Share this:

वाचाराम्भणो विकारो नामधेयं –Everything that exists is the manifestation of speech.
Subject’s ego is formed of verbal nucleus—Sigmund Freud

It is not very tough to decode the fact that psychoanalytic discourses are founded upon the religious discourses of speech and language. Religious metaphysics has  played most important role in the development and grounding of psychoanalytic discourses. We know for sure that Lacan’s hypothesis (which is actually Freudian) that speech even when almost distorted retains its value as a password and can be used to decode the history of subject’s ego is through and through a priestly discourse.  Such distorted speech formula contains no meaning yet it brings about illumination, as Lacan says, “it communicates, it constitutes truth—the discourse speculates on faith in testimony”.  Such mystical password speeches are used by Hindu Ojhas in their treatment of  patients or in exorcism well known to us as Damar and Shabar mantras.  However, in Hinduism as for as speech and affectivity of language is concerned; it has never received respect from the high priests of Hinduism. It is practiced by ignorant and illiterates in villages. Lacan categorically reminds his disciple analysts that in such mystical modes if an analyst seeks to guide himself by some supposed “contact” experience with the reality of subject then he is an intuitionist or phenomenology psychoanalyst -means he is not a scientist.  Psychoanalysts are scientist even if they practice exorcism and follow priestly paths. In fact an Ojha never comes in ‘contact’ with the experience of the subject; he treats his patients from above as a Priest-Father. Before going to the priest patient surrenders his ego-resistance and follows his method and talks to him; sometimes no doubt with the help of ritualistic tricks and force. Second most important hypothesis of Lacan and Freud on which entire psychoanalytic discourses are structured is that only relation that is in psychoanalyst’s reach would be an imaginary relation with the subject’s ego. This hypothesis establishes  psychoanalysis in the domain of pure speech and language.  Lacan goes further even and says that mystical speech and its mode is reminiscent of Karma. If we go further in this drama of psychoanalysis, we discover that it becomes a strange discourse more priestly and theological than the psychoanalysis of  medieval ages. Imaginary relation with the subject’s ego is established with discourses laden with speeches and mystical modes like that of Gospels. Only such speeches are able to confer meaning on the function of individual. Its domain is mystical discourse for psychoanalysis deals with transindividual reality of the subject. Now a question arises that if it deals with the transindivdual reality then how can it decode its history? Lacan’s answer would be–” speech”- for only through it one can reach to this theological reality. “Psychoanalytic experience has rediscovered in man the imperative of the Word as the law that has shaped him in its image. It exploits the poetic function of language to give his desire its symbolic mediation. May this experience finally enable you to understand that the whole reality of its effects lies in the gift of speech; for it is through this gift that all reality has come to man and through its ongoing action that he sustains reality”. Subject is nothing..he is formed of speech that is he has been coded in speech<by father-law> and can be decoded theologically for this coded history is reason <its ego resistances even.>are the product of religious transcendence and good sense reason. What is transindividuality in Lacan’s psychoanalysis? If in this context of speech it is  not a religious notion that directly refers to Karma. According to Lacan, psychoanalytic discourse can only reach the transindividual reality of the subject when it is priestly enigmatic for psychoanalytic transference is enigmatic actualization. And this priestly spirit that brings about enigmatic transference is borrowed from theology, sciences of intersubjectivity and other fields of mystical modes. Any truth is complex and inhuman like the hunt of the goddess, one shouldn’t be guilty for the inhuman hunt for the goddess  knows what you are up to, reminds Lacan. Knowledge is the  only way to reach any reality. One can ask several questions about this priestly psychoanalysis and its ill practices, it has been used by Nazis to construct Auschwitz. American govt. uses it to control the behaviour of the people according to bourgeoisie cultural needs and thinking.  It has become an instrument of capture in the hands of oppressors, it seems that entire psychoanalytic motive is:

At what extent one can reduce other’s <patient is an opponent> ego? What are the means of the capture? <SPEECH AND LANGUAGE>
Relation of theology with psychoanalysis has gone so deep that it seems as if psychoanalytic discourses have become sorcery. Freudo-Lacanin psychoanalysis believes that religious state of knowledge is far reaching than any other state of knowledge.  Lacan believes that Brahma-Nirvanic state of knowledge can provide true logic to obtain psychoanalytic illumination. He even hopes that proceeding of psychoanalytic discourses with same spiritual fervour can even bring about an earthquake-much awaited in psychoanalysis. Freud preferred the discourse of the hysteric and Lacan thinks that Illumination of knowledge is better attained in combination of hysteric and paranoiac state. But I think that at this point Deleuze’s illumination is remarkable, he  believes that it is attained by schizophrenics–mode of illumination is not paranoia and delirium rather schizophrenia. What is striking here is that Lacan is confused and doesn’t understand the state of spiritual illumination; he thinks that the Brahma-Nrivanic state or Nirvanic state is hysteric or paranoiac state. In fact Nirvanic stat of knowledge in Bhagwad Gita is not of hysteric or paranoiac category; Gita says:
“yathā dīpo nivātastho neṅgate sopamā smṛtā

yogino yata-cittasya yuñjato yogam ātmanaḥ”

As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.  Such state of knowledge doesn’t come under hysteric or Paranoiac category. I think the question, in which state of madness illumination of knowledge is attained? is a  complex one. In spite of paranoic state it is better realized in Schizophrenic state. The search for truth is eschatological and  Schizophrenia too is eschatological. Only a schizophrenic can tread this deadly path. Eschatology is deadly –it is said to be the path that is steep and dangerous <Churasya dhara nishitha durattyayaछुरस्य धरा निसिथा दुरत्यया >  Illumination of knowledge is attained in hynoid state.

—Post is still in a draft mode .–Rajesh

Related articles

• Kabbalah: The Mystical Origin of Psychoanalysis (blogcritics.org)

Advertisement