Thursday, June 30, 2016

From where should changes begin?

Last Sunday one sis requested me to visit her home. She told me that her computer was out of order and it should be fixed. From her explanation, I could understand that there was hardly any possibility to fix it but I agreed to visit her because I had another interest, study her a little bit. She is a good subject matter to study the different sides of mind as she maintains a very complicated state of mind and attitudes.  I visited her according to the promise I made and after checking computer began to speak casually. She is a beautician and DTP operator having enough experience in both fields. She failed in all the attempts in which she tried to run a successful business. She sees her husband an unsuccessful one. Speaking to her is a big task; never see subjective sides but sees everything objectively. When coming to the case of other persons related to her, she sees their subjective sides, the subjective faults. Her husband has the habit of drinking liquor, she blames him not his situations; because of his faulty character, it happens so. Means in her husband’s situation she won’t allow to apply objective factors, only husband’s subjective factors. In her failures, see the double standard, she won’t allow applying this subjective side but completely objective means situations and other peoples.
Anyway, I told her that she should change, knowing that she won’t agree. Suddenly her expression and emotion changed and a nonverbal blistering question could be seen on her face and in her eyes; Me?  

Why this expression and emotion?

If we check the lives of each and every one of us, we can see these conflicting attitudes prevail in our personal lives too. We have to understand some facts, some principles, first to overcome this attitudinal conflict and to move ahead. We cannot completely reject the fact that there are objective causes (causes other than personal attitudes – subjective) exist. But in life, there are no absolute objective causes that impede our going ahead. Behind every such objective obstacle, there will be subjective elements or Element. To break such obstacles which often cover us as shell, we have to outgrow them. It is not fighting against them (but in some other meaning we are fighting against them) but ‘grow to break’. What is that or how is that?

Consider a hatching egg. The embryo in it grows daily receiving energy or food from its environment. When its growth quantitatively reaches a particular level there will be a qualitative change or transformation in its life and its existing objective situations cannot stand as an obstacle in its life, so it breaks the covering shell of impedance and enter into a new stage of life, to a new world. In the case of this embryo, the obstacle is natural and it never fights against it but grows. Neither the shell acts as a harming element in its growth but protect until it reaches a specific level of growth. Otherwise, the obstacle is a protection up to a certain level in which the subject achieves a certain level of ability or maturity to face new situations in the next level. 

In each and everyone’s life, there will be such shell exists as an obstacle. I f anyone feels it as an obstacle, means he wish to come out to the next stage without growth; means without personal changes, qualitative changes or subjective changes. Even though someone could come to next stage without such growth, he will not be able to survive there.  The one who cannot make or who doesn’t willing to make such qualitative changes, subjective changes, always see objective causes in their problems. Means they see the shell that protects them as an obstacle. When the qualitative changes in us culminate to a specific level, obstacles will become obsolete and weak therefore they shall fall away. We needn’t blame and criticize them. So when you fail, make introspection to know where you want to get more strength or more growth.

This is a universal law. Look into the stages of a butterfly from the stage of a larva. It becomes pupa at a particular stage of growth then began to grow inside the pupa the strong covering with silk threads. But whatever the strength of pupa that doesn’t matter at another particular point of growth, breaking the covering, it comes out as a beautiful butterfly.

A seed’s interior goes through changes, grows internally, and at a particular time of growth it breaks the outer shell and come out as a sprout and again to grow to face another stage of change and again transforms. (John 12:24)

So if the obstacles (it may different in types like social, political, financial, and educational so and so)   exist against us, it means we have to grow to break it. Obstacles mean the need of growth, need of change.

How to grow to break such obstacles and get transformed to next stage of growth or success?
Use this above-mentioned principle in personal growth. As the growth of inner being of a person at a particular stage breaks his shell, all his personal limitations, and transforms to a new personality bestowing best performance in new areas so this transformed, grown, personality overthrow social, political, economical or any other barriers or limitations.

How to make changes internally to transform personally? Most important thing, the thing deserves first priority, is ‘always be positive’, always try to fill your mind with positive emotions. It is not easy but to say it is very easy. The best way to practice it is to practice meditation; if you are a believer then it is easy. Otherwise, practice autosuggestion. Think always about positive things and peoples and cooperate with such people, keep distance with negative people and emotions. Participate in all programs which contribute positive attitude and thought. Maintain positive emotions such as faith, hope, love, enthusiasm etc. Hear music a few minutes every day. Read good books which give us positive attitudes, especially about persons who rose up from failures and humble beginnings like Gandhi, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, Mandela etc.   Whenever you face hardship, take it positively and believe it is a transition point, you are on the cross; resurrection is nearby and works for your goals. Most of the failure occurs at the transition point because it is the time of hardship, none will be ready to go through and imbibe energy from it. So give up at this point because as I mentioned earlier we try to see matters objectively, reasons in the environment, not subjectively, within us. Don’t give up but imbibe energy from it. In each failure there is a seed of success or a hidden success, try to find it out. If you can continue this way a few months, sometime a few weeks, you can see the improvements in your life. Without your awareness, many mental abilities and qualities will have been developed in you amazingly, enough to break your obstacle shell.

If your ‘inner being’ cannot break your personal limits, you will not be able to break the limits and obstacle around you. So don’t focus on your personal limit but unlimited possibilities which the ‘inner you’ offers. Human thoughts, imaginations, confidence broke his limits so that he could break the limit of the sky; now he travels to the unlimited space.

Helen Keller is the everlasting example for this fact. In full  Helen Adams Keller (born June 27, 1880, Tuscumbia, Ala., U.S. died June 1, 1968, Westport, Conn.) American author and educator who was blind and deaf. Her education and training represent an extraordinary accomplishment in the education of persons with these disabilities.

Keller was afflicted at the age of 19 months with an illness (possibly scarlet fever) that left her blind, deaf, and mute. She was examined by Alexander Graham Bell at the age of six; as a result, he sent to her a 20-year-old teacher, Anne Sullivan (Macy) from the Perkins Institution for the Blind in Boston, which Bell's son-in-law directed. Sullivan, a remarkable teacher, remained with Keller from March 1887 until her own death in October 1936.

Within months Keller had learned to feel objects and associate them with words spelled out by finger signals on her palm, to read sentences by feeling raised words on cardboard, and to make her own sentences by arranging words in a frame. During 1888–90 she spent winters at the Perkins Institution learning braille. Then she began a slow process of learning to speak under Sarah Fuller of the Horace Mann School for the Deaf, also in Boston. She also learned to lip-read by placing her fingers on the lips and throat of the speaker while the words were simultaneously spelled out for her. At age 14 she enrolled in the Wright-Humason School for the Deaf in New York City, and at 16 she entered the Cambridge School for Young Ladies in Massachusetts. She won admission to Radcliffe College in 1900 and graduated cum laude in 1904.

Having developed skills never approached by any similarly disabled person, Keller began to write of blindness, a subject then taboos in women's magazines because of the relationship of many cases to venereal disease. Edward W. Bok accepted her articles for the Ladies' Home Journal, and other major magazines—The Century, McClure's, and The Atlantic Monthly—followed suit.

She wrote of her life in several books, including The Story of My Life (1902), Optimism (1903), The World I Live In (1908), My Religion (1927), Helen Keller's Journal (1938), and The Open Door (1957). In 1913 she began lecturing (with the aid of an interpreter), primarily on behalf of the American Foundation for the Blind, for which she later established a $2 million endowment fund, and her lecture tours took her several times around the world. Her efforts to improve treatment of the deaf and the blind were influential in removing the disabled from asylums. She also prompted the organization of commissions for the blind in 30 states by 1937. Keller's childhood training with Anne Sullivan was depicted in William Gibson's play The Miracle Worker (New York opening, October 19, 1959), which won the Pulitzer Prize in 1960 and was subsequently made into a motion picture (1962) that won two Academy Awards.

This is the true life of a lady of a blind, deaf and mute who had only limitations nothing else in the world. But her ‘inner being’ the undying spirit outgrew all her personal limiting obstacles and conquered the world and became a heroine in the history in her own way. Don’t focus on limitations but focus on the one that resides in you who can overcome any personal limitations and obstacles and thereby overcome all barriers that stand against you in your social, political or financial environment.



   



Sunday, June 5, 2016

Happy Marriage


Everyone likes to lead a happy marriage and work for it in deferent ways. Some try to find a model to follow. These both ways shall not make a marriage happy. Whatever effort you make no use, not the effort that makes a marriage happy. If you follow some example, that shall also not work in your particular relation because you cannot become someone else and if you try to follow some example, there is also a chance of falling in danger. Why?


We can see many happy couples live around us now a day; in parks, in restaurants, in coffee cafes, in internet cafes, along with road sides, so and so we can see them spending time laughing, playing games, cracking jokes etc. If we decide to follow such a life, means follow such an example; we have to ask ourselves a question. Whether they are leading happy lives? Then what kind of happiness they experience? Long lasting one or momentary? Then another question comes along with these questions, how we will know these facts?  Again ask why they are happy? Now you are close to the matter. Most of the happy couples we see in such places are happy because they have enough to spend. They will have a good bank balance, sometimes a good income from business or a good family asset. So they are leading a life of pleasure or enjoying consumerism. You may not able to lead such a happy life because of the lack of such wealth and assets. They may lead such a life as long as they have the material resource to live so. Again we should ask a question if these people come to a situation in which they lose everything and at the brim of starvation, can they be happy? No, most of them will blame each other, sometimes blame and curse their marriage. So this kind of happiness is not absolute happiness or joy but it depended. So following example of every happy couple is not wise.

A real happy marriage is pivoted on unconditional ‘love'. If it is so, in any social and financial conditions the couple can maintain joy in their life. As long as this unconditional emotion's presence is not there between spouses, a happy marriage is not possible, no use in working hard to mend marriage and following an example. Such a true love is divine, for such divine love man/woman will give up anything and in turn, that kind of love motivates and energizes them without limit. The best example is King Edward who abdicated crown to live with Wallis Simpson. The King signed the Instrument of Abdication on 10 December 1936, in the presence of his three surviving brothers, the Duke of York (who would ascend the throne the following day as George VI), the Duke of Gloucester and the Duke of Kent. Special laws passed by the Parliaments of the Dominions finalized Edward's abdication the following day. On 11 December 1936, Edward said in a radio broadcast, "I have found it impossible to carry the heavy burden of responsibility, and to discharge my duties as King as I would wish to do, without the help and support of the woman I love".

And marriage life is a bilateral process. If one side is not willing the total relation is in danger, so it is not possible by being only one partner faithful and loving to make marriage happy and fine. Jesus is the greatest example of unconditional love. His ministry and church are considered as his bride. He loved intensely his bride, but his bride betrayed him because his love was unconditional but his ministry's, his bride's, was not so. The unconditional love existed between them was not bilateral. That led to the crucifixion, the biggest tragedy in the human history.  So we have to care the love that we maintain to be unconditional and bilateral in marriage life. If our love in marriage is conditional and nonbilateral, that is a betrayal and it will lead to a crucifixion.

Check always our heart to see whether I set any condition before my spouse for anything. If it is so then it means within a short time your marriage is going to ruin because the love is not unconditional and divine. Most of the love we see around us is generated from the culture of consumerism; use, exploit maximum then avoid. Means the love we maintain is to exploit, to use. That love is a love of consumerism, not divine. Sometimes we will get instructions and advice to behave conditionally with our spouse, beware away from such company.

What will happen if we set such condition for love from the side of our spouse? What does it mean by setting condition for love? Means, if the condition is not fulfilled, I will seek the place for love where it is fulfilled. In this juncture, not the love we value but the condition. That's betrayal for thirty silver coins. All those love for material benefit, convenience or comfort are betraying love.  I can point out a real event occurred here in Cochin, Kerala, India.

In Cochin, there is a naval base. There are quarters for navy officers in Cochin naval base. As we know navy officers draw good salary and allowances. Their lives are very comfortable and luxurious. They used to get together often for dinner with their spouses. Their spouses enjoyed the special allowance and other convenience for the spouses of naval officers. So they loved this special status and convenience more than their officer husbands. So gradually their indulgence became in these conditions, means they loved their husbands conditionally, they loved them because of these conditions. The officers' mentalities were also the same. So gradually their love became towards only the conditions where they had been. They decided to enjoy it maximum. So in one get together and dinner they decided to enjoy the conditions maximum swapping wives. They carried out their plan and continued as a routine in their get-togethers, but one estranged wife of an officer filed a case in Kerala high court against this immoral activity. The court has ordered to conduct police inquiry into this case.


We can understand from this that where the conditional love takes us to and where the unconditional love takes us to, in our marriage lives. 

Monday, March 28, 2016

Accept Freudian technique means rebuild it on our Doctrine


In my last post, I very strongly supported the application of Freudian psychoanalysis in the congregation. But it doesn’t mean we have to accept everything Freud serves before us, we have to modify it. That is what Pfister did. He didn’t accept Freudian technique as what it was. But he modified it according to the doctrines on which he built up his life. To prove it I would like to quote a letter which was sent to Pfister by Freud in Feb 1909. It is as follows.

Berggasse 19
Vienna IX,
9.02.1909

Dear Dr. Pfister,
I  have to-day re-read your valuable paper, to which I shall open a discussion to-morrow in our small circle,  and I should like to hear more from you on the subject than I can gather from the printed word and say more about it than can be put in a letter. Perhaps the opportunity for such an exchange of ideas will arise. To-day I shall confine myself to throwing light on the difference between your field of activity and the medical, as you can also confirm in Stekel.

The permanent success of psycho-analysis certainly depends on the coincidence of two issues: the obtaining of satisfaction by the release of tension, and sublimation of the sheer instinctual drive. If we generally succeed only with the former, that is to be attributed to a great extent to the human raw material -human beings who have been suffering severely for a long time and expect no moral elevation from the physician, and are often inferior material. In your case, they are young persons faced with conflicts of recent date, who are personally drawn towards you and are ready for sublimation, and to sublimation in its most comfortable form, namely the religious. They do not suspect that success with them comes about in your case primarily by the same route as it does with us, by way of erotic transference to yourself. But you are in the fortunate position of being able to lead them to God and bringing about what in this one respect was the happy state of earlier times when religious faith stifled the neuroses. For us, this way of disposing of the matter does not exist. Our public, no matter of what racial origin, is irreligious, we are generally thoroughly irreligious ourselves and, as the other ways of sublimation which we substitute for religion are too difficult for most patients, our treatment generally results in the seeking out of satisfaction. On top of this there is the fact that we are unable to see anything forbidden or sinful in sexual satisfaction, but regard it as a valuable part of human experience. You are aware that for us the term 'sex' includes what you in your pastoral work call love, and is certainly not restricted to the crude pleasure of the senses. Thus our patients have to find in humanity what we are unable to promise them from above and are unable to supply them with ourselves. Things are therefore much more difficult for us, and in the resolution of the transference, many of our successes come to grief.

In itself, psycho-analysis is neither religious nor nonreligious, but an impartial tool which both priest and layman can use in the service of the sufferer. I am very much struck by the fact that it never occurred to me how extraordinarily helpful the psycho-analytic method might be in pastoral work, but that is surely accounted for by the remoteness from me, as a wicked pagan, of the whole system of ideas.

Let me express the hope that your interest will not fade if the first phase of striking successes gives way to the familiar second phase in which the difficulties tend to obtrude. After overcoming the latter one attains a feeling of quiet confidence.

 I make practically no use of the association technique and see no advantage in it over my own technique of free association, which has not been fully communicated yet. However, in intractable cases- as I knew and as is confirmed once more from your reports- it is very valuable, and for dealing with psychotic states such as dementia praecox it is indispensable. That is because our neurotics suffer severely and put a high degree of cooperativeness at our disposal.

It is certainly not the least of our friend Jung's services that he has become the source of stimuli such as impelled you to your work. Let us hope that the spark that we keep from going out here by laborious fanning will turn you into a fire from which we in our turn will be able to fetch a flaming torch.

Yours with grateful thanks,
Freud



Sunday, March 27, 2016

Congregation and Psychoanalysis

 Some of my friends have been accusing a Biblical fellowship of teaching Freudian Technics. Actually, these fellows had been working among the people of this fellowship for decades.  Before we criticize anything, we have to know enough about it. Each and everyone doesn’t know everything. But the ability to access the required information and assimilate it quickly then react to the situation is also known as wisdom. Without it, blindly accuse somebody or something is the job of fools.
 But I am not going to check why they criticize, but as usual, everything is a material before me to study, I decided to study the subject ‘teaching believers Freudian psychoanalysis’, to know how much or to what extent it is a sin. I have read Freudian theory before but in this case, I needed to read it from a different point of view. So I searched for the literature related to psychoanalysis. By God’s grace, in the first attempt itself, I got what I needed.  The e-book titled “Psychoanalysis and faith” from the archive of UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA LIBRARIES. When began read, I totally discouraged because it is a collection of letters. Later I could understand that the same was I needed for the present situation. I would like to copy the preface, written by Heinrich Meng, of that book. This preface itself closes the mouth of those foolish criticizers who pretend as scholars and wise men. It is as follows.

OSKAR Pfister, the youngest of the four sons of a Protestant pastor, was born in Zurich in 1873. He lost his father at the age of three. After attending school in Zurich he studied theology, philosophy, and psychology in Zurich, Basle, and Berlin. His first congregation was at Wald in the canton of Zurich, and in 1902 he joined the Zurich circuit, of which he remained a member until his retirement in 1939. In 1934 he received an honorary degree from the theological faculty of the University of Geneva.

His first wife, Erika, nee Wunderli, died in 1929, leaving a son who is now a psychiatrist in Zurich, His second wife was a widowed cousin, Martha Zuppinger-Urner, who already had two children, to whom Pfister was an admirable father.

During the first years of his ministry, Pfister wrote a paper protesting against 'the sins of omission towards the psychology of present-day theology'. In 1908 he came across the work of Freud, which provided him with the tool for which he had long sought, enabling him to give additional aid to those whom his spiritual aid alone had been insufficient. He made his way to the unconscious and half-conscious sources of anxiety states, doubts of conscience and obsessional ideas of those who sought his help and, in so far as medical intervention was not called for, worked with them in loosening up and dispersing their psychological difficulties, fixations and repressions, and independently laid the foundations of a psychologically oriented system of education and pastoral work.

Between 1909 and his death in 1956 he published numerous books and papers in which he described his work and observations, in particular on psycho-analytic technique, on the aetiological importance of sexuality in the formation of the neuroses, on religion and hysteria, the psychology of art, philosophy and psychoanalysis, analysis in pastoral work, Christianity and anxiety, and related themes.

A matter of especial concern to him was the application of psychoanalytic findings to education, a field of study to which he gave the name of paedanalysis.

It would be a great mistake to assume that because of his work in the field of psycho-analysis Pfister neglected his pastoral work or his spiritual duties. He was a man incapable of doing things by halves, and in his ministry he was wholeheartedly and utterly sincere, radiating warmth and benevolence and helpfulness to all who turned to him. His friend Pastor Pfenninger writes of him: 'As the representative of a free Christianity he was opposed to all dogma, but he met with understanding and love those who held fast to dogma because of inner ties . . . and he was backed by the love of his congregation.'

His relations with Freud continued through all the years of his ministry and were consolidated in numerous letters and occasional meetings. The two men were real friends. Their correspondence demonstrates how close and productive was the bond between them. Their temperaments, and the honesty and integrity which characterized both, often brought them into sharp conflict, but they also always showed true tolerance and mutual understanding.

Pfister's Illusion of a Future, written in reply to Freud's The Future of an Illusion, illustrates the personal courage, critical ability, practiced skill, as well as respect for Freud's greatness, with which his theologically and psychoanalytically trained colleague opposed his master. This controversy is an example of how scientific discussion with Freud should be conducted. The difference from Freud does not mean breaking with him. On the contrary, as Goethe said, differing opinions on a subject need part men only when their basic outlook differs. But in this Freud and Pfister were closely akin. At the roots of both lay love of truth, indeed love itself, as the central factor in obtaining an understanding of mankind, a total lack of compromise in relation to the ultimate and highest values, and incorruptibility by praise or blame.


A number of Pfister's works were stimulated by conversation and correspondence with Freud, and similarly, Freud took suggestions from Pfister for his own work. There is, for instance, no doubt that he accepted the most varied suggestions for the technique of child analysis from Pfister's very concrete communications concerning the psycho-analysis of children and young persons at the stage of puberty.


In accordance with Pfister's calling, it was in the pastoral field that his analytic work was most fruitful. It is interesting to note that Freud, who speaks of himself as a 'secular pastoral worker',  has an open ear for the technique and experiences of the religious and spiritual pastoral worker Pfister, while the latter emphasizes the objectivity of Freud, who described himself as being devoid of religious feeling. In this connection Pfister quotes the letter Freud wrote him in which he said:

In itself, psycho-analysis is neither religious nor non-religious, but an impartial tool which both priest and layman can use in the service of the sufferer. I am very much struck by the fact that it never occurred to me how extraordinarily helpful the psychoanalytic method might be in pastoral work, but that is surely accounted for by the remoteness from me, as a wicked pagan, of the whole system of ideas.

Pfister's contributions to the practice of psycho-analysis are contained in numerous publications. Even more important than the written word was the impact of his personality. His thesis that true religion can be a defense against neurosis was not denied by Freud, though he thought that in this loveless world it was a rarity and therefore not a thing not to be depended on.


When he talked about his correspondence with Freud, Pfister was full of gratitude, pride, and pleasure of the structure on which the two 'architects' had worked over the years. In 1944 he entrusted joint responsibility for its publication to the undersigned, subject to the condition that he also imposed on Anna Freud, namely that nothing should be published that might give offense to any living person.


                                                                                                                                                                      Heinrich Meng