Aspects of the Imaginal (Part 2)

Okay, so just to recap a little, briefly: we said we could notice, acknowledge, think about there, a spectrum of uses of the imagination, or ways that the imagination is used. And so, for example, there is the unskilful, unhelpful use of the imagination in papañca, and then there are many kinds of good, useful, important ways the imagination can be used, that are actually part of developing practice. We can differentiate different ways the imagination can be used.

And we can discern a little bit more finely and understand what we mean by 'imaginal' -- the imaginal imagination, if you like. And in doing that, in pointing to some of those features, attributes, aspects of the imaginal, this will be useful not just for the understanding and the logos and the usefulness of the conceptual framework, but also in terms of igniting practice. These discernments can function (I'll explain how later) as keys to ignite and deepen imaginal practice.

On that spectrum, we talked about, for example, the use of imagination with mindfulness -- what's often not there when there's papañca, of course. So mindful imagination, for example, in mettā practice, compassion practice -- we're deliberately and mindfully using the imagination for skilful ends. And we can have mindful, embodied imagination, and healing imagination -- again, with mindfulness, with body awareness. All kinds of possibilities there: light shining onto the body, or in the body where there's illness or injury, or all kinds of possibilities.

But these examples -- the mindful imagination in mettā or compassion, embodied imagination, healing imagination -- they are not necessarily imaginal. They may be very, very helpful, important, necessary parts of practice, very useful, very beneficial, but they're not necessarily imaginal. Often they are not. They may be imaginal. In other words, it's possible to be doing, using the imagination in a compassion practice, and it becomes imaginal or it is imaginal. And the same with healing images -- it's both imaginal and healing. So they may or may not be what we're calling imaginal. Actually, even a daydream -- we can catch a daydream, and then there's mindfulness there, and we stay with it and start relating to it in certain ways, and it becomes imaginal. So these may or may not be imaginal.

And I sort of rattled very quickly through a list of attributes, of aspects, of the characteristics of what we're calling the imaginal. That list was not intended to be exhaustive, and it certainly wasn't exhaustive. Nor was it intended to be too rigid, or too neatly delineating between these different elements or aspects of the imaginal. So not too rigid, not too neat and sharp, these distinctions between these elements. And they're certainly not an exhaustive list. So, for example -- and we talked about 'imaginal' -- you could sum up what the imaginal is as more about the way of looking than about the object, per se. But that way of looking includes some degree of lessening of fabrication in the way of looking, that it's fabricating perception less, even if that's very, very slight.

So I'm actually mentioning some elements now that I didn't mention in the list yesterday, and mentioning them now. You could say that they're implicit in the list, but actually we could draw them out and kind of add to the list. In this relationship that makes up a part of the imaginal, the actual relationship between subject and object, the poise, the stance of that relationship with the imaginal includes a sense of duty -- a duty to what is perceived, a duty of the self to what is perceived. I've talked, I think, quite a bit about this on several retreats in the past few years. Duty is another element of this constellation of the imaginal; trust as well. And again, that's something that I've highlighted several times on past retreats dealing with imaginal practice. Duty and trust.

Now, if someone's coming to this new, and they just hear those words, "Duty and trust to something in your imagination? It sounds completely bonkers. Certainly very dangerous. What, I have a duty? I'm going to follow all the voices in my head and do what they say? And I just blindly trust them?" So I'm not going to go into it right now, but if you're, again, familiar with the material that we've covered, you'll know that it's much more nuanced than that, much more subtle than that, and doesn't come without caveats and certain qualifications.

But duty and trust are elements we could add to the list, as is -- and again, related to the relationship that makes up the imaginal, that constitutes the imaginal -- the intention for being with this image, and for exploring this imaginal image, needs to be not primarily for the sake of self, in the ways that we usually understand self -- not primarily for my psychological process, for my spiritual development, for my personal growth, for my empowerment. All these things may well accrue with imaginal practice. But something happens when those intentions are the primary intentions. And strictly speaking -- again, we're talking about a spectrum here -- we're not really in the fully, authentically, or genuinely imaginal there. So there's something, again, about the relationship: duty, trust, and the intention is not primarily for self. Again, that's also something I've talked, I think, quite a bit about in one of the last retreats. I think it was Re-enchanting the Cosmos. I'm not sure.

So not an exhaustive list, not a too rigid list, not so neatly, sharply cut up between the elements. But most of these elements will apply to so-called (I wish I had a better word) intrapsychic images, imaginal images, and the perception of a material other, a material object or other person, or the world, or the self -- an imaginal perception of that: this world that we move in, that we agree on, seen imaginally. So this list applies to both, because again, the way we have been and still want to use that word 'imaginal' means more than just intrapsychic, more than just, you know, I close my eyes and something appears in my mind's eye, etc., or I hear something, or whatever it is. And as I said, we'll come back to this, but a better term, a more helpful term for some people to really make that aspect clear, that it's not just intrapsychic, is this 'sensing with soul.' We'll return to that.

Now, before we elaborate further some of these elements that I've touched on in this -- if we even call it a list, some of these constituent aspects of the imaginal constellation -- before we amplify them a little bit, and fill them out, and say a bit more about them, and also how they might be used as keys or, if you like, ignition points in practice, let's just touch base a little bit about intrapsychic images, and just say a few things about practising with them.

A number of people have said to me over the last few years, "I don't get images. Oh, but I don't get images. It sounds really interesting, but I don't get images." So again, this is also something I've talked about in the past; I can't quite remember where. I think it might be in the talks entitled "Opening, Tuning, and Relating to the Imaginal" or something, which is in the retreat Path of the Imaginal. I don't know how many talks there are; two or three, perhaps. I think there are quite a few instructions in there for this kind of thing, and obviously scattered elsewhere. Someone else may know better than I do.

But if we just briefly review some of those possible approaches to kind of open the gates a little bit to the images, or stimulate the imaginative faculty, at least, towards images and the imaginal. And again, just rattling through some possibilities, because we're really reviewing briefly.

(1) There's the possibility of samādhi, some degree of samādhi, dipping into that. However or whatever ways work for you, dipping into that. And again, I mean by samādhi this whole body harmonization and alignment of the energies, etc., in the well-being. Dipping into some samādhi, to whatever degree, and then kind of just coming out a little bit, and slightly relaxing the sort of intense focus, if you like, or grip on that sense of well-being that's the object of the samādhi, and just relaxing that a little bit, and sort of just hanging out in that space, where there's a relative degree of samādhi, but it's more relaxed. That can be a very fertile ground or space for images to arise in.

(2) Very similarly, some kind of emptiness practice -- and again, whatever you know, and whatever depth you've sort of developed that. Working with that, with the emptiness, and then, again, just backing off, taking the foot off the accelerator, the gas pedal, a little bit, slightly relaxing in that space that has opened up. So both of these, with the samādhi and the emptiness, really what's happened is we've kind of decreased the fabrication of perception, of self and objects, and then kind of loosened the mind just a little bit. So those are two options.

(3) Another is actually to recall a dream figure or a dream scene that has touched you or felt potent in some way. Often it's easiest right after the dream, or pretty soon after the dream -- say, in the morning or something -- when it's still alive, and the soul-resonances are still kind of accessible when you recall the dream figure. And taking up the dream figure as an object of meditation, or entering into a meditative exploration of relationship with that dream figure.

(4) Or it might be a previous imaginal figure, something that has ignited for you and felt fertile as an imaginal image in the past. And absolutely, you can just deliberately bring back that image and work with it again. Reconnect in that relationship. See what else needs to happen, or just find yourself again in the same kind of territory. Maybe something different wants to happen. So that's another two possibilities: recalling a dream figure, or a previous imaginal figure that has worked for you, and deliberately reincarnating it.

(5) There are, of course, a whole host of deliberate meditations on pre-prescribed imaginal figures, often from -- some of you have Vajrayāna backgrounds, and it might be Tārā or Avalokiteśvara, many sort of tantric deities, or could be non-Buddhist, depending on your background, whatever. They're actually prescribed: this is a standard meditation on this figure, and then we enter into. And there are differences between the way we're approaching things and sort of a more, let's say, "standardly taught" Vajrayāna approach.

(6) It could also be a character from history, or from literature, a novel, or a film that, again, has touched you, has sparked and grabbed your soul, moved your soul. Again, I've spoken in the past -- Nelson Mandela, or John Coltrane. I mean, there are many for me. And some purely fictional characters there are potent as images. So that's, again, a very, very beautiful way in.

(7) It could be an actual living person that you know or know of: a friend, a teacher, you know, something else. Can be even family, someone in your family who is alive as image for you. Someone was telling me of her grandchildren, and the delight there, and the eros there, and how they came alive as imaginal figures there. So someone who you know, who is alive as image, as imaginal image for you. They're already alive, and then you take them, even though they might not be present with you in the room at that time, you bring them, you elicit them, you conjure them in the consciousness and meditate on them as an imaginal figure.

(8) I'm pretty sure I shared a certain technique which was useful to me for quite a while: it's actually imagining, deliberately, myself descending a staircase -- oftentimes it would be a stone or a spiral staircase -- down, down into a kind of cell. It was more like a kind of prison cell. And then waiting there in the dark. And oftentimes different images would appear in that cell -- very beautiful, very fertile. Or perhaps beneath the foliage of a tree -- big tree or little tree -- a beautiful tree, and sitting or standing under the leaves, and the dappled sunlight in the shade there, warm or cool or whatever it is. And in that space, that enchanted space, images can enter or arise, or certain encounters can take place, etc.

(9) And again, really, really, really not to overlook the possibility that often, when the emotions are quite alive -- either in a difficult way, when there's a difficult emotion, when we're struggling with something, or in a lovely way, when there's some very beautiful emotion -- there's the energy in the emotionality that can constitute an image. And I just have to hang out, open to, be with, find ways of being with that emotion, difficult or lovely, in ways that can give birth to images. So I'm hanging out there, open to, connected with, intimate with, with the energy body, etc., and sensitive to and caring for and receptive to what arises out of that kind of vortex of the emotions, and what arises as image, or may arise as image. A really important possibility. [18:51]

(10) And then we can also, for example, deliberately imagine the body in a certain way, or with regard to the body. So I can deliberately play with imagining my body as a body of light, perhaps a certain colour, or a body of fire, or fire emanating from my body, or -- as Catherine did a beautiful guided meditation on the last retreat -- the body as the beloved other, and then entering into that body as beloved other, with all the senses and all the sensitivity and receptivity. So there are all kinds of possibilities, and I really encourage you to try some of these if it feels like you're one of those people who says that "I don't get images."

Now, I'd like to actually give you an example of a very unremarkable image to make the point that -- you know, because sometimes people say, "Oh, I don't get very interesting images," or "Rob, you describe your images, and they're really intense and far out and kind of amazing and da-da-da." I've tried on the past retreats to deliberately give both kind of far-out images, if you like, or kind of intense-sounding images on the one hand, and on the other hand, really not far out, very kind of ordinary-sounding images, to really emphasize the fact that, in a way, the remarkability or unremarkability of images is really not that important. It's kind of irrelevant. It may impress your friends if it's something remarkable, but in itself, it doesn't mean much at all.

So not too long ago -- this is an example of an unremarkable image -- I was sitting in meditation, and a visual image came up. It was fairly vivid as an image, but it was really unremarkable and very limited in scope. And the visual image was of a black suit coat, like kind of what a businessman might wear, a sort of overcoat on a suit -- a black suit coat or overcoat, whatever they're called. And it was just its lapels. It wasn't even the whole coat! [laughs] It was just the lapels and the white shirt underneath, with a kind of dark tie there.

And so it was just that for a while. And of course, initially one thinks, "Well, that's not very interesting." And it wasn't like there was a particularly great upsurge of soul-resonance or emotion. We were just hanging out with it. Hang out. Not too quick to judge. Just hang out. Just be open, be sensitive, be delicate.

So as I stayed with this, it was almost like I get more of a sense of the man who was wearing this very standard sort Western attire of a certain kind of style, I guess. I get a sense of him. I don't really see him that much, per se, but I just get a sense of him, and he's a kind of a research scientist. And in his inside pocket to the coat, he has papers. And they contain a theory. He's travelling around with these papers and studying and contemplating this theory on his travels. Sometimes he's alone, and sometimes he's moving around -- it's probably, I don't know, some kind of Western country in Europe, and fairly modern, you know, sometime in the, let's say, nineteenth or twentieth centuries -- and he's sometimes alone, and sometimes he meets with others who are kind of similar to him to discuss and share and study these papers, this text together. So there's a very small kind of group of guys bound together by this intense focus and passionate involvement and devotion to this study.

So all this is a kind of sense I get. It's not like I really see all this happening, and there's a whole, like, watching a film of him going and meeting all these guys. It's sort of visual, but certainly not a dramatic visual in any intense way. It's more just a sense of what he is, and what he does, and what he's about, and his story. And I also get the sense, it's not even that they think this theory represents or even seeks the truth, like "This is the truth now. This is the theory of the world," or whatever it is, in some kind of simple way. There's something about this theory that's as much a creation, a sort of 'as if,' or an art, and there's also something kind of religious or spiritual, if you like, about it for them.

So it's a curious kind of blend. It's sort of scientific, and sort of artistic creation, and sort of religious, and all that. And that goes for their relationship with it: it's a kind of religious, spiritual thing. It's an art. It's all of that. It's a research. There are not very many of these people in the world. And it's not secret, what they're doing -- it's not like some super-confidential thing -- but they don't really speak or share much about it, or about their devotion and passion. They don't really speak much about that with those who are not interested. And most people are not interested, so they don't really talk about it with most people, basically. But their focus and their devotion to this exploration, this study, and this sharing together, it gives their lives a kind of profound sense of alignment and rootedness, and a kind of steadiness of depth -- and to the extent that something is more important to them than their individual fate, their individual life or death.

And again, none of this is very dramatically conveyed in the image. It's just a kind of intuition I have about what is going on there with this man and these people. [25:23] I am also, during this image, kind of struck by the fact that, "Okay, these are white men." They're all white men in suits. [laughs] They're kind of conservatively dressed. I don't know -- is it, like, the thirties or forties or fifties? So that kind of strikes me, and I'm not sure how I feel about that, but that's the deal.

I am reminded, at the same time: there are kind of echoes of, you know, like, ancient or medieval mystical, esoteric texts, shared among small and often disparate groups of initiates or seekers, and carried on journeys by them, travelling members of this group or collective or whatever it is. And the texts are carried and communicated to each other -- you know, before the printing press, before pressing 'send' on an email, and all that; before all of that. And sometimes it's paper. Sometimes it's a sort of paper-bound leaflet, kind of booklet thing. Sometimes it's a dark hardback book. It's not so important.

So the reason I'm saying all that is, it doesn't sound very interesting. I imagine it doesn't sound very interesting. It was a visual image, but there's a lot that wasn't visual in it. It was more like an intuitive sense of who they were and what was going on there. Visually, it wasn't that detailed. It wasn't that rich or complex visually. And the effect on the energy body was definitely not dramatic. You know, sometimes it can be really dramatic, the sense of alignment or release or energization that comes into the energy body with an image that really resonates with your soul. So it really wasn't dramatic, but it was there. There was an effect on the energy body. I can't remember, actually, but I can't tell or decide: was I in the image as one of them, or was I kind of outside, just watching them, and in a kind of soul-relationship with them?

So, very unremarkable, probably not very interesting if one tells one's friends such an image, but imaginal nevertheless. Why? Because of the soul-resonances it had for me, which were quite subtle -- again, not dramatic, not fireworks, not shooting flames and all that business -- the soul-resonances and the kind of reciprocal, infinite echoing and mirroring of the image and the imaginal characters with currents of my life, currents of my soul. Some of you will obviously recognize that in the image. But the point is, images don't need to be dramatic, intense, vivid visually, or remarkable, unusual, far out, etc., to be imaginal.

On the other hand, we can have very remarkable, vivid, intense and dramatic images that are not imaginal, yeah? So here's an example of one like that. I'm sitting in meditation, and suddenly a snake appears. And it's very vivid, a very vivid visual image, and kind of very intense. Its presence is very intense, right there, like its head or its hood, like a cobra, is right kind of face to face with me. But I can't quite relate to it somehow. It actually doesn't feel imaginal. What's not there? A sense of beauty, a sense of meaningfulness, a sense of dimensionality, divinity. These are not obvious. Nor is my energy body kind of signalling a soulmaking engagement.

So I'm a little bit puzzled, but really struck by the vividness. I sort of ask it -- but not necessarily as a whole formal question -- I'm trying to get a sense, you know, what does it want? "What do you want?" Or in relationship to it, "What do you want?" Again, that doesn't need to be a formal question. Sometimes that can be a little too clunky as a sort of technique. And the snake said something like, "To burn you," or "To burn through you." It wants to burn me or to burn through me, which means to hollow me out through its fire breath. It breathes fire, the snake, which it then instantaneously does. So that's a really dramatic, intense thing.

Suddenly this vivid image, and it wants to burn through me, and then it just does that, and I kind of disappear. So there you have a pretty remarkable, very vivid visually, intense, dramatic [image]. There's even talking going on, all of which can sound really impressive. But it wasn't imaginal.

Another aspect that was missing there was love, and also trust. Now, what happened over a little time -- I think it took a few sessions -- was, I started playing with a few elements. This is the kind of thing we'll come back to later and amplify a little bit. I started playing with a few elements, or kind of gently allowing the possibility, or looking for a few elements -- like love, like trust -- or introducing them a little bit. And also, aware of the dependent arising of the image. [31:10] So we've talked about this before. When I introduce just a little bit of trust, the image actually is shaped by that trust. So an imaginal image is always a dependent arising. We're not overlooking that fundamental Dharma insight.

So it was only then that it began -- still it took a little time to -- I won't go into what happened right now, but it became more imaginal. I didn't trust it. It did this thing with its fire breath, and disappeared me. It said, "I want to burn you or burn through you," and I sort of said, "Why?" And it said, "So you can live forever." And I was very suspicious. It's like, that's a very strange-sounding thing. And something about it, I didn't trust -- actually, quite a number of things about it. I really didn't trust what was going on there. There wasn't that full trust there. But as I was saying, it wasn't imaginal at that point. It didn't have the beauty, the meaningfulness, the dimensionality, divinity, etc., love, all of that, despite the vividness and intensity and all that, remarkability of it. But in time, with practice, actually, it did become imaginal, opened up, and it was actually quite fertile.

So again, I'm repeating things I've said before, but it's important. It seems important because of how often I hear people say things which make me think, "Oh, they haven't quite grasped that aspect or this aspect of what's important here." An image, in our sense, despite the way we tend to hear that word in our language, is not necessarily visual. Any of the senses could be primary, not just the sight. Could be the hearing, or the kinaesthetic sense, or touch, or smell, taste, whatever. Or something we can't even quite put our finger on "How is it that I'm sensing this?" But an imaginal image is not necessarily visual.

When we're practising (and again, I'm trying to address someone who says, "I don't get images"), oftentimes, what happens is a person dismisses what comes up as a potential image, if you like. They dismiss it too quickly. So I could've easily dismissed that image of that suit lapel -- you know, the lapels of the suit with the tie. It's like, it really wasn't that interesting. It hardly registered as being interesting at all. But really, don't dismiss too quickly, because something that appears insignificant or appears like, "Oh, I just made that up" -- don't worry about whether you think your ego has made it up, or whether it feels like it's not interesting, or it's insignificant, or it's just the tail end of a daydream, or whatever. Don't dismiss too quickly. Stay with it a little bit. And see what can be worked with, what happens when you hang out, when you come into a different kind of relationship with it. [34:47]

So we have to be patient, both in a session, if we're trying work with imaginal practice, and also over time, with the development of this practice over time. Really, what we're talking about is, with 'imaginal' -- again, it's more a way of paying attention and being with that constitutes the imaginal. And that, if you like, allows something that might seem insignificant, uninteresting, a total mental fabrication of some element of me that is not even that profound or interesting -- it's the way of paying attention to and being with that oftentimes is the most important to allow that germ, that seed, to become something imaginal, to gain that dimensionality, and that beauty, and that meaningfulness, and all of that, and the echoing.

I think I've said this before. I've definitely said it to some individuals, who were quite surprised when I said it. But I, I don't think -- I am not a natural. I don't naturally have like a super, you know, imaginative faculty that just churns out images and all that. I don't consider that the case at all for myself. I'm not a natural. Some people really are: a lot of images come very easily to them. That's not me. But what I can be, and what I was in the initial stages of developing this -- and I still very much feel that I'm developing this, that I'm learning, that I'm expanding -- what I can be, and what I was, rather than being a natural, was I can be patient. I can be dedicated. I can be curious. I can experiment and play. And I can notice, "Oh, that's interesting. When I experiment like this, that happens. Ah, that's interesting!" And I can ponder.

So bringing those qualities to bear, something gradually -- it really took some time, and it's still very much developing for me -- something begins to develop, to accrue. Something starts to come together. A facility starts to emerge, and get founded, and flower, blossom, and unfold, and take you places. So it may well be, and if I think back for myself, it was the case that I did use certain, if you like, 'techniques' that I ran through briefly before, at first -- this descending a staircase to a cell and waiting there, etc., all these things, recalling a dream figure, all of that. I did use that at first, and you might need to at first, if you're one of these people that says, "I feel something in me calling when I hear about these or read about these practices, but I just don't seem to get any images."

So go ahead. Use some techniques at first, no matter what James Hillman said about that. I would judge it by the results rather than being suspicious of your ego or suspicious of technique. Techniques, at first, might be helpful. What we're looking for is the soulmaking. We use the soulmaking as the indicator: "Now I sense that I'm on the right track. I can smell it. I can feel the eros, etc. I feel the resonances." But techniques at first, and then, in time, it becomes more just a mode of being, if you like. The imaginal is opened by the mode of being that we just move in and out of with kind of less fuss and big deal. It's something that we just kind of glide in and out of in our lives. It becomes more of an art rather than a technique. It's more a matter of attunement, receptivity, flexibility, play, discovery, all of that.

But sometimes we need the techniques at first. Some people need -- like myself -- need the techniques at first, or different approaches that you might discover for yourself, to kind of get into the territory a little bit, and then develop it. Even if they're not (we'll go back to this thing) 'fully' imaginal or 'genuinely' imaginal, as we said before, it's like, gets you into the territory. And then you can start working with that, as we'll fill out more as we go on through this first group of talks. [39:31]

So sometimes, you know, we might be trying too hard to kind of get an image or receive an image. And maybe what's needed is, we just need a little more sensitivity and attention, without pressure, sensitivity and attention to, perhaps, a pain, or a lack, or a confusion we're feeling. And we do that with the energy body, or just paying attention to the energy body, and just dwelling in the energy body, as we've emphasized on the retreats. Just hanging out there is really, really, really, really good practice. Even if no image comes, just this skill and facility and familiarity with the energy body -- so, so helpful, in so many ways, and for so many practices.

And sometimes we're trying too hard to get an image. Just let it go. Let that whole attempt go, and just go into some samādhi to just, you know, develop the well-being, nurture the well-being in the energy body, whatever way you know how. Or some emptiness practices, if you know those. Anyway, as I've mentioned in the past, we want to alternate. No one's going to be doing imaginal practice all day long. The balance will be off there. So we want to move in and out of other practices which really put down images, let them go quiet, let them fade, come into something simpler -- samādhi, some emptiness, some basic mindfulness practice, etc.

Maybe sometimes what we need to do when it's like, "Oh, I'm trying too hard for images" -- just loosen the mind and let it drift for a while. Yes, just let it drift. Then, just with a light mindfulness, just let the mind kind of drift for a while. And sometimes out of that, an image emerges. And maybe sometimes we need to stop 'meditating,' you know, and realize or kind of notice, an imaginal image is sometimes already existing for us in our lives, at times, in how we see our lives, or again, the persons in our lives, or certain persons in our life, at times, or our self, or our endeavours, or activities, or ... It's already there, the image or the fantasies that run through our life. I don't need meditation to find them. They're already in my life. All I need a certain kind of understanding and a certain kind of awareness to notice what they are. Where there's inspiration, there's fantasy, there's image. Where there's love, where there's dedication, there's fantasy, there's image.

And these, when we start -- some of us not so much in the formal meditation; I pick up on them outside of the formal meditation. Then I can maybe get a sense of what they are, and take them, if I want to, into the formal meditation. And you -- here, now -- can also be seen imaginally. Not something other. You, here, now, can become image, can become imaginal image. So for example, even the image of oneself humbly, reverently waiting for an image, and maybe even slightly frustrated. And then, it's the way of relating to that, the way of seeing that, that itself -- the self, sitting here, waiting, whatever it is, walking up and down -- becomes image. The self practising becomes image.

Or the inquiry, your inquiry, your dedication in asking a question, your aliveness, your longing to know, to open, to understand -- this, too, can become image. There's nothing different, but what is going on? Just seeing differently becomes imaginal image.

Or the conversation with a teacher or with a fellow practitioner, the very conversation becomes image, or the memory of the conversation becomes image. It's almost like realizing something about it, or seeing it in a certain way, opening to certain aspects of it that we might have not allowed or not caught the scent of, if you like.

Even yourself, myself, confused or having difficulties on the path, but still earnest in one's attempts, in one's dedication, in one's efforts -- that, too, can become image. This confusion, this difficulty that the self is experiencing, the self that is experiencing that difficulty, but still showing up -- that, too, can become beautiful poetry, an image, an imaginal image of meaningfulness and depth and divinity and all of that. [45:08]

So an image can be -- nothing's actually appearing different. The image of the body -- it just doesn't appear as blue light, or this or that, or with flames shooting out or anything else. It's the body as it usually appears. It doesn't appear differently, but it's sensed, if you like, in relation with or surrendered to or given to, let's say, divinity. So there are all these possibilities. In other words, the self, another, an object, the world, our eros -- all this can, each of these can become imaginal without something different being introduced as 'the image.'

So we don't need, necessarily, something like a pink rabbit suddenly appearing to the mind and spewing forth profound and pithy and bizarre Zen utterances. This, here, now, very ordinary-looking to one view, and quite fathomless, and pregnant with meaning and with beauty and with poetry to another view. Nothing -- no different object, if you like, is in the consciousness or made to be the image or introduced as image.

When there is humility, and the softening or opening of the heart, when there's even just a little less fabrication, when there's a certain looseness and openness of the perception and the perceptual grasping, if you like, where there's a delicacy of sensitivity, where there's the whole energy body awareness -- all these together, and other factors, they support the opening to the imaginal.

So it's less about 'getting' an image than something in the stance of the being, in the mode of the being, in the way of looking, in the relationship with what is here, now, in the material world. Certain factors, certain elements/constituents come into that, and they, together, support the opening to the imaginal, the opening of the mundus imaginalis, the world of the imaginal. This, here, now is image or becomes imaginal, can be imaginal when related to in certain ways.