanne’s genius that when the overall composition of the picture is
seen globally, perspectival distortions are no longer visible in their own
right but rather contribute, as they do in natural vision, to the impression
of an emerging order, an object in the act of appearing, organizing itself
before our eyes.



In the same way, the contour of objects, conceived as a
line encircling the objects, belongs not to the visible world, but to geometry.



belongs 的主词是the contour of objects,而不是a line

If one outlines the contour of an apple with a continuous line, one
turns the contour into a thing, whereas the contour is rather the ideal
limit toward which the sides of the apple recede in depth. To outline no
contour would be to deprive the objects of their identity.



To outline just
one contour sacrifices depth—that is, the dimensions which give us the
thing, not as spread out before us, but as full of reserves and as an inexhaustible


That is why Cézanne follows the swelling of the object in
a colored modulation, and outlines several contours in blue lines. Referred
from one to the other, the gaze captures a contour that emerges from
among them all, just as it does in perception.



Nothing could be less arbitrary
than these famous distortions which, moreover, Cézanne abandoned
in his last period, after 1890, when he no longer filled his canvases with
colors and when he gave up the closely woven texture of his still lifes.


The drawing must therefore result from the colors, if one wants the
world to be rendered in its thickness.


For the world is a mass without gaps,
an organism of colors across which the receding perspective, the contours,
the angles, and the curves are set up as lines of force; the spatial
frame is constituted by vibrating.


“The drawing and the color are no
longer distinct. Gradually as you paint, you draw; the more the colors harmonize,
the more the drawing becomes precise. . . . When the color is at
its richest, the form is at its fullest.”


Cézanne does not try to use color to
suggest the tactile sensations which would give form and depth. These distinctions
between touch and sight are unknown in primordial perception.
It is only as a result of a science of the human body that we finally learn to
distinguish between our senses.


The lived object is not rediscovered or
constructed on the basis of the data of the senses; rather, it presents itself
to us from the start as the center from which the data radiate.


We see the
depth, the smoothness, the softness, the hardness of objects; Cézanne
even claimed that we see their odor.


If the painter wants to express the
world, the arrangement of his colors must bear within this arrangement
this indivisible Whole, or else his painting will only be an allusion to the
things and will not give them in the imperious unity, the presence, the insurpassable
fullness which is for us the definition of the real.


That is why
each brushstroke must satisfy an infinite number of conditions; that is why
Cézanne sometimes meditated for an hour before putting down a certain
stroke, for, as Bernard said, each stroke must “contain the air, the light,
the object, the composition, the character, the drawing, and the style.” Expressing
what exists is an endless task.


Nor did Cézanne neglect the physiognomy of objects and faces: he
simply wanted to capture it emerging from the color.


Painting a face “as
an object” is not to strip it of its “thought.” “I agree that the painter must
interpret it,” said Cézanne, “the painter is not an imbecile.”


But this interpretation
must not be a thought separated from vision. “If I paint all the
little blues and all the little browns, I make it gaze as he gazes.



Who gives
a damn if they have any idea how one can sadden a mouth or make a cheek
smile by wedding a shaded green to a red.”



The mind is seen and read in
the gazes, which are, however, only colored wholes. Other minds are given
to us only as incarnate, as belonging to faces and gestures.



It serves no
purpose to oppose here the distinctions between the soul and the body,
thought and vision, since Cézanne returns to just that primordial experience
out of which these notions are pulled and which gives them to us as



The painter who thinks and seeks the expression first misses
the mystery—renewed every time we gaze at someone—of a person’s appearing
in nature.



In The Wild Ass’s Skin Balzac describes a “tablecloth
white as a layer of fresh-fallen snow, upon which the place settings rose
symmetrically, crowned with blond rolls.”

巴爾札克(Balzac)在『憂鬱人生』(La Peau de chagrin)中描述,「桌布白得如同一層新雪,桌面上的擺設對稱地捲起,像鑲上了一些起伏縐摺。」塞尚說:


“All through my youth,” said
Cézanne, “I wanted to paint that, that tablecloth of fresh-fallen snow. . . . Now I know that one must only want to paint ‘rose, symmetrically, the place settings’ and ‘blond rolls.’

“All through youth, ” said Cézanne, “I wanted to paint that, that tablecloth of new snow… Now I know that one must will only to paint the place-settings rising symmetrically and the blond rolls.



If I painted ‘crowned’ I’m done for, you
understand? But if I really balance and shade my place settings and rolls
as they are in nature, you can be sure the crowns, the snow and the whole
shebang will be there.”


If I paint
‘crowned’ I’ve had it, you understand? But if I really balance and shade my place settings and rolls as they are in nature, then you can be sure that the crowns, the snow, and all the excitement will be there too. ”


We live in the midst of man-made objects, among tools, in houses,
streets, cities, and most of the time we see them only through the human
actions which put them to use. We become used to thinking that all of
this exists necessarily and unshakably


. Cézanne’s painting suspends these
habits and reveals the base of inhuman nature upon which man has installed



This is why Cézanne’s people are strange, as if viewed by a
creature of another species. Nature itself is stripped of the attributes
which make it ready for animistic communions: there is no wind in the
landscape, no movement on the Lac d’Annecy, the frozen objects hesitate
as at the beginning of the world. It is an unfamiliar world in which one
is uncomfortable and which forbids all human effusiveness.

這也就是為何塞尚筆下的人顯得奇怪,好像是不同族群生物眼光下的產物;自然本身被剝卻了所有可用以聯結定形的屬性,地景裡沒有風,安西湖(Lac d’Annecy)面沒有任何波瀾,凝固的對象就如同在世界之始初般的猶豫不安。這樣一個不熟悉的世界,令人覺得不適,也禁止任何人文的情思。



Animism—the doctrine that all natural objects and the universe itself have souls 所有的自然的物体与宇宙本身具有灵魂的信念
Communion—The sharing of personal thoughts and feelings 个人的思想与感觉到分享沟通

If one looks at the work of other painters after seeing Cézanne’s paintings, one feels
somehow relaxed, just as conversations resumed after a period of mourning
mask the absolute change and restore to the survivors their solidity.



But indeed only a human being is capable of such a vision, which penetrates
right to the root of things beneath constituted humanity. All indications
are that animals cannot gaze at [regarder] things, cannot penetrate
them in expectation of nothing but the truth.



Gaze at (regarder)英译gaze at 用斜体字,又括弧附法文,强调「凝视」的意涵不仅是一般的注视或观看。而是,仅是企求真相地注视,才叫凝视。这是具有其他意图性的动物或人的眼睛无法做到的。

Émile Bernard’s statement
that a realistic painter is only an ape is therefore precisely the opposite of
the truth, and one sees how Cézanne was able to revive the classical definition
of art: man added to nature.



added to nature不是过去式,而是过去分词片语,修饰man,整句的定义是Art is man who is added to nature的省略。

Cézanne’s painting denies neither science nor tradition. He went to
the Louvre every day when he was in Paris. He believed that one must
learn how to paint and that the geometric study of planes and forms is necessary.


He inquired about the geological structure of his landscapes.
These abstract relationships must be operative in the act of painting, but
ruled over by the visible world. Anatomy and design are present in each
stroke of his brush just as the rules of the game underlie each stroke of a
tennis match.



What motivates the painter’s movement can never be perspective
alone or geometry alone or the laws governing the breakdown
of colors, or, for that matter, any particular knowledge.



Motivating all the
movements from which a picture gradually emerges there can be only one
motif: the landscape in its totality and in its absolute fullness, precisely
what Cézanne called a “motif.”



He would start by discovering the geological
foundation of the landscape; then, according to Mme Cézanne, he
would halt and gaze, eyes dilated; he “germinated” with the countryside.



What was at issue, all science forgotten, was to recapture, through these sciences,
the constitution of the landscape as an emerging organism.



Science– Ability to produce solutions in some problem domain 智慧,解决难题的能力
Science– A particular branch of scientific knowledge 科学

All the partial views that the gaze catches sight of must be welded together; all
that the eye’s versatility disperses must be reunited; one must, as Gasquet
put it, “join the wandering hands of nature.”



“A minute of the world is
going by which must be painted in its full reality.



” The meditation was suddenly complete: “I have a hold on my motif,” Cézanne would say, and
he explained that the landscape had to be tackled neither too high nor
too low, caught alive in a net which would let nothing escape.



Then he
attacked his picture from all sides at once, using patches of color to surround
his original charcoal sketch of the geological skeleton.



The image saturated itself, composed itself, drew itself, became balanced; it came to
maturity all at once. “The landscape thinks itself in me,” he said, “and I
am its consciousness.” Nothing could be farther from naturalism than this
intuitive science.



Science– Ability to produce solutions in some problem domain 在某个困难的领域,产生解决的能力
Gay science –joyful wisdom 欢愉的智慧

Far from—by no means 绝非是,根本就不是
Nothing could be farther from my intention than to offend you.
=I have no intention at all of offending you.

Art is not imitation, nor is it something manufactured according to the wishes of instinct or good taste.

Art is not imitation, nor is it something manufactured according to the wishes of instinct or good taste.



It is a process of expression. Just as the function of words is to name—that is, to grasp the nature of what appears to us in a confused way and to place it before us as a recognizable object—so it is up to the painter, said Gasquet, to “objectify,” “project,” and “arrest.”

It is a process of expression.
Just as words name—that is, grasp in its nature and place before us
as a recognizable object what appears in a confused way—the painter, said
Gasquet, “objectifies,” “projects,” and “fixes.”



Just as words do not resemble
what they designate, a picture is not a trompe l’oeil.

Words do not took like the things they designate; and a picture is not a trompe-l’oeil.


Trompe-l’œil (French for “deceive the eye”, pronounced [tʁɔ̃p lœj]) is an art technique that uses realistic imagery to create the optical illusion that the depicted objects exist in three dimensions.


Cezanne, in his own words, “writes in painting what had never yet been painted, and turns it into painting once and for all.”We, forgetting the viscous, equivocal appearances, go through them straight to the things they present.

Cézanne, in his own words, “writes in painting what is not yet painted, and turns it into painting
absolutely.” We forget the viscous, equivocal appearances, and by means
of them we go straight to the things they present.



The painter recaptures and converts into visible objects what would, without him, remain walled up in the separate life of each consciousness: the vibration of appearances which is the cradle of things. Only
one emotion is possible for this painter—the feeling of strangeness— and only one lyricism—that of the continual rebirth of existence.

The painter recaptures and converts into visible objects what would, without him, remain
closed up in the separate life of each consciousness: the vibration of appearances
which is the cradle of things. Only one emotion is possible for
this painter—the feeling of strangeness—and only one lyricism—that of
the continual rebirth of existence.



Identification 47

November 28, 2014

Identification 47

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

17.1.62 VIII 1
Seminar 8: Wednesday 17 January 1962

24.1.62 IX 3

It must be the same for the signifier, and this is what justifies
the definition of the signifier that I give you, its distinction
from the sign: the fact is that if the sign represents something
for someone, the signifier is articulated otherwise, it
represents the subject for another signifier. This you will see
sufficiently confirmed at every step provided you do not let go
of the solid hand-rail. And if it represents the subject in
this way, how is it done?


Let us come back to our starting point, to our sign, to the
elective point at which we can grasp it as representing something
for someone in a trace. Let us start from the track in order to
track down our little affair.


A footprint, a track, Friday’s footprint on Robinson’s island:
emotion, the heart racing before this trace. All this teaches us
nothing, even if from this racing heart there results a whole lot
of stamping around this trace; this could happen on coming across
(6) any animal tracks but if coming on it unexpectedly I find the
trace of something whose trace someone has tried to efface, or if
even I no longer find the trace of this effort, if I have come
back because I know – I am not any more proud of it because of
that – that I left the trace, that I find that, without any
correlative which allows this effacing to be attached to a
general effacing of the traits of the configuration, one has well
and truly effaced the trace as such, then I am sure that I am
dealing with a real subject.


Notice that, in this disappearance
of the trace, what the subject is trying to make disappear is his
own passage as a subject. The disappearance is redoubled by the
disappearance that is aimed at which is that of the act itself of
making disappear.


24.1.62 IX 4
This is not a bad trait for us to recognise in it the passage of
the subject when it is a question of his relationship to the
signifier, in the measure that you already know that everything
that I am teaching you about the structure of the subject, as we
are trying to articulate it starting from this relationship to
the signifier, converges towards the emergence of these moments
of fading linked properly speaking to this eclipse-like pulsation
of what only appears in order to disappear and reappears in order
to disappear anew, which is the mark of the subject as such.


Having said this, if the trace is effaced, the subject surrounds
its place with a ring (cerne) something which thenceforward
concerns him; the mapping out of the place where he found the
trace, well then, here you have the birth of the signifier. This
implies a whole process involving the return of the last phase
onto the first, that there cannot be any articulation of a
signifier without these three phases. Once the signifier is
(7) constituted, there are necessarily two others before. A
signifier is a mark, a trace, a writing, but it cannot be read
alone. Two signifiers is a bloomer, a cock-and-bull story.


Three signifiers is the return of what is involved, namely of the
first. It is when the pas (step) marked in the trace is
transformed in the vocalisation of whoever is reading it into pas
(not) that this pas, on condition that one forgets that it means
the step, can serve at first in what is called the phonetics of
writing, to represent pas, and at the same time to transform the
trace of pas eventually into the pas of the trace.


I think that you can hear in passing the same ambiguity that I
made use of when I spoke to you, in connection with the
witticism, of the pas de sens, playing on the ambiguity of the
word sens (meaning) with this leap, this breakthrough which takes
hold of us us when we start to have fun when we do not know why a
word makes us laugh, this subtle transformation, this rejected
stone which being taken up again becomes the cornerstone (pierre
d’angle), and I would be quite happy to make a play on words with
the TvR of the formula of the circle because moreover it is in it


– I announced it to you the other day in introducing the minus 1
– that we will see that there is measured, as I might say, the
vectorial angle of the subject with respect to the thread of the
signifying chain.


It is here that we are suspended and it is here that we should
habituate ourselves a little to displacing ourselves, on a
substitution through which that which has a meaning is
transformed into an equivocation and finds its meaning again.



Aion 166

November 27, 2014

Aion 166


Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格




256 We find the crucial importance of self-knowledge for the
alchemical process of transformation expressed most clearly in
Dorn, who lived in the second half of the sixteenth century.


The idea itself is much older and goes back to Morienus Romanus
(7th-8th cent.), in the saying which he wrote on the rim of the
Hermetic vessel: “All those who have all things with them have
no need of outside aid.” 46

这个观念本身更加古老,回溯到摩瑞那思 罗马那思(7到8世纪)。在他所书写的辞说,探讨密封船隻的边缘时:「身上拥有这一切的那些人们,他们并不需要外在的帮助。」

He is not referring to the possession
of all the necessary chemical substances; it is far more a moral
matter, as the text makes clear.47 God, says Morienus, made the
World out of four unequal elements and set man as the “greater
ornament” between them: “This thing is extracted from thee,
for thou art its ore; in thee they find it, and, to speak more
plainly, from thee they take it; and when thou hast experienced
this, the love and desire for it will be increased in thee.” 4S


This “thing” is the lapis, and Morienus says that it contains the four
elements and is likened to the cosmos and its structure. The
procedure for making the stone “cannot be performed with
hands,” 49 for it is a “human attitude” (dispositio hominum).
This alone accomplishes the “changing of the natures.” The
transformation is brought about by the coniunctio, which forms
the essence of the work.50


257 The “Rosinus ad Sarratantam Episcopum”—which, if not
altogether Arabic in origin, is one of the oldest texts in Arabic
style—cites Magus Philosophus: 51 “This stone is below thee, as
to obedience; above thee, as to dominion; therefore from thee,
as to knowledge; about thee, as to equals.” 52

Rosinus ad Sarratantam Episcopum的起源并不完全是阿拉伯文,它是阿拉伯文的风格的其中最古老的文本—玛格思的哲学引述说:「这个石头在你们之下,作为顺服;在你们之上,作为统辖。因此,从你们那里,作为知识;关于你们,作为相等。」

The passage is
somewhat obscure. Nevertheless, it can be elicited that the stone
stands in an undoubted psychic relationship to man: the adept
can expect obedience from it, but on the other hand the stone
exercises dominion over him. Since the stone is a matter of
“knowledge” or science, it springs from man.


But it is outside
him, in his surroundings, among his “equals,” i.e., those of like
mind. This description fits the paradoxical situation of the self,
as its symbolism shows. It is the smallest of the small, easily overlooked
and pushed aside.


Indeed, it is in need of help and must
be perceived, protected, and as it were built up by the conscious
mind, just as if it did not exist at all and were called into being
only through man’s care and devotion. As against this, we know
from experience that it had long been there and is older than
the ego, and that it is actually the secret spiritus rector of our


The self does not become conscious by itself, but has always
been taught, if at all, through a tradition of knowing (the
purusha Iatman teaching, for instance). Since it stands for the
essence of individuation, and individuation is impossible without
a relationship to one’s environment, it is found among those
of like mind with whom individual relations can be established.


The self, moreover, is an archetype that invariably expresses a
situation within which the ego is contained. Therefore, like
every archetype, the self cannot be localized in an individual
ego-consciousness, but acts like a circumambient atmosphere to
which no definite limits can be set, either in space or in time.
(Hence the synchronistic phenomena so often associated with
activated archetypes.)



个人梦的象征 7

November 27, 2014

个人梦的象征 7

Individual Dream Symbolism in Relation to Alchemy : 359

卡尔 荣格

3. The Symbolism of the Mandala

12. Dream:

The dreamer finds himself with his father, mother, and
sister in a very dangerous situation on the platform of a


Once more the dreamer forms a quatcrnity with the
other dream figures. He has fallen right back into childhood,
a time when we are still a long way from wholeness.
Wholeness is represented by the family, and its components
are still projected upon the members of the family and
personified by them.


But this state is dangerous for the
adult because regressive: it denotes a splitting of personality
which primitive man experiences as the perilous “loss
of soul.” In the break-up the personal components that have
been integrated with such pains are once more sucked into
the outside world.


The individual loses his guilt and exchanges
it for infantile innocence; once more he can blame
the wicked father for this and the unloving mother
that, and all the time he is caught in this inescapable causal
nexus like a fly in a spider’s web, without noticing that he
has lost his moral freedom. 77


But no matter how much
parents and grandparents may have sinned against the
child, the man who is really adult will accept these sins as
his own condition which has to be reckoned with. Only
a fool is interested in other people’s guilt, since he cannot
alter it. The wise man learns only from his own guilt. He
will ask himself: Who am I that all this should happen
to me? To find the answer to this fateful question he will
look into his own heart.


As in the previous dream the vehicle was an airplane, so
in this it is a tram. The type of vehicle in a dream illustrates
the kind of movement or the manner in which the dreamer
moves forward in time—in other words, how he lives his
psychic life, whether individually or collectively, whether
on his own or on borrowed means, whether spontaneously
or mechanically.


In the airplane he is flown by an unknown
pilot; i.e., he is borne along on intuitions emanating
from the unconscious. (The mistake is that the “mirror” is
used too much to steer by.) But in this dream he is in a
collective vehicle, a tram, which anybody can ride in; i.e.,
he moves or behaves just like everybody else. All the same
he is again one of four, which means that he is in both
vehicles on account of his unconscious striving for wholeness.


13. Dream:

In the sea there lies a treasure. To reach it, he has to
dive through a narrow opening. This is dangerous, but
down below he will find a companion. The dreamer takes
the plunge into the dark and discovers a beautiful garden
in the depths, symmetrically laid out, with a fountain in the


The “treasure hard to attain” lies hidden in the ocean of
the unconscious, and only the brave can reach it. I conjecture
that the treasure is also the “companion,” the one
who goes through life at our side—in all probability a close
analogy to the lonely ego who finds a mate in the self, for
at first the self is the strange non-ego.

This is the theme of
the magical travelling companion, of whom I will give three
famous examples: the disciples on the road to Emmaus,
Krishna and Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita, Moses and
El-Khidr in Sura 18 of the Koran.78 I conjecture further
that the treasure in the sea, the companion, and the garden
with the fountain are all one and the same thing: the self.


For the garden is another temenos, and the fountain is the
source of “living water” mentioned in John 7 : 38, which
the Moses of the Koran also sought and found, and beside
it El-Khidr,79 “one of Our servants whom We had endowed
with Our grace and wisdom” (Sura 18).


And the legend
has it that the ground round about El-Khidr blossomed
with spring flowers, although it was desert. In Islam, the
plan of the temenos with the fountain developed under
the influence of early Christian architecture into the court
of the mosque with the ritual wash-house in the centre
(e.g., Ahmed ibn-Tulun in Cairo).

根据传说,环绕阿-基德尔的土地盛开著春天的花,虽然那沙漠。在回教,具有喷泉的圣地的计划,在早期的基督教的建筑的影响之下发展成为回教寺庙的庭院,在中央有仪式的洗刷屋(请参照开罗的艾哈迈德 伊本 突伦)。

We see much the same
thing in our Western cloisters with the fountain in the
garden. This is also the “rose garden of the philosophers,”
which we know from the treatises on alchemy and from
many beautiful engravings. “The Dweller in the House”
(cf. commentary to dream 10) is the “companion.”


The centre and the circle, here represented by fountain and
garden, are analogues of the lapis, which is among other
things a living being. In the Rosarium the lapis –
“Protege me, protegam te. Largire mihi ius ineum, ut te
adiuvem” (Protect me and I will protect you. Give me my
due that I may help you).


Here the lapis is nothing less
than a good friend and helper who helps those that help
him, and this points to a compensator) relationship. (1
would call to mind what was said in the commentary to
dream 10, more particularly the Monogenes-/fl/?/5,-self parallel.)


The crash to earth thus leads into the depths of the sea,
into the unconscious, and the dreamer reaches the shelter
of the temenos as a protection against the splintering of
personality caused by his regression to childhood. The
situation is rather like that of dream 4 and vision 5 in the
first series, where the magic circle warded off the lure of
the unconscious and its plurality of female forms. (The
dangers of temptation approach Poliphilo in much the same
way at the beginning of his nckyia.)


The source of life is, like El-Khidr, a good companion,
though it is not without its dangers, as Moses of old found
to his cost, according to the Koran. It is the symbol of the
life force that eternally renews itself and of the clock that
never runs down.


An uncanonical saying of our Lord runs:
“He who is near unto me is near unto the fire.” 81 Just
as this esoteric Christ is a source of fire—probably not
without reference to the rrvp äd £diov of Heraclitus—so the
alchemical philosophers conceive their aqua nostra to be
ignis (fire). 82


The source means not only the flow of life
but its warmth, indeed its heat, the secret of passion, whose
synonyms are always fiery. 83 The all-dissolving aqua nostra
is an essential ingredient in the production of the lapis.


But the source is underground and therefore the way lea
underneath: only down below can we find the fiery source
of life. These depths constitute the natural history of man,
his causal link with the world of instinct. Unless this link
be rediscovered no lapis and no self can come into being.



Identification 48

November 26, 2014

Identification 48

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

17.1.62 VIII 1
Seminar 8: Wednesday 17 January 1962

24.1.62 IX 2

Let us now take up again our pilgrim’s staff, let us take up
again where we are, where I left you the last time, namely on the
idea that negation, if it is indeed somewhere at the heart of our
problem which is that of the subject, is not already,
immediately, even if one looks at its phenomenology, the simplest
thing to handle. It is in many places, and then it happens all
(3) the time that it slips through your fingers. You saw an
example of it the last time, for a moment in connection with the
“non nullus homo non mendax”, you saw me putting in this non,
taking it out and putting it back again; you see this every day.


It was pointed out to me in the interval that in the discourses
of the one that someone, in a note, my poor dear friend
Merleau-Ponty, called the Great Man who governs us, in a
discourse that the aforesaid great man pronounced one hears “on
ne peut pas ne pas croire que les choses se passeront sans maF
(one cannot not think that things will happen without harm). The
exegesis on this: what does he mean? The interesting thing, is
not so much what he means, it is that obviously we understand
very well precisely what he means and that if we analyse it
logically we see that he is saying the opposite.

在这期间,有人跟我指出:在这个一的这些词说里,某个人,请注意,我亲爱的朋友,梅洛 庞蒂,称统治我们的这位伟人,在一个词说里,上述被宣告的伟人,我们听见「我们无法认为,事情将会发生,没有伤害」。对于这点的紧急状况是:他是什么意思?有趣的事是,并不是他是什么意思。显而易见地,我们确实清楚地理解他是什么意思,假如我们逻辑地分析它,我们看见,他正在说相反的事情。

This is a very pretty formula which you ceaselessly slips into
when you say to someone “vous n’etes pas sans ignorer” (you
cannot fail to be ignorant of [to realise]). It is not you who
are wrong, it is the relationship of the subject to the signifier
which emerges from time to time. It is not simply tiny
paradoxes, slips, that I am pinpointing here in passing. We will
rediscover these formulae at the appropriate bend in the road.


And I think I am giving you the key to why “you cannot fail to
realise”, only means what you mean. In order that you may find
your bearings here, I can tell you that it is indeed by exploring
it that we will find the proper weight, the proper incline of
this balance on which I place before you the relationship of the
neurotic to the phallic object when I tell you in order to catch
this relationship, one must say: “il n’est pas sans 1’avoir” (he
is not without having it). This obviously does not mean that he
has it. If he had it, the question would not arise.


(4) In order to get there, let us begin from a little reminder
about the phenomenology of our neurotic concerning the point that
we are at in it: his relationship to the signifier. For the
last number of times I have begun to make you grasp the sort of
writing, of original writing there is in the business of the
signifier. It must really have all the same occurred to you
that it is with this that the obsessed subject is dealing all the
time: ungeschen machen, to undo something. What does that mean,
what does that involve?


Obviously, it can be seen in his behaviour: what he wants to
abolish is what the annalist writes throughout his history, the
annalist – with two n’s – that he has in himself. It is the
annals of the affair that he would like to efface, to scratch
out, to abolish. From what angle does Lady Macbeth’s discourse
reach us when she tells us that all the waters of the sea would
not wash away this little spot if not through some echo which
guides us to the heart of our subject?


Only the point is, in
washing away the signifier, since it is clear that this is what
is involved – in his way of behaving, in his way of effacing, in
his way of scratching out what is written, what is much less
clear to us, because we know a little bit more about it than the
others, is what he is trying to obtain by doing that.


This is why it is instructive to continue along the road that we are on,
where I am leading you as regards how a signifier as such comes
about. If this has such a relationship with the foundations of
the subject, if no other subject is thinkable than this natural
something, x, in as much as it is marked by the signifier, there
must all the same be some source or other for that. We are not
going to content ourselves with this sort of blindfolded truth.


(5) It is quite clear that we must find the subject at the origin
of the signifier itself; “in order to pull a rabbit out of a
hat”, this is how I began to spread scandal in my properly
analytic remarks: the poor dear man who is now dead and who was
so touching in his fragility, was literally exasperated by this
reminder which I so persistently gave – because at that time it
was a useful formula – that “in order to pull a rabbit out of a
hat you must have put it in beforehand”.