Manuscript 9 De Ware Betekenis Van Bezit - a podcast by Een Cursus in Wonderen

The real meaning of possession should be clarified. 2Fear of possession is a perverted expression of the fear of the irresistible attraction of God. 3The truth is still that the attraction of God is irresistible at all levels, and the acceptance of this totally unavoidable truth is only a matter of time. 4But you should consider whether you want to wait, because you can return now, if you choose.

2 Possession is a concept which has been subject to numerous distortions, some of which we will list below:

3 Type 1: Possession can be associated with the body only. 2If this occurs, sex is particularly likely to be contaminated. 3Possession versus being possessed is apt to be seen as the male versus the female role. 4Since neither will be conceived of as satisfying alone, and both will be associated with fear, this interpretation is particularly vulnerable to psychosexual confusion.2

4 Type 2: From a rather similar reference point, possession can also be associated with things. 2This is essentially a shift from type 1 and is usually due to an underlying fear of associating possession with people. 3In this sense, it is an attempt to protect people from one’s possessiveness, like the superstition about “protecting the name” we mentioned before.3

5 Both type 1 and type 2 are likely to become compulsive for several reasons, including:

a) 2They represent an attempt to escape from the real possession drive, which cannot be satisfied this way.

b) 3They set up substitute goals, which are usually reasonably easy to attain.4

c) 4They appear to be relatively harmless, and thus seem to allay fear. 5The fact that they usually interfere with good interpersonal relationships can be interpreted, in this culture, as a lack of sophistication on the part of the other (not the self), and this induces a false feeling of confidence in the solution. 6It is also fairly easy to find a partner who shares the illusion. 7Thus, we have any number of relationships which are actually established on the basis of type 1, and others which hold together primarily because of a joint interest in type 2.

d) 8The manifestly external emphasis which both entail seems to be a safety device, and thus permits a false escape from much more basic inhibitions.5 9As a compromise solution, the illusion of interpersonal relating is preserved, along with the retention of lack of love. 10This kind of psychic juggling leaves the juggler with a feeling of emptiness, which in fact is perfectly justified, because he is acting from scarcity. 11He then becomes more and more driven in his behavior, to fill the emptiness.

6 When these solutions have been invested with extreme belief, type 1 leads to sex crimes and type 2 to stealing. 2The kleptomaniac is a good example of the latter.

7 Generally, three types of emotional disturbance result:

a) 2The tendency to maintain the illusion that only the physical is real. 3This produces depression.b) 4The tendency to invest the physical with nonphysical properties. 5This is essentially magic and tends more toward anxiety-proneness.

c) 6The tendency to vacillate from one to the other, which produces a corresponding vacillation between depression and anxiety.

7All three result in self-imposed starvation.

8 Type 3: Another type of distortion is seen in the fear of or desire for “spirit” possession. 2The term “spirit” is profoundly debased in this context, but it does entail a recognition that the body is not enough and investing it with magic will not work. 3This recognition accepts the fact that neither type 1 nor type 2 is sufficient, but precisely because it does not limit fear so narrowly, it is more likely to produce greater fear in its own right.

9 Endowing the Spirit with human possessiveness is a more inclusive error than type 1 or type 2, and a step somewhat further away from the right mind. 2Projection is also more likely to occur, with vacillations between grandiosity and fear.6 3“Religion,” in a distorted sense, is also more likely to occur in this kind of error, because the idea of a “spirit” is introduced, though fallaciously, while it is excluded from type 1 and type 2. 4Witchcraft is thus particularly apt to be associated with type 3, because of the much greater investment in magic.

10 It should be noted that type 1 involves only the body, and type 2 involves an attempt to associate things with human attributes. 2Type 3, on the other hand, is a more serious level confusion, because it endows the Spirit with evil attributes. 3This accounts both for the religious zeal of its proponents and the aversion (or fear) of its opponents. 4Both attitudes stem from the same false belief.

11 This is not what the Bible means by “filled with the Holy Spirit.”7 2The concept of “speaking in many tongues” was originally an injunction to communicate to everyone in his own language, or at his own level. 3It hardly meant to speak in a way that nobody could understand.

12 This strange error occurs when people do understand the need for universal communication, but have contaminated it with the possession fallacy. 2The fear engendered by this misperception leads to a conflicted state in which communication is attempted, but the fear is allayed by making the communication incomprehensible.8 3It could also be said that the fear induces selfishness or regression, because incomprehensible communication is hardly a worthy offering from one Son of God to another.

13 Type 4: Knowledge can also be misinterpreted as a means of possession. 2Here, the content is not physical, and the underlying fallacy is more likely to be the confusion of mind and brain.9 3The attempt to unite nonphysical content with physical attributes is illustrated by statements like “the thirst for knowledge.” 4This is not what “thirst” in the Bible means.10 5The term was used only because of humanity’s limited comprehension and is probably better dropped.

14 The fallacious use of knowledge can result in several errors, including:

a) 2The idea that knowledge will make the individual more attractive to others. 3This is a possession fallacy.11

b) 4The idea that knowledge will make the individual invulnerable. 5This is a reaction formation against the underlying fear of vulnerability.

c) 6The idea that knowledge will make the individual worthy. 7This is largely pathetic.

15 Like all of these fallacies, type 4 contains a denial mechanism, which swings into operation as the fear increases, thus canceling out the error temporarily but seriously impairing efficiency. 2For example, one person might claim she cannot read, while another might claim he cannot speak.12

16 Note that depression is a real risk here, for a child of God should never reduce his efficiency in any way. 2The depression comes from a peculiar pseudo-solution which reads:

3A child of God is efficient.

4I am not efficient.

5Therefore, I am not a child of God.13

6This leads to neurotic resignation, and this is a state which merely increases the depression.

17 The corresponding denial mechanism for type 1 is physical inability, or impotence. 2The denial mechanism for type 2 is often bankruptcy. 3Collectors of things often drive themselves well beyond their financial means, in an attempt to force discontinuance. 4If this idea of cessation cannot be tolerated, a strange compromise involving both insatiable possessiveness and insatiable throwing away may result.

18 An example is the inveterate or compulsive gambler, particularly the horse-racing addict. 2Here, the conflicted drive is displaced both from people and things, and is invested in animals. 3The implied derogation of people is the cause of the underlying extreme superstition of the horse-racing addict.14 4The alcoholic is in a similar position, except that his hostility is more inward than outward directed.15 5Defenses aimed at protecting (or retaining) error are particularly hard to undo, because they introduce second-order misperceptions which obscure the underlying errors still further.16

19 The pseudo-corrective mechanism for type 3 is apt to be more varied because of the more inclusive nature of the error, which has already been mentioned. 2Some of the possibilities are listed below:

a) 3One aspect of the possession/possessed conflict can be raised to predominance. 4If this is attempted in connection with possessing, it leads to the paranoid solution.17 5The underlying component of “being possessed” is retained in the “persecution” fantasies which generally accompany the paranoia.

Further episodes of Een Cursus in Wonderen Dagelijkse Les

Further podcasts by Een Cursus in Wonderen

Website of Een Cursus in Wonderen