The
Italian Roberto Assagioli
(1888-1974)
was the first Western psychologist to seriously incorporate religion
and
spirituality into an overall view of the human psyche. When we look at
his
predecessors in the field of psycho-analysis, Freud was downright
contemptuous
about religion. He considered all forms of
religion
and spirituality to
be a regression into childlike states of consciousness. For Freud, the
highest
and most healthiest state the psyche could ever attain, was a strong
rational
and full grown consciousness, presided over by a realistic ego, that
was
able to
integrate
and regulate as many aspects from the conscious and the unconscious as
possible.
Everything irrational had to be avoided or at least scrutinised and
given
its place by the mind. The unconscious drives had to be canalised. The
ego
had to be a mediator between the rules and regulations of the superego
(the
sum total of all internalised commandments and advises you have ever
learned)
and the demands of the Id (the unconscious and all its drives).
Religion
and spirituality were low forms of consciousness, which had there place
and function in the psychological world of the child, but had to be
left
behind in reaching maturity.
Freud's student, the Swiss Karl-Gustav Jung, disagreed with the old master. He was more positive about the role religion played in the human psyche. For he discovered that deep down in the collective unconscious of man there were symbols at work which he called 'archetypes'. These symbols were unconscious images of certain psychological realities, charged with tremendous psychodynamic energy, like the image of the archetypical Mother, who would always look after you, or eg. the White Horse, as a symbol of freedom. Some of these symbols were of a religious nature, like the Guardian Angel or the Son of God, the Saviour.
Jung made it his lifetime work to study these archetypical symbols and thereby unravel the secrets of the unconscious. He showed us with a wealth of material that we could find these archetypes at work in myths and stories all over the world. Also in our dreams could we discover the workings
of these symbols.
These archetypes had meaning
to the individual psyche and could be studied for the purpose of
diagnosis
and used in therapy.
For Jung contended that the archetypes had the power to integrate the different psychological functions, both of the conscious and the unconscious. They were like batteries filled with high energy, able to ignite the psyche into lofty aspirations, high goals and images of a better human being, of a better world. Especially religious archetypes, like the hero, the avatar, the incarnate god, or the saint, to name only a few, had the power to harmonise and stabilise the psyche. They seemed to be the images of the Self, the higher part of the psyche.
So Jung was more positive about the role religion and spirituality played in the life of the psyche. He did not reduce all religious feeling and thought to be expressions of lower, immature drives in the unconscious. But, as Ken Wilber ea. has convincingly shown, Jung in the end did not do spirituality much of a favour. He was not able to give spirituality and religion a well deserved and highly esteemed place in psychology. For he did not make a clear distinction between archetypes of the higher, spiritual realms (supra conscious and transpersonal facets of the psyche) and archetypes of lower, mythological (infra conscious and infra personal) origin, that sometimes even originated from the very beginning of the evolution of consciousness. He treated them as if they had no hierarchical values. For not all archetypes and psychological symbols are spiritual and of higher value by nature. Freud was indeed right in labelling some religious feelings as primitive and childlike, eg. images produced by the lower magical layers of our (sub)consciousness.
For what psychology until Jung failed to offer us was an overall map of the spectrum of consciousness, that gave credit to all aspects of the human psyche, including the religious and the spiritual. In order for this overall map to be accurate and in accord with all psychological data it also had to be in one way or another hierarchical, ie. fields of higher and lower value had to be delineated. For we needed desperately to make distinctions between one (religious) feeling and another, between one archetype and another, in order to understand the different levels of integration the different archetypes offered our psyche. In other words we needed a scientific map that could give us a detailed survey of the different meanings and values each psychological phenomenon had.
Roberto Assagioli was the first scientist in psychology to give us such an overall map. His view of the human psyche is here presented. This view offers us a more accurate view of consciousness than both the systems of Freud and Jung. In the system of Freud 1, 2 and 3 taken together formed the
Id
and the Superego, both being irrational
and unconscious, and 4 the field of consciousness, with 5, its agent,
the
Ego. But Freud never spoke about both 3 and 6. He placed the field of 4
more up high in consciousness, as he considered the Ego within its
field
of consciousness the highest form of evolution. Jung spoke about 6 but
did
not clearly differentiate between 1, 2 or 3.
Let's get into
details about
Assagioli's
map of the human psyche.
1. the lower (infra) unconsciousness
In this part of our unconscious psyche all our unconscious drives and instincts are stored. Much of what unconsciously motivates our acting and thinking has its ground here. This is also the place where all our repressed thoughts and feelings are being put away, far remote from our field of consciousness, that we can't be bothered in the waking state by fears, griefs and anxieties. Or to put it negatively, this is the place where all mental pathologies have their roots. This is 'evil territory' for most people, truly a 'dark ground' and a 'hellish abyss'. When the nervous system is very tensed and ill, this is the place from where neuroses, phobia's and psychoses enter consciousness.
2. the middle unconsciousness
This is the part of the unconscious we have access to during our waking state. It is a kind of 'waiting room' for things we've recently experienced. Here we unconsciously elaborate and develop much of our thoughts and feelings, that solutions or insights might later on enter our field of consciousness. It's some sort of an intermediate state between waking and sleeping.
3. the higher unconsciousness
This is the field from where all our higher feelings and thoughts enter consciousness, like artistic or scientific intuition and inspiration. All our noble ethical feelings, like altruistic love or self sacrifice, derive from this higher unconsciousness. It's also the place of genius and higher spiritual forms, like ecstasy and the power of enlightenment. Here the hidden psychic energies are enormous and can not only extol the psyche but can also disrupt and disintegrate its functions by its sheer power. This is a field in consciousness that is not accessible, or only rarely, for most people.
4. the field of consciousness
This part of our personality is accessible to us during the waking state: 'a never ending stream of sensations, images, thoughts, feelings, desires and impulses that we can observe, analyse and judge.'
5. the conscious self or ego
This is designated by the black dot in the diagram. It's the centre of our consciousness from where we regulate, observe and judge all content of our consciousness. It can be compared to a 'helmsman' or 'a charioteer' in steering and controlling everything that is going on in our consciousness. It is the definite name of a person, the feeling of 'I-ness'. It gives the impression that it is something permanent amid the fleeting content of consciousness (though this is only seemingly the case). Freud gave it the central place in his psychology, because of its great power to regulate and integrate. But it is also the mechanism that represses and makes unconscious. So in a sense the ego is also responsible for keeping much of our psychic functions and content unconscious.
6. the higher Self
When we are asleep, hypnotised or numbed by narcotics, our self, or conscious I, seems to be totally lost
and
gone.
But when we awake and come to our senses, we regain our consciousness
again.
So there must be 'a Self behind the I' that keeps our consciousness
alive,
when we can not control it. For otherwise we would die every time we
had
fallen asleep or had become intoxicated. It is also responsible for
keeping
alive all our involuntary functions, both biological and psychological.
For can we start or stop breathing?
So it must be inferred that the ground of our feeling of 'I-ness' is something higher. Assagioli states that this Self is something permanent and that It is not afflicted by the daily stream of our consciousness, nor by the physical process of our body, but that it can be felt and experienced as the Source of our consciousness. Kant called it the noumenal ego to distinguish this higher Self from the empirical ego. The ego seems to be some kind of an image of this higher Self.
The concept of the higher Self is an important one in the psychology of Assagioli, because he wanted psychology to be a science that could integrate all the different functions of the human psyche into a harmonious whole. He contended that of all the fields in consciousness the Self had the highest potentials to bring about this harmony. He wanted in therapy to build up the whole structure of the personality around this concept of the higher Self and use all its potentials in unifying individual consciousness. He wanted to synthesise the different psychological functions, after the ground for integration was laid by a thorough analysis, with the aid of methods and techniques developed by Freud and his successors. For Assagioli also believed with Freud that the ego and its field of consciousness were very important in making integration possible. But a true synthesis was brought about when we also made use of all the energies of the higher Self. That was his major objective and that's the reason he called his new psychology psychosynthesis.
7. the collective unconsciousness
In the diagram consciousness seems to be isolated and cut off from the field around it by a marked line. This is only done for the convenience of representation. For in fact there is a constant exchange going on between the world inside individual consciousness and consciousness surrounding it (much like the cell inside a body is continuously 'osmoting' with the world outside). Our consciousness is not isolated but relates to past, present and future consciousness working in our world, both in man and outside. This overall consciousness can be termed the collective unconsciousness, because most people are not conscious of the fact that they are embedded in this larger field of consciousness.
We must give Assagioli the credit for introducing the concept of the higher Self into western psychology. He deserves our gratefulness in opening up psychology to all sorts of investigations into the higher, and afterwards called 'transpersonal', realms of consciousness. Assagioli was the pioneer who laid the foundation for future explorers of the human psyche, like Ken Wilber and all his colleagues in the transpersonal psychology of today. He is sometimes blamed for not stating his sources. For Assagioli based his psychosynthesis on esoteric psychology and the work of Alice Bailey, a theosophical scholar, in particular. But we can see now why he was so reluctant to point out the Eastern sources of his psychosynthesis. The scientific world of his days was not ripe to acknowledge the deep wisdom of esoteric traditions and was very sceptical about 'everything higher'. So he chose to frame his findings about the Self in Western, 'scientific', vocabulary. This prudence made his writings more acceptable in academic circles. He was wise in doing so.
His method of psychosynthesis is a very thorough one. He started therapy with focusing the attention of the patient on field 4, the field of consciousness, because that was for the average person the closest at hand. With strengthening this field of consciousness and in particular the ego as the controller, the next steps would give more results. So he tried to fortify the conscious will of the ego. For a strong will facilitated therapy and strengthened the patient's ability for self knowledge. Perseverance and braveness were needed for a successful psychosynthesis to take place.
The second step was to analyse the unconscious of fields 1 and 2. All fears and anxieties, all blockades and inhibitions, all trauma's and neuroses had to be made conscious. The deep anchored habits of the personality had to be scrutinised to estimate and value the patterns of behaviour the patient was prone to. Why did the patient always behave the way he or she did? What was the root cause of all troubles? Assagioli agreed with Freud that bringing awareness to unconscious feelings and thought brought about a catharsis: to be aware, to know thyself had a healing and integrating effect upon consciousness.
For most people success in this first and second step would be already a major improvement in their mental health. If the field of consciousness could be enlarged and could be brought to also include field 1 and 2 (if, in our representation above, field 1 and 2 could also become red), then therapy would be already of some success in most cases. Most people would surely benefit from this enlargement of their consciousness. For the majority of patients only wanted and were only capable of realising a personal psychosynthesis. The higher unconscious is not easily accessible to most people. Its energies in most cases are still dormant. So Assagioli worked very hard to develop techniques to promote this limited form of psychosynthesis. He wanted to take into account the limitations most patients have in realising their self.
But he also developed techniques for realising a spiritual psychosynthesis, the highest form of synthesis that could be achieved. For he was very assured about the fact that only this kind of synthesis could really make and end to all suffering and mental illness. Only if the whole spectrum of consciousness had become conscious (if the whole circle had become red, including field 6, the Self), could there be harmony, contentment and blissfulness in the human psyche. That truly would be a synthesis indeed.
So let's discuss the third step Assagioli wanted to take in treating his patients, the spiritual psychosynthesis. For as concerns the study of mysticism, that's what interests us the most here at the Mystical Site.
He begins by stating that it is a scientific fact that there is a tendency in the human psyche to reach for higher forms of consciousness. The ego wants to come into contact with its own Source of being, the Self, which is represented in the diagram by the line drawn between 5 and 6. In fact it can be seen as a strong pulling line, originating from the Self, to lift up consciousness to include
the supra
consciousness
and the higher Self. The Self out of its own nature wants us to be
lifted
up. In what vocabulary we frame this tendency, be it religious,
metaphysical,
philosophical or artistic is of no concern to the psychologist.
Assagioli
only wants to state the fact that there is such a tendency and that it
works. It would be unscientific to deny the working of these
psychological
tendencies. They have to be described for a psychology that wants to be
precise, accurate and factual. Furthermore these higher tendencies seem
to work in integrating and synthesising all normal psychological
functions.
So they can be very helpful to a psychology that wants also to be
therapeutical.
The life and works of exceptional gifted artists and geniuses give us an example, that it is possible indeed to enlarge consciousness and so to include the higher realms. They have an expanded consciousness that is not confined to field 4 alone, but stretches out into field 3. There they make use of extraordinary potentials, that ordinary men only can dream about. But we clearly must make a distinction between the higher unconsciousness and the Self itself. For geniuses, artists or mystics may have (temporarily) access to the supra unconsciousness, but that does not always mean that they have the Self realised. Their personality may still have flaws. Only when the Self is completely included in the expansion of consciousness, can there be full harmony of all psychic functions. For we must not forget that the higher unconscious can also be open at times for ordinary persons (the so called peak experiences) and even for mentally deranged persons, like schizophrenics, but that does not mean that they have the Self realised. Realisation of the Self is the ultimate goal in human development and (still !) happens very rarely.
But every human being feels the pull of the line and already this pulling force can be beneficial. It is in the nature of the psyche to always reach higher and beyond. This reaching is already salutary. So Assagioli wanted to develop techniques that could enforce the pulling of the line, so to speak. Let's discuss some techniques that can be helpful in reaching for the Self.
1. the use of spiritual archetypes and symbols
Spiritual symbols are not only reflections of the higher tendencies of our psyche, but they can set these tendencies in motion also. In this way symbols are used in all sorts of spiritual settings, like liturgies or in art. These archetypical images open up consciousness to the higher fields. Abstract and nature symbols repeatedly come up in these settings, like the image of the sun, the star, the eye (often images of the Self) or images of flowers as the rose or the lotus. Also wine and bread in the West are used as symbols of our spiritual hunger.
But also can the image of certain persons be used as symbols of higher spiritual growth, like the internalisation of certain holy men and women (Jesus, Krishna, Buddha etc.). Especially for religious persons these images are of enormous potency in bringing about a synthesis, but also atheists or agnostics make progress when they visualise and internalise certain exceptional persons, like the Inner Teacher, or the Old Wise Woman, the Inner Warrior, to name only a few. Everyone is able to name such a person and reflect and internalise the realised qualities these persons represent.
2. the inner dialogue
This is one of Assagioli's most beautiful techniques. He asked the patient to visualise before him with closed eyes an Inner Teacher. He invited the patient to express his or her problem before this Inner Guide and ask for explanations and solutions. In most cases the expressed problem was not instantaneously solved, but in the long run, on unexpected moments, some insights did come up, that proved beneficial. Assagioli explained the working of this technique by stating that the Inner Teacher of the patient was none other the Self itself, that offered wisdom and balance to the mind of the questioner.
Personally I much applaud this technique, because the person who asks the questions is looking for the answers and solutions himself. Gradually the insight will dawn that the problems can be solved from the inside. That there is no need anymore of any therapist or any outside authority to give guidance. Then the patient will be a healer onto himself, which is the only way to ever have progress on the spiritual path.
The therapist must take great pains in making the patient see this, that it really is himSelf that is giving the solutions and procuring all the mental recoveries. That the Inner Teacher or the Wise Woman surely is a mere symbol and nothing more. That way the patient will find the self assurance and the trust, that all the healing potentials really reside inside. For eventually we can only heal our self. It can be damaging to the mental health of the patient if he or she is too much relying on the help of some outside authority.
3. the dramatic enacting of spiritual quests
Assagioli had confidence in the healing power of some great spiritual story's from world literature. He for instance told his patients to play out, alone or in a small group, some scenes from the Holy Grail legend or from Dante's Divine Comedy. Through identification and role playing of the major characters in the play, the patient(s) would psychologically undergo the same problems and eventually the same catharsis as the main characters in the story. The acting out of the spiritual story invited the patient to make a spiritual quest for himself.
Though Assagioli admitted that the nature and the functions of the Self were still relatively poor described in psychological literature and that much research was needed to gain insight into the world of the supra unconscious and the Self, he nevertheless thought that much was to gain, when future investigations would focus on this important domain. Assagioli's merit lies in being one of the first to have widened the range of psychology to include also the religious and spiritual aspects of consciousness. For the first time in modern science religion was studied as a serious subject, worthy of our profound attention. But to arrive at this critical point it was necessary for religion to become a branch of psychology itself (what it is, in fact).
From the viewpoint of mysticism however, Assagioli's investigations into the nature of the Self and his consequent recommendations as concerns the contact with and the integration of this psychological domain, seem rather shallow. He seems more interested in strengthening the line between 5 and 6, than in a total expansion of consciousness to include all fields, to make the whole spectrum of consciousness red. His approach to religion and spirituality seems to be quite behavioral. He is more interested in what spirituality does than what is actually is. He would have defended himself by stating that his main concern was psychotherapy and that he wanted to heal his patients. But for the mystic the reading of his books is sometimes a bit of a disappointment.
Let me give an example. A whole chapter of Psychosynthesis is devoted to techniques on how to strengthen the personal will. Assagioli asserts that it is crucial for the ego to have a strong determination and a strong resolution, to be able to make progress and gain or restore mental health.
Now
it surely is the case that the
will
of the person who realises the Self becomes strong, but it is not his personal
will, but something quite different, it is his spiritual will
that becomes strengthened and in fact becomes the all determinating
force
in the psyche. In order to bring this about, the personal will
needs
to be surrendered. In fact it is very detrimental for Self realisation
to
occur, if one keeps on strengthening the personal will. From the
standpoint
of mysticism the personal will needs to be of little concern. We must
focus
our attention more on the higher will of all encompassing
consciousness,
or to speak in more familiar images, we have to take heed of the Thy
will be done.
Assagioli seems to be very realistic. As a therapist he wants to take into account that not all his patients can reach out to the higher levels of 3 and 6. That most patients will only be capable of synthesising the lower levels of 1, 2 and 4. But the mystic objects that only true mental health can be gained by reaching out to the higher levels. Only from these levels of consciousness can come the integrating force that really synthesises all our psychological functions. All attention must therefore ultimately and for everybody be focused on the Self. For staying at the conscious and infra unconscious levels is not enough to free oneself of all pain and suffering. If we want to be truly free, if we want full mental health, if we want everlasting liberation, then we have to do more than strengthening our personal will, writing diary's, using colour therapy or analysing our dreams, however helpful all these techniques surely can be for most patients. If we want to get rid of it all, we have to be one with Truth, one with the god/Brahman.
Assagioli seems to suggest 'well, in some cases and only for certain types of patients, we can also try to reach for the Self. Maybe that will do also'. This is a bit of a hypersimplification of his statements, I agree, but he devoted only a small chapter in his book to spiritual synthesis, so there seems to be some ground for thus ironically restating his theory. For the mystic this is too much of an offer without engagement. For the quest for the Self can be the only way. We surely can follow Assagioli's advise in taking each step at a time, but we all have to end with the third step.
But Assagioli took the third step and in doing so he opened up the eyes of the whole of Western psychology. Finally the forgotten wisdom of all ages and cultures was beginning to re-enter Western science again. The results are enormous. Now in the third millennium spirituality is a serious subject on university curricula again. It's not being dismissed as 'unscientific' anymore, but it again draws the attention of the serious Western scientist. So Assagioli has done something of enormous value. He has taken away our prejudice. He has united the worlds of the East and the West, though someone once said 'and never the twain shall meet'. Assagioli proved otherwise.
Arnhem, January 2003
religion
and spirituality to
be a regression into childlike states of consciousness. For Freud, the
highest
and most healthiest state the psyche could ever attain, was a strong
rational
and full grown consciousness, presided over by a realistic ego, that
was
able to
integrate
and regulate as many aspects from the conscious and the unconscious as
possible.
Everything irrational had to be avoided or at least scrutinised and
given
its place by the mind. The unconscious drives had to be canalised. The
ego
had to be a mediator between the rules and regulations of the superego
(the
sum total of all internalised commandments and advises you have ever
learned)
and the demands of the Id (the unconscious and all its drives).
Religion
and spirituality were low forms of consciousness, which had there place
and function in the psychological world of the child, but had to be
left
behind in reaching maturity.
Freud's student, the Swiss Karl-Gustav Jung, disagreed with the old master. He was more positive about the role religion played in the human psyche. For he discovered that deep down in the collective unconscious of man there were symbols at work which he called 'archetypes'. These symbols were unconscious images of certain psychological realities, charged with tremendous psychodynamic energy, like the image of the archetypical Mother, who would always look after you, or eg. the White Horse, as a symbol of freedom. Some of these symbols were of a religious nature, like the Guardian Angel or the Son of God, the Saviour.
Jung made it his lifetime work to study these archetypical symbols and thereby unravel the secrets of the unconscious. He showed us with a wealth of material that we could find these archetypes at work in myths and stories all over the world. Also in our dreams could we discover the workings
of these symbols.
These archetypes had meaning
to the individual psyche and could be studied for the purpose of
diagnosis
and used in therapy.
For Jung contended that the archetypes had the power to integrate the different psychological functions, both of the conscious and the unconscious. They were like batteries filled with high energy, able to ignite the psyche into lofty aspirations, high goals and images of a better human being, of a better world. Especially religious archetypes, like the hero, the avatar, the incarnate god, or the saint, to name only a few, had the power to harmonise and stabilise the psyche. They seemed to be the images of the Self, the higher part of the psyche.
So Jung was more positive about the role religion and spirituality played in the life of the psyche. He did not reduce all religious feeling and thought to be expressions of lower, immature drives in the unconscious. But, as Ken Wilber ea. has convincingly shown, Jung in the end did not do spirituality much of a favour. He was not able to give spirituality and religion a well deserved and highly esteemed place in psychology. For he did not make a clear distinction between archetypes of the higher, spiritual realms (supra conscious and transpersonal facets of the psyche) and archetypes of lower, mythological (infra conscious and infra personal) origin, that sometimes even originated from the very beginning of the evolution of consciousness. He treated them as if they had no hierarchical values. For not all archetypes and psychological symbols are spiritual and of higher value by nature. Freud was indeed right in labelling some religious feelings as primitive and childlike, eg. images produced by the lower magical layers of our (sub)consciousness.
For what psychology until Jung failed to offer us was an overall map of the spectrum of consciousness, that gave credit to all aspects of the human psyche, including the religious and the spiritual. In order for this overall map to be accurate and in accord with all psychological data it also had to be in one way or another hierarchical, ie. fields of higher and lower value had to be delineated. For we needed desperately to make distinctions between one (religious) feeling and another, between one archetype and another, in order to understand the different levels of integration the different archetypes offered our psyche. In other words we needed a scientific map that could give us a detailed survey of the different meanings and values each psychological phenomenon had.
Roberto Assagioli was the first scientist in psychology to give us such an overall map. His view of the human psyche is here presented. This view offers us a more accurate view of consciousness than both the systems of Freud and Jung. In the system of Freud 1, 2 and 3 taken together formed the
Id
and the Superego, both being irrational
and unconscious, and 4 the field of consciousness, with 5, its agent,
the
Ego. But Freud never spoke about both 3 and 6. He placed the field of 4
more up high in consciousness, as he considered the Ego within its
field
of consciousness the highest form of evolution. Jung spoke about 6 but
did
not clearly differentiate between 1, 2 or 3.
Let's get into
details about
Assagioli's
map of the human psyche.
1. the lower (infra) unconsciousness
In this part of our unconscious psyche all our unconscious drives and instincts are stored. Much of what unconsciously motivates our acting and thinking has its ground here. This is also the place where all our repressed thoughts and feelings are being put away, far remote from our field of consciousness, that we can't be bothered in the waking state by fears, griefs and anxieties. Or to put it negatively, this is the place where all mental pathologies have their roots. This is 'evil territory' for most people, truly a 'dark ground' and a 'hellish abyss'. When the nervous system is very tensed and ill, this is the place from where neuroses, phobia's and psychoses enter consciousness.
2. the middle unconsciousness
This is the part of the unconscious we have access to during our waking state. It is a kind of 'waiting room' for things we've recently experienced. Here we unconsciously elaborate and develop much of our thoughts and feelings, that solutions or insights might later on enter our field of consciousness. It's some sort of an intermediate state between waking and sleeping.
3. the higher unconsciousness
This is the field from where all our higher feelings and thoughts enter consciousness, like artistic or scientific intuition and inspiration. All our noble ethical feelings, like altruistic love or self sacrifice, derive from this higher unconsciousness. It's also the place of genius and higher spiritual forms, like ecstasy and the power of enlightenment. Here the hidden psychic energies are enormous and can not only extol the psyche but can also disrupt and disintegrate its functions by its sheer power. This is a field in consciousness that is not accessible, or only rarely, for most people.
4. the field of consciousness
This part of our personality is accessible to us during the waking state: 'a never ending stream of sensations, images, thoughts, feelings, desires and impulses that we can observe, analyse and judge.'
5. the conscious self or ego
This is designated by the black dot in the diagram. It's the centre of our consciousness from where we regulate, observe and judge all content of our consciousness. It can be compared to a 'helmsman' or 'a charioteer' in steering and controlling everything that is going on in our consciousness. It is the definite name of a person, the feeling of 'I-ness'. It gives the impression that it is something permanent amid the fleeting content of consciousness (though this is only seemingly the case). Freud gave it the central place in his psychology, because of its great power to regulate and integrate. But it is also the mechanism that represses and makes unconscious. So in a sense the ego is also responsible for keeping much of our psychic functions and content unconscious.
6. the higher Self
When we are asleep, hypnotised or numbed by narcotics, our self, or conscious I, seems to be totally lost
and
gone.
But when we awake and come to our senses, we regain our consciousness
again.
So there must be 'a Self behind the I' that keeps our consciousness
alive,
when we can not control it. For otherwise we would die every time we
had
fallen asleep or had become intoxicated. It is also responsible for
keeping
alive all our involuntary functions, both biological and psychological.
For can we start or stop breathing?
So it must be inferred that the ground of our feeling of 'I-ness' is something higher. Assagioli states that this Self is something permanent and that It is not afflicted by the daily stream of our consciousness, nor by the physical process of our body, but that it can be felt and experienced as the Source of our consciousness. Kant called it the noumenal ego to distinguish this higher Self from the empirical ego. The ego seems to be some kind of an image of this higher Self.
The concept of the higher Self is an important one in the psychology of Assagioli, because he wanted psychology to be a science that could integrate all the different functions of the human psyche into a harmonious whole. He contended that of all the fields in consciousness the Self had the highest potentials to bring about this harmony. He wanted in therapy to build up the whole structure of the personality around this concept of the higher Self and use all its potentials in unifying individual consciousness. He wanted to synthesise the different psychological functions, after the ground for integration was laid by a thorough analysis, with the aid of methods and techniques developed by Freud and his successors. For Assagioli also believed with Freud that the ego and its field of consciousness were very important in making integration possible. But a true synthesis was brought about when we also made use of all the energies of the higher Self. That was his major objective and that's the reason he called his new psychology psychosynthesis.
7. the collective unconsciousness
In the diagram consciousness seems to be isolated and cut off from the field around it by a marked line. This is only done for the convenience of representation. For in fact there is a constant exchange going on between the world inside individual consciousness and consciousness surrounding it (much like the cell inside a body is continuously 'osmoting' with the world outside). Our consciousness is not isolated but relates to past, present and future consciousness working in our world, both in man and outside. This overall consciousness can be termed the collective unconsciousness, because most people are not conscious of the fact that they are embedded in this larger field of consciousness.
We must give Assagioli the credit for introducing the concept of the higher Self into western psychology. He deserves our gratefulness in opening up psychology to all sorts of investigations into the higher, and afterwards called 'transpersonal', realms of consciousness. Assagioli was the pioneer who laid the foundation for future explorers of the human psyche, like Ken Wilber and all his colleagues in the transpersonal psychology of today. He is sometimes blamed for not stating his sources. For Assagioli based his psychosynthesis on esoteric psychology and the work of Alice Bailey, a theosophical scholar, in particular. But we can see now why he was so reluctant to point out the Eastern sources of his psychosynthesis. The scientific world of his days was not ripe to acknowledge the deep wisdom of esoteric traditions and was very sceptical about 'everything higher'. So he chose to frame his findings about the Self in Western, 'scientific', vocabulary. This prudence made his writings more acceptable in academic circles. He was wise in doing so.
His method of psychosynthesis is a very thorough one. He started therapy with focusing the attention of the patient on field 4, the field of consciousness, because that was for the average person the closest at hand. With strengthening this field of consciousness and in particular the ego as the controller, the next steps would give more results. So he tried to fortify the conscious will of the ego. For a strong will facilitated therapy and strengthened the patient's ability for self knowledge. Perseverance and braveness were needed for a successful psychosynthesis to take place.
The second step was to analyse the unconscious of fields 1 and 2. All fears and anxieties, all blockades and inhibitions, all trauma's and neuroses had to be made conscious. The deep anchored habits of the personality had to be scrutinised to estimate and value the patterns of behaviour the patient was prone to. Why did the patient always behave the way he or she did? What was the root cause of all troubles? Assagioli agreed with Freud that bringing awareness to unconscious feelings and thought brought about a catharsis: to be aware, to know thyself had a healing and integrating effect upon consciousness.
For most people success in this first and second step would be already a major improvement in their mental health. If the field of consciousness could be enlarged and could be brought to also include field 1 and 2 (if, in our representation above, field 1 and 2 could also become red), then therapy would be already of some success in most cases. Most people would surely benefit from this enlargement of their consciousness. For the majority of patients only wanted and were only capable of realising a personal psychosynthesis. The higher unconscious is not easily accessible to most people. Its energies in most cases are still dormant. So Assagioli worked very hard to develop techniques to promote this limited form of psychosynthesis. He wanted to take into account the limitations most patients have in realising their self.
But he also developed techniques for realising a spiritual psychosynthesis, the highest form of synthesis that could be achieved. For he was very assured about the fact that only this kind of synthesis could really make and end to all suffering and mental illness. Only if the whole spectrum of consciousness had become conscious (if the whole circle had become red, including field 6, the Self), could there be harmony, contentment and blissfulness in the human psyche. That truly would be a synthesis indeed.
So let's discuss the third step Assagioli wanted to take in treating his patients, the spiritual psychosynthesis. For as concerns the study of mysticism, that's what interests us the most here at the Mystical Site.
He begins by stating that it is a scientific fact that there is a tendency in the human psyche to reach for higher forms of consciousness. The ego wants to come into contact with its own Source of being, the Self, which is represented in the diagram by the line drawn between 5 and 6. In fact it can be seen as a strong pulling line, originating from the Self, to lift up consciousness to include
the supra
consciousness
and the higher Self. The Self out of its own nature wants us to be
lifted
up. In what vocabulary we frame this tendency, be it religious,
metaphysical,
philosophical or artistic is of no concern to the psychologist.
Assagioli
only wants to state the fact that there is such a tendency and that it
works. It would be unscientific to deny the working of these
psychological
tendencies. They have to be described for a psychology that wants to be
precise, accurate and factual. Furthermore these higher tendencies seem
to work in integrating and synthesising all normal psychological
functions.
So they can be very helpful to a psychology that wants also to be
therapeutical.
The life and works of exceptional gifted artists and geniuses give us an example, that it is possible indeed to enlarge consciousness and so to include the higher realms. They have an expanded consciousness that is not confined to field 4 alone, but stretches out into field 3. There they make use of extraordinary potentials, that ordinary men only can dream about. But we clearly must make a distinction between the higher unconsciousness and the Self itself. For geniuses, artists or mystics may have (temporarily) access to the supra unconsciousness, but that does not always mean that they have the Self realised. Their personality may still have flaws. Only when the Self is completely included in the expansion of consciousness, can there be full harmony of all psychic functions. For we must not forget that the higher unconscious can also be open at times for ordinary persons (the so called peak experiences) and even for mentally deranged persons, like schizophrenics, but that does not mean that they have the Self realised. Realisation of the Self is the ultimate goal in human development and (still !) happens very rarely.
But every human being feels the pull of the line and already this pulling force can be beneficial. It is in the nature of the psyche to always reach higher and beyond. This reaching is already salutary. So Assagioli wanted to develop techniques that could enforce the pulling of the line, so to speak. Let's discuss some techniques that can be helpful in reaching for the Self.
1. the use of spiritual archetypes and symbols
Spiritual symbols are not only reflections of the higher tendencies of our psyche, but they can set these tendencies in motion also. In this way symbols are used in all sorts of spiritual settings, like liturgies or in art. These archetypical images open up consciousness to the higher fields. Abstract and nature symbols repeatedly come up in these settings, like the image of the sun, the star, the eye (often images of the Self) or images of flowers as the rose or the lotus. Also wine and bread in the West are used as symbols of our spiritual hunger.
But also can the image of certain persons be used as symbols of higher spiritual growth, like the internalisation of certain holy men and women (Jesus, Krishna, Buddha etc.). Especially for religious persons these images are of enormous potency in bringing about a synthesis, but also atheists or agnostics make progress when they visualise and internalise certain exceptional persons, like the Inner Teacher, or the Old Wise Woman, the Inner Warrior, to name only a few. Everyone is able to name such a person and reflect and internalise the realised qualities these persons represent.
2. the inner dialogue
This is one of Assagioli's most beautiful techniques. He asked the patient to visualise before him with closed eyes an Inner Teacher. He invited the patient to express his or her problem before this Inner Guide and ask for explanations and solutions. In most cases the expressed problem was not instantaneously solved, but in the long run, on unexpected moments, some insights did come up, that proved beneficial. Assagioli explained the working of this technique by stating that the Inner Teacher of the patient was none other the Self itself, that offered wisdom and balance to the mind of the questioner.
Personally I much applaud this technique, because the person who asks the questions is looking for the answers and solutions himself. Gradually the insight will dawn that the problems can be solved from the inside. That there is no need anymore of any therapist or any outside authority to give guidance. Then the patient will be a healer onto himself, which is the only way to ever have progress on the spiritual path.
The therapist must take great pains in making the patient see this, that it really is himSelf that is giving the solutions and procuring all the mental recoveries. That the Inner Teacher or the Wise Woman surely is a mere symbol and nothing more. That way the patient will find the self assurance and the trust, that all the healing potentials really reside inside. For eventually we can only heal our self. It can be damaging to the mental health of the patient if he or she is too much relying on the help of some outside authority.
3. the dramatic enacting of spiritual quests
Assagioli had confidence in the healing power of some great spiritual story's from world literature. He for instance told his patients to play out, alone or in a small group, some scenes from the Holy Grail legend or from Dante's Divine Comedy. Through identification and role playing of the major characters in the play, the patient(s) would psychologically undergo the same problems and eventually the same catharsis as the main characters in the story. The acting out of the spiritual story invited the patient to make a spiritual quest for himself.
Though Assagioli admitted that the nature and the functions of the Self were still relatively poor described in psychological literature and that much research was needed to gain insight into the world of the supra unconscious and the Self, he nevertheless thought that much was to gain, when future investigations would focus on this important domain. Assagioli's merit lies in being one of the first to have widened the range of psychology to include also the religious and spiritual aspects of consciousness. For the first time in modern science religion was studied as a serious subject, worthy of our profound attention. But to arrive at this critical point it was necessary for religion to become a branch of psychology itself (what it is, in fact).
From the viewpoint of mysticism however, Assagioli's investigations into the nature of the Self and his consequent recommendations as concerns the contact with and the integration of this psychological domain, seem rather shallow. He seems more interested in strengthening the line between 5 and 6, than in a total expansion of consciousness to include all fields, to make the whole spectrum of consciousness red. His approach to religion and spirituality seems to be quite behavioral. He is more interested in what spirituality does than what is actually is. He would have defended himself by stating that his main concern was psychotherapy and that he wanted to heal his patients. But for the mystic the reading of his books is sometimes a bit of a disappointment.
Let me give an example. A whole chapter of Psychosynthesis is devoted to techniques on how to strengthen the personal will. Assagioli asserts that it is crucial for the ego to have a strong determination and a strong resolution, to be able to make progress and gain or restore mental health.
Now
it surely is the case that the
will
of the person who realises the Self becomes strong, but it is not his personal
will, but something quite different, it is his spiritual will
that becomes strengthened and in fact becomes the all determinating
force
in the psyche. In order to bring this about, the personal will
needs
to be surrendered. In fact it is very detrimental for Self realisation
to
occur, if one keeps on strengthening the personal will. From the
standpoint
of mysticism the personal will needs to be of little concern. We must
focus
our attention more on the higher will of all encompassing
consciousness,
or to speak in more familiar images, we have to take heed of the Thy
will be done.
Assagioli seems to be very realistic. As a therapist he wants to take into account that not all his patients can reach out to the higher levels of 3 and 6. That most patients will only be capable of synthesising the lower levels of 1, 2 and 4. But the mystic objects that only true mental health can be gained by reaching out to the higher levels. Only from these levels of consciousness can come the integrating force that really synthesises all our psychological functions. All attention must therefore ultimately and for everybody be focused on the Self. For staying at the conscious and infra unconscious levels is not enough to free oneself of all pain and suffering. If we want to be truly free, if we want full mental health, if we want everlasting liberation, then we have to do more than strengthening our personal will, writing diary's, using colour therapy or analysing our dreams, however helpful all these techniques surely can be for most patients. If we want to get rid of it all, we have to be one with Truth, one with the god/Brahman.
Assagioli seems to suggest 'well, in some cases and only for certain types of patients, we can also try to reach for the Self. Maybe that will do also'. This is a bit of a hypersimplification of his statements, I agree, but he devoted only a small chapter in his book to spiritual synthesis, so there seems to be some ground for thus ironically restating his theory. For the mystic this is too much of an offer without engagement. For the quest for the Self can be the only way. We surely can follow Assagioli's advise in taking each step at a time, but we all have to end with the third step.
But Assagioli took the third step and in doing so he opened up the eyes of the whole of Western psychology. Finally the forgotten wisdom of all ages and cultures was beginning to re-enter Western science again. The results are enormous. Now in the third millennium spirituality is a serious subject on university curricula again. It's not being dismissed as 'unscientific' anymore, but it again draws the attention of the serious Western scientist. So Assagioli has done something of enormous value. He has taken away our prejudice. He has united the worlds of the East and the West, though someone once said 'and never the twain shall meet'. Assagioli proved otherwise.
|
support
www.mysticism.nl by visiting our sponsors
|
Arnhem, January 2003
