With Kirpal Singh you immediately had the feeling and could have certain experiences, that led you to believe that he had brought his analysis to an end - though it might not be advantageous to apply psychoanalytic criteria in this instance -, and that he was authentic through and through, honest and true.
And his technical qualification was at the level of a theologian with profound knowledge of yoga and meditation.
One may certainly inquire on what integrity really means in this context. I understand it to describe an analyst without negative counter-transference, meaning an analyst who is aware of his own projective identification, and that of the other individual, and actively engages in it. Or, an analyst who applies an 'omni-perceptive', urgent, sincere gaze in his therapy. Normally, this is not the case.
In a psychological sense, the term 'normal dissociative phenomenon' would apply, which has a similarity with that of 'stigmatization'.1 mental processes can be somaticized to the extent that its outcome is directly visible - as an imaginary signifier - in the appearance of the person, which bears a supportive aspect in analysis. This was the case with Kirpal Singh. Regretfully, he was neither a linguist nor an analyst. That would have prevented the occurrence of many issues.
Nevertheless, I believe that my way in life, thirty years of psychoanalytic practice and being Kirpal Singh's pupil for the same amount of time authorize me to write this book. I have often been through serious crises, some of them on issues of whether I was playing one thing off against the other, thereby cheating myself. In the course of years, though, I became ever more convinced that there is more that connects east and west than separates them, more connections between analytic science and mystic-meditative practice than there are separators.
We only need to relate both seemingly different ways to each other with instruments that are scientifically composed, but are still outside of both, i.e. topology, or mathematics. An example would be the SHINES' tetrahedron in relation to the SPEAKS' pentahedron.
1 Fiedler, P., Dissoziative Störungen und Konversion, Beltz (1999) page 62. The author describes ‚normal dissociative phenomena' as creativity phenomena that derive from „...willfully chosen extreme stress..." or "...re-learned and automated behaviorisms..." which appear to most people as being 'peculiar'. In the sense of this phenomenon, extraordinary somatic processes may arise, such as the imaginary signifier within a gaze as mentioned above.
Anmerkung der Redaktion: Dieser Artikel stammt aus einer Beitragsreihe zum Thema: Analytische Psychocatharsis.
