Franz of Asissi and Assignment
- Details
- Parent Category: Analytische Psychokatharsis
- Category: Artikel
- Hits: 730
However, Lane’s work seems to bear two problems. It is only – as he says himself – ‘sociological-political’. The entire area of the ‘mystic-spiritual’ can’t be accommodated in science, and Lane can only attempt to do so (and that, only in an approach) by taking two different standpoints: working scientifically as a sociologist and for the other area (‘spiritual’), just having faith, being religious, or having a creed.
This is similar to Descartes’ approach, namely of being a thinking person, because God exists. 1 At this point it is easier for me as a psychoanalyst, and still to remain more scientific: I am in the position of describing the entirety of the ‘spiritual’ as a psychological complex, whereby I can deliver a weighty argument for a ‘successor’ for whom external ‘legitimacy’ (now in quotes) is not important.
After all, ‘legitimacy’ in psychoanalysis is composed exactly of the form of attention and Other’s ‘assignment’, thus congruent to a ‘successor’ together with his smaller group of fellows in Surat Shabd Yoga.
These leave external establishment up to the ‘officials’, and seemingly in a true religious, sacrificial manner. Actually, only attention and the Other’s ‘assignment’ (SHINES/SPEAKS) is of interest, since the rest of the specter can be neglected – from a scientific standpoint.
History offers many examples (with which Lane occupied himself) for such an Other’s ‘assignment’. We can find indications of it in all religious founders, such as with Moses in his encounter with the burning bush of thorns, though more explicit on Sinai mountain.
Augustus, troubled with religious doubts, hears a child in the neighboring yard saying: “Take it and read it!” He lunges to the bible lying before him, opens it and, of course, finds a fitting place that convinces him in faith.
But it wasn’t the child who had called him to read. Augustinus, in his despair, had gathered his own previously shaped thoughts from the child’s voice, from its ‘sound’. In this case, the Other was not God, but rather a SHINES / SPEAKS cascading from a highly tensile and inner attention to an assignment, a constellation of first signifiers within himself, the Other per se, Augustinus’ own Otherness. 2 ‘Legitimacy’, written on a piece of paper, wasn’t necessary. The place in the Bible only played the role of an ideal object of transference.
Sufi mystic Maulana Rumi heard the voice of his teacher, Shamaz Tabrez, Franz of Asissi cries: ‘The church is in flames!’ which, as above, meant that he had the assignment to save it. S. Freud received the assignment to describe the essence of dream interpretation (and with that, psychoanalysis) in the interpretation of his dream of ‘Irma’s injection’.
Hundreds of such examples can be listed to evidence that the SHINES / SPEAKS in its highest form evolves to such an Other’s ‘assignment’, and which almost resounds synchronously on the outside and in the inside.
While the accent for the Other’s ‘assignment’ is laid into the SHINES, it is now put into the SPEAKS. Both receive their true direction through the ‘a-‘, and acquire their true significance in their collaboration. However, this significance is too incorrect when emphasized by the items of yoga-systems.
