A.H. Almaas.

Work on the Superego

GROWTH
Man's ordinary state of consciousness leaves him falling far short of what he
could be: a fully conscious and fully alive human being. This ordinary state falls
somewhere in the middle of the continuum between the pathological and the
fully conscious, and has no clear demarcations. Growth, as we see it, is
movement or evolution from that middle range toward more consciousness and
more life, and is the actualization of man's inherent potential.
The fully conscious and alive individual is totally present in the moment and
perceives each situation as it is, free from all prejudice and all bias. His
perceptions and his actions are not hampered by emotional or mental
preconceptions and are not conditioned by past experience. Therefore, his
perception is accurate and his action is to the point; accordingly, he has the
capacity to respond efficiently, in tune with the needs of each situation he
encounters.[1] This, of course, implies a certain kind of freedom, which such an
individual experiences within his body as a lack of barriers to the movement of
energy. His emotions flow unhindered and are appropriate responses to the
situations he encounters. This quantitative change from man's normal mode
results in a qualitative change in the content of such a person's inner
experience, which cannot be accessed by an ordinary person, even in his
imagination.
Although this state is not conceived of by the majority of humanity, it is still a
potential for each human being. There is proof enough of its reality in the few
individuals of the various spiritual traditions who have realized it.[2] That it is
difficult to attain does not negate its possibility. All disciplines truly oriented
toward freeing man attempt to realize it. The desire for growth and expansion
is, among other things, a direct consequence of the experience of the absence
of this condition of freedom, indicating that something necessaryand
therefore attainableis missing.
With this ideal condition as a background, the process of growth and
unfoldment becomes easier to understand and appreciate: any deviation from
this condition indicates the presence of prejudices based on the past, whether
obvious or hidden, and growth is a matter of uncovering these prejudices and
moving beyond them.
THE ORDINARY STATE
In contrast to the fully conscious individual, the average human being suffers
from conscious or unconscious prejudices, whether they are racial, social, or
personals.[3] These prejudices not only color a person's perceptions and
actions, but also his relationship to others, since relationships involve both
perception and action. He does not see a situation or a person as is, but rather
through his own filter of prejudices and biases; and this leads to inappropriate
responses and actions. The result is suffering and frustration, and ultimately a
dampening of life.
A hypothetical example is that of a man asking a woman for a date in which the
woman says no. The man feels rejected and assumes she rejected him because
there is something wrong with him. He thinks this because he projects his own

self hatred onto the woman. The woman really said no because she is afraid
that if the man gets to know her better, he will uncover her inadequacies. She
likes him, but rejects him out of fear. She is afraid because she projects her
self-judgments on him. They both suffer as a consequence of inaccurate
perception distorted by projection, due to certain personal prejudices.
This hypothetical example illustrates the ordinary functioning of perception
and action between people. It is not an extreme case, although its negative
content might lead one to think so. A psychologically normal man would forget
this incident quickly; while if psychopathology were present, the man, if he
even managed to talk to the woman, would be incapacitated for some time. A
really healthy man would accept the rejection without any prejudice of his own
and with no consequent suffering. In fact, he might not even have asked her in
the first place because his acute awareness might have told him her answer
directly. This illustratesin a very rough mannerthe continuum of possible
reactions based on conditions of consciousness.
When we use the word "prejudice," we don't mean just its common restricted
usage: having fixed ideas about a particular group, race, religion, or set of
beliefs. Prejudice, as we are using it, means anything that distorts the
objective perception of reality. In other words, we consider prejudice anything
that determines the attitude of a person that is not totally in accord with what
actually is. Prejudice, of course, comes in many varieties, operates on all
levels, and is not always as simple or obvious as in the example above. Mental
attitudes, emotional predispositions, beliefs, and ideals are just a few obvious
kinds of prejudice. Some are so imbedded in the personality that the individual
takes them to be part and parcel of reality. They determine the individual's
range of ideas, feelings, and actions; and they influence him on many levels
including character structure,[4] body structure,[5] and lifestyle. They
determine his relationship to himself, to other people, and to situations in
general.
CONDITIONING
How do these prejudices come about, and why are many of them so hidden?
The answer comes from the psychological theory of conditioning. The most
relevant proven fact is that the human being is impressionable and can be
conditioned to respond in certain ways to certain stimuli. The human infant, if
not physiologically damaged, usually responds appropriately to inner and outer
stimuli. When hungry, he cries for food; and when satisfied, he is happy and
goes to sleep. However, the environment is not always understanding or
responsive to the child's nature or needs. The child is discouraged from certain
actions or encouraged toward other actions that might not be his own choices.
He is expected to be and behave in particular ways; otherwise, he receives
some form of punishment. He is encouraged (implicitly or explicitly) not to
express or even feel certain emotions. Because the human child is so
dependent on his parents, he learns to get or keep their love and protection by
accommodating them.[6] He is dependent on them for his very survival, and so
is motivated by his survival instinct to do whatever is necessary to retain their
love and avoid their displeasure. If he does not accommodate them, he is afraid
of losing them or their love, and that would threaten his very survival.
So the instinct for survival, which translates into fear of annihilation and death,
is the energy behind adaptation and hence, conditioning. The child finds

himself in the situation of having to be what his environment (parents) dictates

in order for him to survive. So we can say that it is due to the instinct for selfpreservation that acquiescence to the coercive forces in the environment
occurs. The child, then, adopts his parents' values and attitudes or rebels
against them. In either case, he is conditioned to be and to act in certain ways,
which, through the passage of time, become so ingrained that he takes them to
be his identity. Slowly he forgets his true identity and becomes what he is
being conditioned to be and to believe. He develops patterns of thought,
feeling, and action that become habitual and not always appropriate to the
moment. His relationship to his parents not only determines his relationship to
himself but also to other people, for it is the prototype of relationship with
others and makes its impact on his mind when he is most vulnerable and
impressionable. In later years, he relates to people in ways determined by how
he related to his parents as a child. The person, then, lives under the tyranny
of his past, instead of being free to be present in the moment. This does not
mean that the entirety of the individual is conditioned; rather, that the more
conditioned a person is, the less accurate are his perceptions, the less
appropriate are his actions, and the more pathological is his condition.
We see that growth is, at least in part, a process of Reconditioning, of freeing
parts of the individual that have become arrested by the bonds of repetitive
and compulsive ways of responding to life. It is the regaining of the capacity to
respond in a fresh manner, instead of reacting in outdated modes.
MODEL OF PERSONALITY
We have seen that the human child learns to avoid experiencing or expressing
certain things if he knows that he is going to be punished for them, and learns
to experience and express certain other things that will bring him love and
approval. So, certain impulses, feelings, ideas, and actions are suppressed and
in time become repressed [7], i.e., not available to consciousness. They form
part of what Freud called the unconscious.[8] The ego, in Freud's terminology,
is that portion of the psyche which has the capacity for suppressing and
repressing these impulses.
At the beginning, the external world, particularly the parents, is the primary
coercive agency that influences the ego and conditions it to be one way or
another. Of course, there are other influences, like constitution, heredity, and
temperament. Constitutional and parental influences overlap if we consider
that the prenatal experience is also a time of interaction with the parents. This
means that some of the experiences of the embryo in the womb can, and in
fact, do act as coercive agencies by imprinting the consciousness in such a way
that permanent structures are developed. For the ego to listen and obey the
demands of the external agencies (to avoid their displeasure and to gain their
love and approval), the ego develops ways to check and control certain of the
impulses of the organism. These methods are what are called the ego's defense
echanisms.[9] They are defenses against the impulses of the id (the largely
unconscious seat of the instincts in the psyche), and whatever thoughts,
fantasies, and sensations that cluster around them or point to them. But they
are, as we see, ultimately defenses against the coercive agencies, instituted to
defend against their punishments and to please them.
In time, the external coercive agencies become internalized. This is done
through the processes of introjection and identification, in which the coercive

agencies become part of the internal structure of the child. In other words, the
child psychically takes in parental demands, and they become his or her own.
We must remember here that these processes are defensive mechanisms, and
they are employed, in this instance, to avoid the loss or expected loss of the
parent or his love. So, becoming like the parent acts as a way of having him,
and hence as a defense against losing him; and at the same time, these
defenses are also used to get the parents love and approval. The resulting
inner coercive agency is what Freud called the superego.
Introjection and identification also constitute the primary psychic processes
that build the psychic structure in general, indicating that they have functions
which are not purely defensive. The superego, which these processes are
central in creating, is in reality the most structured and most highly developed
part of the psychic structure or ego. It becomes the inner regulating agency,
containing one's adopted and developed moral codes and standards of being
and action.
In the developed psychic structure, where both ego and superego have
developed and differentiated, the defense mechanisms become primarily
defenses against the superego." (The defense mechanisms are also defenses
against painful ego states, like those of separation anxiety and inadequacy;
these are deeper than the defenses against the recriminations of the superego,
and hence these latter ones are those first encountered in the process of
working on oneself.) The defense mechanisms we encounter initially function in
relation to the superego because as the ego and superego develop in
childhood, the identity becomes associated with the ego, and the superego
becomes the inner representative of the external coercive agencies. Hence, a
person learns to avoid the disapproval of the superego, and tries to do
everything to ingratiate it. The individual, in other words, learns to approve of
in himself what his parents approved of, and to disapprove of what they
disapproved of. What is disapproved of becomes mostly pushed out of
consciousness, relegated to the unconscious; and so these defense
mechanisms are ultimately forms of repression, as Freud articulated [12].' For
this repression to be done effectively, the whole operation becomes
unconscious; i.e., both the ego defense mechanism and the corresponding
coercive parts of the superego become unconscious.
Especially for the well developed and integrated ego, the moment that there is
the likelihood that part of the unconscious is going to surface to consciousness,
the ego starts experiencing anxiety. This anxiety is a response to the
anticipation of danger. In the past, libidinal impulses and accompanying
actions, and certain feelings and thoughts and their expression, became
perceived as dangerous to the person because of the reactions encountered in
the environment to them (especially from the parents) such as disgust,
rejection, punishment, abandonment, belittlement, humiliation, judgment,
criticism, invalidation, being threatened, doubted, ridiculed, made to feel guilty
or shameful, etc. Since the person learned to anticipate such reactions from
the environment in childhood and therefore suppressed himself, he now
anticipates the same reactions from his own superego. And the superego does
react in this way, because it is the internalization of all of these originally
external reactions.

In other words, the ego relates to the superego just like the child related to the
coercive agencies in his environmentafraid of its attacks. So the moment that
there is the possibility of unconscious material that drew attacks in the past
surfacing to consciousness, the ego responds with anxiety, the danger signal
anticipating a superego aback. The ego, to check the emergence of such
disapproved of material, employs its defense mechanisms, which results in
keeping such material out of consciousness.
It is important to understand that the necessity for repression first occurs in
childhood, when the ego is fragile and not developed enough to deal with the
external world or the instinctual and internal demands:
Even in organisms which later develop an efficient ego-organization, their ego
is feeble and little differentiated from their id to begin with during their first
years of childhood. Imagine now what will happen if this powerless ego
experiences an instinctual demand from the id which it would already like to
resist (because it knows that to satisfy it is dangerous and would conjure up a
traumatic situation, a collision with the external world) but which it cannot
control, because it does not yet possess enough strength to do so. In such a
case the ego treats the instinctual danger as if it was an external one; it makes
an attempt at flight, draws back from this portion of the id, and leaves it to its
fate, after withholding from it all the contributions which it usually makes to
instinctual impulses. The ego, as we put it, institutes a repression of these
instinctual impulses. For the moment this has the effect of fending off the
danger; but one cannot confuse the inside with the outside with impunity. One
cannot run away from oneself. In repression the ego is following the pleasure
principle, which it is usually in the habit of correcting; and it is bound to suffer
damage in revenge. This lies in the ego's having permanently narrowed its
sphere of influence. The repressed instinctual impulse is now isolated, left to
itself, inaccessible, but also un-influenceable. It goes its own way. Even later, as
a rule, when the ego has grown stronger, it still cannot lift the repression; its
synthesis is impaired, a part of the id remains forbidden ground to the egos.
[13] (Within our work, a more accurate term than organism here is "soul.")
However, this simple repression, which is caned the primary defense, does not
always work perfectly; and so some unconscious material pushes toward
consciousness, activating a state of anxiety. Implied within this anxiety is the
unconscious material, whether libidinal or any other repressed part of the soul.
If the anxiety remains conscious, this material will emerge to consciousness,
bringing about attacks from the superego.
So a secondary defensive process is developed to bind this anxiety and to
render it unconscious, cementing the work of repression. This is sometimes
accomplished through the development of symptoms and phobias, but most
often it is done through the building of the character structure of the
individual. Character patterns and traits take the place of specific symptoms,
and when they dissolve, anxiety emerges followed by the unconscious
historical material, as Wilhelm Reich demonstrated.[14]
This anxiety is always present because these impulses and feelings are always
in the unconscious, and so the defenses are always operating to ward off this
anxiety and the ensuing attacks of the superego. The defenses therefore
become chronic.

Every time these impulses get stronger or the person is in situations reminding
him of them, the anxiety increases, which means that the defenses also have to
get stronger. This is usually experienced as tension. (From this we see that in
the process of retrieving the unconscious, we can expect that the defenses get
stronger when a person gets closer to these impulses and feelings. While he
isn't conscious of this, this mobilizing of defenses might manifest as the person
wanting to quit the task.)
When the anxiety becomes too much for the defenses to bind, what is called
free floating anxiety results, which is sometimes experienced as nervousness.
Even under normal circumstances, there is usually a low level of free floating
anxiety present.
When the defenses start actuary breaking down, a person will experience
increased anxiety, followed by the repressed impulses and feelings. So under
normal circumstances, the presence of unusual anxiety indicates that some
defenses are dissolving and that some piece of the unconscious is pushing
toward consciousness. Anxiety, therefore, can be seen as a prelude to selfknowledge.
We see, then, that the anxiety that starts the process of repression is fear of
the superego. The superego, however, not only conditions our inner life
through fear, but it also gives approval to the things that the external coercive
agencies gave approval to in childhood. Although such approval may appear
harmless, since the approval is for certain directions of libido or manifestations
of the soul, it also contributes to the creation of prejudices which in turn help
to create compulsive patterns of thought, feeling, and behavior. These, in turn,
become incorporated into the character structure.
As it is a suppressive agent, the superego uses the energy of aggression in its
control of the ego. Most of this aggressive energy is nothing but the
aggression that the child experienced toward the coercive agencies in
childhood. Now this aggression is used by the superego to punish the ego; i.e.,
it is retroflected.[15]
We mentioned earlier that the energy supporting the process of conditioning is
that of the instinct of self-preservation. Now we see that it is this same energy
which starts and sustains the superego. In other words, the superego is ready
formed in the service of self-preservation. This does not contradict Freud's
theory that it is formed as a response to castration anxiety, because castration
anxiety is preceded, as he himself asserted, by the fear of helplessness which
we saw as arising out of the fear of death. "It may be said that to a given
period of development is assigned the anxiety occasioning situation which is,
so to speak, appropriate to it. Psychic helplessness is the danger which is
consonant with the period of immaturity of the ego, as object loss is the danger
appertaining to the state of dependence of early childhood, the danger of
castration to the phallic phase, and dread of the superego to the latency
period."[16]
Therefore, it is the aggression of the instinct of self preservation that the
superego directs toward the ego. (This aggression is actually a distorted
expression of the vitality of the life force, which has the essential aspect of
Strength as its primary element.) As we saw earlier, this introjection of the
coercive agencies is the only way that the child's ego finds to preserve itself

and to avoid the wrath and suppression of the external coercive agencies. The
ego does not need this inner coercive agency in the years of maturity, but
continues to act as if it does. No longer dependent on the parents, the ego,
now being the structured part of the soul, really needs only knowledge in
adulthood; but it keeps behaving as though the superego's rules and
suppression are still necessary for survival.
As Idries Shah says it:
Certain coercive agencies have become indispensable to the victims. People
with closed minds or small ranges of thought and action depend for their
pleasures upon the rewards offered by obedience to the coercive agency. If this
obedience is couched in the form of disobedience, they feel that they are not
coerced.
Such people cannot make progress towards their mental liberation at one
bound. Their world has to be made larger, and to be seen to be larger, before
they can take any step beyond their narrow life.[17]
So the superego, which was erected to preserve and protect life, becomes a
coercive agency that leads to death not only in the mental, emotional, and
spiritual sense; but sometimes also in the physical sense, as in the case of
psychosomatic illness and self-destructive behavior. In fact, psychosomatic
illness is frequently nothing but physical destruction resulting from the
aggression of the superego toward the self. So we see that because of
ignorance, which is itself the result of this process, the self-preservation
instinct turns against itself; and the superego, using the aggression of this
instinct, becomes the agent of death, the force opposing life. This distortion of
the energy of self-preservation transforms the life-force and its essential
strength into destructive and angry aggression. The superego becomes the
coercive agency par excellence.
The way we are using the concept of the superego here is somewhat different
from Freud's definition. Ours includes Freud's, but also includes all other inner
coercive agencies. Freud saw the superego as the part of the mind that
contains moralizing and punitive attitudes, whose development is mainly a
reaction to castration anxiety. Our definition of the superego includes all
influences in the mind that enforce compulsive patterns in the ego and that are
based on any evaluation, whether of good or bad, high or low. As long as the
ego does not perceive and respond to reality objectively, it is either a distorted
structure or is under the influence of the superego, assuming that there are no
actual coercive agencies in the environment or physical damage to the
organism. The superego is that part of the person that maintains repression
and fights any changes to the status quo. It is one of the main reasons why the
ego defenses are needed (defending against painful ego states and
maintaining ego structures being the others, as noted earlier); and hence it is
responsible for the presence of prejudices, overt and covert. It is the tyrant
king who maintains the status quo of conditioning.
Psychoanalysis tries to uncover the unconscious primarily through resistance
analysis. This method has proven not to be terribly successful. This, however,
does not warrant rejecting the whole Freudian system; it only means that the
techniques used in it are not highly effective. Other therapeutic approaches
have been more effective in getting through the ego resistances. Body

oriented therapies owe whatever success they have to identifying the egoresistances in the musculature and posture of the physical body. In Reichian
therapy, one is helped to tolerate one's unpleasant feelings of anxiety, guilt,
anger, fear, etc., and the sensations that accompany them. When this is
accomplished, the defense mechanisms become ineffective and the
unconscious is retrieved. Bioenergetics facilitates the loosening of chronic
muscular tensions with expressive movements, stressful postures, breathing,
and analysis, and hence defuses the defense mechanisms.[18]
However, even the body approaches will not work effectively if one does not
learn to deal with the superego. Dissolving the body armor, which is the
somatic expression of the defenses, will bring up unconscious material, but in
so doing the ego becomes vulnerable to attacks of the superego. If one does
not know how to deal with these attacks, the worked through defenses will
reassert themselves or new ones will be found in order to avoid the onslaught
of the superego. Of course, the superego has its physical counterpart in the
armor, but this is not usually emphasized in any of the body approaches.
Our understanding of the superego also helps us to understand why some
people get into trouble by engaging in powerful spiritual exercises designed to
free one's energy. It is true that the energy can be released in this way, but this
then leaves one vulnerable to the superego. Ecstatic or spiritual states usually
do not last because, among other things, anxiety or superego attacks return
after a while and the defenses reassert themselves, sometimes stronger than
before. This happens unless one has learned to tolerate anxiety and defend
against the superego. A sound spiritual teaching must therefore include the
preparation of dealing with the superego.
Many therapeutic and growth disciplines can be seen as different ways of
getting through the ego resistances to unconscious material, although some
approaches reject this terminology. The classical approaches see ego
resistances as defenses against the id impulses; while in our work, especially
in the initial stages, we see them as defenses against the superego. The
superego, as we have seen, is the first coercive agency that we encounter in
working on ourselves, which we find to be invested in keeping the unconscious
unconscious and which accomplishes this by disapproving of the unconscious
material. So, our approach is to help the ego consciously defend itself against
the attacks of the superego, and hence to eliminate this important part of the
need for unconscious ego defense mechanisms. If this is done, some awareness
of feelings and sensations will bring up the part of the unconscious
disapproved of by the superego, now that the ego is not guarding against it.
This in turn will bring up other attitudes of the superego, which the person can
then learn to work with. Deeper layers of the unconscious will surface, like
those related to painful ego states or to the elements of the ego structure. This
process can continue until all repressed material becomes conscious, which
means that all hidden prejudices are recognized and dealt with; and in this way
the superego loses all of its coercive power. In this stage of working on oneself,
the ego turns against the superego, instead of against the id or the other
repressed parts of the soul.
We mentioned before that the superego uses the energy of aggression against
the ego. At this stage, this aggression is turned outward against the superego.
Besides dealing with the superego effectively, the ego now has access to

energy which it can use to deal with the external world. Previously, this energy
was used to defend against the life force; now it can be used in its service. Not
only is the energy of aggression retrieved for the service of life, but its
distortion is eliminated in the process: The individual not only learns to use
this energy for defending herself, but also reowns her essential strength.
As we have seen, the superego is nothing but the internalized coercive
agencies that were once external forces. So dealing with one's own superego
goes hand in hand with dealing with all coercive agencies in the environment,
especially the superegos of others. In the process, the individual learns how to
deal with his environment efficiently, and his aggression becomes used for life,
instinctual and essential, as is appropriate. Dealing with one's own mind, then,
and dealing with the external world are part of the same process.
Every time the individual succeeds in defending against the superego, a certain
amount of aggressive energy is liberated and can manifest as anger. This is
why anger is frequently experienced simultaneously with the process of
defending oneself. In other words, the anger that was directed by the superego
toward the ego is now in the possession of the ego, to use for whatever
purpose it chooses. We have observed that when a person is engaged in the
process of disengaging from the superego, she is strengthened and endowed
with more energy. In fact, one is strengthened not only by reowning one's
anger, but also, and more fundamentally, by integrating the essential aspect of
Strength, which is the energetic basis of the emotion of anger.
This approach addresses any new prejudices that are incorporated into the
superego through the process of working on oneself Whenever a person works
within a certain system, the values and prejudices of that system are
automatically incorporated into his superego, and in time become coercive
agencies.[19] Or, to put it more graphically, the individual develops the
particular system's superego. Any value of a system that becomes rigidified
and not a direct response to reality is obviously a coercive agency. Values are
not static; they may be appropriate for certain situations and at certain times,
but if carried beyond a particular situation or time of usefulness, they must be
discarded, or else they will become impediments to growth. If the superego is a
focus of one's work, then everything incorporated into it will be seen and dealt
with. This guards against the ossification and rigidification of new values and
attitudes, which the superego is very clever at incorporating as a way of hiding
and strengthening its old ones by making them invisible.
Through working in this way with the superego, all standards, attitudes, and
values will be recognized until one can deal with naked reality without the need
for them. When this occurs, it marks the end of the superego, and the
beginning of the arising of essential conscience, our inherent knowing of what
is or is not appropriate.
This notion might provoke fear for two different reasons: First, it might
encourage some of one's libidinal impulses or repressed feelings, which in turn
activates anxiety. Secondly, one who lives under the domination of the
superego cannot imagine living without its rules and values because he does
not know reality, or does not trust in its existence or even in its desirability.
Such a person feels the need for, and vehemently upholds morality and its
standards regardless of the requirements of reality. This attitude is not

restricted to certain people, for as we know, everyone has their share of this
attitude.
This fear remains as long as the superego survives. In fact, it will sometimes
increase the more a person becomes free from the superego. This is because
freedom from the superego is experienced as more aliveness, which is exactly
what brought about the situation of danger in childhood. So every time a
person expands and gains more aliveness, the association to aliveness in
childhood will emerge as an attack from the superego; which will activate
anxiety. This is most apparent in the case of individuals whose parents couldn't
tolerate their aliveness because it threatened the parents' repression of their
own aliveness. In such cases, the child protects her parents by suppressing her
own aliveness, and at the same time protects herself from their attacks.
This fear is fear of life, and can be seen in those scared people who express a
suppressive and hostile attitude when they are around a person who is alive.
Such people are usually not in touch with the fear, but feel repulsion and
hostility toward the alive person. These reactions are rationalized with
judgments and criticisms, which are nothing but the attacks of their superegos.
As Shah puts it:
If you become diverted from us by our behavior,
you would never have been able to keep pace with us, anyway.
If this sounds unpleasant, it does not signify that it is
meant to be unpleasant. If you think that we are
unpleasant, you are holding up a mirror to yourself, and
saying, "Look at them!"[20]
We must, however, understand the psychodynamics of such attitudes. It is easy
to see that the child internalized the coercive agencies to guarantee her
survival. We have seen that risking these agencies' total rejection provokes
fear for her very survival; i.e., it is really the fear of annihilation and death that
is the core of anxiety. Total rebellion against the superego might reactivate this
fear of total rejection by the coercive agencies and the ensuing fear of total
helplessness, which to the undeveloped ego of the child is tantamount to the
extinction of the organism. This implies that to totally dissolve the superego,
the individual has to be willing to face the fear of death. This does not mean
that the individual has to actually face physical death in order to be free from
the superego, although in some cases this actually happens. Rather, it means
that the individual may experience fear of dying if she regresses to an infantile
state where rejection and abandonment meant death; and she has to be willing
to face this fear and learn that she can survive without the love and approval
of her parents, i.e., that she can survive without the superego.
The fact that the death of the superego (which leads to the birth of life) might
mean to the individual her own death, is often encountered in spiritual systems
as part of the notion of death and rebirth. In other words, this cessation of the
superego is necessary before we can allow that of the ego, which results in
spiritual awakening. An amusing story by Shah called A Death is Indicated
illustrates this point, if we see the king as the superego:

There was once a dervish who had sixty disciples. He had taught them as well
as he could, and the time came to undergo a new experience. He called the
disciples together and said:
"We must now go on a long journey. Something, I am not sure what, will
happen on the way. Those of you who have absorbed enough to enter this
stage will be able to accompany me.
"But first you must all memorize this phrase, 'I must die instead of the dervish:
Be prepared to shout this out at any time, whenever I raise both of my arms."
Some of the disciples started muttering among themselves, now highly
suspicious of the dervish's motives. No less than fifty-nine of the sixty
deserted him, saying, "He knows that he will be in danger at some time and is
preparing to sacrifice us instead of himself."
They said to him, "You may even be planning some crimeperhaps even a
murder; we can never follow you on terms like that!"
The dervish and his sole remaining companion started the journey.
Now a most terrible and unjust tyrant had seized the next city shortly before
they entered it. He wanted to consolidate his rule with a dramatic act of force
and called his soldiers together. He said to them: "Capture some wayfarer of
meek aspect and bring him for judgment in the public square. I prepare to
sentence him as a miscreant." The soldiers said, "We hear and obey!" and went
into the streets and pounced upon the first traveling stranger they met. He
happened to be the disciple of the dervish.
The dervish followed the soldiers to the place where the king sat, while all the
citizenry, hearing the drum of death and already trembling with fear, collected
around. The disciple was thrown in front of the throne and the king said, "I
have resolved to make an example of a vagabond, to show the people that we
will not tolerate nonconformists or attempted escape. You are to die at once."
At this the dervish called out in a loud voice: "Accept my life, O Mighty
Monarch, instead of the life of this useless youth. I am more blameworthy than
he, for it was I who induced him to embark upon a life of wandering!"
At this point he raised both arms above his head and the disciple cried out,
"Munificent King! Please allow me to die. I must die instead of the dervish!"
The king was quite amazed. He said to his counselors, "What kind of people are
these, vying with one another to taste death? If this is heroism, will it not
inflame the people against me? Advise me as to what to do."
The counselors conferred for a few moments. Then they said, "Peacock of the
Age! If this is heroism, there is little we can do about it, except to act more
viciously until people lose heart. But we have nothing to lose if we ask this
dervish why he is anxious to die."
When he was asked, the dervish replied, "Imperial Majesty! It has been
foretold that a man will die this day in this places and that he shall rise again
and thereafter be immortal. Naturally, both I and my disciple want to be that
man."

The king thought, "Why should I make another immortal when I myself am
not?" After a moment's reflection, he gave orders that he should be executed
immediately, instead of the wanderers. Then the worst of the king's evil
accomplices, eager for immortality killed themselves. None of them rose again,
and the dervish and his disciple went their way during the confusion.[21]
It is interesting to note here how the tyrant king uses the same methods of
suppression toward his subjects as does the superego toward the vagabond
instinctual impulses. Also, we see here how dealing with the internal superego
goes hand in hand with dealing with the external coercive agencies; the king
can stand for both.
THE SUPEREGO IN RELATIONSHIPS
A good arena within which to recognize, understand, and deal with the
superego is in our relationships with others. This is primarily because one
frequently projects one's superego onto certain individuals, and relates to
them as one does to one's own superego. Of course, this defense mechanism of
projection helps to keep the superego unconscious, just as any defense
mechanism does. A person can even project his superego onto a whole group,
all people in general, the universe, God, or even inanimate objects and natural
phenomena. The slightest association to a parental coercive figure suffices for
this projection.
Our discussion applies to all types of relationships, but intimate couple
relationships are stressed. When two people are relating, it is not only their
conscious egos that are involved but also their superegos. The superego is
present in the majority of cases in varying degrees and intensities. When a
person is rejecting or accepting according to certain values, it is the superego
that is at work. When a person is envious, jealous, afraid, etc., it is frequently
the result of the prejudices of his superego.
In our earlier example in which the man felt bad about himself after being
turned down for a date, this self-hatred is nothing but the hatred and the
rejection of his superego toward his ego that is projected onto the woman
instead of being seen as his own. When the woman says no to him, it is her
superego rejecting him. The mechanism works like this: the woman's superego
rejects her ego and belittles it; her ego projects her superego onto the man;
the woman defends against the man's assumed rejection by rejecting him; and
in this way is defending against the attacks of her own superego. If the woman
knew how to defend herself against her own superego, she would not have to
reject the man and she would feel free to be herself. We see that this
relationship is mainly between the two superegos, and the individuals hardly
have a chance to relate.
This does not mean that the couple wouldn't get along when their superegos
are relating. In fact in many cases, it is the superegos that get along, fitting
together in a tight net of collusion. This can be understood through the
phenomena of transference,[22] because the superego is mostly one's
internalized parents. Transference means relating to another as though they
were a significant person from one's childhood, usually a parent. Often, the
superego approves of the ego when the ego is attracted to someone
reminiscent of the parent of the opposite sex. In other instances, the superego
disapproves of the prospective partner unless the other person bears no

resemblance to this parent because the other internalized parent disapproves.

This possibly reflects a fear of castration.
Therefore we can say that the less free a person is from his superego, the more
his relationships are determined by itnot only in the choice of partners but
also in what transpires in the relationship. If the superegos complement each
other, we have a stable relationship. But it is stable only as long as there is no
growth or change. It is asserted here that in the majority of cases, stable
relationships are ones in which the two superegos can live together without
too much friction. In other words, they are superego relationships and not real
ones. In fact, often the individuals involved dislike each other but they still stay
together because of the dominance of their superegos. This is the situation
when relationships are based on dependency and insecurity. In other cases, the
couple cannot stay together although they love each other, because the
superegos don't get along. This explains those cases in which a couple
experiences difficulty when their two sets of parents don't get along; because
their superegos, as a result, cannot get along. So a couple can spend their
whole lives together but never really come into close contact because it is the
superegos that are in relationship.
Even the emotion of love can be transference, and in this case the relationship
is called positive transference.[23] In such a relationship, part of the dynamic
is that the superego approves of the ego when it loves someone who fulfills the
requirements of the superego. However, when the object of love changes his or
her behavior, the love will turn into resentment and hatred because the
superego no longer approves. So superego love, which is an important part of
transference, is conditional and maintains the status quo. This is the kind of
love that the majority of people are familiar with. It is a love that imprisons
instead of setting free; it is a coercive agency. The love that sets us free, love
that is unconditional, can only be experienced by someone who is free from the
coercive influence of the superego.
However, love based on transference is still love in the sense that the emotions
and sensations experienced are similar to those of real love. This is because
the love relationship is a transference of the relationship to the parents.
Although it feels similar to real love, it is conditional, and this conditionality
makes it laden with expectations. However, when one learns to stand up
against the tyranny of the superego, one can shed a major segment of one's
conditions and expectations, which allows more space for love that is
unconditional. One good way to differentiate between the two kinds of love is
to look at their consequences: one binds us and the other frees us. We can see
that one's capacity for unconditional love is proportional to one's freedom from
the superego.
Looking at this from a different perspective, for a person to love, she has to be
able to be vulnerable. Vulnerability is difficult to tolerate if she cannot defend
against the superego, because she will be vulnerable to its attacks. In fact,
when she begins experiencing real love, she will encounter tremendous
anxiety. This is because as a young child, she was alive and loving and was
rejected, abandoned, or punished; usually because her parents or the external
world in general couldn't tolerate her state. So she associates experiencing
love with a situation of danger. And as we know, this sense of danger comes in
later years to be associated with the attacks of the superego. But when she

learns to defend against the superego whenever needed, she becomes more
able to be soft and vulnerable. Then the capacity for love has a chance to grow,
meaning that she can relate to another person directly without the superego,
amongst other things, being in the way.
When this becomes possible, loving, liking, or being friendly toward another
comes under the dictate of reality instead of that of the superego. It arises
spontaneously when appropriate to the situation. This means, in Freud's
language, that the ego has more conscious control in the displacement of
quantities of libido.[24] The ego now invests libido or withdraws it according to
the needs of each situation, instead of compulsively reacting under the
influence of the superego. The person then is living in the present, and her
perception of what is happening is objective instead of being subjectively
prejudiced. Life becomes more of a creativity instead of a reactivity. There is
then no difference between spontaneous action and intelligent action, because
they are both grounded in reality.
This eliminates the possibility of a person loving someone who is cruel to him
or being cruel to someone who loves him, because these are inappropriate
responses to the situation. If a couple likes each other, they stay together and
treat each other well. If they don't, they just separate with respect for each
other's integrity. A relationship becomes a true response between two human
beings, instead of being primarily two superegos robotically reacting to each
otherthe past being re-enacted instead of the present being lived.
APPLICATION OF THEORY
THE INDIVIDUAL
We have proposed that for a human being, growth and enlightenment is
evolution toward greater consciousness and greater aliveness. The meaning
and the actual lived experience of this deepens, expands, and evolves the more
a person grows. We have seen that growth is movement toward greater
freedom in the perception and response to reality as it unfolds from one
situation to the next. The person lives more and more in the moment,
responding to each situation freshly and uniquely. This implies greater freedom
from the repetitive and compulsive patterns of perception and action, and we
have seen that this means greater freedom from the unconscious.
The unconscious controls the present by virtue of not being available to
consciousness. It is not available to consciousness because of the ego
defenses, which are necessary for the ego to defend itself, at least in part,
against the superego. The resulting situation is the transference of the past
onto the present, and the consequent loss of reality. From this perspective, we
see that self-realization is equivalent to the end of all transference. And
because transference is maintained partly by the superego, freedom and selfrealization mean in part the dethronement of the superego. This is a very
simplified way of looking at human development, but it captures the essence of
the process; and furthermore, it implies a practical and tangible way of going
about it: the individual needs to become aware of his superego and to learn to
consciously defend himself against it. This is crucial in the initial stages of the
Work, but continues to be important throughout its various stages. It is simple
but not easy, for the process progressively becomes subtler, and the superego
gets fiercer the closer one gets to home.

Now what does it mean to consciously defend against the superego? This is the
practical side of this part of our approach, and there are no rules.[25] What is
needed is natural intelligence and common sense. When these are not
available, a helper is necessary someone who has these simple qualities.
An example of how to go about the process of defending is helpful here, and
we will use our earlier one of a man being turned down by a woman when he
asks her for a date. He suffers because he thinks he is being rejected because
of a judgment the woman makes about him. First, we need to see that he
believes this assumed judgment, because otherwise the situation wouldn't
affect him so adversely. This means that he has the same judgment about
himself that he thinks she has about him. So his own superego is judging him.
Suppose he thinks he is being rejected because he is dumb. When the woman
rejects him, he is reminded of his own rejection of himself, and starts belittling
himself for being so dumb. And that is why he is suffering. The woman did not
hurt him; it is his superego that is hurting him. What he needs to do is defend
himself against this self-recrimination.
But how? He needs to look at the origin of his superego, his internalized
parents. He needs to find out which one of them called him or considered him
or made him feel dumb. Let's assume that it was his mother. He couldn't defend
against his mother's attitude when he was a child. The way he responded to
her is now a rigid pattern, and is now transferred onto the woman. He needs to
learn how to defend against this attitude, and he can do this by not going
along with his mother's judgment and putting this lack of acquiescence into
action. Awareness alone is not enough here; it is not enough until the deepest
stages of realization are reached. When he was a child, he could have defended
himself effectively if he had had the attitude that his mother was deluded. He
didn't defend himself then, and went along with and believed her because he
needed her and because she was too powerful a coercive agency to resist. So
now, when he becomes aware of his self-recrimination, he only needs to
visualize his mother in his mind's eye, and tell her forcefully that she is full of
shit. (One needs to be very graphic with the superego!) In this way, he is
defending himself against his superego, and he needs to do this until his
superego affects him no more.
This process will bring up his anger toward his mother for belittling him, which
will in turn make him less afraid of women and more confident around them.
Reowning his anger will give him more strength, which he can now realize on
the essential level. It will also remove the ego defenses against his aggressive,
erotic, and tender feelings toward his mother. This is part of the unconscious
being retrieved. Of course, this is a process, and not a one time affair. The
actual operation of the process of defending against the superego depends
upon the situation, but this example lays out its general principles.
THE COUPLE
Now we turn our attention to intimate couple relationships. We have discussed
how a relationship can stabilize if the two superegos mesh, and in this case,
growth is experienced as a disturbance of the status quo and will be resisted
by both superegos. If one person changes, this person will become free from a
portion of his or her superego. The partner's superego is going to resist this
change since otherwise it, too, has to change; because the meshing pattern
has been disturbed and a new point of homeostasis will have to be found. This

means that for one person to change, he or she must deal with two superegos
instead of just one. Therefore, a relationship based on maintaining the status
quo can hamper growth, for it is much harder to deal with two superegos than
with one.
Going back to our earlier example, let's assume that the woman agrees to go
out with the man, they continue to see each other, and after a while they get
married. Let's also assume that the woman is judgmental. The man judges
himself as dumb, and she in time agrees with him. So, both superegos collude
and they live a life that is stabilized, at least in part, around this agreement.
Neither of them questions it, because if they did then they both would have to
deal with their superegos. The man would see that he is not dumb, and he
would have to deal with his anger toward his wife who now represents his
mother. She would have to deal with her judgmental attitude, which would
ultimately lead her to her judgmental parent whom she internalized and all the
emotional conflicts around this parent. So the relationship survives, thanks to
this mutual comfort operation, which maintains the relative ignorance.
In our work, however, we are dealing with human development, and hence, the
changing of the status quo. If this couple were involved in such work, many
possibilities would become open to them. They might come to it with different
levels of awareness of the superego, and this is where their work would begin.
The man, for example, might not be aware of his self-recrimination. He might
instead be aware of some kind of defensiveness arising in him whenever the
pattern is activated; for example, he might see that at such times, he tries to
show his wife how smart he is, both verbally and in fantasy. He might argue
with her about her assumption, and he might find himself always trying to
maintain a sense of himself as smart and superior in reaction formation.
(Reaction formation is a defense in which one does the opposite of what one is
actually thinking or feeling.) If he were aware of these reactions, he would be
aware of his response to his superego, but not of the superego itself. Or he
might just feel depressed or angry whenever the pattern is activated, without
any indication of what the issue is. He also might only be aware of the
projection of his superego. Or, of course, he might be directly aware of the
recriminations of his own superego.
No matter which level of awareness of the superego the husband has, the wife,
for her part, can either go along with their mutual superego judgment, or she
can suspend hers. Let's assume that she cares for her husband and wants to
help him grow, and therefore chooses not to go along with the superego
judgment. There are two things she can do: first, she can be considerate by
trying not to push his buttons and activate his superego; and second, she can
help him defend against his superego. To behave in both of these ways, she has
to be interested enough in him to try to understand him. Attempting to
understand him is more realistic than trying to love him: it does not make
sense to try to love, but it is quite feasible to try to understand. Understanding
him is, in fact, a practical way of loving and caring for him because in so doing,
she will understand that he has an unconscious, and that he is struggling with
his superego just as she is with hers. If both relate to each other in this way,
there is the possibility of compassion and love arising between them. By
understanding him, she will know what activates his unconscious and so what
to avoid. If she does whatever pushes his buttons, she is attacking him just like
his superego. It is an attack because he might not choose at that time to deal

with his unconscious, and he is forced to buy her attack. If she keeps on
attacking him (meaning doing what brings up his unconsciousness), then she is
not his friend.
This is an important point that is usually overlooked in intimate couple
relationships: it is an act of hostility if a person brings up the unconscious of
the partner, without the partner choosing to deal with it. In fact, this is a
common way that partners express hostility to each other indirectly. After
some time of living together, couples become experts at pushing each other's
buttons, and in this way wars are waged and fought covertly. A couple who
cares for each other will make an effort not to do so, and will try to understand
each other's superego so that the occurrences of such attacks can be
minimized. is love in action, and it is harder to achieve but more valuable than
the emotional love in which one feels love for one's partner, but is pushing his
or her buttons all over the place. This, of course, does not mean that one must
walk on egg shells so as not to push one's partner's buttons. In fact, in many
cases, pushing buttons can't be helped; it happens just as a response to the
way one is. In this case, it is the partner's responsibility to deal with his or her
superego. Understanding oneself helps greatly here, for through it, one can
find out how one expresses hostility indirectly. Also, by seeing the tendency to
attack one's partner, one can find out about one's own superego.
This brings us to the question of defending within a relationship. Using our
example, let's say that the wife says to her husband, "You are dumb." Instead
of believing her and feeling miserable, or trying to convince her how smart he
is, the husband can defend himself by responding with, "Keep your opinion to
yourself, my dear." He has to defend against the superego inside and outside of
himself in the same way.
Now we go back to how the wife can help her husband defend himself against
his superego. First, she needs to understand what is happening. If the husband
is not aware of the issue, she can make it clear to him that her feelings about
him and her actions toward him have nothing to do with whether he is smart or
dumb but she must not play therapist. If he starts trying to show her how
smart he is, she must not take the issue seriously; because if she does, she is
buying into his superego, which will only reinforce the transference. If she's
light-hearted and open with him, he will see in action that she likes him
irrespective of his intelligence. She might use humor, which is useful in
dissipating the tension and seriousness that one usually feels about one's
buttons. This will also help him see that she is not his mother, releasing him
from the projection.
She must not try to convince him that he is not dumb, because if she does, she
is doing exactly what he has been doing with his superego, and that obviously
has not worked. Arguing with the superego means taking its attacks seriously,
and so is buying into them. The superego's attitude is not rational. It is an
emotionally compulsive behavior, and only actionnot rationalizationwill
work against it. Also, argumentation puts one in a vulnerable defensive place,
making real defense impossible.
If he gets angry at her, she can just say, "Look at me, am I your mother?" If he
sees the situation clearly, he will see that she is not, and this will redirect his
transferred anger where it belongs. If he gets depressed, then he is directing
his anger toward himself, and the best thing she can do is to get him angry. In

all these cases, the wife is helping her husband understand his behavior and
redirect the emotions to their source, without having to take on the role of
therapist. This, if done consistently, will end the transference, and they will
both become gradually free from their superegos.
For the wife to help her husband in this way, she must first have Misidentified
from her own superego. Her awareness of its attacks and her ability to defend
against them enable her to refrain from attacking him. Her husband, in turn,
will have helped her become aware of her superego by not allowing her to
attack him through defending himself against her attacks, as described above.
If she is identified with her superego, whether she is aware of it or not, she
cannot help her husband, and he has to deal with both superegos. He then has
two options: he can either acquiesce to both superegos and maintain the
status quo, or he can opt for change. If he wants to change, he can either leave
the relationship or try to bring about change within it. In the latter case, he can
either do it single-handedly, which is very difficult, or he can seek external
help. This brings us to the subject of growth in relationships with the help of a
counselor.
COUNSELING THE COUPLE
Our concern here is how a counselor can contribute to the development of two
people in an intimate relationship. Their development might entail the growth
or the dissolution of the relationship, depending upon the particular situation,
because their development might or might not be compatible with being in
relationship. The couple must have a primary interest in growth also;
otherwise, seeing a counselor with this orientation is not appropriate for them.
The task of the counselor is again very simple though not easy, as it entails
helping them, in part, to defend against the superego. This may again sound
simplistic, but its implications are very profound, and we can glimpse some of
this profundity when we remember that the superego is the coercive agency
within the mind of the individual. And if a person learns to deal with the
superego, then he won't be unconsciously under the influence of any coercive
agency. This presupposes trust in reality, i.e., the trust that when a person is
left to his natural intelligence, he will be naturally oriented toward life.
The counselor must be relatively free from her own superego, i.e., she can be
aware of it and knows how to defend against it. She is dealing here with three
superegos, and if she cannot deal with her own, at least when she is in the role
of counselor, then she cannot be of help
to the couple. In a sense, she is the representative of the forces of life, and
that is why the couple are coming to her. She is an authority in dealing with the
superego, not in the sense of being authoritarian, but of being authoritative.
This is just the same as accepting Einstein's authority in the field of theoretical
physics: we don't consider Einstein authoritarianhe just knows his field well.
The counselor's first task is to acquaint the couple with their unconscious' and
their superegos. She initially helps them identify the interactions of their
respective superegos, both in times of collusion and friction. This is obviously
necessary before they can learn how to defend against them. She shows them
how to deal with each part of the superego that is uncovered. She gives them
information, suggestions and advice, and it is up to them to do the actual work

in their daily life as situations arise. This approach demands a lot of

responsibility from the couple, but the counselor can show them how to go
about it in the session itself. In working with the couple in our example, for
instance, she might ask the woman to say to the husband, "You are dumb." She
observes the reaction of the husband and how he handles the situation. She
guides him in becoming aware of his response. Then she suggests to him to
respond to his wife by saying, "I don't care what you think of my intelligence,
my dear," and sees how this affects the husband's emotional state, and the
situation as a whole. Here, the husband with the counselor's help learns to
defend against the attacks of his wife.
The counselor can go further. She can find out through questioning how the
husband learned his habitual response. Then he can be taught how to defend
against his own superego by saying, "I don't care what you think of me," to his
mother in his mind. Also, the attitude of the wife can be explored and she can
be helped to defend against her superego. The counselor can show her that
when she tells him, overtly or covertly, that he is dumb, it is a hostile attack;
and then the anger toward her husband behind the attack can be explored.
In this way, she can learn to direct the hostility where it belong-toward her
inner coercive agencies. The counselor can encourage them to be considerate
of each other by refraining from attacking each other. They thus learn a
tangible way of caring for each other.
Although this approach is highly beneficial and necessary, the most effective
way the counselor can work with them is through defending herself against
their superegos whenever they attack her. This is the most direct way to teach
them defending because she does it by demonstration. For instance, let's
suppose the husband says to the counselor, "I have heard that your colleague,
Counselor B. is very good and has been in the profession longer than you. Is
that true?" Obviously the husband is attacking the counselor by comparing her
and putting her down. There is a wide range of responses open to the
counselor. She might be reasonable and answer yes or no. She might be
defensive and try to show that she is as good as or maybe better than
Counselor B. She might argue about how their approaches are different. She
might feel insulted and angry; or she might play therapist and say, "what are
you feeling now?" or, Are you angry at me?" or, "It seems to me that you are
angry at me." All of these responses are really not directly dealing with the
situation, and most of them beg what is actually happening.
However, if the counselor is aware that the question is an attack, then she can
simply respond with, "I don't care who is better. I feel good about what I do."
She is not getting sucked into the comparison, and at the same time is
validating herself. She is also responding to the situation directly by taking
care of herself, and without explanations. She is showing the husband that he
attacked her by comparing her to someone else. She is also showing the
husband, in action, that his attacks are fruitless as expressions of hostility. She
is being a clear example of a person whose integrity rises above comparison.
There are many levels to her response, which is usually the case when an
action originates from a life-affirming attitude.
By consistently defending herself each time she is attacked, she is exposing
the superegos of her two clients, and at the same time showing them how to
defend against them. In this way, each of them learns how to defend against

his own superego and that of his partner. Teaching by example is in most cases
the most effective means. This is because the counselor is dealing with the
unconscious, and reasonable discussion and interaction are not as effective in
dealing with it as actual action appropriate to the situation. After taking action,
the counselor can explore with the husband the motivation and
psychodynamics of his attack.
There is also another way the counselor can make a person become aware of
his or her superego. She can do this by playing out his or her superego. For
instance, if it is not clear to the husband that his superego attacks him for
being dumb, then at the appropriate moment, the counselor might say to him,
"I think you are dumb. No wonder your wife can't stand you." The husband's
response will make it very clear how he deals with his superego. The counselor
can exaggerate this role until the husband sees this unconscious inner attack
and his response to it. This is much more effective than just explaining it to the
husband, because he now has the chance to see it happening by himself. The
counselor might keep on attacking this man in very obvious and exaggerated
ways until the husband gets angry at her. In this case she is not only forcing
the husband to see the situation, but also to get in touch with his repressed
feelings. After provoking him, the counselor can explore the situation in terms
of the husband's own superego, and in this way, transfer the affect back to its
cause. This is especially effective when the husband's habitual response is
depression, which is usually the result of the superego relentlessly beating up
the ego.
The counselor can also take sides against the superego. Sometimes she might
take the side of the wife, another time that of the husband, a third time she
might appear to be against both of them, or on both sides at once. In time they
will see that she is not really siding with anyone, but rather that she is siding
with the forces of life and growth. This is a very subtle and powerful method in
which the clients learn how to be on their own sides against the superego,
although they might not necessarily be able to verbalize it. They learn to do
this with themselves and with each other.
The counselor can produce in them the discrimination between the superego
and life by giving them respect and energy when they are siding with life, and
by not giving them attention when they are siding with their own or their
partner's superego This is similar to behavior modification, and, for it not to
become another coercive agency, the counselor must be aware of her superego
and be capable of dealing with it. This method can be used to the extreme, as
when the counselor actually attacks a person's superego. Let's suppose that
the husband says to his wife, "I really do my best. I try to do things right. I
can't help it. I don't know what to do. It's awfulmaybe I am hopelessly dumb
or something." Here he is siding with his superego, and playing "poor me." The
counselor can say, "Good, good. I think you deserve what you get. People like
you should suffer. Maybe you should go down some sewer and drown. However,
the rest of us are happy and doing very well. Oh, I am so happy." She keeps on
doing this until the attack is so unbearable that the man starts defending
himself. Here, the counselor attacks the superego by attacking the victim
attitude. She is also exaggerating the man's superego, and hence, making it
graphic how he attacks himself. In so doing, she is giving him the opportunity
to defend himself in an actual situation that is clear cut and cannot easily be
avoided.

The counselor can also attack both of the couple's superegos when they are
both aligned with them. For instance, if they are involved in an argument right
in the session, she might observe the dynamic and when she is sure that they
are both coming from their respective superegos, she might say, perhaps when
they are complaining to her about their fighting, "You are so bitchy" to the
wife, "and you are so damn controlling" to the husband, "so what kind of
relationship do you expect!" to both of them. She is using strong language to
shock them into seeing what they are doing.
On the other hand, she can show her respect and pleasure whenever one or
both of them side with life, or make a positive change of attitude. She can do
this quite effectively by increasing her presence and output of energy, and by
showing interest in the person or the couple. If she is relatively free from her
superego, then these responses will occur naturally in her; since she is
oriented toward life, she becomes more present when there is life in the
couple. This is a natural human response.
To work in this way, it is clear why the counselor must be relatively free from
her own superego. If she is interested in being liked, if she is afraid of anger, or
if she values politeness and good manners for their own sake, then she cannot
do this kind of counseling. If she is on the side of life and against the tyranny
of the superego, she uses whatever means are necessary to promote life and
growth. She does what the situation requires, instead of listening to her
superego or the superegos of the people working with her. In this way she is
not only counseling, but she is also living her life fully, right in the moment,
free from all forms of coercive agencies. The effectiveness of the counselor is
proportional to her freedom from the influences of the superego and to her
realization of life within her own body.
The same methods and techniques can be and are used in private teaching
sessions and in group meetings by teachers of the Work. A teacher of the Work
is not a couples counselor or a therapist, but these techniques of teaching
students how to defend against the attacks of the superego in themselves and
in others, are part of the overall process of doing the Work.
SELF-EXPRESSION
A child is naturally and spontaneously self-expressive. His expression is his
being; i.e., he expresses what he is just by being himself. He does not try to or
think about expressing himself. And as long as the love of his parents is secure,
his expression stays pure, spontaneous, and self-affirming. Every gesture,
every sound, and every movement expresses his beingness.
This state of affairs does not last for long, as the environment starts exerting
its pressure on the child to conform to it. We have seen how the parents, as the
representatives of the environment, and as the sources of needed protection
and love, become coercive agencies which shape the personality and future of
the growing child. The child's expression becomes more and more directed
toward them to gain their love and to avoid their displeasure. He learns that it
is permissible to express certain things, and not permissible to express certain
others. The parents become internalized as the superego, which determines
the kind and range of expression for the growing human individual.

In the culture we live in, the expression of both aggressive and erotic
tendencies is discouraged or inhibited. This is due to the influence of the
Victorian era, an influence that is now going through modifications and
transformations. As a reaction to the taboos of the Victorian superego, the
modern growth movement has emphasized the role of the expression of
feelings, mainly the aggressive and the erotic. This is the focus of encounter
groups, sensitivity training, body-movement classes, and many schools of
human development. This emphasis has had the effect of loosening the stifling
taboos and prohibitions of the Victorian superego. Being able to express one's
feelings leads to being more in touch with oneself, more in contact with others,
and more ability to deal with and enjoy one's life. Also, the expression itself is
liberating and pleasurable; it rids a person of accumulated charge, which gives
the experience of relief and cleansing.
However, self-expression can be seen as the end all and be all of growth and
development. When this happens, self-expression becomes a barrier to further
expansion and growth. Self-expression is not necessarily synonymous with
growth. Whether it is or not depends on what we mean by self. If by self we
mean the true identity of the individual, then self-expression is growthenhancing. But if by self we mean the personality, which was created under the
influence of the superego (and the environment before that), then selfexpression is not always positive. And since the majority of people do not really
know their true identity, regardless of their furious protestations, it follows
that most self-expression is fundamentally the expression of the ego, and is
therefore determined by the superego. In fact, most of the time people are
really expressing their egos and superegos through their gait, their posture,
their words, their emotions, their work, etc. Even the inhibition of certain
emotions is an expression of the superego. Most people live and die expressing
their egos and superegos, and rarely does the real person get expressed.
From this we see that self-expression is not an absolute value. In terms of
human development, it is valuable in only two cases: when the self expressed
is the true identity, which is Essence; and when expression of the ego or
superego is helpful to loosen and destroy the superego's coercive influence on
the individual. Most cases of expression of emotion in growth or therapeutic
settings are of the second type. If a person has difficulty in expressing certain
emotions, learning to express them breaks through the inhibitions of the
superego and the person has a better chance to grow and develop.
Let's take the example of a paranoid person who we will call "A." The
mechanism of paranoia works like this: A likes another man, who we will call
"B." A's superego says, "How could you- he's not the kind of person you should
like." To defend against the superego, A says to himself, "I hate B." Now the
superego says, "Bad, bad, hating is not good." To defend himself again, A
thinks, "B hates me." The end result is a feeling of fear and a sense of
persecution by B. These are the surface feelings. However, the true feeling of A
is that he likes B. but because of the inhibitions of his superego, he
experiences paranoia. For this person to get in touch with and express his true
self, which his loving feelings toward B are an expression of, he has to go
through several layers of emotion. To go beyond the fear and paranoia, he has
to experience his anger and hatred. His superego inhibits him from
experiencing and expressing his aggressive emotions. So, expressing his fear
might help him get in touch with his anger. Then, he needs to learn that he can

contact and work through his anger by expressing it. However, he does not
need to keep expressing it every time he feels it. This is because the value lies
not in expressing anger, but in pushing beyond it to deeper levels of
experience.
Let's suppose that he learns to express his anger. It is likely that, with his
paranoid personality, he will then feel angry whenever he thinks he's being
persecuted, whether he is or not; and this might translate into anger and
rebellion against all authority figures. He can express this anger forever
without going deeper. Many people get stuck in this place, regardless of what
the expressed emotion is. In the case of A, his anger cannot be exhausted by
expression because it is really not a true emotion, but rather a defense against
his tender emotions. Also, it is a transferred emotion; for very likely, if we
explored the psychodynamics of A, we would find that it has its roots in
hostility toward his father.
So we see that the expression of anger in this case loses its value after a while.
It ceases to be growth-promoting at a certain point, and in fact, the superego
can use it to defend against the deeper feelings. If A still feels threatened by
his loving feelings toward B. then continuing to express his anger becomes a
resistance. In other words, catharsis can become a barrier against further
growth. What A needs now is to stay with his anger, neither express nor
repress it, and to observe in what situations it arises. He might find out that he
feels angry toward all men he likes, or toward a certain kind of man. By seeing
this, he has the chance to get in touch with the feelings beneath it. On the
other hand, if he expresses his anger the moment he feels it, he dissipates the
charge. But if he stays with it, the emotional charge increases until the deeper
feelings break through or the anger is redirected toward its true source, his
father.
The person can get hooked on the pleasure of expression, but if he does, he is
avoiding himself Expressing the anger is experienced as pleasurable and
relieving, because it discharges the mounting tension and it also relieves the
anxiety caused by the deeper feelings threatening to break through. But for
the person to go further, he will have to tolerate the tension of the mounting
charge as he stays with his anger. This means growing up, for only a child
cannot tolerate increasing charge and cannot wait for its release. A child
cannot but express his feelings as they arise. Grownups, however, can tolerate
delayed gratification and tolerate the accompanying unpleasantness. So
expressing emotions every time they arise is a sign of immaturity.
In our example, A at this point needs to learn to feel and express his deeper
feelings. As we have seen, this can be done by tolerating the aggressive
feelings and having insight into the situation, but not necessarily by
expression. But is this the end? Suppose he learns to express loving feelings.
This will help him be more in touch with himself, be more honest, and have
more direct contact with B. But if he expresses his positive feelings every time
they arise, it is possible that he isn't deeply experiencing them and might not
be able to tolerate experiencing them. So expression, at this point, can become
a defense against experience. But if he some times refrains from expression
and just stays with his loving feelings, then he can learn to tolerate more and
more charge, which will deepen his experience of this emotional state. Also, by
not expressing these emotions, he might re-experience his early feelings

toward his father, thus having the chance to end transference onto all men. The
possibility also then exists that the charge contained in the emotions will be
expressed in actions that are useful and helpful for both A and B. instead of
just being discharged in emotional or physical expression of affection.
If the person stays with his loving feelings longer, he also has the very
important possibility of experiencing himself on deeper levels. Emotions are
energy, and if these ordinary emotions are experienced and stayed with, they
might transmute into finer and subtler forms of energy. The person then has
the opportunity to experience his true identity, which is independent of all
emotional states. Lois is the one who experiences the love, the anger, and the
fear. In other words, he has the chance now to experience the experiences. This
is a higher form of experience, which the intentional and intelligent use of nonexpression of emotions can lead to.
This brings us to a very important point. The individual seeking self-realization
is generally really seeking certain states of consciousness. Now seeking any
particular state of consciousness, whether it is painful or ecstatic, is obviously
an activity that is oriented in a certain direction; and this implies the presence
of a prejudice or a coercive agency dictating this direction, whether through
the promise of reward or through the threat of punishment. So, seeking any
state of consciousness is really an indication of the presence and influence of
the superego. As we already know, this implies the loss of objectivity or loss of
contact with reality, and leads to the rigidity inherent in such seeking.
Although this rigid seeking might lead to blissful and ecstatic states, it
necessitates repression of all states other than those sought, and is motivated
by the pleasure principle; and so is just as coercive as our childhood experience
which curtailed our freedom and growth.
However, if we let go of seeking or holding onto any particular state of
consciousness and concentrate our efforts on combating all inner coercive
agencies, we might come upon the consciousness that contains all states of
consciousness. Then we can have access to any state that we need in any
situation. Or as Shah puts it: "The goal of man is Truth. Truth is more than
happiness. The man who has Truth can have whatever mood he wishes or
none."[26]
We might discover Essence, the truth and real nature of what it is to be human.
Or, put in other words, we might discover how the free man who has no moods
at all experiences reality; which is how reality is apprehended when there is no
superego, and no inhibitions on being truly oneself. It is possible then to know
Essence as one's real nature.
We see here how any prejudice, even prejudice for sublime states of
consciousness, is still limited and limiting, and falls short of reality. The
following story, presented by Shah, is a good example of how prejudice, the
result of fixed assumptions, precludes the perception of reality:
Time and again Nasrudin passed from Persia to Greece on donkey back. Each
time he had two panniers of straw, and trudged back without them. Every time
the guard searched him for contraband, they never found any.
"What are you carrying, Nasrudin?"

"I am a smuggler."
Years later, more and more prosperous in appearance, Nasrudin moved to
Egypt. One of the customs men met him there.
"Tell me, Mulla, now that you are out of the jurisdiction of Greece and Persia,
living here in such luxury, what was it that you were smuggling when we could
not catch you?"
Donkeys." [27]
Now we turn to some of the ways that self-expression is used by the ego and
its coercive agency, the superego. An artist, for example, who is spontaneous
in his creativity will express whatever comes out of himself. If he is neurotic,
his creation will be an expression of his neurosis. While creating it, he will feel
spontaneous and emotional, but this does not mean that he is expressing his
true identity, his essential presence. He might spend his whole life expressing
his neurosis spontaneously, and in this way is spreading disease instead of
health. Modern art is replete with this kind of expression. It is mostly
subjective, and expresses the ego and the demands of the superego. When art
expresses the essential self, then it is objective and universal, and can assist
other people in contacting their true selves. This kind of art acts as a mirror
and a reminder of reality. But many modern artists place a value on subjective
self-expression just because it is spontaneous and feels good. It becomes a
value in itself and hence negates growth.
Another example is a man who feels and expresses loving feelings toward a
woman who already is in a relationship. He feels justified in having an affair
with this woman simply because he feels loving and warm toward her. He
claims he is expressing his feelings and that he does not want to be
withholding or controlled. In many cases, such a man is indirectly expressing
hostility toward the other man through his actions. This kind of situation is
common in on-going growth groups and long workshops. It is the classical
Oedipal situation, but only half of it is recognized: the man recognizes that he
wants the desired woman (representing his mother), but doesn't recognize his
hatred of the other man (representing his father). So when this situation
occurs in supposedly love-oriented groups, the other man gets hurt indirectly,
in the name of love. This serves the superego, because the would be lover
keeps on expressing his hostility toward men (his father) indirectly and so
keeps it out of consciousness. But if he refrains from expressing his love
toward the woman, he might get in touch with his desire for his mother, as well
as his hostility toward men; and then he has the chance to work through his
relationship with both his mother and his father.
Hostility is also expressed in many indirect ways through the sharing of
emotions: if a person keeps on saying how depressed he is, the listener is
bound to become depressed also or to feel responsible. Complaining can only
bring down the energy of the listener. Also, many times guilt is evoked in the
listener by the person sharing in the name of truth and encounter. For example:
"I don't want to lay a trip on you, but I feel hurt by what you said. It is true that
this is my reaction, but I just wanted to share it with you, so you know what's
happening with me." This sounds clean and straight and encounter like.
However, it is an indirect way of saying, "You hurt me. You should feel guilty for
that." This is the case because, in most cases, the one being talked to cannot

but feel guilty. However, in some groups, this person is expected to receive this
sharing as a sign of honesty, while suffering under the guilt produced by this
devious attack.
Another phenomena that happens in private work as well as in some groups is
a person wanting to hug the teacher or members of the group. In some cases
this is a true expression. But in many cases, it is an avoidance of the feelings
that the person is experiencing. Often when a person cannot tolerate certain
emotional states, like anxiety or awkwardness, he opts for the physical
expression of affects. In this case, there is an avoidance of self in the name of
love, and the hugging is really an expression of cowardice and not of real
affection.
People also express themselves as a way of getting certain human needs met,
like those of approval, recognition, attention, love, caring, warmth, etc. Filling
these needs is a legitimate use of self-expression and most people do it,
especially in intimate relationships. But if such expression becomes habitual
and compulsive, then it is an avoidance, and it can backfire. For example, if a
person does not love herself (which is the normal state of humankind), she can
get all the love and attention available from outside and still never feel
fulfilled. If growth is what concerns us, then these human needs must be
explored to their utmost depth, and this sometimes requires their nonexpression.
Let's say that the person in our example cannot be with herself and always
wants to be with others. Her values, therefore, are those of friendship, contact,
and sharing. But these values are really barriers against self-love for her,
because she cannot tolerate being with herself. She looks outside of herself for
the friendship and contact that she does not have with herself. If, however,
when she feels the impulse to see a friend, she were to stay present with
herself for a while, she might experience what she wants to avoid in herself.
And by staying with her need for contact, she might learn to satisfy it by
herself, through becoming her own friend. In fact, this is the way to realize the
essential aspect related to contact. Then her contact and friendship with others
becomes an expression of abundance, of her essential nature; and not of
deficiency.
These days there is a popular trend toward wanting deep and loving
relationships, and in most cases this arises out of a need for the love and
contact that one does not experience within oneself. Love and contact with
someone else is satisfying and feels good, but it is transitory. However, selflove is permanent; it lasts as long as the person exists. The need for love is
really the need for self-love, and there is no contentment or final rest until it is
attained. And self-love cannot be attained until the desire for love and contact
is tolerated and lived with, without avoidance or distraction. Then this human
need, this deep vulnerability, this burning desire, will be transmuted into its
opposite. The burning coal of longing, if tolerated and accepted, can change
into the shining jewels of joy and love, which are everlasting and unconditional
and are two manifestations of our essential nature.
When contact with our essential nature is part of our on-going experience, then
self-expression happens in living. We no longer need to express ourselves; we
cannot but express ourselves just by living. We are, and our life is the
expression of this Beingness. Our expressions of emotion become

manifestations of the affects of our essential nature. They are appropriate

responses to real situations. They are free and intelligent responses, no longer
conditioned by past experience, or influenced by the superego.
We see, then, that self-expression is not an absolute value, but has value at
particular points in the process of growth and the expansion of consciousness.
People following any discipline or movement that values the expression of all
states are bound to get stuck at one stage or another. Expression of emotions
works mostly as an opener, but not necessarily as a processor. Working through
the coercive influences of the superego requires more than expressing oneself,
as we're seeing, and many times it requires non-expression.
Since our interest is self-realization, self-expression is not an end in itself. Selfexpression, just like any experience of the soul, is nothing but an external
manifestation, and not Essence itselfwhat is ultimately real in man. All
external manifestations of Essence are to Essence like the scent of musk is to
the musk itself. As Rumi puts it:
For this substance is like a musk-pod, and this material world and its delights
are like the scent of the musk. This scent of the musk is but transient, for it is
mere accident. He who has sought of this scent the musk itself and has not
been content with only the scent, that man is good. But he who has been
satisfied to possess the scent, that man is evil; for he has grasped after a thing
that does not remain in his hand. For the scent is only the attribute of the
musk. So long as the musk is apparent in this world, its scent comes to the
nostrils. When, however, it enters the veil and returns to the other world, all
those who lived by its scent die. For the scent is attached to the musk, and
departs whither the musk reveals itself.
Happy then is he who reaches the musk through the scent and becomes one
with the musk. Thereafter for him remains no passing away; he has become
eternal in the very essence of the musk and takes on the predicament of the
musk. Thereafter, he communicates its scent to the world, and the world is
revived by him.[28]
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FOOTNOTES
1. Trungpa, Chogyam, Cutting Through Spiritual Material ism, Berkeley,
Shambhala publications, p. 208.
2. Eliade, Mirca, Yoga, Immortality and Freedom, New York, Bollingen
Foundation, Inc., p. 4.
3. Shah, Idries, Caravan of Dreams, Baltimore, Penguin Books. Inc., p. 201.
4. Reich, Wilhelm, Character Analysis, New York, Simon and Schuster.
5. Rolf, Ida P., Rolfing, Santa Monica, Dennis Landman publishers.
6. Hoffman, Bob, Getting Divorced from Mother and Dad, New York, E.P. Dutton
R. Co., Inc., p. 17.
7. Freud, Sigmund, Collected Papers, Vol. 4, New York, Basic Books, Inc., p. 4.
8. Ibid, p. 98

9. Freud, Anna, The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense, New York,
International University Press, p.
10. Freud, Sigmund, The Ego and the Id, New York, W.W. Norton & Company,
Inc., p. 18.
11. Freud. Anna, The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense, p.54.
12. Freud, Sigmund, The Problem of Anxiety, New York, W.W. Norton &
Company, Inc., p.34.
13. Freud, Sigmund, The Question of Lay Analysis, New York, W.W. Norton &
Company, Inc., p.29.
14. Reich, Wilhelm, Character Analysis, p. 157.
15. Ibid, p. 157
16. Freud, Sigmund, The Problem of Anxiety, p. 82.
17. Shah, Idries, Caravan of Dreams, p. 198.
18. Lowen, Alexander, The Betraval of the Body, London, Collier McMillan
Limited, p.204.
19. Shah, Idries, Caravan of Dreams, p. 197.
20. Ibid, p. 158.
21. Shah, Idries, Thinkers of the East, Baltimore, Penguin Books, Inc., p. 15.
22. Freud, Sigmund, Therapy and Technique, New York, Collier Books, p. 105.
23. Ibid, p. 167.
24. Freud, Sigmund, Collected Papers, Vol.5, New York, Basic Books, Inc., p.
131.
25. This perspective about defending against the superego comes from the
work of Henry Korman. Personal communication.
26. Shah, Idries, Thinkers of the East, p. 66.
27. Shah, Idries, The Exploits of the Incomparable Mulla Nasrudin, New York:
E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc., p. 6.
28. Arberry, A.J., Discourses of Rumi, New York, Samuel Weiser, Inc., p. 70.