Identification With Self

By The Pathwork Guide

Greetings, my dearest friends. Blessings for everyone of you. Blessed be this lecture. May all of you derive benefit from these words, even though it often happens that the real understanding of these lectures comes only later, when in this Pathwork you reach within yourself those levels that apply to the content of a particular lecture. When you find your corresponding inner problems and conflicts, then the words of these lectures will really make sense. Sometimes this happens years after you have read a lecture. But when it does happen, then it is an entirely new understanding, and therefore an entirely new experience. Then you know what is meant by the difference between intellectual understanding and emotional understanding.

For the new friends this lecture will not be easy to follow for the very reasons just mentioned. For those who already pursue this Path it is not always possible to really understand. How much more difficult then it is for someone who is not involved with self-exploration. Even intellectual understanding is not possible if the previous talks leading up to this one are not known. Still, you might feel a deep inner echo with some thought advanced here, and this might, sooner or later, help to bring you to this Path of liberation. In other words, a seed may be sown that will come to fruition at a later period.

Now I wish to discuss a topic I have not gone into before, and that is identification with oneself, as opposed to identification with others. The last time I talked about man's relationship to time. You will recall that I said, in essence, that very rarely does man live in the now. He either pushes into the future or he pulls back into the past. Often the two contradictory movements happen simultaneously. In both alternatives, man strains away from the now.

Only when you live in the now do you live in reality. You cannot live in reality when you strain into the future, because such a future, as you hope it or imagine it or fear it, may never come to pass in exactly that way. But let us suppose, theoretically, that it were possible to imagine the future as it will be -- which can never be the case. Even if it were possible for the future to be as we imagine it, then it would still be living in an illusion because it would not be happening at that moment. You would not be first experiencing it and then reacting to it in reality, but only in fantasy.

On the other hand, if you pull backward into the past, if you try to re-live it in exactly the way it was -- that is, if this were possible which, again, it is not -- then you would still be in illusion, because at this moment you are in a new segment of time. You live in fantasy, and therefore you react to fantasy. In other words, you do not live in and react to the reality of the now. One of the characteristics of reality is its constant state of flux. It is contrary to being stagnant or static.

You cannot duplicate the past exactly, any more than you can imagine a future and live in it. Your subjective colorings -- which originate from your desires and fears -- distort the picture of reality. They make you blind to factors that existed or that will exist; they make you ignore your different state of mind and feelings, even though you deliberately try to deny this change -- and thus stunt your growth -- in order to live your fantasy. You fear to allow the natural flux of time to become part of your soul because of your distorted ideas and misconceptions. If you would trust the flux of time, the benign quality and the movement and growth of time, then you could allow yourself to follow suit and thereby make it possible for your inner faculties to swing into harmony with the stream of time. Then you would not need to manipulate time either by holding it back or by pushing it forward. Then you would not need to fear the future, or wish for fulfillment in the past. This happens only because you do not trust the future -- that is, you do not trust yourself to live in the now when the future comes. This distrust is partly justified due to your unrealistic concepts and to your destructive attitudes which prevent fulfillment in the now -- whatever this now happens to be. But by either pulling back into the past or by pushing forward into the future, you seek the wrong remedy against these obstructions: you seek an easy way out, rather than tackling that in you which prevents you from living as fully as you are meant to live.

In order to live in the now, and therefore in reality, you have to have a keen sense of the reality of yourself. Often this is not the case. Most people do not experience themselves in reality. This is a subtle process. It can be rarely pinpointed or proven, except in very advanced states. Most of you are probably convinced that you do have a sense of the reality of yourselves. However, upon a closer examination of certain symptoms, which you learn to evaluate as such and follow through, then you will eventually find that this is fallacious. This is always the first step towards eliminating a destructive condition. All of my friends have gone through similar experiences regarding other factors of their inner life. Outwardly nothing seemed to indicate a certain negative condition. You were convinced that all was well with you in a certain respect. Only after closer inspection did you find the opposite to be the case. Then you understood how this hidden distortion destroyed for you many possibilities for living fully, for happiness, and for meaningfulness. Finding what is can never harm you. However, not seeing what is -- in other words, blindness -- does harm you.

Eventually you will find this lack of the reality of yourself. Before I talk about self-identification, I would like to indicate a few symptoms by which you may begin to detect this lack of feeling real. In the crassest possible way, this aspect can be found in the symptom that most people do not feel that for them death is a reality. To experience oneself as mortal is not negative or morbid, as might be misunderstood. A realistic sense of one's mortality is never a burden. It is never depressing or fear-producing. It never diminishes the now, nor the reality of living, regardless of what concepts or beliefs one holds regarding the afterlife. It is the opposite. It goes hand in hand with the fact that he who never experiences his mortality as a reality is the person who is morbidly afraid of his own death. In this vital question, you will find a distinct symptom of your lack of experiencing yourself as real. For if you do not feel your mortality as real, then you cannot possibly feel your aliveness as being real either.

There are many other less crass or extreme symptoms which tell about the sense of your self-identification. One such symptom may be in the fleeting moment when you discover that what you think, or what you feel, or what you will utter, or what you have uttered in a conversation is not as important in itself as it appears now. In other words, that how it appears is more important than how it is. This is a distinction that is not easily determined because it is so subtle. But once you discover it, then it stands out, and it is bound to show you the vital difference between identification with the self and identification with others, between experiencing yourself as real and not experiencing yourself as real. Even the most vital and essential feelings, thoughts, and inner experiences are often shifted in this way.

Or you may discover, in a fleeting and vague way, that your attitude toward your actions, toward your thoughts, and toward your feelings is geared to the idea of: "If only others could see me act that way, think that way, and feel that way." In this moment of discovery, you will detect that you shift your identity from yourself onto others. Therefore, your sense of the reality of yourself is dependent on others. In other words, you live through others.

I do not want to be misunderstood. I do not want you to believe that when I mention these symptoms you are being reprimanded and that you are invited to quickly change. This can be even less the case than with any other miscondition that we have ever been concerned with on this Path. By trying forcefully and intentionally to eliminate this condition, you will only make the condition worse because then you identify with me instead of with yourself. You merely obey another authority. In other words, you have merely shifted your identification.

Rather than trying to immediately correct these distortions, greet them as symptoms which will lead you -- like a red thread, like a well-marked road -- into a deeper area. Then this will afford you a greater awareness of yourself, and therefore a deeper understanding of yourself. This is the overall area that we are concerned with at the moment.

Now we will approach the topic of identification in a more direct way. To a degree, your present day psychology and psychiatry has found this aspect and is aware both of its healthy manifestation and of its unhealthy manifestation. But I wish to go into it a little deeper and shed light on it from a wider outlook.

When the infant is born and grows into a little child, its ego is still so weak that it cannot sustain itself. Therefore, the child is dependent on the more powerful, stronger adult world. Everyone realizes this and understands this dependency for physical life. The child is dependent for its nourishment, dependent for its protection from danger, and dependent for its shelter. But the subtle bodies have their own life, which functions according to laws that are similar to the physical laws. The child is not only dependent in regard to its physical existence, but also in regard to its emotional existence, to its intellectual existence, and to its spiritual existence. Love has to be given to the child, just as food does. It cannot obtain either by the fruits of its own resources. The mature soul does not wait helplessly to be loved. Love comes to him through his capacity for loving and for relating. He never feels insecure and helpless because he has no love. When you find such aspects in yourself, then you know that this indicates emotional immaturity. Love is an essential in life. But the weak ego of the child is dependent. The mature adult is no more dependent on it than he need be dependent on others for his physical subsistence.

Similarly, the child is not capable of forming his own ideas or concepts. He cannot discriminate between reason, common sense, logic and their opposites. He is dependent for being supplied with the ideas and the principles which are guideposts to his growing up process. To deny the child any such guideposts will not cause him to form his real independence quicker and better. On the contrary, if you let a child starve, then he does not become better equipped to cope with the struggle of existence. If you do not give a child love, then he does not become better able to love. It is just the opposite. Only when the child grows -- provided this growth occurs organically -- will he gradually cut the ties to the parents by standing on his feet financially; by developing his capacity to love -- and thereby not being in dependent need that love be given to him; by discriminating regarding the ideas and the principles that he has heard and that he learned -- and then by discarding what he cannot accept; by searching and then changing. He may later return to the same ideas, but only after he has found them by himself and for himself. For only then are they his. In this process organic growth prevails, and independence of body, independence of soul, and independence of spirit are established. Thus the dependent bond to the parental authority is cut. The healthy spirit will cut this triple bond, even if the parents do not encourage such severance but try their utmost to hold it intact.

But the spirit, or the soul, that is burdened with unresolved problems will not desire to cut it. On the contrary, it will do its best to maintain it. Such maintenance is often done in hidden ways which are distorted, and therefore precarious. Often the misunderstanding exists that emotional independence means isolation. Conversely, the withdrawal from involvement -- while frantically holding on to dependency -- is interpreted to mean the ability to love. I have mentioned this in the past, but now I find that it is necessary to repeat it in the present context as a warning. If you ponder the above, then you cannot fail to see that the truth is the opposite of what it is believed to be. The mature person stands on his own feet both outwardly and inwardly. And in this process lies the capacity for mutuality, for involvement, for giving and for receiving. In other words, for relationship.

In this inner, and therefore unconscious, refusal to cut the ties with protective authority lies identification with such authority. The child needs a good example from which to mold its ego, which will later afford him the possibility to stand free. But if such a good example serves only to continue the identification -- and thereby prevents self-identification -- then the original good purpose has been misconstrued. In such a case the child wants to become the parent with whom he favorably identifies, and he later tries to be that parent, rather than first find himself and then be himself.

It is important to understand that such identification may not be either obvious or on the surface. It is also necessary to understand that negative identification must also be looked for. In other words, a parent whom one hates or despises, and whom one certainly does not want to emulate, can also be identified with on an unconscious level. In one's fear to not ever be like this parent, and in one's suspicion that one might be like him, is imbedded this identification, with perhaps the vague idea that this parent may be better off despite his unlovable traits. In short, this entire preoccupation -- though often unconscious -- may be a negative identification. The tie to this undesirable parent that one rejects may be even more difficult to sever than the tie to a cherished parent. It is very important to understand this.

For the child, positive identification is desirable. For an adult, a positive identification is often just as undesirable as a negative one, because both prevent the evolvement of the self.

I want to warn you against trying to judge or evaluate in what way you may identify with whom, and doing so merely with your intellectual equipment. What actually exists in you may be entirely different. Only extensive work in this respect will reveal the truth to you. You may consciously admire, and therefore wish to emulate, one parent and despise and hate the other. Yet in the course of this work many of you have found that you have trends, attitudes, and behavior patterns which are similar to those of the hated and despised parent. This often comes as a shock. But such a finding indicates that you identify with the parent you least wish to be identified with. So beware of quick judgments.

The original identification with the parent is later substituted with others who take his or her place. This is done without the conscious self being aware of it. Such identification not only occurs with individuals, but also with groups, with nationalities, with religions, and with political affiliations. Even minority groups rebelling against the masses serve as a means with which to identify in this psychological distortion. Conformism is really a consequence of the need to identify with someone more powerful. Such conforming, or identifying with, can also occur under the guise of non-conformism and of apparent individualism. But if such individualism is strained -- in other words, if too great a point is made of it -- then it indicates that the group is conformed to and identified with. Often a rebellious minority group of people believes that they are free because they rebel and -- according to all appearances -- they seemingly defy conformism. But when this stringent need to prove something exists -- in this case non-conformism -- then one can be certain that there is a flaw underneath. The truly independent, free individual does not have to make a show of it. He does not have to be militant about it. So a rebellious, non-conforming minority group may serve as a substitute to identify oneself with.

People may also identify with causes. No matter how valid and how good the cause itself may be, if it serves as a substitute for identifying with oneself, then there is harm. The harm is not in embracing this worthy cause, in believing in it and working for it -- for all this can be done with inner freedom. The harm is in your need of a substitute for yourself to lean on, because you have not found within yourself that area that is still as weak as a child, and because you have not understood the hidden motivation of your reason for embracing the cause.

I am not advocating a life in which you separate yourself from all ideas, from all groups, from all loyalties, and from all causes. This would be isolation, and even irresponsibility towards society. But there is a great difference between embracing a cause out of a healthy conviction and out of inner freedom -- gaining your sustenance from your inner resources -- and using the worthiest of causes to replace the well that exists within you, if only you would go and tap it.

The extreme form of such identification with others -- because of a weak ego that has not grown -- is conformism to public opinion and parroting the views of others. But the same condition exists within almost every human being in one form or another, only in a much subtler way. Therefore, it is much more difficult to detect it. That certainly does not mean that it is less important to find it and to grow out of it.

Some time ago I gave a lecture on self-alienation. It is needless to say that there is a connection between that topic and the one we are discussing here. But it is not the same. Self-alienation is a product, or a result, of non-identification with the self. In other words, when discussing self-alienation, then we still discussed an effect, while now we are coming closer to a cause. When you find psychological conditions and currents in which you feel an emotional dependency on others, then you can be sure that you are on the right track of finding that in some respects you have not yet established your selfhood. When you feel that vague fear or the anxiety that others will not supply you with what you need and expect of them -- be it financial help, be it approval, be it love, or be it acceptance -- then take it as an indication that here you are dealing with more than the natural need for human interdependence. Healthy interdependence never causes the emotion of anxiety, which is often accompanied by other emotions as well. Such fear and anxiety might be interpreted as a need to receive your inner lifeblood from sources outside yourself. That such a state of affairs is not natural and necessary hardly needs to be emphasized, once you see it clearly. From there it follows that it can be changed. In other words, you no longer have to live in such useless dependency that weakens you.

Do not overlook the fact that rebellion may indicate a need for being accepted or a need for being agreed with. You now know from past experience that behind your rebellion you often find a stringent need for the very thing that you rebel against.

When the emotional and spiritual umbilical cord has not been cut, then the self cannot grow. It can grow only to a very limited degree, just as the baby in the mother's womb can grow only to a certain point. In order to affect further growth, the physical umbilical cord has to be cut so that the baby can then evolve. In other words, only then is further physical growth possible. The process is not different regarding the inner personality. When the inner umbilical cord is not cut, then you are -- in the truest sense of the word -- dependent on others for your right to exist. All the psychological aspects of appeasing, of betraying, of self-alienation, and so on are indications that you have not been able to identify with yourself -- at least in certain areas. Therefore you have no sense of the reality of yourself. Subsequently, you cannot experience each living moment in fullness. Where and when such lack of selfhood -- such dependency on others through false identification -- exists, then you are bound to find that in one way or another you try to use others. Since you condemn yourself to living a parasitic life, festering on others, then you cannot help trying to use those whom you depend on. In this hidden attitude of using others can be found the distortion of your false love. In other words, you pretend to love. In reality you merely need others to take care of you. Therefore, you have to use others because otherwise you feel yourself sinking. You feel that you have no reality other than the reality accorded to you.

The more you use those whom you need, then the weaker you become. Therefore, the more you believe that you need others to strengthen you.

Living in the now is living in the wave of time. In this dimension, time flows in a certain movement and rhythm. This movement can be determined by the seasons, by day and night, by the position of the planets in relationship to the earth, and by the position of the earth in relationship to the planets, all of them constantly moving in space. These movements create certain rhythmic waves. To a tiny degree man, in the course of the centuries, has sensed some of these laws of the rhythmic movement of time, such as, for example, in astrology. Only a very limited understanding has been gained here. But everyone knows and feels -- and often expresses this in terms of having good times or bad times -- a period when things go well, when whatever one undertakes goes well, has good results. During such times one feels freer than usual in spite of the existing problematic conditions, one has a hopeful outlook, and therefore one is fulfilled, at least to a degree. And then there are the times of the downward curve of the wave, when all seems to go wrong. Anyone who during those times perseveres -- with a wholehearted desire to look at himself in truth -- sooner or later will come to the point when these so-called bad times -- which are actually manifestations of the disharmony that man has created in his relationship to his time-dimension -- will yield such a victory and such understanding that, as a result, he will no longer experience the rhythmic downward curve in the movement of time as a depressing period, or as an upsetting period, or as a disadvantageous period. For then each living movement -- fully experienced in the reality of the Now -- will yield adventure and excitement in a peaceful, harmonious way. It will be valuable, vital living.

This cannot happen unless you first learn to evaluate and to understand the negative in you, and thus your bad times. Then you will be in your time-dimension. Then you will experience yourself in reality. And this peace, this inner anchor within yourself, is something that cannot be described. It cannot be replaced with any other goal, or with any seemingly worthwhile aim, or with desirable accomplishments, or with desirable states. There are riches contained in each individual soul. They are yours for the asking. It is often sad for us spirits to notice how man turns in the wrong direction in order to seek the fulfillment that he senses exists; how he literally wastes his time seeking the solution and the fulfillment in the wrong direction. Only when he has tapped that well of his inner wealth will he stop straining away from the Now. Therefore, he will no longer be estranged from himself. Thus he will no longer derive his sustenance from other sources. As long as he remains dependent on this foreign source of life, then he has to go through all sorts of means that weaken -- and therefore increasingly diminish -- his real self.

It is important for you to see this desire to use others in yourself. First you have to find it and then you have to understand it. But do not apply this merely to the extreme outer manifestation of using others. Try to see it in its more subtle version. In other words, that you have to use others since your life seems to depend on them. Therefore, you need to be in control. So many of my friends have begun to see this strong tendency of needing to be in control. Different individuals resort to different means in order to first gain control and then to exert it. Each one of you has to find your particular means of control. How you fear not to be in control; how you destroy relationships because there is a mutual battle for control, each one acting inwardly as though it were a fight for survival. It is sad for us to see how you distort the issues in this unrealistic fight for survival, how you spoil all living substance toward the growth of mutuality and your vital natural feelings. By this process the self cannot evolve strong, free, and independent.

Where you find your stringent need to be in control -- of others, of a situation, of a relationship -- then you have a direct indication of your non-identification with yourself. If you look at this trend from the point of view discussed here -- in other words, if you use these clues and highlights as points to pursue and from which to go on -- then you will understand not only the harm of this inner stunting, but you will also come to the nucleus of your deliberate self-denial that causes you so much unnecessary hardship. Then you will be able to go about bringing yourself out of it. This step will be easier than the first step, that of first seeking and then finding such a negative condition. But, above all, you have to be in full awareness of your parasitic clinging to others. In other words, of identifying with others so as to depend on them in one way or another. Then you will see the ties that until now you have refused to cut, therefore preventing entire areas of your being from establishing their independent roots within yourself. Once you find these areas, then it will be comparatively easy -- though certainly not a sudden or quick process -- to cut the ties, to become yourself, and to finally identify with yourself.

**********

And now, my friends, you have a few weeks to ponder over this lecture before I answer your questions. Prepare your own interpretations for the discussion so that we can see if you have really understood it. This in itself is of great value. Are there any questions not pertaining to this lecture?

QUESTION: Will you kindly explain the phenomenon of sleep?

ANSWER: Man's subtle bodies need to shed the burden of the physical body, of the gross physical matter. He could not sustain a lifetime without this rest. Physical matter is a burden to the real personality. I mean that in the literal sense of the word. Man needs a respite from this burden, when he can move freely and be in freedom. This happens in a different dimension. In this other, wider, freer dimension there is respite, there is relaxation, and there is a gathering of strength. This is essentially the main reason for sleep. It is the function of sleep. This freeing of the gross matter, and thereby moving into a wider dimension, not only restores the physical organs, but the physical organs are actually revitalized by a restoration of the psychic bloodstream that is regenerated in a different dimension. The psychic or subtle bodies are always the cause. The physical body is always the effect.

I now leave you with much love. I bless each one of you. This blessing contains a great strength. It is a substance that can bring truth and regeneration to your soul, so as to help you to find the necessary stamina and the necessary will to establish yourself IN yourself. Be in peace. Be in God.

March 29, 1963