The Mystic that Challenged Freud 

Part 1: The Most Dangerous Mind of the 20th Century ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4sge_4KfCrM.html Part 2: The Mystic that Challenged Freud ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-NSNVB-iYNyY.html Part 3: FREUD, Sex & Science vs JUNG, Religion & Occultism ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-m2t0Yi2OJvE.html

As an atheist and sceptic myself who is trying to learn more about religion and mysticism, I have to agree with Roland that Freud's criticisms are just the same stereotypes that many atheists throw against fundamentalists.

I am glad this is in parts. For one thing, the philosophies presented require detailed introspection. Furthermore, a presentation in parts means we are not ‘short-changed’ on all the concepts. Zevi’s discussions are genuinely thoughtful and reflect lots of scholarship on his part. Freud certainly had good ideas on why people are “religious.” Sometimes it is hard for people to examine their motivations. But regardless of your ideas on the subject. It is still helpful to understand those around you and be respectful of others. After all, we are seeking unity.

In collaboration with Esoterica. Watch Dr. Sledge's episode: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zuHwws5aXBE.html Part 1: The Most Dangerous Mind of the 20th Century ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4sge_4KfCrM.html See also: Is Mysticism Rational? LOGIC and MYSTICISM with Esoterica's Justin Sledge ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CaLDtvUJI_A.html

Ahoy! We were not aware of this. thx. While on the topic, let's not forget about CG JUNG, either.

Dr. Justin Sledge brought me here, and I will not be leaving. So happy to have found your channel!

LOL that smile you got at "Your remark about a feeling you describe as 'oceanic', has left me no peace." Beautiful

I am very grateful to you, Zevi, for exploring Freud's ideas expressed in CIVILIZATION AND ITS DISCONTENTS as his attempt to come to terms with the mystical sense of oneness put forward by Romain Rolland in his works. I looked into all this years ago when I came upon the 1932 correspondence between Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud, which are called the WARUM KRIEG letters. Einstein thought that Freud could enumerate what causes men to engage in war - and what psychological solutions that Freud might conceive to prevent future catastrophic wars on the same scale as World War I. Their correspondence was to be made public by the League Of Nations through the editorial pages of the major Newspapers of Europe. The project was scrapped in 1933 with the ascendancy of Hitler and the direct threat his Nazis posed to the lives of both Einstein and Freud. (The letters were found and published years later by Otto Hahn, a longtime friend and associate of Einstein...)

Below is an attempt to reframe unity as an experience emerging through our interactions with place. 19:30 "... is a feeling of an indissoluble bond of being one with the external world as a whole" For proto-humans in transition, For beings just beginning to realise their abilities to shape the spaces within which they spend their time, The "external world" was undergoing a transition from 'That which is.' to 'That which we (co-)create.' In other words, as our distant ancestors gained more and more mastery over their environments, they bade farewell to experiences characterized by oneness with that which was once experienced as - either external to or indistinguishable from - the self. We began shaping the external world. We poured our attitudes into a boundaried area and called this area home. Thus, home became a reflection of our attitudinal choices. Wilderness could now be contrasted with home, the former now acknowledged as those spaces not shaped by our attitudinal inputs. Questions concerning who and what we are are now answered in the context of reflecting on our past, present and future interactions with a given space. Want to know who you are? Look at the external world which you've shaped. You are shaped in the process of shaping. The World becomes Our World. For the burgeoning Shaper of Spaces, language as used to: explore the possibilities of modifying the look & feel, sounds & scents, proprioceptive stimuli & fine/gross motor challenges...of a given environment; was inseparable from language as used to gain insight into the realm of psychological/social truth. For the Shaper of Spaces, the internal and external worlds are experienced as intertwined. Fast forward to a place wherein the inhabitants are no longer (capable of) experiencing their world as a reflection of themselves. For the many villagers transformed into city dwellers during the early phases of civilization, it would have been quite impossible to make sense of the immediate environment without recourse to explanations pointing at humankind's subjugation to political-religious forces determining hierarchy and guaranteeing order. Both in the city and in untamed wilderness, the external world announces itself to the population/tribe without requesting their input. The environment is experienced as foisted upon its dwellers from above, the crucial difference being that in the city 'above' is the synthesis of the forces of nature and human-made power structures. The dwellers of both the city and jungle stand in stark contrast with the denizens of the emergent village for whom the place they are beginning to call 'home' is taking shape as a result of their direct interactions with it. Their dwelling places are felt to be a reflection of who they are. Not so in the city. Designed, built and presided over by rulers, priests and politicians, benevolent or otherwise. Here, the roles of the general population are dictated from above rather than discovered from below. Not so in the wild where communion with nature means submitting to the forces of nature. Here, however, the forces in question are experienced as personal. This submission to the (myriads of) personal forces is a basic feature of Animism, a feature often preserved (in attenuated form) well after the end of nomadic ways of life. Much of idolatry/religion in the earlier phases of civilization can be understood as a yearning for the experience of total enmeshment within a space not (yet) defined by the needs of man, wherein nature's glory isn't (yet) reduced to what it does for me, where plenty isn't (yet) a product of my anxious efforts to guarantee abundance. The fertility rites of early civilization are an expression of anxiety, a reflection of a desire to return to the oceanic bliss of Eden. Man banished from Eden cannot banish the memory of his banishment from an existence where anxiety is all but futile for guaranteeing abundance. A peculiar kind of submission is often found in a modern urban context - submission to the impersonal. Submission to the impersonal processes which dictate the look, feel, sounds and smells of the modern industrial city. Submission to the invisible hand of sound economic logic. Submission to a human nature made sense of in terms of the blind logic of evolution. Submission to a view of history guided by the inevitable and ultimately impersonal dynamics of class struggle. And not least... submission to unconscious forces only observable through rigorous subjugation to objective scientific couch-based therapy presided over by disembodied wordsmiths emitting sounds from a calcifying rigid skeleton sorely deprived of physical stimuli. Due to the astounding successes of monotheism in banishing paganism, by the time the modern city came into being, the drive to submit oneself to an isolated and personified force of nature had been long forgotten/surpressed. Here, if despite (or, as a reaction to) the alienating effects of the impersonal city one discovered a longing to submit to something bigger, that bigger entity would express itself as limitless and singular. 20:30 "The idea of an individual receiving an intimation of their connection with the world around them...sounds so strange..." True dat. If you live in a rapidly industrializing urban environment, spend all of your time using words to analyze words which (you perceive as) emerging from still further verbal/linguistic structures and you are deeply committed to identifying impersonal forces which drive individuals/society...of course you're going to find it strange that one might feel connected to 'the world around'. 28:40 "through the practices of Yoga, by withdrawing from the world" Not all physical practices require the practitioner to withdraw from the world. Yoga is indeed an inwards looking practice but there are many physical practices which to varying degrees look outwards. Parkour is a good candidate for being designated as the penultimate outwards looking physical practice; asking the question of how to view the potential of the spaces I find myself in as an opportunity to develop character through physical challenges. Recent western intellectual history would have looked very different if Freud practiced parkour. But alas... western thought is dominated by hyper-verbal thinkers like Freud who see thought/language as describing what is rather than pointing at that which cannot be held/staticized/presenced/reified. "Don't concentrate on the finger" - Bruce Lee Many traditions have long recognized that in this finite realm knowledge can only be knowledge of self-world in motion. Motion always occurs somewhere. When the relationship between the body in motion and physical space is made explicit, experiences of unity can be more fully acknowledged as steps in a process occurring vis-a-vis a relationship with our physical environments AKA planet earth AKA home. 'והייתם כאלוקים' - יוצרי עולמות. (רש''י בראשית ג, ה) אבל הנשמות שנמשכו מבחי' מחשבה היו קודם ששת ימי בראשית וכמארז''ל במי נמלך בנשמותיהן של צדיקים ולא צדיקים לבד אלא כמ''ש ועמך כולם צדיקים. (לקוטי תורה ד''ה ציון במשפט תפדה)

Jung also disagreed with his once master. Jung called the elevation of the libido, evil.

Good video, I also wondered why Freud used the word “oceanic” in Civilization and it’s Discontents. The word “oceanic” was peculiar to read because of Freud’s anti-mysticism. But in that essay Freud acknowledges it as real thing, even though he never experienced it himself. Freud’s essay is very insightful, but I think Freud repressed “oceanic” feeling, and/or probably felt he could not afford the luxury of indulging it.

Roland felt tht living core of eternity in Indian yogi Swami Vivekananda he also wrote an excellent book about him.

Fantastic analysis

I find it interesting that Freud’s view of oceanic unity is that the person is experiencing the whole of the universe as a part of their ego. I’m not sure if there’s a subjective way of determining whether one is being subsumed into the universe or whether the universe is being subsumed into them.

Loved this! Can’t wait for part 2 👍

High praise for you and Dr. Sledge's fine works, a thousand thanks.

Here from Esoterica. Thanks for making such great content.

I don’t think Freud is totally wrong, there are subconscious desires for certain aspects of religion, but the matters of the spirit and the cosmos are a different question

I look forward to next week’s conclusion!! Loved the first part!! ❤

Always absolutely outstanding.

Dr. Sledge sent me from Esoterica. I'm glad he did, good video. Keep it up.

Thanks Zevi, i never knew about Rolland and his long correspondence with Freud... "get a room guys" cracked me up but, jokes aside, great content as usual.

Quite a man Monsieur Rolland: vegetarian and pacifist yet, oddly, a friend of Stalin. Mystic yet friend of Freud. Hesse dedicated his Siddhartha to Romain Rolland. Thank you for this presentation ,Zevi.

Awesome video, thank you!

Freud reached the limit of reasoning that the Dao has created.

I was just reading about these two last week! thanks Zevi

Well done, thank you!

Freud had another mystic friend, the theosopher Friedrich Eckstein, who taught him about theosophy and yoga

Thanks for another great topic and discussion. Yacher koach

thank you for this great video! although i don't agree with Freud, i can see how someone can arrive at the 'limitless narcissism' from a material-first perspective, and i find it fascinating :) i'm looking forward to part 2 :D

To me it sounds like there are a lot of parallels between the story of Eden. Where the choice is made for the individual ego to have space. Leaving us,as humans,on a journey to bring ourselves back to the limitless narcissistic state of Eden.

Thanks!

For a second I thought you were going to talk about the Rebbe Rashab.

excellent - one of your best so far, i think - freud was an interesting and profound synthesiser hiding a great deal of himself in his writings and also plainly fraudulent in much of his purported methodology - yet holding with conflicted fear to key insights that he drapes in 'scientific' language but are not in themselves scientific (little of interest in science is truly 'scientific'...)

In terms of being first Freud’s importance to history is undeniable. In terms of expanse of thought, extreme genius, and a better understanding of how consciousness works Carl Jung obviously was the more important thinker. He was also far more interested in spirituality and mysticism. I actually agree with much of what Freud thought but his view of dreams, symbols, the unconscious is simplistic, let’s be honest. Jung really had a greater recognition of these things in their totality.

All respect to Freud, but my man always sounded like he needed to take some shrooms out in nature with Jung. And then he wouldn't of been such a buzz kill.

Fanboying is annoying. But this is still fascinating.

The problem is that there are two ways of looking at religion. One is as defined by Marie-Louise von Franz: "...religion means never acting only in accordance with conscious reasoning, but with constant attention and consideration of the unknown participating [unconscious irrational] factors." (Alchemy p95). This is the psychological view, but you can also look at religion sociologically. In this view religion is a community organizing structure using a shared experience idea, or ideology. The sociological religion begins with an experience such as one following von Franz's definition, but then the experience is shared with a community which then formalizes the idea of the experience to maintain social structure. This eventually becomes government or business where the community must maintain itself through daily activity and contribution. One is about the individual; the other is about the community.

A Course In Miracles, written thru a Scribe, the Author being Jesus, is psychoanalytic in essence and there are dozens of references to Freud directly, often pointing out his errors, not to mention where he WAS correct. It's essentially Freud corrected, by bringing into the picture God.

I am mystified that you fail to mention Jung in all this?? Still enlightening with respect to Freud and his other interesting associates...

I read quite a few years ago that someone had debunked Freud perfectly. I was inclined to agree. If you read the case notes of Little Dora, for example, it seems that Freud was wrong-headed to say the least. The almost obsession about dreams is suspect, also, I would say. My dreams are about what one would expect, my desires and fantasies that appeal to me. Nothing more complicated than that. It was alleged that Freud falsified his case notes to support his theories. Just my view.

I love challenging Freud, and even Jung, to be honest. It is important we take analytical psychology to the next step, using the knowledge that we have now.

I can relate to Freud's need for a father figure as males are generally more analytically inclined which is linked to the left side of the brain. (I am left handed). Also patriarchal societies tend to use tests in education with the purpose of testing listening and trust by means of which they choose and form the hierarchies. Steve Taylor is writing a book with a new understanding of human behavior. Freud analytical approach seems to resemble Buddhist analytical meditation. He seems to dive toward the primal instinct of man which he sees as part of Nature, like Kundalini Shakti, which is benevolent, much like Buddha's insight on our True Nature. His insights on the basic primal instincts are correct. The sex center and hara which is the death center are close by. I started reading Haim Shapira's book "The wisdom of King's Solomon". Interesting you mentioned William James. I found a book of Kabbalah written by Brian Lancaster and William James was mentioned in a review but I didn't knew who he was.

Subscribed for your interests in sufism and mystic concepts that are deemed essential by theology

I came from esoterica

Whose a-Freud of a big bad dream ? Freud is a bit dated now and I take absolutely no notice of dated ‘psycho-analyisis’.

I not really entertained Freud due to mainly his obcessed ideas of sex which I know I should look at other ideas but when someone says we all want to sleep with our mother's my eyes glaze over when it comes to other things they say

He should have taken psychedelics to get the experience of the oceanic feeling. Maybe in another life time...

Aren't we all imaginary friends?

Predestination of those who are gods chosen people as kings or prophets or high priests are the solution. Only when they become self righteous and allow people to worship them as gods or idols does it manifested the grace of god that has been perverted.

Fascism is when the procreation instinct uses the kinship instinct, a la "Good Will Hunting". ... Maybe.

How come the babe-at-the-boob (25:15) is not enlightened??

Your accent is a mix of American and Australian.

Like many members of his 'tribe', Freud was a self-confessed 'Godless Jew'. A more credible and better argued case for the 'source of religion' is almost certainly William James' concise essay, 'The Will To Believe. Religious consciousness is inevitably part and parcel of our 'understanding' of death and time. Here again I find Freud unavailing. His remarks a propos the death wish do no pass muster.

Perhaps it's worth pointing out that the childish narcissism of the mystical experience is not that of Narcissus himself, it just carries that name. Infantile narcissism is, i think, more like a limitless self.