THE EGO IN INTEGRAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN EAST-WEST PERSPECTIVE

OF THE EGO'S ROLE IN DEVELOPMENT

by

Larry L. Reaves

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the California Institute of Integral

Studies

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in East-West Psychology

California Institute of Integral Studies

Committee Chair

Brendan Collins, Ph.D.

San Francisco, California

2005
 UMI Number: 3203165

Copyright 2005 by
Reaves, Larry L.

All rights reserved.

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI
UMI Microform 3203165
Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company

300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346
© 2005 Larry L. Reaves
 Ego in Integral Psychology

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL

I certify that I have read The Ego in Integral Psychology by Larry Reaves, and
that in my opinion, this work meets the criterion for approving a dissertation
submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy
degree in East-West Psychology at the California Institute of Integral Studies.

te,u.u.Qw.~ fG1-
Brendan Collins, Ph.D. (Chair)
Associate Professor,
East-West Psychology

/I1111()~
'1dn;~-~~~.
Adjunct Faculty,
School of Consciousness and
Transformation
State 'l1niversity ofNf,w t,YorftPress 90 State Street, Suite 700
Albany, New York 12207
518-472-5000
Fax 518-472-5038
http://www.sunypress.edu

3 June 2002

Mr. Larry L. Reaves

2410 Madera Circle
1\ .... a....me....
1"'\1-' ~ 1"''''
. I LI I· I IL "'-,

Port Hueneme, CA 93041

Dear Mr. Reaves:

You have our permission to use the material (Table 1.3, p. 24) you requested from the
SUNY Press book The Ego and the Dynamic Ground: A Transpersonal Theory of
Human Development by Michael Washburn. This permission is given without charge
for use in this unpublished printed thesis only. If the thesis is later published using this
material you will need to seek permission again. The thesis may be copied by the
dissertation committee for display/review purposes only.

There should be an acknowledgment statement similar to the following:

"From The Ego and the Dynamic Ground: A Transpersonal Theory of Human
Development by Michael Washburn, by permission of the State University of
New York Press. ©1988 State University of New York. All Rights Reserved."

Best wishes with your thesis presentation.

Sincerely,

~~ng~, J~ !~J
V ~~9hts and Permissions Manager
SHAMBHALA PUBLICATIONS, INC.
Horticultural Hall 300 Massachusetts Avenue Boston Massachusetts 02115

21 May 2002

Mr. Larry L. Reaves

2410 Madera Circle
Apartment 122
Port Hueneme, CA 93041

RE: EYE TO EYE by Ken Wilber, Figure 9 "The Nested Hierarchy of Basic Structures
of Consciousness" to be included in a dissertation by L.Reaves at the California
Institute of Integral Studies in San Francisco department of East-West Psychology,
2002; 10-15 copies, one-time, non-exclusive, gratis

Dear Mr. Reaves:

Weare pleased to grant the above mentioned permission. We ask that you include the
following credit line exactly as it appears below:

"from EYE TO EYE by Ken Wilber. © 1983, 1990, 1996,2001 by Ken Wilber.
Reprinted by arrangement with Shambhala Publications, Inc., Boston,
www.shambhala.com "

With thanks for your request and your interest in Shambhala Publications,

Sincerely,

Sc tt Lesniewski
Permissions Coordinator
Shambhala Publications

Telephone: (617) 424-0030' Fax: (617) 236-1563

Larry L. Reaves
Brendan Collins, Ph.D., Committee Chair
California Institute of Integral Studies, 2005

THE EGO IN INTEGRAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN EAST-WEST PERSPECTIVE

OF THE EGO'S ROLE IN DEVELOPMENT

ABSTRACT

The role and function in human development of the psychological construct

known as "ego" is controversial, but the contrasting views are especially apparent

when examined from an East-West perspective. Eastern philosophical and

religious systems are typically seen as advocating transcending ego in the quest

for enlightenment, which often leads to the negation of ego's importance in

development. Western psychology and psychotherapy, on the other hand, support

the development of a healthy ego, which is understood to be essential to mental

stability and a cohesive sense of self. Can both views be partially correct? This

study examined key issues currently under debate in the psychology of the ego

with special focus on psychoanalytic ego psychology, transpersonal psychology,

the ego in Buddhist psychology as discussed by Western psychologists and

psychotherapists, and integral psychology. The study sought to unite the distinct

views of Eastern mystical traditions and Western ego psychologies concerning the

appropriate place and function of the ego. These discussions were guided by

integral psychology's fundament "unity-in-diversity" and present an integral

approach to ego development psychology.

VI
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract vi

List of tables and figures x

Chapter 1 .1

Introduction .1

Purpose of the study 3

Self-concept in integral psychology, psychoanalytic ego psychology,

And Buddhism 5

Method 8

An integral approach to personal formation 8

Chapter 2 " 13

The Ego in Psychoanalytic Theory 13

Identifying with the properties of objects 13

Ego development in psychoanalytic ego psychology .21

Ego pathology and ego grasping 25

Integration in ego psychology .28

Chapter 3 31

The Ego in Transpersonal Psychology 31

Dynamic-Dialectic paradigm 35

Structural-Hierarchical paradigm .38

The ego in analytical psychology 59

Vll
Chapter 4 69

The ego in Buddhist psychology: Perspectives of Westem psychologists and

psychotherapists 69

Chapter 5 77

The Ego in Integral Psychology 77

Chapter 6 83

Parts of Being and Planes of Consciousness 83

The outer Being 83

The inner Being 87

The Psychic Being 89

Reconciliation of the inner and outer Being 91

Psychic integration 92

Unity in diversity 94

Discreet vs. continuous degrees , 95

Psychic transformation 100

Chapter 7 105

Summary and Discussion l 05

Psychoanalytic theory 107

Psychoanalytic ego psychology 11 0

Transpersonal psychology 112

Dynamic-dialectical paradigm 113

Structural-hierarchical paradigm 114

V111
 Analytical psychology 117

Buddhist psychology 120

Integral Psychology 124

Discussion '.'.129

An integral ego psychology 131

The way ahead: Ego transformation ' " 136

Questions and suggestions for further study 140

References 142

IX
 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1
Washburn's Dynamic-Dialectical Paradigm of Triphasic Development 36

Figure 2
Hierarchy of Basic Structures of Consciousness 39

Figure 1
The Concentric System of Consciousness 85

Table 3
Aurobindo's Hierarchical System of Consciousness 86

Figure 2
Multiple egos 97

Figure 3
Ego integration 100

Figure 4
Integral self-realization 104

Table 4
Multilateral perspectives of the ego 130

x
 CHAPTER 1:

INTRODUCTION

Studies related to ego and ego development have been a central focus in the

field of psychology. Psychotherapists, particularly, are interested in ego

development, since the ego as the center of conscious personality is understood to

bridge the outer and inner worlds and provide a sense of continuity and self-

concept. If the ego breaks down, mental disorders result. Most psychotherapists,

therefore, are concerned with helping the individual in therapy to develop a stable

ego. Practitioners of some religions who teach the suppression or obliteration of

ego through meditation and ascetic self-denial have held an opposite view,

however. In these belief systems, the ego is understood to be a barrier to spiritual

growth and enlightenment. In Buddhism, for example, attachment to and

identification with personal existence is understood to be born of illusion or

ignorance of one's true nature and is the cause of suffering. That is, egocentric

consciousness may block human development in some way and limit our

awareness of the world. Can both views be true? Is it possible that egocentric

behavior is appropriate at one level of development but transcended at another?

A further problem concerns using the term "ego" to refer to different or

contrasting realities. Ego development psychologists, as well as integral

psychology, emphasize a healthy ego. On the other hand, Eastern mystical

traditions refer to an "unhealthy ego" that gets in the way. It is important not to
 use the same tenn to refer to both realities without first clarifying the way "ego"

is being used. Integral psychology can reconcile the conflicting perspectives held

by ego psychology and Eastern schools of religion concerning the role ego plays

in human development. This task will be advanced throughout this dissertation

through application of integral psychology's triadic principles of uniqueness,

relatedness, and transcendence.

Briefly stated, integral psychology's view is that every individual is unique,

unlike any other individual, and develops according to his or her unique potentials

and givens. Repetition of persons, places, or events is not possible. Integral

psychology, therefore, argues for strengthening the ego at the egocentric sphere of

consciousness, as opposed to suppressing or destroying it, a view that has resulted

from a certain misinterpretation or misunderstanding by some individuals

concerning Eastern teachings on the ego. At the same time, individuality cannot

be realized apart from the relationship to a larger wholeness or collective

environment. In addition to the inalienable principles of uniqueness and

relatedness in human personality, there is the third principle, transcendence.

According to integral psychology, there is a self-transcending dimension to

human nature. The transcendence principle is the heart of human freedom. It is

the depth dimension associated with the ground of Being and transcends

individual personality, groups, and limitations of all kinds.

These principles, however, can be carried to an extreme, which creates an

imbalance in human development. Uniqueness in its distorted form may lead to a

deep sense of isolation and unhealthy narcissism. Relationships may be fonned in

2
a way that results in the suppression of individuality. Transcendence, when taken

to the extreme, may lead to the denial of the importance of both individuality and

society in the search for a transcendental "other." Integral psychology attempts to

reconcile these extremes and restore the balance that is necessary to achieve the

full flowering of human development.

Ego development from a Western perspective will draw on the literature in

transpersonal psychology and ego psychology. The ego will be studied from an

Eastern perspective through teachings found in religious and mystical traditions,

particularly Hindu and Buddhist traditions. The theory of integral non-dualism

will be used as the organizational framework in forming an integral approach that

promotes the positive development of a healthy ego.

Presently the purpose of the study will be stated. Then a methodological

technique employing an integral approach, as a means of reconciling opposite

viewpoints in ego psychology and Eastern religion will be introduced.

Purpose of the Study

The aim of the study is to investigate personal formation (ego) from the

perspective of integral non-dual theory and to build an integral approach to ego

development in integral psychology. A developmental psychology is needed that

can address ego at multiple levels of consciousness. Eastern mystical traditions

emphasize transcendental levels of consciousness but do not stress developmental

stages as found in Western studies of human development. On the other hand,

human development psychology makes no allowance for transcendental

3
dimensions of human consciousness. Integral methodology can bridge this

discontinuity by offering critical perspectives concerning the complimentary

relationships between object-oriented consciousness (ego) and non-dual

consciousness (Being). Knowledge of the relationships between object-oriented

consciousness and non-dual consciousness can be used to address developmental

tasks associated with identity formation and object constancy. This link is

important since in both transpersonal psychology and Buddhist psychology, the

traditions emphasized in this paper, the self is formed as a result of relations with

objects in the environment. That is, a sense of identity and sameness over time is

experienced as these objective images are remembered, internalized, and

ultimately consolidated into a self-representation or self-concept. There is

disagreement, however, as to the outcome of this self. Western psychology sees

this self-concept as essential to normal growth and development. Buddhism sees

it as the root of suffering. An integrative approach is needed to examine this

issue. According to Engler (1984), Eastern religious traditions, emphasizing

transcendental development only, have sometimes attempted to bypass the

developmental tasks of identify formation and object constancy in an attempt to

annihilate the ego. Engler (1984) says this course of action may have fateful and

pathological consequences. Ego development psychology, at the opposite end of

the spectrum, may fail to attain to transcendental dimensions of human

development. The purpose of this study is to examine these issues by offering an

approach through integral psychology that will reconcile opposite and conflicting

4
 viewpoints. The study will focus on the principles of egocentric, psychocentric,

and cosmocentric principles as a working theme.

Before examining these contrasting viewpoints, I would like to present a brief

presentation of self-concept as understood in integral psychology, psychoanalytic

ego psychology, and Buddhism, three important theoretical perspectives of the

nature of self discussed in this paper.

Self-concept in Integral Psychology, Psychoanalytic Ego

Psychology, and Buddhism

Integral Psychology is built upon a comprehensive and connected view of

human nature and the universe. Without this inclusive and integral worldview,

our understanding of the human being can at best be isolated and fragmented.

Integral psychology calls for a comprehensive synthesis and harmonization of

experience as an essential prerequisite for understanding human reality. This

inclusive synthesis leads ultimately to a consolidation of the diverse aspects of

personality into a cohesive sense of self.

Integral psychology posits a distinction between ego consciousness and a more

inclusive integral self. While it is possible to speak of a higher, more-inclusive

self, there appears to be no way to confirm or deny its existence by way of

scientific measurements; rather, the higher self must be directly experienced

through introspective methods, which are empirical but subjective. The ego self,

on the other hand is understood to be an empirical self, particularly suited to

contrast, distinguish, and objectify sensory impressions from the natural

environment. In a word, self in integral psychology may be said to be both

5
cosmocentric and egocentric, with the egocentric consciousness obstructing the

cosmocentric consciousness in day-to-day experiences of reality.

From the perspective of psychoanalytic ego psychology, the self-concept is a

result of recalled images of our experiences being stored, consolidated, and

ultimately internalized (Jacobson, 1964; Mahler, Pine, & Bergman, 1975;

Lichtenberg, 1975). Bruner (1964) holds that the selfis literally constructed out

of our experience with the world of objects, a composite representation forged out

of select memories from our past encounters with the object environment, as

discussed above.

World religions, philosophical schools, and mystical traditions, have

challenged ego's exclusive occupation with objective reality as a means of

obtaining a stable sense of self-identity, however. These schools teach a way of

liberation from the consciousness associated with the ego mind, which is usually

presented as a restricted, even alienated, consciousness that poses a barrier to

spiritual growth and enlightenment. Engler (1984), contrasting self in

psychoanalytic psychology with Buddhist teaching, states:

From the perspective of psychoanalytic object relations theory, the deepest

psychopathological problem is the lack of a sense of self, [while from the
Buddhist perspective], the deepest source of suffering is the attempt to
preserve a self, an attempt that is viewed as both futile and self-defeating. (p.
30)

Engler (1984) presents perspectives from several writers that support what

appears to be opposite viewpoints concerning the nature of self in psychoanalytic

theory and Buddhism:

The most severe clinical syndromes-infantile autism, the symbiotic and

functional psychoses, the borderline conditions-represent failures, arrests, or

6
 regressions in establishing a cohesive, integrated self (Kohut, 1971, 1977) or
Self-Concept (Kernberg, 1975, 1982).

In contrast, from the Buddhist perspective the psychopathological problem is the

presence of a self and the feeling of selfhood. According to Buddhist diagnosis,

the severest form of psychopathology is precisely attavadupadana, the clinging to

personal existence (Buddhaghosa, 1975; Nyanatiloka, 1972). The therapeutic

issue in psychotherapy and psychoanalysis is how to "regrow" a basic sense of

self (Guntrip, 1969) or how to differentiate and integrate a stable, consistent, and

enduring self-representation (Kernberg, 1977a). The therapeutic issue in

Buddhism is how to "see through" the illusion or construct of the self (atta-ditthi),

how to disidentify from "those essential identifications on which the experience

of our personal identity is founded" (Jacobson, 1964, p. xii).

Engler (1983) stressed that Western tradition has emphasized the importance

of becoming somebody while Eastern tradition has placed emphasis on the

importance of becoming nobody. This leads Engler to believe that both a sense of

self and a sense of no self are essential in realizing a state of optimal

psychological well being. According to Engler, the two greatest achievements

realized through the study of object relations, through ego psychology, are

identity and object constancy and these are seen by Buddhist analysis as the root

of mental suffering. Epstein (1993) emphasizes that, from the Buddhist

perspective, the ego consciousness that is transcended does not imply non-

existence. Epstein quotes the Dalai Lama on this point: "Selflessness is not a

case of something that existed in the past becoming nonexistent. Rather, this sort

of 'Self is something that never did exist. What is needed is to identify as

7
nonexistent something that always was nonexistent" (pp. l22~123). According to

Epstein, "It is not ego, in the Freudian sense, that is the actual target of Buddhist

insight. It is, rather, the self-concept, the representational component of the ego,

the actual internal experience of one's selfthat is targeted" (p.123).

Method

An Integral Approach to Personal Formation

This study is exploratory and utilizes a theoretical method employing a

comparative approach that will be used to contrast the ego psychology of the

West, including transpersonal psychology, with a Buddhist view of ego in the

East. An integral approach to ego development will then be constructed upon the

fundamental principle of integral philosophy. This principle can be stated as

"unity~in-diversity", and will be applied to ego development in terms of integral

psychology's three interrelated aspects of personality. The thesis guiding the

study is that essential relationships exist between the triadic principles of

uniqueness, relatedness, and transcendence and ego development. These

relationships will be studied in the context of integral psychology which, inspired

by ego development psychology, argues for strengthening the ego at the

egocentric sphere of consciousness, in contrast to suppression of the ego as taught

in Eastern mystical traditions. Chaudhuri (1977) says,

Broadly speaking, there are three inseparable aspects of human personality:

uniqueness or individuality, universality or relatedness, and transcendence. In
different schools of philosophy we fInd that there has been a tendency to over~
emphasize one aspect or another. It has not occurred to many people that all
these are very essential and interrelated aspects of being. (p. 74)

8
 Ego development, from the perspective of integral psychology and its

fundament "unity-in-diversity," understands all aspects of human personality to

be inseparable, non-linear, and interdependent aspects of being. Ego development

involves a dynamic, evolutionary urge that operates simultaneously at multiple

levels of being. Integral psychology, guided by integral non-dual theory, asserts

that positive ego development involves an ascending as well as a descending

movement of consciousness. An evolutionary urge or "push" of being operates,

as it were from below, out of the unconscious depths of primordial nature. This

evolutionary impulse upward toward the potentiality of consciousness is counter-

balanced and supported by an evolutionary "pull" future-ward through a descent

of the "Overmind" and "Supermind". These latter states of consciousness do not

originate in a direct sense from any biological or cultural matrix. The Overmind

is total or global consciousness (Ohose, 1970), and according to Chadhuri (1974),

the "structural principles of Being such as life, mind, Supermind, psyche, spiritual

energy, and pure being are also present in matter from the very beginning in a

state of involution" (p.182). Supermind is integral consciousness. It is the

awareness of Being in its integral fullness as distinguished from the mind's

sectional or fragmentary cognition. It is above matter, life, and mind. According

to Chaudhuri, it is the "creative medium of manifestation of the infInite and

eternal Spirit into the space-time world of matter, life, and mind" (p.180). Human

development, as seen from an integral viewpoint, is occurring simultaneously at

preconscious, personal, and transpersonallevels of existence. While linear

development occurs, there appears to be no compelling evidence to limit

9
 development to linear progression alone or to give it predominance in

development. Moreover, because of the multidimensional and integral nature of

'Being', the demarcations between the ego, the larger self, and consciousness

states in general, particularly transpersonal states, do not always seem clear. For

this reason, the study does not make rigid distinctions between the terms "ego",

"personal", "self', or "human" development, although the need for clarity in

distinguishing these terms is acknowledged. The term "ego" is used in the

attempt to contrast or distinguish so far as possible the personal aspects from the

more inclusive aspects of Being. This distinction seems necessary for purposes of

discussing the East-West controversy concerning whether ego should be

suppressed or integrated in the course of reaching a transcendent or higher state of

"Being-awareness." Such a distinction may become less useful, however, when

attempting to discuss higher states of awareness. In this study, the terms 'self

and 'consciousness' are written in the lower case for purpose of consistency,

although the demarcations of consciousness associated with the particular usage

may vary significantly.

The goal of human development in integral psychology is to achieve integral

self-realization. In this process, ego is not annihilated or by-passed, but fulfills its

natural potential within a more-inclusive state of integral consciousness.

Therefore, the strategy of the study is to construct an approach that can be used to

understand ego development at multiple levels of consciousness. The study will

suggest a way of understanding ego through an analysis of ego in terms of these

various spheres of consciousness. Since integral psychology is grounded in the

10
 inclusive theoretical perspective of integral non-dualism, a perspective that

consolidates yet transcends contents of consciousness, it has the capacity to

incorPOrate contrasting and even opposing views regarding ego. Therefore, an

integral approach will be developed as a method to reconcile, as far as possible,

these seemingly opposite views of ego consciousness in the East and West.

"Reconciliation of the opposites," the heart of integrative methodology, will be

used as the methodological technique.

Presently, the fundamental structure underlying identity formation in

psychoanalytic theory will be reviewed. Particular attention will be given to the

way objects are set up in the ego to form a self-concept. This review should

provide a context for later discussions of ego development in transpersonal,

Buddhist, and integral psychology. The review of transpersonal psychology will

highlight three developmental models that include transpersonal spectrums of

development now central in the current dialogue in transpersonal psychology.

These models are the structural-hierarchical model or paradigm authored by Ken

Wilber (1990), the dynamic-dialectical paradigm formulated and developed by

Michael Washburn (1988), and a discussion of the ego-self axis in analytical

psychology as presented by Carl lung. This review will be followed by a review

of the literature in Buddhist psychology, drawn predominantly from Western

psychologist concerned with issues of ego development and ego transcendence

and will be discussed in association with the other transpersonal paradigms of

development and in relation to the psychoanalytic theory of identity formation.

Following the review and discussion of the psychoanalytic, transpersonal, and

11
Buddhist literature, the ego will be discussed from the perspective of integral

psychology.

12
 CHAPTER 2:

THE EGO IN PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY

Identifying with the Properties of Objects

The history of ego psychology in the West has evolved from a tripartite theory

of the psyche, conceptualized by Sigmund Freud, into a complex ego

development psychology. As early as 1900 Freud had already begun intensive

study of the way identity formation occurs in human development. Meissner

(1970) traced the concept of identification in Freud's writings and found it to be a

central mechanism in the process of ego development in psychoanalytic theory,

touching on nearly all aspects of personality formation. As Meissner says, "The

development of the structural theory was closely linked to the emergence of

Identification as a primary mechanism of structuralization, being both the

mechanism of superego formation and a contribution to the development of the

ego" (p.582).

Freud's structural theory, which contains his explanations of introjection,

identification, and setting up of the object in the ego, still carries great influence,

if not predominance, in psychoanalytic thought. Freud emphasized the important

role that identity plays in early childhood development especially, and

distinguished the process of identification in three ways according to the level of

development. At the early stage of development when the infant is in a state of

symbiosis, identification occurs as a strong emotional tie, with the infant

13
experiencing the object as part of self. At a later stage, the object is introjected

into the ego, which occurs regressively as a substitute for a libidinal bond. Lastly,

identification occurs as a means of separating from objects by registering the

desirable quality ofthe object internally (Meissner, 1970).

Meissner found that Freud's use of the concept of identification differed

significantly from the way it later came to be used in psychoanalytic thought

where a variety of meanings have been applied to the term. However, the process

by which the ego registers and identifies with the properties of objects continues

to be of central importance in developmental psychology, especially among the

theorist who built on Freud's metapsychology. The extent, if any, to which the

ego is formed regressively as a result of a substitute for a libidinal bond or formed

representatively through internalizing the properties of objects is a source of rich

debate and will be addressed throughout this study. Two contrasting paradigms

of ego development as presented by Washburn (1988) and Wilber (1990) are

central to this debate and will be discussed in the section on ego development in

transpersonal psychology that follows. Briefly stated, in Washburn's view, which

is based on the psychodynamic model, the ego is formed through an ontological

deficiency in a regressive escape from the overpowering libidinal energies.

Wilber, on the other hand, while incorporating much of psychoanalytic theory,

sees a less severe regression and a more natural unfolding of ego structures and

potentials through a linear course of development that is predominantly cognitive.

An additional, related controversy, which asks whether ego consciousness (or

self) is representational reality or ontological Being, will also be considered at a

14
later point from the perspective of integral psychology. In what now follows, a

brief presentation of Freud's view of identification as the central mechanism in

ego formation and development will be stated.

Freud understood the primary function of identification to be a mechanism

whereby instinctual libidinal energies were channeled pathologically to

circumvent the subject's repressive efforts. Freud held that an affect attaches to

the perception of an external object or to some quality associated with the object.

He termed these varying degrees of emotional investment in an object, "object

cathexis." The process through which a person places heavy emotional energies

into an object, internalizes, then identifies with the properties of the object,

became a cornerstone in Freud's theories of ego formation and development.

Strachey (1962) calls cathexis the "most fundamental of all Freud's hypotheses,"

where

in mental functioning something is to be distinguished-a quota of affect or sum

of excitation...which is capable of increase, diminution, displacement and
discharge, and which is spread over the memory-traces of ideas somewhat as
an electric charge is spread over the surface of the body. (p.60)

During cathexis, the desirable essence of the object is registered or retained in

the person's internal structure through a complex process of introjection and

subsequent identification. Freud believed that this process was at the heart of

character formation and that memory played an important role in the development

of character. In his early interpretive work with dreams, Freud describes

character as formed from memory traces that are mostly unconscious. He says,

"What we describe as our 'character' is based on the memory-traces of our

impressions; and, moreover, the impressions which have the greatest effect on us-

15
those of our earliest youth-are precisely the ones which scarcely ever become

conscious" (Freud, 1900/1953, pp. 539-540).

Memory traces, he believed, were internalized and recorded, resulting in a self-

concept or self-representation that is subsequently treated as an object. He states,

An object-cathexis has been replaced by an identification...this kind of

substitution has a great share in determining the form taken by the ego and that
it makes an essential contribution towards building up what is called its
'character'...the character ofthe ego is a precipitate of abandoned object-
cathexes and that it contains the history of those object-choices. (Freud,
1923/1961, pp. 28-29)

Freud held that identification was a necessary and important means of

displacing or "diffusing" aggressive libidinal instincts directed at objects and that

this identification process resulted in character formation. Moreover, he found

that overwhelming unconscious energies, if not displaced, especially energies or

"wishes" directed at objects, were sometimes translated into hysterical behaviors

that could be directed against the self in the form of reproach or hysterical

punishment, even to the extent of causing blindness or other forms of self-

paralysis. Freud referred to the function that held back or in some way censored

the powerful libidinal forces, originally discovered at work in dreams, "ego."

This marks the beginning of ego psychology.

Freud's views on identification widened with the emergence of his thoughts on

narcissism, which were well formulated by 1914. Meissner (1970) provides

Freud's explanation ofthe way the subject gains a sense of apparent enrichment

by taking the object into itself (introjection) and acquires the properties of the

object within his own inner structure. Briefly stated, narcissistic identification,

like hysterical identification, involves an attachment of the subject to the object,

16
and is associated with the object cathexis involved. However, in narcissistic

identification the object cathexis is abandoned in favor of regression to the

primitive oral phase, through a process Freud tenned "secondary identification."

In secondary identification the overbearing object cathexis is given up or

exchanged for narcissistic identification with the object. In secondary or

narcissistic identification the longed~for object is assimilated and consumed. The

object is in this way set up within the ego.

The following two examples will illustrate the distinction between aggressive

libidinal instincts that are directed at an object and the transfonnation of these

instincts into narcissistic libido through identification. The first example can be

seen perhaps most clearly in Freud's early work with depression. In his study,

"Mourning and Melancholia," (1917/1958), Freud distinguished mourning, which

is said to be depression due to the loss of an object, from melancholia, which

refers to depression over the worthlessness of the self. In this work Freud says,

"The analysis of melancholia now shows that the ego can...treat itself as an

object" (p.252). In depression associated with mourning, libido energies are still

directed toward the object, but in melancholia the subject has abandoned the

cathexis associated with the lost object, and in an "oral" sense, has "devoured" the

object. The original object cathexis aimed at the object is, as it were, diffused. In

this way, by identifying with the properties of the lost object (in the narcissistic

sense), object loss is translated into ego loss. That is to say, in melancholia the

subject attacks his or her own sense of self, which really represent attacks on the

object that has been introjected or internalized. Identification allows the subject

17
 to put himself/herselfin the place of the hated or lost object. Concerning this

process, Freud says,

From this we can conclude that the melancholic has, it is true, withdrawn his
libido from the object, but that, by a process which we must call 'narcissistic
identification', the object has been set up in the ego itself, has been, as it were,
projected onto the ego....The subject's own ego is then treated like the object
that has been abandoned, and it is subjected to all the acts of aggression and
expressions of vengefulness which have been aimed at the object. (Freud,
1923/1961,p.427)

Freud (1917/1958) says, "Thus the shadow of the object fell upon the ego ... " (p.

249)

The now classical Oedipal Complex in psychoanalytic theory will serve as a

second example of the process whereby aggressive libidinal instincts directed at

an object are transformed into narcissistic libido through identification. In the

Oedipal Complex the subject develops an object cathexis for the mother through

the intense libidinal energies directed toward her. The gratification of these

desires toward the mother is frustrated through competition with father, and the

Oedipal complex arises. Eventually the infant child is faced with the

hopelessness of the situation. At some point during this intrapsychic conflict, the

child breaks the libidinal tie with the object, and through introjection, sets the

object up in the ego in the form of a secondary narcissistic identity. This

identification is not primary as in the early, more primitive form of emotional tie

with the object, but depends on the introjection of a cathected object. As the

subject regresses to the primitive oral phase, the object cathexis and identification

become indistinguishable. When the lost object is introjected and set up in the

ego, a split, as it were, occurs. One part of the ego is altered as a result of

18
 identification with the properties of the object. By identifying with the powerful

father object the subject can gain a measure of control over the intense energies

associated with the object cathexis (in normal cases). As the identification

develops through the subsequent identification with the paternal authority, the

overwhelming libidinal energies can be diffused.

Freud's formulations of identification and narcissism, particularly the breaking

of the libido tie with the object and setting up the object within the ego, gave rise

to the superego and became the foundation of what would later develop into the

structural theory. The process by which an object is set up in the ego, thereby

building character and a self-concept, provided not only a basis and starting point

for ego development psychology, but also a fertile ground for controversies that

would later arise among ego psychologist concerning ego formation and ego

functions. Although Freud would revise his explanation of identification

somewhat in later years, it was already clear in his early writings that "a subject

can assimilate, and appropriate as his own, qualities belonging to an object based

on a shared common element" (Meissner, 1970, p. 568). While this process of

introjection and subsequent identification is fundamental to psychoanalytic

theory, perhaps not overstated even to say the "root" of personal formation in

psychoanalytic theory, it appears to express a contrary view to that of Eastem

schools of thought where ego attachment, or "internalizing the properties of

objects", would seem to be the very shadow of ignorance blocking the way to

higher consciousness and development. From the psychoanalytic perspective, not

only is the subject "attached" to the object, but also the object and its properties

19
 have become woven into the very fabric of the being in the form of a self-image

or concept, a process at the very heart of character formation. To rid oneself of

these attachments would mean losing one's self-identity or cohesive sense of self.

And this is just what therapists are trying to avoid or repair. But can we be sure

that consciousness or one's sense of self is an epiphenomenona arising out of the

interplay of objects and energies? If consciousness is that, can we be certain that

it is only that? Could consciousness be an eternally self-existent reality

essentially beyond objects and their interactions, an eternal seed reality that has

given rise not only to personality but also to all forms of existence? Plato seemed

to have had such a view of a pre-existing ideal reality. Moreover, many other

cultures believe that one's personal consciousness is linked to past generations, or

even to their own past lives. Many Hindus will contend that perfect

consciousness is preserved in Brahman, not in the experiences woven in the

material world, and Christians will argue that they are made in the image of God,

their soul or true self originating beyond the veil and interactions of matter.

While these thoughts are but speculations here, the controversy as to whether ego

consciousness is the essential foundation of healthy psychological development or

the ignorance and illusion barring it's path, or some combination of both, will be

further advanced in the sections on transpersonal and Buddhist psychology that

follow and through the contributions of integral psychology. Before turning to

those discussions, however, I will review a few central contributions from

psychoanalytic ego psychology that are especially relevant to the present

discussion, which will also provide a context for discussion and contrast for topics

20
 presented in later sections of the study. For a more complete review and

biography of psychoanalytic ego psychology in the West the reader is referred to

Blank and Blank's history of ego psycholo~ (1994).

Ego Development in Psychoanalytic Ego Psychology

Psychoanalytic theorists, along with Freud, have generally believed that the

development of a stable sense of ego is a secondary process that is not activated

until around the second year (Mahler et al., 1975). That is, self-representations

can build a stable sense of self/ego only after the infant develops a conscious or

preconscious awareness of objects in the immediate environment. Freud believed

that this ability coincided fairly closely with the advent of language. In this way,

the development of self was believed to have an environmental basis, being

shaped from the flux of experience flowing in from memory traces of objects and

events. Piaget's research seems to confirm this theory (Inhelder & Piaget, 1969),

and Hartman has shown that unconscious id impulses cannot have clear and stable

objects (Hartmann, 1964). Recent research in cognitive psychology, however,

demonstrates that infants can recognize and distinguish objects and events within

a few days after birth. The infant lives in a world of clearly defined objects

located in time and space (Kellman & Spelke, 1983). These studies strongly

suggest an autonomous organizing principle or function, present at birth, which

precedes and works in conjunction with mental imagery, memory, and language.

Such studies invariably expose and extend the complexity underlying ego

formation and development.

21
 Scholars, moreover, have challenged the idea that the ego-self is merely a

"self-concept" or composite of internalized imagery. McIntosh (1993) argues

against the view that we perceive and understand the world indirectly through

mental representations, images, or ideas that form in the mind. McIntosh

contends that people relate to real people, not to representations inside their

psyche. The memory of a person is the means by which we think about or

remember our experiences with that person. A painting is a representation that

recalls the actual event, McIntosh says. This argument stimulates topics and

questions that require further exploration: When a person internalizes and

registers the properties of an object, do the images constitute the self? Or are

these images merely agents that the person or self avails himself/herself of?

When the object has been internalized and set up in the ego, can we be sure that

the object is always something mental, abstract, or conceptual? Can't we relate to

realities in our experience that are not strictly conceptual? When we register an

experience with another person, can we be sure that we are only registering a

memory or image associated with our feeling? Can we "know" without

registering at all? McIntosh says,

The view that the object of a cathexis is always something mental creates
severe difficulties for psychoanalytic theory. For example, it would not be
strictly correct to say that a daughter loves her mother. Instead, she is
understood to have a bound libidinal (sensual-affectionate) cathexis of the
mental representation of her mother. Since the object of a cathexis is always
mental, all cathectic relations are purely intrapsychic. This is the source of the
frequently heard charge that Freud's psychology lacks an "object-relations"
theory, i.e., that it says nothing about the psychological relationships among
actual people. One cannot even love or hate oneself, for we are dealing with a
cathexis not ofthe self, but of a self-image or self-representation. (McIntosh,
1993, p. 689)

22
 Freud often used mental states or representations as the object of the cathexis.

McIntosh states:

Freud's approach to intentionality was in accord with the prevailing outlook of

his time, which nowadays is often called "Cartesianism." Descartes held that
our knowledge of the world derives from sense experience, from which we
build ideas about the world. These ideas are the objects of perception,
cognition, desire, etc. It follows, as Kant concluded, that we cannot know the
world as it is "in itself," but only as it appears in our thoughts. The world is
hidden behind a "veil of ideas." Given this position, the object of a cathexis
must always be something mental, such as an idea or mental representation.
(Mcintosh, 1993, p.690)

McIntosh contends, however, that a person can be the object of a cathexis, as

could an image, an idea, a fantasy, a belief, etc. There are interpersonal objects as

well as intrapsychic objects. This subject has been a source of debate, Mcintosh

says. Moreover, the subject becomes more complex when we ask if the Being is a

consciousness or conscious "witness" that stands behind the personal, emotional,

and mental world as a silent, yet aware observer, as is taught in various schools of

yoga and Eastern religions.

Since Freud, theoretical and academic trends have moved away from regarding

the ego as an exclusive product of instinctual drives, or drive maturation. The

representational view of ego formation is also being examined in new ways.

Today, ego psychologists tend to understand the ego in terms of its development

and the functions it performs in the course of its maturity. The belief that the ego

has a high degree of autonomy from both the id and the environment is widely

held by ego psychologists and ego analyst (King & Neal, 1968).

Heinz Hartmann (1958), known to many as the father of ego psychology,

modified Freud's structural tripartite theory in a major way and greatly developed

23
 Freud's idea that the ego is partly unconscious. Blank and Blank (1994) state that

it was Hartmann who expanded psychoanalysis from a psychopathology into a

normal developmental psychology, and that it was Hartmann's theories and work

that advanced ego psychology toward the complex object relations psychology

into which it evolved.

Hartmann held that a newborn infant is not merely a creature of instinctual

drives. Rather, the ego is inborn. It does not develop out of the id's contact with

the environmental reality, as Freud believed. The situation is far more complex.

Hartmann introduced the idea that many structures differentiate out of the life

matrix and develop along separate lines, including ego, id, and other capacities.

That is, id and ego are separate differentiations, not distinct realities on the same

primal or libidinal continuum. The fact that the ego develops separately from the

id, according to Hartmann (1956), explains the important difference between the

instincts in humans and the instincts in animals.

Hartmann's theories presented functional and integral views of ego

development in addition to expanding Freud's seminal ideas concerning

internalized images (representations). Hartmann (1958) held that the ego is "a

substructure of the personality, defined by its functions II (p. 75). These

fundaments laid much of the groundwork upon which later ego psychologist

would build diverse theories. Hartmann believed that autonomous thinking

processes with their expressions of visual and verbal symbols played an important

role in ego development by helping the individual distinguish self and

environment as well as cope with the environment (Hartman, 1956). Such

24
 symbolic process present in thinking, memory, language, self-perception and

perception of others, are crucial in the studies of ego psychology. Through the

use of symbolic process, ego theories have shifted their emphasis from an

individual interacting with the environment by external behavior, to a more or less

autonomous ego that is required to deal with intrapersonal process as well as the

environment (Roseman, 1955).

For Hartmann, then, the ego is an autonomous specialized agent of adaptation

in its own right. As an organ of adaptation, the ego is endowed with a variety of

functions, including especially, a synthesizing function. Hartmann (1950) says,

"One speaks ofthe 'ego' as being rational, or realistic, or an integrator, while

actually those are characteristics of one or the other of its functions only" (p. 93).

Ego-Pathology and Ego Grasping

Kernberg, the fIrst person to make in-depth, systematic studies in borderline

and narcissistic pathologies from the psychoanalytic perspective fmds these

pathologies to originate in the abnormal development of internalized object

relations (Kernberg, 1975; 1980; 1984; 1987). Kernberg found that during the

normal course of development, object relations are internalized in a balanced way,

and structuring is organized and proceeds naturally. However, if the structuring

proceeds badly, it disrupts or obstructs ego integration and pathology develops.

From the perspective of psychoanalytic ego psychology, it is by means of

registering images of objects and storing them internally in the form of a self-

representation or self-concept that the infant can obtain a sense of separation from

objects. As natural development advances, the infant in the separation-

25
 individuation process realizes that it is the object (mother, food, etc.) that is

relieving the distress and restoring equilibrium. The way the infant deals with

object loss and lack of gratification at this stage of development is critical since

the infant is in a state of near total psychic and physical dependency.

Jacobson, an important contributor to ego development psychology, began

investigating the way identity formation emerges and develops after discovering

that poor identity formation is the major ego deficit in psychosis. Jacobson

(1954) introduced the concept of selective identification where the child identifies

with some admired aspect of an object as distinguished from total identification.

According to Jacobson, selective identification is an important factor in the

individual's ability to form and maintain a sense of adaptation, self-preservation,

and stability in the midst of change. Selective Identification helped to promote

the concept of identity formation as an ability to preserve the whole psychic

organization with a sense of direction and continuity at any stage of human

development.

Jacobson, building on Freud's concept of regression as a means of dealing with

object loss, came to the conclusion that a healthy narcissistic balance between the

self-representation and object- representation is essential in maintaining this

equilibrium. Narcissistic imbalance (pathology) occurs, Jacobson believes, when

the self-representation is overvalued at the expense of the object representation; or

in the reverse, when the object representation is overvalued, resulting in the self-

representation being undervalued.

26
 Ego grasping can be understood in the above psychoanalytic context, and in a

positive sense, as a means of maintaining psychic, vital, and physical balance in

the organism. In a negative sense ego grasping can be understood as resulting

from an extremely imbalanced and thus impoverished self-representation. When

negative, the self-representation is cathected or charged with various degrees of

negative affect directed toward an object with the intent of having the object

restore the organism's equilibrium.

Ego grasping has been studied as a Western psychometric construct.

Knoblauch, in collaboration with Falconer (Knoblauch & Falconer, 1986),

developed a self-descriptive inventory to study ego-grasping orientation (EGO).

The authors developed a continuum based on Taoist principles that ranged from

being with the Tao or observational acceptance, to fighting against the Tao, or ego

grasping. The following definition of ego grasping was provided:

Ego grasping is defined as a dualistic stance that is marked by the person's

attempts to make things more positive while striving to eliminate the negative
aspects of human experience. This psychological stance fits into the ego-
dominated world of self-asserting power. From the Taoist perspective this
stance typically motivates behavior through idealism and the resultant guilt
produced by ego-centered attempts to dominate and control experience.
Subject and object are perceived as separate entities with no implicit oneness.
(Knoblauch, 1985, p. 55)

Knoblauch found that a strong relationship exists between ego-grasping and

Western categorization of dysfunctional behavior. The self-descriptive inventory

measuring ego-grasping orientation (EGO) was administered along with ten

Western scales of personality to 136 undergraduates at Northwestern University.

Anxiety and affective dimensions were measured, as well as self-esteem and

27
 socialization skills. The study supported Knoblauch's thesis in the following

manner:

If a person is caught up in their limited rationality, their mire of well-meaning

stubbornness, the person may suffer from what is known in the West as an
affective disorder, anxiety, low self-esteem, and impaired socialization skills.
(Knoblauch & Falconer, 1986, p. 74)

Knoblauch & Falconer's definition of ego-grasping bears a similarity to

Kemberg and Jacobson's explanation of narcissist imbalance in that a self-

asserting subject is separated from an object, yet is attempting to maintain control

over his/her own experience.

Integration In Ego Psychology

Hartmann explained ego development and identity formation in terms of an

upward spiraling cycle of increasing differentiation, integration, and then

differentiation again. For Hartmann, id and ego are not always in conflict as

Freud believed. Rather, ego conflicts are intrasystemic, arising out of ego

functions that oppose one another, yet contribute to the integral development of

the individual.

Rothstein (1981) believes that Hartmann came upon an important key in

understanding ego as a system of intrasystemic conflicts. Rothstein discusses the

ego as an evolving construct. In the beginning, Freud developed a functional

perspective of ego, believing that the ego's primary function was to control the id.

Rothstein believes, however, that a more balanced view of Freud's overall

contributions on ego formation and development emphasize both functional and

representational perspectives of ego. Following Hartmann, Rothstein views the

28
 ego as having a variety of substructures and functions, one of which is the

representational agent. He emphasizes the ego as a system of the personality

uniquely equipped to deal with intrasystemic conflicts. The representation-as-

agent develops as a substructure within the ego that is "ofequal importance to the

substructure of ego functions and importantly related to them" (p.440). From

earliest infancy there is an integral connection between the infant's

neurophysiologic substrate and his developing representational world. The

construction of self-representation develops later as the toddler takes pleasure in

mirror play.

Moreover, Rothstein draws attention to Federn's (1928) statement that "the ego

must be conceived as a continuous experience ofthe psyche and not as a

conceptual abstraction" (p.283), and to Klein's (1976) view that "an integrating

center beyond the ego is necessary." Rothstein believes that it is possible to view

the ego in a number of ways. He states:

Activity, the subjective feeling of'!' or 'agent', is just one more, albeit very
important, potential content (conscious and/or unconscious) of representations.
. . . I am suggesting that the ego can be conceived in a variety of ways as both
an experience and as an abstraction or content ofthe mental apparatus. The 'I'
experience can be conceptualized from an abstract perspective as a content of
the ego and designated the self-representation-as-agent (Rothstein, 1981, pp.
440- 441).

For Rothstein, then, the self and object representations in the representational

world are in constant states of integration and dynamic flux (a position that will

be considered further when looking at Buddhist explanations of ego). They are

not, as traditionally supposed, passive reified content.

29
 By characterizing the representation"as"agent as one substructure within the

ego among a variety of other substructures that deal with intrasystemic conflict,

Hartman, Rothstein, and other psychologists who stress ego as a system of

integrated functions, appear to have opened a Pandora's Box within ego

psychology. One may begin to wonder how many substructures are contained in

the intrasystemic system ofthe ego. Are these substructures autonomous or

dependent? Are there substructures within these substructures as Hartmann's

theory of integration and differentiation seems to suggest? If so, are these other

substructures also in a dynamic state of change and integration as Rothstein

suggests in his analysis ofthe representation-as-agent function? Are their higher

and lower levels of consciousness associated with these integral functions?

Perceiving the ego in terms of a dynamic and integral system of functions and

substructures, many of which may be autonomous and in conflict, may present a

notable challenge for ego psychology in its future development. If autonomy

along with dynamic change and integration characterize the intrinsic nature ofthe

ego, a new paradigm or shift in the way ego psychology is perceived and studied

may be needed. In the section that follows, two contrasting paradigms that

address ego development from the field of transpersonal psychology will be

reviewed. These views will then be followed by discussions of the ego in

Buddhist psychology and in Integral psychology.

30
 CHAPTER 3

TIlE EGO IN TRANSPERSONAL PSYCHOLOGY

In beginning a discussion of ego from the perspective of transpersonal

psychology, it may be useful to ftrst suggest a deftnition of transpersonal

psychology. "Transpersonal" in its literal and obvious meaning implies

something "beyond the personal" or "beyond ego." However, a variety of

deftnitions of transpersonal psychology have been suggested since the inception

of the transpersonal psychology movement in the late 1960's. Lajoie and Shapiro

(1992) made a comprehensive review of the literature deftning or characterizing

transpersonal psychology. The authors found two hundred and two (202)

citations that attempted to deftne transpersonal psychology. Forty citations that

represented the most comprehensive deftnitions oftranspersonal psychology were

selected. Only five themes were found to occur fifteen times or more. Other

definitions given less frequently were found to fit in with these five

comprehensive themes. These themes were: (1) States of Consciousness, (2)

Highest or ultimate potential, (3) Beyond ego or personal self, (4) Transcendence,

and (5) Spiritual. Lajoie and Shapiro consolidated these themes to form the

following definition of transpersonal psychology: "Transpersonal psychology is

concerned with the study of humanity's highest potential, and with the

recognition, understanding, and realization of unitive, spiritual, and transcendent

states of consciousness" (p. 91).

31
 Lajoie and Shapiro found that the concept "beyond ego or personal self' was

one of the most frequently given definitions for transpersonal psychology.

However, this phrase was not included in the above definition because the authors

felt that the words "beyond ego or personal self' could be included in the more-

inclusive category of ''transcendent states of consciousness". Moreover, Lajoie

and Shapiro felt that the term "beyond ego" has been interpreted differently in

classical spiritual traditions and in transpersonal psychology (Lajoie and Shapiro,

1992, p. 95, footnote #7).

We see then, from the definitions given in the literature, that transcendence of

ego is one ofthe fundaments oftranspersonal psychology, ifnot its primary

objective. Transpersonal psychology seeks to go "beyond the personal", a process

that may be variously interpreted and that implies a consciousness that transcends

ego. One may ask at this point, "If'transpersonal' means a transcendent state of

consciousness that, by definition, is beyond ego or 'personal' reality altogether, is

it possible to discuss ego at a transpersonallevel at all"? Then again, there is the

problem in some Eastern traditions that the very definition of ego consciousness

implies a consciousness that is not transcendental, since transcendental refers to a

consciousness that is attained after ego has been transcended in the sense of being

suppressed or nullified (in these traditions). While a ''transpersonal''

consciousness may exist, one might argue that ego cannot exist at a transpersonal

level, just as darkness can no longer exist in the presence of light, or ignorance in

the face of knowledge. On the other hand, if ego is an illusive construct,

fabricated out of something that never existed, then what is there to transcend?

32
 Integral psychology understands this problem in a different way. Unity-in-

diversity, a key organizational structure in integral psychology and integral non-

dual philosophy, contends that integral consciousness or integral Being

differentiates but does not divide. The unity ofthe whole does not cancel out the

uniqueness of its particulars. This perspective suggests that a transpersonal

consciousness or Being may retain a personal, although transparent center or ego.

While it is possible to discuss ego at a transpersonallevel (transformed ego), one

encounters a paradox when attempting to discuss ego (or self) as a transcendental

state of consciousness that is no longer ego. The terms "non-egoic," ''pre-egoic,''

and ''trans-egoic'' are used by authors in the discussions that follow, as one way of

addressing this problem. Moreover, the term "ego" will be kept throughout the

discussion of the ego in integral psychology since in this perspective ego is

integrated rather than suppressed or obliterated at the higher levels of human

development.

It has already become apparent from our review of the psychoanalytic

literature that the ego is perceived in a number of ways. Briefly recapping, we

saw in the review of identity formation in psychoanalytic theory how Hartmann

introduced the concept of id, ego, and other capacities developing along divergent

lines as separate differentiations, as opposed to being distinct realities on the same

primal or libidinal continuum (Hartmann, 1956). This was a major change from

the earlier Freudian view. Moreover, Rothstein (1981) highlighted Hartmann's

view of the ego as intrasystemic, composed of many autonomous and highly

integrated functions that are evolving. In addition, we saw how Fedem (1928)

33
believes that the ego must be conceived as a continuous experience of the psyche

and not as a conceptual abstraction, and that Klein (1976) holds that an integrating

center beyond the ego is necessary. We also saw controversy concerning to what

extent the ego should be considered "intrapersonal" or "intrapsychic."

Transpersonal psychology is presenting another view of ego development. The

transpersonal view is also filled with controversy.

There are two outstanding perspectives currently at the heart of the

transpersonal debate in ego development psychology. These are the "structural-

hierarchical" paradigm constructed by Ken Wilber, (Wilber, 1977, 1980, 1990,

1995), and the "dynamic-dialectical" paradigm formulated by Michael Washburn

(1988). Both of these authors make extensive use of psychodynamic theory in

building their transpersonal models, but especially Washburn. Wilber, although

frequently discussing his model in terms of psychoanalytic theory, depends more

heavily on cognitive psychology and builds aspects of his model on Buddhist

psychology and on transpersonal concepts in Hindu philosophy.

The structural-hierarchical paradigm and the dynamic-dialectic paradigm

present an important dialectic in ego development psychology. These contrasting

paradigms cast light from opposing sides on the controversial question in this

study that is asking, in the widest sense, whether ego is basically healthy and

natural, or basically deficient. Is ego a fabricated, illusive structure that is

limiting and blocking the expression of higher human potential and therefore must

be transcended, repressed, or in some way fundamentally restructured? Or is ego

the natural and only means through which we may live and express our unique

34
individuality? Is self-concept a highly evolved means of temporarily repressing

overpowering primitive impulses? Or is self-concept simply a self-reflective and

natural function in nature? Washburn and Wilber have formalized different

points of view on these questions.

Dynamic-Dialectic Paradigm

Washburn, like Wilber sees human development as divided along triphasic

(pre-egoic, egoic, and transegoic) lines, but with very different perceptions and

understanding of the underlying constitution of the psyche and of the way these

stages relate to each other (Washburn, 1988, pp. 9-10). Perhaps the most

fundamental constitutional difference in the two paradigms can be found in the

way the two paradigms understand the self.

In the dynamic-dialectical view, the mental ego first appears as an act of

alienation from its roots in the dynamic Ground of the Mother or great Being. In

Washburn's model (see Table 1), the Ground with its instincts and powers is

pregnant with potential, being the storehouse of archetypes, the collective

unconscious, and other mysterious, spiritual, and constitutional givens.

35
 Table 1

Dynamic-Dialectical Paradigm a/Triphasic Development

The two poles of the psyche, having been reunited and

their resources fused into higher fonns, are integrated as a
INTEGRATION true bipolar system, a true two-in-one or coincidentia
oppositorium. The power of the Ground, as spirit, is
sovereign; the ego is subject.

The ego, having ceased its resistance to nonegoic

REGENERATION potentials, is now enhanced rather than assailed by these
IN SPIRIT potentials; it begins to be regenerated by the power of the
Ground: spirit.

Original repression gives way and the ego is resubmitted

REGRESSION IN to the nonegoic pole, to which it regresses. The ego is
SERVICE OF assailed by resurging nonegoic potentials in their arrested,
TRANSCENDENCE "pre-" fonn.

The ego develops its operational functions in relative

independence from the nonegoic pole, which, repressed
EGO OR MENTAL and submerged, underlies the ego as the dynamic
EGOIC STAGE unconscious. The nonegoic pole is the not-self or id; the
egoic pole is the mental or Cartesian ego.

At this turning point, the ego wins its individuated

ORIGINAL selfhood but only by repressively dissociating itself from
REPRESSION the nonegoic pole, the potentials of which are arrested at
the pre-egoic level and submerged into unconsciousness.

Pre-Oedipal childhood is a period during which the ego

PRE-EGOIC OR begins to be differentiated from the Great Mother but is
BODYEGOIC still under sway of nonegoic forces. The nonegoic pole is
STAGE a primordial self; the egoic pole is a body-ego.

The neonatal condition is a state prior to any

ORIGINAL differentiation of the egoic from the nonegoic pole, of the
EMBEDMENT ego from the Dynamic Ground.
Reprinted by permission from Washburn (1988). The ego and the dynamic

ground: A transpersonal theory a/human development:.. Albany, NY: State

University ofNew York Press.

36
 The ego is simultaneously autonomous and dependent. Ego is autonomous in

that it is a constitutional given in the dynamic Ground. Yet it is dependent on the

Ground from which it emerges. As ego emerges from the Ground in the course of

natural development, it is overwhelmed by the instinctual impulses and backward-

pulling forces of the Ground. In order to counteract this primordial power of the

Ground, ego commits the first act of self-alienation. Washburn (1988) refers to

this act as "original repression" (p. 18). In Washburn's view, as the ego emerges,

now a "body ego," a basic polarity of Ground-ego is established. According to

Washburn, the basic polarity between the nonegoic and egoic poles, which he

refers to as a "bipolar structure," is implicit in Freud's structural model. The

nonegoic pole corresponds with the id, and the egoic pole corresponds to the ego.

The nonegoic pole is the seat of dynamism, the source of all biophysical,

instinctual, and affective potentials. The egoic pole is the center of operational

cognition, rational volition and controlling functions . Through this act of original

repression, a long and difficult process of self-alienation (ego formation) from the

Ground begins. This is a necessary and crucial phase in the course of

development, however. The ego arises as a buffer against the powers of the

"Terrible Mother," the dynamic Ground. All of this results in a self or ego that is

ontologically deficient, Washburn says, "a merely partial and distorted reality,

since it is out of touch with its proper Ground and contorted in the false sense of

ontological independence" (1988, p. 39). That is, "the mental ego has "sinned"

against its origins and consequently is liable to the existential burdens of "fallen"

37
 ,

existence: forsakenness, rootlessness, guilt, and despair" (p. 36). Even so, for

Washburn (1988), "The Ground remains the principal reality of the ego's life, not

only as the aboriginal source from which the ego sprang but also, now, as the

primordial self out of which the ego grows and to which the ego, dissolubly,

frequently returns" (p. 21). Summarizing, from the perspective of the dynamic-

dialectic paradigm, the primordial Ground, not the ego, is the true self. The ego

arises only by repressively alienating the primordial Ground or self and assuming

a false posture of exclusive self-identity (ego), or self-concept. Unfortunately,

since the ego is born through this act of self-alienation, it is prone to all kinds of

self-doubts as well as to guilt from being untrue to its higher power, and as a

result the ego is generally unstable and subject to all kinds of existential anguish.

Moreover, the ego must "regress" to the Ground if it is to be healed from its

ontological crisis.

Structural-Hierarchical Paradigm

The structural-hierarchical model proposed by Wilber (1990) carries a

different understanding of self and ego formation. According to the structural-

hierarchical model, the self is a transitional structure that naturally emerges in the

course of development. The self emerges, not as a basic structure such as

Ground, body, sensation-perception, or even mental cognition, but as a "locus of

identity" that is constantly shifting in the course of development (Wilber, 1990,

p.293). Wilber uses the image of a ladder to illustrate this point. He compares

the various stages of development to various rungs on a ladder (Figure 2).

38
 Starting from the bottom of the ladder, Wilber identifies the first five stages or

basic structures of development as physical, sensoriperceptual, emotional-sexual,

phantasmic, and representational mind. These structures are permanent. They are

fixed and remain, just as the need for food or the need to visually perceive the

environment remains. Wilber outlines his model as follows:

Figure 2

Hierarchy ofBasic Structures ofConsciousness

(35 YR.)------------------------Causal

(28 YR.)------------------------Subtle

(21 YR.)------------------------Vision-Logic Sunyata-Tathata

11-15Yr. ----------------------Reflexive-Formal Mind (fundamental Ground)

6-8 YR.-------------------------RulelRole Mind

15 MO.-2 YR.--------------- --Rep-Mind

1 MO.- 6 MO.----------------Emotional-Sexual

Prenatal-3 MO.-----------------Sensoriperceptual

Prenatal--------------------------Pl1ysical

Reprinted by arrangement with Wilbur (1990). The questfor the new paradigm

(Expanded). Boston, Massacl1usetts: Shambl1ala Publications, Inc.

At the Ground level there is no ability to recognize an "other". Wilber quotes

Piaget, "During the early stages the world and the self are one; neither term is

39
 distinguished from the other.... The self is still material, so to speak." (Wilber,

1990, p.87). In the course of natural evolution, basic forms or structures

differentiate out of the "pleromatic fusion" with the material world. At that level

the self is one and the same with the material world. As the body emerges or

differentiates out of the Ground, consciousness became identified with the body.

That is, a body-self appeared. This self is not something separate from the body

but is the locus of identity of the body itself. It is the consciousness of the body

as the body. As the process of differentiation and subsequent integration

continues, more complex forms emerge. As language emerges in consciousness,

for example, the locus of identity shifts from a "body-self' to a "language self' or

"syntaxic self." "There are structures of consciousness," Wilber says, "But no

separate self in consciousness" (p.291).

We can best understand Wilber's concept of self in the way he is using "locus

of identity." As new and higher structures emerge, the locus of identity shifts

from the lower structure to the higher structure. This shift, says Wilber, is natural

and necessary. When the body, for example, differentiated from the material

matrix, a consciousness of being able to operate on the material environment by

the use of muscles and sensations became evident. As language and ego-mind

differentiated from the body, the ego-mind consciousness, characterized by being

able to operate on the body, naturally emerged as the locus of identification at that

level.

It is an important fundament in the structural-hierarchical model that, in order

for higher levels of development to occur, lower levels must be incorporated, just

40
 as wholes incorporate their parts and these wholes are in turn. incorporated by

larger wholes. Each new and higher level becomes a new locus of identity, a new

structure of consciousness that is built up out of the preceding level. This is the

self in Wilber's model, which is a "no-thing-in-itself." Wilber (1990) compares

his explanation of self with the Buddhist view of self:

But our point for now is that no single rung of the ladder, nor any combination
of them can be said to constitute an inherent self This is very similar to the
Buddhist notion of the five shandas - roughly, the physical body, sensation-
perception, emotion-impulse, lower cognition, and higher cognition. Each of
these is said to be annafa, or without self, yet each (temporarily and
unavoidably) serves as a substrate of the self-sense. (p.291)

In Wilber's model then, the body and other structures of consciousness that

emerge in the natural course of development, provide a locus of identity and

stability at a particular developmental level in the course of the natural life cycle.

Higher levels build upon and incorporate lower levels. Parts are contained within

wholes, and these wholes are contained within greater wholes. Wilber quotes the

philosopher Jan Smuts concerning this point:

Everywhere we look in nature, said the philosopher Jan Smuts, we see nothing
but wholes. And not just simple wholes but hierarchical ones: each whole is a
part of a larger whole which is itself part of a larger whole. Fields within fields
within fields, stretching through the cosmos, interlacing each and every thing
with each and every other. (Smuts, 1926, as quoted in Wilber, 1990, p. 83)

Washburn counters Wilber's concept of self, stating that the "s" self as set

forth in Wilber's structural-hierarchical paradigm is not a real thing. It is not part

of the basic or constitutional structure of the psyche at all. This self "is merely a

transitional structure, something that exists only virtually, as a developmental

epiphenomenona" (p. 39). That is, the mental ego is a level-specific identification

with basic ego structures, a false identification in fact. It is false, Washburn

41
 contends, because, in reality, there is no actual separate self (ego) in Wilber's

model. This is so because ultimate unity transcends all selfhood, according to the

structural-hierarchical paradigm, Washburn says. In that paradigm, the mental

self is an illusion because one's true identity coincides with reality itself: "One's

true existence is none other than the Brahman of Upanishadic Hinduism, the Void

of Mahayana Buddhism, the Godhead behind God of Judeo-Christian mysticism"

(p.39). For Washburn and the dynamic-dialectical paradigm, the small "s" self

(ego) is a real thing that needs to be re-integrated into the larger, more-inclusive

dynamic ground or matrix from which it originally emerged and became

estranged.

In addition to the contrary views concerning ego formation or self-concept in

the two models, there is an important difference in the way the two paradigms

understand the role of repression. We have already looked at the psychoanalytic

explanation of how cathected or overwhelming libido energies are re-channeled or

displaced through the process of secondary identification and subsequently set up

in the ego, a position that Washburn borrows heavily from. Here we will briefly

look at the alternative view of responding to id or instinctual processes proposed

by Wilber's model.

Original repression and the proposed self-alienation that follows in its wake,

while being a cornerstone structure in the dynamic-dialectical paradigm, are

problematic for the structural-hierarchical model. In the structural-hierarchical

view, the ego has not become alienated from its origins and true foundations

through an act of original repression. In the structural-hierarchical paradigm,

42
there is no fundamental, self-alienating conflict between the egoic and nonegoic

dynamic ground, the two sides of the bipolar structure ofthe psyche in

Washburn's model. On the contrary, the structural-hierarchical model holds that

in the natural course of human development there is a tendency for higher

structures in the psyche to naturally incorporate lower structures, building upon

them while at the same time, preserving them (Wilber, 1990). The mental ego has

not turned its back on its origins, and there is no fiery return of the repressed, as in

the dynamic-dialectical model. On the contrary, repression is more strongly

associated with arrested states of development than with natural, healthy states of

development. For the structural-hierarchical model, repression is not a protection

against the overwhelming instincts of the "Terrible Mother", but is a natural

screening and selection process gone awry (Wilber, 1990, p. 111).

As development proceeds up the hierarchical ladder, a process of detachment

inevitably occurs as the self-identification is broken with one locus of

identification and a new locus of identity is formed at the next higher level. In

order for this development to proceed naturally and normally, it becomes

necessary to screen out or filter all perceptions and experiences that do not

conform (belong) to the new level or locus of identity. This "inattention" is not

repression proper. It is not an aggressive blocking of primordial id impulses.

Rather, it is a healthy, selective filtering that "prevents the self-system from being

overwhelmed by its surroundings, internal or external" (p. 111). The self-system

doesn't take in what is inappropriate or what it doesn't need.

43
 Repression arises, on the other hand, when the self-system mistranslates the

processes appropriate for a particular locus of identity, and forcefully restricts

awareness natural and necessary to that particular developmental level. At this

point the individual is not simply screening out inappropriate perceptions and

experiences, he is intentionally and forcefully editing out elements of a particular

level that could have been allowed appropriate expression; elements that have

been mistranslated. For instance, Wilber states that anxiety may appear as

feelings of masked rage that has resulted from distorting, blocking, or

mistranslating feelings natural to a particular level of development. Repression is

a "forceful forgetting" of things that would be better dealt with and processed.

In the structural-hierarchical paradigm, then, repression (in contrast to

screening) is a maladaptive process (extreme or wrong filtering) that interferes
with the natural growth process through which new self-identities emerge.
This is a bold contrast to the dynamic-hierarchical paradigm presented by
Washburn that views repression as the key, ifnot single power or agent
responsible for the development of the ego or individual self: According to
the dynamic-dialectic paradigm, then, the ego becomes an individual self only
by assuming the posture of an exclusive self. The ego alienates the primordial
Self and takes on airs of being the sole, and hence supreme, self of the psyche.
(Washburn, 1988, p.21)

In addition to the very different conceptions of self in the two paradigms, self

as Ground, and self as transitory locus of identity, and to the important theoretical

differences concerning the function and purpose of repression in the two

paradigms, there is disagreement in the two models concerning the nature of

transpersonal states. Specifically, pre-egoic and transegoic states are being

confused.

Washburn (1988) believes that as a consequence of the complete and total

repression of Ground potentials by the polar ego, that all subsequent higher

44
development can proceed only by reclaiming this repressed material. Therefore,

after the mental ego has achieved a mature level of liberation from the "Terrible

Mother," there is a developmental necessity to regress to the pre-egoic dynamic

ground in order to re-incorporate the potentials within the nonegoic great Mother.

The mental ego differentiated from the dynamic ground through an autonomous

act of self-alienation and now must make a V-turn and re-encounter and re-root in

the dynamic ground before making further ascent into the transegoic state. This

"regression in the service of transcendence" is fraught with danger. The danger of

regression may bring psychosis or disintegration, or the possibility of

enlightenment or integration. Whatever the outcome, regression, in the view of

the dynamic-dialectic model, is a developmental necessity and cannot be avoided.

Wilber (1990) contends that the dynamic-dialectic model, in making a V-turn

of regression in the service of transcendence commits the error of "pre-/trans-

fallacy," which is the error of confusing prepersonal states with transpersonal

states. Washburn states that Wilber rejects "regression in the service of

transcendence," a central organizational structure in the dynamic-dialectical

paradigm, believing that this paradigm is courting "regression in the name of

transcendence or, even worse, psychosis in the name of salvation" (Washburn,

1988, p. 37).

Wilber does in fact reject "regression in the service of transcendence" along

with the dynamic-dialectical theoretical fundament that ego has emerged through

an act of original repression. In Wilber's view, the course of development moves

forward through a natural developmental process from pre-egoic, to egoic, to

45
transegoic stages on an ascending path as described in the "ladder model" above.

The basic course of human development knows only 'progress,' not 'regress."

Higher order structures emerge and subsume lower order structures. To equate

the transegoic state at the top of the latter with the pre-egoic state at the bottom of

the latter is to commit the error of "pre-/trans" fallacy. Wilber (1990) says,

Thus, each transformation upward marks the emergence in consciousness of a

new and higher level, with a new and deep structure, within which new
translations or surface structures can unfold and operate. Every time a higher-
order deep structure emerges, the lower-order structures are subsumed,
enveloped, or comprehended by it. That is, at each point in evolution or
development, what is the whole of one level becomes merely a part of the
higher-order whole of the next level. (p. 103)

In order to advance on the developmental ladder and acquire a new locus of

identity (self), it is necessary to dis-identify with the level we are advancing from.

Before we can use the rules of formal logic and identify with what Wilber terms

the "rule/role" mind, for example, we must ftrst be able to let go of our exclusive

identity with the more limited cognitive expressions of the "representational

mind". The representational mind is below the "rule/role" mind, which can as of

yet only form symbols and representations of things and classes but cannot

operate on or coordinate those representations. The higher (wholeness) always

includes the lower (wholeness or locus of identity) and acts upon it. Higher

structures, Wilber says, cannot in fact emerge in consciousness until the lower

structures have emerged and consolidated.

According to the structural-hierarchical model, developmental structures that

emerge and integrate lower structures are not under any pressure to 'violently'

claim any due that was formerly denied them. There is no violent return of the

46
repressed in nonnal development. Stages are simply emerging naturally. They

are not emerging as a result of "original repression". They have not arisen

through an act of self-alienation, and there is no developmental need for these

structures to re-link with the dynamic Ground from which they have never been

separated.

The "pre/trans" fallacy, marks another major theoretical difference in the

two human development paradigms. Wilber (1990) maintains that holding the

ego responsible for alienating the dynamic Ground not only wrongly devalues the

place of ego but also mistakenly romanticizes nature. He states:

Nature, instead of being seen as unconscious imperfection, is viewed as

unconscious perfection, as ifthere could be perfection outside of Self-
realization. But it then appears that the previous stages of evolution-the
prepersonal, subhuman, subconscious stages-constituted some sort of
transpersonal heaven, whereas they really added up to nothing but physical
forces and animal impulse. (p. 223)

For Wilber and the structural-hierarchical paradigm, alienation begins with

material nature, not with original repression. The dynamic Ground is not a

paradise of Eden from which humans fell, as suggested by the dynamic-dialectic

paradigm. ''Nature, or the prepersonal world, is already self-alienated Spirit,

without any help whatsoever from the ego; and further, nature is the greatest point

of alienation from Spirit" (Wilber, 1990, pp. 221-222). "Regression in the service

of transcendence" is not a route to higher transpersonal states but is a way of

mistakenly elevating prepersonal realms to quasi-transpersonal status, which may

appear as "a type of infantile psychological Garden of Eden." Wilber says, "And

while we can agree that infancy is free of certain conceptual anxieties, that

"freedom" is not due, in my opinion, to transpersonal protection but prepersonal

47
ignorance" (p. 226). Further, Wilber says, by devaluing ego to the status of an

alienating agent, and elevating pre-ego realms such as body impulses and

sensations, proponents who support the ego as the height of alienation-pathology

are actually championing realms that are more self-centric and narcissistic than

the ego.

In rebuttal of Wilber's criticism, Washburn (1988) argues that pre-egoic and

transegoic states are ''two different developmental expressions of the same

nonegoic potentials." That is, pre-egoic conditions are primitive and arrested

nonegoic potentials, while transegoic conditions are nothing other than these same

non-egoic potentials after they have been freed from original repression and

joined with mature or developed egoic forms. Selflessness (transegoic), for

example, is simply narcissism (pre-egoic) freed from its state of original

repression. The same is true of other "pre-trans" apparent fallacies such as

primary process (pre-egoic) and visionary cognition (transegoic), impulsivity

(pre-egoic) and spontaneity (transegoic), or temporal oblivion (pre-egoic) and

eternity within time (transegoic), (Washburn, 1988, p. 37).

Is ego consciousness ontologically deficient as a result of original repression,

as Washburn suggests? Or is the ego mind a no-thing-in-itself, an apparent self

that arises when consciousness temporarily identifies with the emergent mental

structure or other developmental structure, as Wilber contends? Which is right?

Could both views be partially correct? Presently, there is a lively debate

between leading transpersonal thinkers concerning these questions and other

48
contrasting issues being raised by these two models of human development. In

what follows, I will introduce other voices in this debate.

Stanislav Grof, psychiatrist, and one of the acclaimed founders and

theoreticians of transpersonal psychology, has criticized Wilber's pre/trans fallacy

theory. At the heart of this debate lies the two authors' disagreement concerning

the existence of transpersonallife at the pre-ego or prenatal domain of

development. Wilber believes, as stated above, that development follows a linear

progression. Sustained transpersonal awareness is possible only after lower

developmental levels have been fulfilled and incorporated into subsequent higher

levels. Grof disagrees. For Grof, a linear view ofthe psyche is too simplistic.

The psyche is highly complex. The personal and the transpersonal, the biological

and the spiritual, coexist in a state of interpenetration (Rothberg & Kelly, 1998).

The prenatal and perinatal stage of development is alive with transpersonal

awareness and influences. According to Grof, Wilber criticizes the position of

"peak therapists" who believe that the full spectrum of consciousness is always

available, full formed but submerged. That is, "regressive" experiences, which

Grof advocates, involve far more than a return to perinatal and prenatal

experiences. There is a spiritual opening in regressive experiences that involve

"ancestral, racial, karmic, phylogenetic", and even deeper depths into the history

ofthe cosmos that may be accessed. For Wilber, this transpersonal dimension

does not originate in the prenatal or lower spectrums of development, but in the

higher spectrums. Grofsays (in Rothberg & Kelly, 1998):

According to [Wilber], transpersonal experiences might involve the

"reentering" or "reexperiencing" of a prepersonal occasion, such as pleromaic

49
 indissociation, perinatal patterns, archaic images, phylogenetic heritage, or
animal/plant identification. However, this for Ken does not mean that the
transpersonal elements reside in these archaic structures. It is transpersonal
awareness that is instrumental in this process, not the archaic structures
themselves. In his opinion, not a single prepersonal structure can in and of
itself generate intrinsic transpersonal awareness. It can become the object of
transpersonal awareness, and thus be "reentered" and "reworked." It can then
become a type of vehicle that is used, but never its source. (pp. 109-110)

Grof, in this same work, criticizes Wilber as being unable to understand the

nature and complexity of the archetypal realms of the collective unconscious and

perinatal matrices which are characterized by "multiple holographic enfolding and

unfolding of space and time and escape any efforts of the intellect to arrange and

categorize them into a neat linear system" (p.lll). Grof alludes to Wilber's

criticism of Richard Tamas's application ofthe dynamics of perinatal matrices to

the intellectual development of Western Civilization (Wilber, 1995). Grof objects

to Wilber's use in that work, of the image of an oak and an acorn from which it

sprang, to illustrate the impossibility of the regression to the fetal state as a means

to convey genuine spiritual insights. Wilber's argument, according to Orof, is

that "the regression to the fetal state cannot any more mediate a true mystical

union with the world than an oak can unify its leaves and branches or become one

with the forest by identifying with the original acorn" (Rothberg & Kelly, 1998,

p.lll). "Original union" in this sense for Wilber, Grof says, "whether conceived

as the actual womb or as the prehistorical participation mystique of primitive

cultures is not a union, but an undifferentiation" (p.lll). Orof's rebuttal to this is

that

To more adequately portray the nature of perinatal experiences and the

insights that they mediate, the oak of Ken's simile would have to regress to
the original acorn and, while experiencing its oak/acorn identity, become

50
 simultaneously aware of its entire (acorn and oak) environmental context
involving the cosmos, nature, the sun, the air, the soil, and the rain. This
would also be associated with a sense of its imbeddedness in the forest and its
descent from a line of preceding oak trees and acorns, as well as its entire
development from the acorn to its present form. And an important aspect of
such an experience would be its connection with the archetypes of Mother
Nature or Mother Earth and with the creative divine energy that underlies all
of the above forms. (Rothberg & Kelly, 1998, pp. 111-112)

For Grof, the Absolute Consciousness, as a "superior creative intelligence,

guides the creative process and manifests at all its levels" (p. 110). There is

ample clinical evidence to support the presence of transpersonal states at the

prenatal and perinatal levels, Grof contends, through studying the experiences of

those undergoing regressive therapy, experiences that are often prerequisite to the

gaining of transpersonal states. This clinical evidence, according to Grof, can be

found by studying experiential approaches such as rebirthing, psychedelic

therapy, and holotropic breath work. Practitioners of these therapies witness

dramatic reliving of the birth process daily in their work.

In addition to Washburn and Grof's contentions with the structural-hierarchical

paradigm, a third contender, Sean Kelly (Rothberg & Kelly, 1998) criticizes

structural fundamentals in Wilber's paradigm. Kelly, like Groff, is not convinced

that human development proceeds holarchically and in a linear manner as Wilber

suggests. Kelly's view is that the personal and transpersonal domains run

parallel. Transpersonal structures as described by Wilber are of a different logical

type than personal and prepersonal structures. Transpersonal structures do not

evolve out of previous structures but are already present or built in, along the

lines, Kelly states, of David Boehm's (1982) "implicate order." Kelly (1998)

questions Wilber's seeming contradictory logic where Wilber says, "at any of its

51
stages of stable growth and development, the selfhas access to temporary

experiences ('influx' or 'infusions' or 'transfusions') from the transpersonal

domains" (see Wilber, 1995, p. 743). Kelly says:

But if all levels of the Great Chain manifest the same principles of holarchical
integration, why is it possible for transpersonal influxes to occur at virtually
any "lower" level of organization (even if they don't attain to enduring traits),
whereas it is impossible for someone at, say, cognitive stage 2 (preop) to
experience, again however fleeting, an influx from cognitive stage 4 (formop)?
Clearly, the transpersonal "levels" as a whole are of a completely different
order than the ones that "preceed" them. (Rothberg & Kelly, 1998, p.122)

Rothberg (1998) presents important criticisms and questions concerning

Wilber's model. As a context for his review, Rothberg outlines fundamental

similarities in Wilber and Piaget's models while at the same time acknowledging

important differences, the most notable being the addition of transpersonal stages,

and in Wilber's treatment of the self system and transitional structures.

Highlights from Rothberg's discussion will be presented here.

Rothberg (1998) recaps Piaget's theory showing that, according to Piaget,

development proceeds in four stages, beginning with the sensori-motor stage (one

to two years) and proceeding through the preoperational stage (two to seven

years), the concrete operational stage (seven to eleven years), and culminating

with the formal operational stage (eleven years and beyond). The close

similarities of Wilber's model to these stages are apparent. Further, Rothberg

shows that Piaget made four general claims about these stages, which Wilber has

retained for the most part in the structural-hierarchical model. Briefly stated,

these claims are: Stages are (l) cross-cultural and universal, (2) logically

52
 coherent, structured wholes, (3) of invariant sequence, and (4) more differentiated

and inclusive as development proceeds (p. 135).

Rothberg shows how Wilber's use of a linear, invariant sequence of stages,

applicable to all people, where no stages are skipped and regression to lower

stages is not possible (except in cases ofphysiological damage) can be understood

with greater clarity in light of Piaget's theory of cognitive development. For

Wilber, like Piaget, cognitive structures are built in with the process of biological

maturation. Although Wilber adds additional stages, including transpersonal

stages, and all people do not attain to all stages, nevertheless, all basic structures

are held to be universal. The universality of transpersonal structures can be

reconstructed, according to Wilber, through studying developmental maps drawn

from a number of different philosophical and spiritual traditions, Rothberg says.

Rothberg points out that development through transitional structures also follows

a universal progression in Wilber's model. He gives the example of transitional

moral structures in Wilber's model that are believed to move from

preconventional to conventional to post conventional. However, the claims about

universality are highly controversial and complex, Rothberg says, and have been

criticized (Dasen, 1977; Shweder, Mahapatra, & Miller, 1987) on the basis of

cross-cultural research. A key concern voiced by Rothberg concerning the

universality of cognitive stages is that some cultures place far more emphasis on

cognitive development than do other cultures. Is it fair to say that some non-

Western cultures are hindered from higher development because they do not

strongly emphasize rationality the way Western societies do? Rothberg questions

53
the claim that higher development must always proceed rationally through

universal cognitive structures.

Can transpersonal structures themselves be cognitive? Like Kelly, Rothberg

also questions the linear relationships between rational and transpersonal

structures as suggested in the structural-hierarchical model. It is not clear,

Rothberg says, why dissociation rather than integration is emphasized during the

initial differentiation of rational structures, or in what ways transpersonal stages

presuppose and integrate the rational stages. Rothberg and Kelly, along with

Alexander, Druker, and Langer (1990), question how rational cognitive structures

become subsystems in the more comprehensive systems of transpersonal

cognition (Rothberg, 1998).

Should cognitive structures be considered more "basic" than other structures

such as emotions, personal structures, ego, etc.? Rothberg cautions against

emphasizing one line of development over another. There are many lines of

development, Rothberg points out. "Piaget himself believed that human

personality is not organized according to the same structural principles as

cognition, but is made up of complex and often contradictory process," (p.139), a

fact stated years earlier by Noam (1990). Further, developmental lines do not

progress or unfold evenly. A person may be highly developed intellectually, but

be underdeveloped emotionally, or the reverse, a fact also pointed out by teachers

of meditation that Rothberg interviewed (Rothberg, 1998, pp. 145-175).

Moreover, cultural preference may contribute to emphasizing one line of

development over another as in the case ofprimitive or developing countries that

54
place less importance on rational and cognitive development than do more

technologically advanced cultures as stated above.

"How development is conceptualized may lead to valuing some lines of

development over others," Rothberg says, "Or giving some kinds of development

little or no attention, sometimes at the cost of considerable suffering" (p. 144).

"We can also ask whether transpersonal development is best understood by

centering on cognitive structures or needs to be given a more "integrative"

reading, identifying the apparently many modes of development" (p. 140).

Rothberg's inquiries as to whether human development, especially

transpersonal development, is best understood to be essentially "cognitive" or

"integral" raises important developmental questions, as well as challenges, for a

linear and cognitively based model of development. One such important concern

involves the extent of developmental branching that must be included in order to

move up the structural hierarchy as described in Wilber's model. According to

the structural-hierarchical model's view, in line with Piaget's fourth general

principle stated above, higher stages build upon lower stages. Since the lower

stages are incorporated as content and function within higher stages, greater

wholes cannot become greater without the inclusion of the lesser wholes that

serve as the constituent body. That is, higher stages are entirely dependent upon

lower stage, as "greater wholes are dependent upon lesser wholes." as we saw in

Wilber's quote from Smuts above. This view requires that a multiplicity of

developmental lines be eventually consolidated by the cognitive structures in

order for development to progress. But do cognitive structures possess such a

55
broad capacity for integration? Can the cognitive structures associated with

preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operational, etc., be the centers

that bring all developmental lines together?

A fmal and important point raised by Rothberg, a central point often raised in

developmental theory, concerns the extent to which development is "constructed"

or merely "revealed" as innate structures. Wilber, like Piaget, presents a view of

human development that is largely constructivist, although the initial emergent

structures are held to be universal and invariant. Rothberg ask ''whether it

sometimes makes more sense to speak of "uncovering" what seem to be innate

structures" (p.142). It is especially difficult to conceive of ''transpersonal

archetypes" or "pure awareness" as being constructed, he says.

Cortright (1997) has criticized Wilber's equation of his spectrum model with

Aurobindo's system of integral philosophy, where Wilber's cognitive stages

correspond to spectrums of Aurobindo's model. Wilber has seriously misread

Aurobindo, Cortright says:

Wilber equates his level of sensoriphysical (stage one) with Aurobindo! s

physical subconscient; his phantasmic-emotional (stage two) with
Aurobindo's vital--emotional; his rep-mind (stage three) with Aurobindo's
lower mind; his rule/role mind (stage four) with Aurobindo's concrete mind;
his formal-reflexive (stage five) with Aurobindo's reasoning mind, his vision-
logic (stage six) with Aurobindo's higher mind; his psychic (stage seven) with
Aurobindo's intuitive mind; his causal (stage nine) with Aurobindo's
overmind; and his ultimate/nondual (stage 10) with Aurobindo's supermind.
It appears like a very good match on the face of it. Unfortunately,
Aurobindo's terms have almost nothing in common with Wilber's scheme and
in crucial places are quite the opposite of what Wilber represents them to be.
The net result is a serious misreading of Aurobindo's ideas and model. For
example, although there is some correlation for the first two stages
(quite inexact even here), the next four levels in Wilber's model correspond to
Aurobindo's level of mind. "Lower mind" is not one of Aurobindo's standard
terms to describe the planes of being, though on occasion he used these words

56
 together but not in that context. Wilber then equates what he calls vision-
logic (stage 6) with Aurobindo's higher mind. But vision-logic has nothing to
do with what Aurobindo calls higher mind. Aurobindo means by higher mind
that "plane of spiritual consciousness where one becomes constantly and
closely aware of the Self, the One everywhere and knows and sees things
habitually with that awareness." (p. 342, Vol. 9, Centenary Library, 1971).
For Aurobindo, higher mind is a level of spiritual mind best represented by
Bud~ whereas in the spectrum model the level of vision-logic is still very
much within the realm of mental mind and egoic mind at that. (pp. 78-79)

So far, our review has focused on the contrasting perspectives of the dynamic-

dialectic and structural-hierarchical paradigms and has revealed considerable

disagreement between these two models. Moreover, as was shown, fundaments in

both models are being challenged by a growing number of critics. While it may

not be possible to bring a high degree of reconciliation to the conflicting

perspectives of the two paradigms, it may be possible to gain significant insights

relevant to this study as a result of the dialectic between the two paradigms. It

seems that both the dynamic-dialectical and structural-hierarchical paradigms

agree that the sense of self, (or self-concept), is constructed or somehow formed

out of our experience with the world of objects, although there is disagreement

concerning the validity of this self as well as its outcome. For Washburn, as we

have seen, the ego self is ontologically deficient, constructed through repressive

and defensive acts of escape from the Ground or "terrible Mother". Mental

constructs (self-concept) provide, as it were, a temporary haven from the

overpowering instincts. For Wilber, self arises through identification with a

particular poise of being. In both paradigms identity formation is believed to arise

through internalizing or identifying in some way with the properties of objects. Is

the self literally constructed out of our experience with the world of objects as

57
Brunner (1964), suggests? Is the self-concept recalled images of our experiences,

composite representations that have been stored, consolidated, and internalized as

suggested by Brunner and other object relation theorist? Is this self ontologically

deficient as Washburn suggests? Or, is this sense of self "illusory" in that it is

ever-shifting within a higher, more inclusive structure of reflective Being,

eventually surpassing all structures and disappearing altogether, as suggested by

the structural-hierarchical paradigm? Is the ultimately ground non-dual, or is it

merely the return to primordial, dualistic nature? Could the Ground be a

combination of formless Being and the forms inherent in Becoming?

Both Wilber and Washburn agree that the ego or personal self, while

sometimes suffering from repression or states of arrested development is,

nevertheless, a necessary aspect of human development that is to be integrated

rather than denied. Both models assert that the integration of ego with the larger

being is the height of ego development psychology, whether this higher

development resulted from the ego's reunification with its prehistoric primal

energies (Washburn) or through its successive steps up an evolutionary ladder to

attain to a more-inclusive transpersonal wholeness (Wilber). In what follows, the

transpersonal context surrounding the issue of ego separation and integration from

the perspective of Jungian or analytical psychology will be briefly reviewed.

58
 The Ego in Analytical Psychology

The 'collective unconscious' is a central concept in analytical psychology. In

Collected Works, Archetypes ofthe Collective Unconscious, he refers to a

"suprapersonal" substrate present in all human beings. He says,

I have chosen the term 'collective' because this part of the unconscious is not
individual but universal; in contrast to the personal psyche, it has contents and
modes of behaviour that are more or less the same everywhere and in all
individuals. It is, in other words, identical in all men and thus constitutes a
common psychic substrate of a suprapersonal nature which is present in every
one of us. (lung, 1934-195411968, pp. 3-41)

lung saw the mind and body as 'different aspects of the same thing' (Jung,

192711972). He held that the human being

... appears outwardly as the material body, but inwardly as a series of images
of the vital activities taking place within it. They are two sides,ofthe same
coin, and we cannot rid ourselves of the doubt that perhaps this whole
separation of mind and body may fmally prove to be merely a device of
reason for the purpose of conscious discrimination-an intellectually necessary
separation of one and the same fact into two aspects, to which we then
illegitimately attribute an independent existence. (lung, 1927/1972, pp. 283-
342)

Prior to 1946, lung understood archetypes of the unconscious to consist of

instinct and spirit "antinomies." After this time, however, lung extended his

concept of the archetype to include the 'psychoid' archetype, an organic nucleus

that controlled the behaviour of inorganic matter. The psychoid archetype

became the 'bridge to matter in general' (Jung, 1927/1972). lung came to believe

that at the deeper layers ofthe unconscious, matter and mind are the same. lung

says,

The deeper 'layers' of the psyche lose their individual uniqueness as they
retreat farther and farther into the darkness. 'Lower down', that is to say as
they approach the autonomous functional systems, they become increasingly
collective until they are universalized and extinguished in the body's

59
 materiality, Le. in chemical substances. The body's carbon is simply carbon.
Hence, 'at bottom' the psyche is simply 'world' (Jung, 1956/1970).

For Jung, the human psyche is not a tabula rasa or blank slate at birth. The

human being is born with numerous predispositions that govern his thinking,

feelings, conceptions, and behaving. While the images that are found throughout

various cultures speak of universal experiences or archetypes of human

experience, the archetype itself is more fundamental than the images that arise out

of it. For Jung, there is a 'subjective aptitude', an experience that is universal and

fundamental that lies within and beneath the unconscious and, as yet, unmanifest

images of the psyche:

What is this subjective aptitude? Ultimately it consists of an innate psychic

structure which allows man to have experiences of this kind. Thus the whole
nature of man presupposes woman, both physically and spiritually. His system
is tuned in to woman from the start, just as it is prepared for a quite definite
world where there is water, light, air, salt, carbohydrates, etc. The form of the
world into which he is born is already inborn in him as a virtual image.
Likewise parents, wife, children, birth, and death are inborn in him as virtual
images, as psychic aptitudes. These a priori categories have by nature a
collective character; they are images of parents, wife, and children in general,
and are not individual predestinations. We must therefore think of these
images as lacking in solid content, hence as Unconscious. They only acquire
solidity, influence, and eventual consciousness in the encounter with empirical
facts, which touch the unconscious aptitude and quicken it to life. They are, in
a sense, the deposits of all our ancestral experiences, but they are not the
experiences themselves. (Jung, 1917-1928/1966, pp. 1-119)

The concept of an a priori fundament or archetypal reality underlying psychic

structure, unfolding according to natural laws as basic as cell division, did not

begin with Jung but dates back to various ancient cultures, including Pythagorus

and Plato in ancient Greece, Confucius and pre-Confucian history in China

(Wilhelm, 1950), and was later developed by Johannes Kepler and also by

Immanuel Kant. Stevens (1982) shows this connection:

60
 It is of considerable historical interest that the archetypal hypothesis was
anticipated to some extent by the German astronomer, Johannes Kepler (1571-
1630). Kepler believed that his delight in scientific discovery was due to the
mental exercise of matching ideas or images already implanted in his mind by
God with external events perceived through his senses. This interpretation of
scientific enquiry also owed its origins to Plato but was much developed by
Kepler, who spoke of his innate ideas and images as 'archetypal'. Echoes of
the same notion are to be found in Kant's dictum that 'there can be no
empirical knowledge that is not already caught and limited by the a priori
structure of cognition.' 'For to know is to compare that which is externally
perceived with inner ideas and t-o judge that it agrees with them, a process
which Produs expressed very beautifully by the word "awakening", as from
sleep,' wrote Kepler (1619). For as the perceptible things which appear in the
outside world make us remember what we knew before, so do sensory
experiences, when consciously realized, call forth intellectual notions that
were already present inwardly; so that which formerly was hidden in the soul,
as under the veil ofpotentiality, now shines therein in actuality. How then did
they (the intellectual notions) find ingress? I answer: all ideas or formal
concepts of the harmonies, as I have just discussed them, lie in those beings
that possess the facility of rational cognition, and they are not all received
within by discursive reasoning; rather they are derivedfrom a natural instinct
and are inborn in those beings as the number (an intellectual thing) of petals
in a flower or the number of seed cells in a fruit is innate in the form of the
plants. (Quoted by Pauli, 1955, italics added). (Stevens, 1982, pp. 45-46)

Ego consciousness, for Jung, is as it were, 'pre-programmed' in the self

archetype, analogous to the way the petals of a flower are innate in the plant. Ego

consciousness, according to Jung, is "a relatively constant personification of the

unconscious itself, or as the Schopenhauerian mirror in which the unconscious

becomes aware of its own face" (Jung, 1956/1970). Ego provides the means, or

rather is the means, by which the unconscious becomes self-realized or conscious.

Jung (1963) saw this process of making the unconscious conscious to be the

primary purpose of psychic evolution: "Everything in the unconscious seeks

outward manifestation, and the personality too desires to evolve out of its

unconscious conditions to experience itself as a whole" (p.3). The ego mind has a

physical base in the self archetype, the inert substance of both inorganic and

61
organic matter. The ego is a psychosomatic event, a flowering of consciousness

whose roots are deeply and finnly founded in primordial matter, guided by

autonomous and instinctual process. "The Self, like the unconscious is an a priori

existent out of which the ego evolves. It is ...an unconscious prefiguration of the

ego. It is not 1 who create myself, rather 1happen to myself' (lung, 1938/1969).

The ego is nature becoming aware of itself in a self-reflective process. The ego or

"I" is not the primary reality. It is rather, according to lung, a satellite of the self:

"The ego stands to the Self as the moved to the mover, or as the object to subject,

because the determining factors which radiate out from the Self surround the ego

on all sides and are therefore supraordinate to it" (lung, 1938/1969). In this way,

the "supraordinate" relationship of the self or archetypal structure to the emerging

ego can be understood as a transpersonal relationship. The relationship is both

transpersonal and integral in that the ego or self-reflective function is a

constituent, even physical part of the larger self and arises out of self s pre-

programmed, subjective aptitudes, which moves and guides the ego's

development.

In analytical psychology, the ego is not suffering from a fundamental or

ontological deficiency. The ego has a pre-programmed life cycle, much like the

flower is programmed in the seed through which it emerges. The ego is an

awakening of the instincts to their own reality and process. This process is

natural and unfolds according to natural developmental stages throughout the life

cycle of the organism. The ego guided by its transpersonal fundament, self, plays

an important, yet subordinate role in the self-actualization process. To the extent

62
that the self archetype can manifest without distortion at the ego level, remaining

essentially what it is in a self-reflecting process, development proceeds naturally,

a process Jung termed "individuation." According to lung, "individuation is an

expression of that biological process -simple or complicated as the case may be-

by which every living thing becomes what it was destined to become from the

beginning" (Jung, 1938/1969). Moreover, there is no real separation between the

individual and the collective, or the ego and the self He says, "Ultimately, every

individual life is at the same time the etemallife of the species" (Jung,

1938/1969). Jung's model is psychosomatic and, as Stevens (1982) points out,

Jung

... proposes a phylogenetic structure, the interstices of which are filled out in
the course of ontogenetic development. The phylogenetic structure is made
up of archetypal units which possess the dynamic property of seeking their
own actualization in the behaviour and the developing personality of the
individual as he lives out his life-cycle within the context of his environmental
circumstances. (p.64)

However, the ego is unable to fully actualize the self archetype consciously.

self consists of a far more inclusive foundation in Being with the ego serving as

selfs satellite or object, as a mirror that makes the unconscious self aware of its

own face. A mirror and the image it projects is not the whole of reality. The ego

is not easily convinced of this fact, however. Ego is not always easily persuaded

to submit to the larger self. This fragmented ego perspective brings about

conflict.

The original archetype, before actualizing its self-reflective function, is in a

pure undifferentiated and undistorted state. This state is the paradise of Adam and

Eve before the fall into individuation or ego consciousness, an undifferentiated

63
 blissful state of oneness with life and nature. It is a world close to instinct and

primal, non-reflective awareness in being. However, in the course of self-

actualization, whereby phylogeny (species development) becomes ontogeny

(personal development), as self becomes increasingly aware of its own process in

being, a certain amount of fragmentation and distortion of the self-actualization

process inevitably occurs. Differentiation implies separation from the wholeness

in being. In the process of selfs differentiation, self is increasingly constrained

by the circumstances of the growing individual, especially by the individual's

culture, parents, and relations. The self archetype contains a world of realities

that are unacceptable from a cultural perspective and to the family environment.

These unacceptable aspects of the self archetype are assigned to the Shadow

(Freud's personal unconscious) while other aspects remain latent and may be

actualized at a later time. Stevens (1982) says,

Thus in every individual life span some distortion of primary archetypal intent
is unavoidable: we are all of us, to a greater or lesser degree, only a 'good
enough' version of the Self. This fact is of the utmost psychiatric
significance, because the extent of the distortion is the factor that makes all
the difference between neurosis and mental health. Moreover, the life-long
struggle of each individual to achieve some resolution ofthe dissonance
between the needs of the conscious personality and the dictates of the Self is
at the very heart of the individuation process. Here lies the essence of the
critical distinction which must be made between individuation and the
biological unfolding of the lift-cycle. The two processes are, of course,
interdependent in the sense that one cannot possibly occur without the other,
yet they are fundamentally different. The life-cycle is the indispensable
condition of individuation; but individuation is not blindly living out the life-
cycle: it is living it consciously and responsibly, and is ultimately a matter of
ethics. (pp. 141-142)

A psychic imbalance or dissonance occurs in the ego-self axis when the ego

consciousness 'inflates' its own needs and sense of uniqueness above the needs

64
and purposes of the larger, more inclusive self, a self that includes the needs of

the human species, and to a larger extent the biosphere as a whole. While

individuation involves bringing the universal program of human existence to its

fullest expression in the individual, the needs of one individual cannot encompass

or contain in its entirety the larger self. In this sense, individuality is not be

confused with individuation. A unique, ego-inflated individual is not the self-

actualized personality. The former is a kind of 'totalitarian' expression with the

ego at the center of the universe, while the latter reflects a sense of wholeness and

harmony in being. The ego, reflecting on and identifying with its own process,

thrives on a rationally objective environment. Moreover, with the advent of the

scientific age, reason and the intellect became enthroned and glorified.

Objectivity came to be regarded as a superior method for investigating reality,

with the result that intellect and reason reached new heights in the ability to

discover objective truth. Ego's obsession and identification with objective nature,

however, has a serious downside. A psychic imbalance has occurred, not only in

individuals alone, but also among entire nations as ego consciousness inflates at

the expense of its archetypal roots.

lung goes to great lengths in his writings to show that fulfillment and self-

actualization do not come from outside the person in social structures, wealth, and

external resources, but are expressions of inward realities. Clinging to resources

that lie outside in matter, rather than living naturally from the self, creates a

"cramp" in consciousness and hinders the process of individuation:

The man whose interests are all outside is never satisfied with what is
necessary, but is perpetually hankering after something more and better

65
 which, true to his bias, he always seeks outside himself. He forgets
completely that, for all his outward successes, he himself remains the same
inwardly, and he therefore laments his poverty ifhe possesses only one
automobile when the majority have two. Obviously the outward lives of men
could do with a lot more bettering and beautifying, but these things lose their
meaning when the inner man continues to raise his claim, and this can be
satisfied by no outward possessions.. And the less this voice is heard in the
chase after the brilliant things ofthis world, the more the inner man becomes
the source of inexplicable misfortune and uncomprehended unhappiness in the
midst of living conditions whose outcome was expected to be entirely
different. The externalization of life turns to incurable suffering, because no
one can understand why he should suffer from himself. No one wonders at
his insatiability, but regards it as his lawful right, never thinking that the one-
sidedness of this psychic diet leads in the end to the graves disturbances of
equilibrium. This is the sickness of Westem man, and he will not rest until he
has infected the whole world with his own greedy restlessness. (lung,
1938/1969)

According to analytical psychology, great cultural myths from around the

world reflect the fundamental struggle between ego consciousness and its

archetypal roots in the self. From the perspective of early cultural myths, the ego-

self struggle may evoke the wrath of the Deity. The story of Adam and Eve, for

example, shows us that at an early period in evolution, humans lived in constant

harmony with nature in the Paradise of Eden. Adam and Eve ate the forbidden

fruit of reflective ego consciousness and the door to the Garden of Eden was

bared and an angel with a flaming sword guards against reentry to Paradise. Here,

Paradise implies the unconscious passivity with nature.

As man started the long process of individuation, evolving out of this largely

undifferentiated state of oneness with nature, he began clinging to and identifying

with the more external properties of nature (he ate the fruit of the tree of the

knowledge of good and evil). This attraction towards objective awareness or

rational ego consciousness over the more inclusive archetypal Self ("I AM")

66
brought about the anger of the Deity, the selfs uprising against the exclusivity of

the limited ego consciousness.

We find a statement of this same problem in the New Testament as well, where

the writer asserts that the Deity became angry with humankind because humans

were worshipping the creation over the Creator. In Paul's letter to the Christians

in Rome (New International Version), we read:

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness
and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since
what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it
plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--
his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood
from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they
knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their
thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they
claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the
immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals
and reptiles...They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and
served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
(Romans 1: 18-23,25)

Here the writer is attributing the fundamental religious problem of human beings

to the fact that the created beings turned from the invisible, eternal power within,

to the various forms of creation. Humans had the knowledge of God, "even his

eternal power and Godhead," but exchanged this inner knowledge or awareness

for manifest, objective knowledge of creation. From the perspective of analytical

psychology, the invisible, eternal power within is the self or archetype, and the

tendency to cling to objective ego consciousness is holding to the forms of

creation with the rational mind. Ego consciousness is detaching itself from the

nourishing roots of the self archetype and this is the source of neurosis and mental

disorder, a source that is evoking the wrath of the Deity.

67
 Is Paradise a state of unconscious passivity with nature as lung, Washburn.,

and others in our discussion have suggested? Is Paradise at the bottom of the

evolutionary ladder? Or is transpersonal awareness, the true Paradise, at the top of

the evolutionary ladder as Wilber has suggested in his arguments concerning the

"pre-trans" fallacy? Could there be other explanations?

In the following section, the issue of ego or self-concept will be examined

from the perspective of Westem psychologists and psychotherapists who have

recently taken an interest in the ego in Buddhist psychology. Although these

practitioners are not trained Buddhist scholars, their discussions provide unique

insights that are particularly relevant to the current study of East and West

perspectives of the ego.

68
 CHAPTER 4

THE EGO IN BUDDHIST PSYCHOLOGY:

PERSPECTIVES OF WESTERN PSYCHOLOGISTS AND
PSYCHOTHERAPISTS

Any attempt to discuss the ego from a Buddhist perspective invariably meets

with a paradox: the paradox of discussing "self' from the viewpoint of "no self."

Yet, this is the task. The Buddhist doctrine of anatman (from Sanskrit, "no self')

is central in the study of Buddhism, and marks an important point of departure

from the earlier doctrine of atman, the Hindu concept of the self or individuality

of Brahman. In Buddhism, the idea that one thinks or wills from oneself is an

illusion. Our sense-of-self is a mental construction that has no real basis in the

sense of being self-evident or self-present. In Buddhism, the self or ego is

'deconstructed' and presents a direct challenge to the Western idea of a Cartesian-

type self or soul that is finnly grounded in and of itself, and that must be cleansed

in order to shine forth as 'pure consciousness'.

To say that the ego must be deconstructed from the Buddhist point of view has

come to mean letting go from the perspective of some Western scholars. Engler

(1984b) points out that "ego" and "egolessness" are tenns that have given rise to

much confusion among psychologists who are involved in meditation practices.

Similarly, Epstein (1988) says that Freudian scholars have equated the tenn "ego"

with the rational mind, the self-concept, and the experience of individuality. The

more subtle meaning of ego deconstruction as taught in Buddhism is being missed

69
by many of these scholar-practitioners. "Ego" has come to represent everything

that must be let go of in the process of meditation. Epstein (1988) says:

The fate of the ego in Buddhist meditation, in fact, has not been clearly
delineated in Western psychological tenns. The tendency of contemporary
theorists has been to propose developmental schema in which meditation
systems develop "beyond the ego" (Walsh & Vaughan, 1980), yet this
approach has ignored aspects of the ego which are not abandoned and which
are, in fact, developed through meditation practice itself. (p. 61). Loy (1992)
notes that Sakyamuni Buddha, the founder of Buddhism, was also accused by
his contemporaries of teaching annihilation, an accusation he denied. The
Buddha said: Though I thus say and thus preach, some ascetics and Brahmins
accuse me wrongly and baselessly, saying that "the ascetic Gotama is a nihilist
and preaches the annihilation, destruction and non-existence of an existent
being." That is what I am not and do not affirm. Both previously and now I
preach duhkha [duhkha means suffering] and the cessation of duhkha
(Sakyamuni Buddha, Majjhima Nikaya 1.135). (p.166)

One argument in favor ofthe position that self cannot be annihilated is that,

from a Buddhist point of view, there is no self to annihilate. There is only an

illusion of a self. When we become free from the illusion of selfwe do not find

some "other" reality but we then realize the true nature of this one. Nargajuna

says, "The self-existence of a Buddha is the self-existence of this very cosmos.

The Buddha is without a self-existent nature; the cosmos too is without a self-

existent nature" (MMK XXII: 16), (Loy, 1992, p. 171). Grasping for a sense of

self may be compared to looking for a house that one already lives in, or like a

fish looking for water. We cannot [md "it," because we are "it." Loy says:

Consciousness is more like the surface of the sea, dependent on unknown

depths that it cannot grasp because it is a manifestation of them. The problem
arises when this conditioned consciousness wants to ground itself, i.e., to
make itself real. If the sense-of-self is a construct, it can attempt to real-ize
itself only by objectifying itself in some fashion in the world. The ego-self is
this never-ending project to objectify oneself, something consciousness can no
more do than a hand can grasp itself or an eye can see itself. (Loy, 1992,
p.152)

70
 The reason 'egolessness' has been associated with annihilation may be

understood, in part, by examining the acclaimed Buddhist doctrine, Sunyata, a

Sanskrit tenn usually translated as "emptiness" or "void." As mentioned above,

Buddhism opposes the Cartesian notion of a self-grounded or autonomous

consciousness. All things, including the sense of self, originate, change, and

finally pass away. Sunyata is a notion that guides the person in meditation or

spiritual practice toward a deconstruction of the self-existence of things, a practice

that leads to emptiness or the void. In Sunyata. then, self or ego is deconstructed,

but this deconstruction, according to the Buddha's teaching, is not annihilation.

What then?

In Sunyata we find the paradox: In emptiness all things become full.

Emptiness is fullness. Fullness is emptiness. Loy (in Suzuki, 1996) addresses

this issue from the perspective of Mahayana Buddhism:

For Nagarjuna, the most important Mahayana philosopher, that things are
sunya is a shorthand way to express that no thing has any self-being or self-
presence of its own. In the succinct Heart Sutra, a famous summary of the
prajnaparamita scriptures, the bodhisattva Avalokitesvara realizes that "form
is sunyata and sunyata is form; form is no other than sunyata and sunyata is
no other than form." Unfortunately, the usual English translation "emptiness"
does not convey the full connotations of the original, for the Sanskrit root su
literally means "swollen," not only like an inflated balloon but also like a
pregnant woman swollen with possibility. According to Nagarjuna, it is only
because things are sunya that any change, including spiritual development is
possible. Sunyata, then, invites interpretation as a formless spiritual potential
that is literally no-thing in itself yet functions as the "empty essence" that
gives life to everything and enables it to be what it is. (pp. 104-105)

It is apparent from what has been stated above, that the terms 'emptiness' and

'form' are far from exclusive concepts in Buddhist psychology, and in the "Heart

Sutra" at least have been given an identical meaning. The assignment of an

71
identical meaning to 'fonn' and 'emptiness' results in the paradox that 'emptiness is

fullness, and fullness is emptiness', a seemingly contradictory statement that is

nevertheless based on acceptable premises in Buddhist thought. A deeper

understanding of this paradox may shed light on the nature and purpose of the ego

in Buddhist psychology.

Welwood (1976) suggests some ways that 'emptiness' and 'fonn' serve as

complimentary psychological fimctions, essential to human experience and being.

There are two widespread Western assumptions about mind, he says. First, mind

is often thought of as a "separate substance or system apart from other aspects of

human existence, such as body, spirit, heart, and matter." However, there seems

to be little evidence to support the existence of the mind as an isolated and

separate entity. The second assumption about mind is that it is "often associated

with the differentiated, substantive parts of the stream of consciousness: definite

thoughts or perceptions, or the faculty for having such discrete experiences." That

is, mind is associated with thought or the process of thinking. Weiwood suggests

that a third way of understanding mind is to see it as the "medium through which

we know the so-called 'objective world', and provides the potential for shaping

and modifying the world" (p. 90). In this latter view, the rational faculty is itself

but one aspect of the larger or universal mind-medium. The total mind

environment is larger than any specific object and provides a context or landscape

in which these objects stand out, just as any whole is greater than its parts and by

its greater inclusiveness defines their meaning. Welwood provides examples

from various disciplines to support the view of an empty, yet inclusive mind

72
environment that is integrally related to the fonns in that environment, including

the areas of physics (Capra, 1975), linguistics (James, 1890), and music. Key

points from these examples will be briefly stated here:

There is a curious similarity between the picture of the mind provided by

Buddhist psychology as understood in the West, and modern quantum physics.

Just as sub-atomic particles appear to be intense condensations of an energy field,

thoughts are focused aspects of a larger mind, appearing and disappearing within

the mind field. Welwood (1976) quotes Capra:

In these "quantum field theories", the classical contrast between the solid
particles and the space surrounding them is completely overcome. The
quantum field is seen as the fundamental physical entity; a continuous
medium which is present everywhere in space. Particles are merely local
condensations of the field; concentrations of energy which come and go,
thereby losing their individual character and dissolving into the underlying
field (Capra, 1975, p. 219). (p 97)

Welwood (1976) presents a related example from William James (1890)

showing that inarticulate gaps or spaces in language are essential aspects of the

mind environment and help shape the quality and meaning of the environment.

James was aware that transitive parts, such as commas, periods, hyphens, etc.,

were undifferentiated moments in speech that could not be captured with our

focused attention. James says:

Now it is very difficult, introspectively, to see the transitive parts for what
they really are. If they are but flights to a conclusion, stopping them to look at
them before the conclusion is reached is really annihilating them....The
attempt at introspective analysis in these cases is in fact like seizing a spinning
top to catch its motion, or trying to turn up the gas quickly enough to see how
the darkness looks (pp. 243-44). (Welwood, 1976, p.91)

73
 A "pause" in language is an undifferentiated space between thought; a

preverbal mind moment. This empty space plays a critical role in shaping and

defining the course of communication.

Welwood (1976) provides a third example from music:

Similarly, in music, the meaning and contour of a melody derive from the
intervals between the notes. A single tone by itself has little meaning, and as
soon as two tones are sounded they are automatically related by the shape of
the space or interval between them. The interval of a third has a totally
different feeling-quality to it than does a fifth. When sounding these intervals,
the notes themselves are of secondary importance, for any pair of notes the
same interval apart will sound rather similar. Music serves as a good analogy
for the interplay between form and emptiness as part of the larger environment
of mind. Form is emptiness: the melody is a pattern ofintervals between the
tones. Although a melody is usually conceived as a sequence of notes, it is
just as much a sequence of spaces that the tones simply serve to mark off.
And emptiness is form: nonetheless, this pattern of intervals does make up a
definite, unique melodic progression that can be sung and remembered. (p.
92)

If the analogy between mind and the three examples given in physics,

linguistics and music holds, then, we can say that the space wherein our thoughts

manifest or become focused is part of the qualitative state or condition intrinsic to

the mind environment. If we ignore the emptiness that serves to define the mind

environment, choosing to over-emphasize the seemingly solid and rational aspects

in that environment, identifying with the thought process itself, we may narrow

our field of awareness, just as a musician would limit his or her awareness of

music by focusing on notes to the exclusion of melodies. By clinging to the false

belief that "I am my thoughts", an ego or self-sense is created which is followed

by a certain level of anxiety that is concerned with defending this false sense of

self and its territory. To attempt to block out or ignore (avidya) the larger mind

environment (emptiness), exchanging it for the more rational aspects of that

74
environment (form) creates the false sense of self and prepares the way for

suffering. Therefore, reversing or deconstructing this ego-constructing process

appears to be the essential task ofBuddhist psychology, from the perspective of

some contemporary Western psychologists.

Deconstruction of the Ego

We see, then, that "egolessness" does not imply a "beyond ego,"

transcendental reality, because there is no self or ego-existent to transcend. There

is only an illusion of a personal self that is born of ignorance, a mental

construction or web that is spun in order to create the appearance of a solid base

that can protect us from a fearful sense of "groundlessness" (the "void"). This

sense of ego must be deconstructed in order that reality can be revealed "as it is,"

that is, as non-self-existent. Still, deconstruction leads to enlightenment and

awareness of interdependence, not to annihilation.

According to Suzuki (1996), the interdependence of all things is a key concept

in Buddhism and is explained in the doctrine pratitya-samutpada (dependent-

origination). Pratitya-samutpada is characterized by "one in all and all in one," a

total and complete integration. The doctrine of dependent-origination reveals that

the ego is not a stable, solid structure that can be transcended in the sense of being

left behind or burnt out. On the contrary, the ego is understood as a complex and

elaborate network or matrix of functions and structures that are integral in nature.

This essential relationship, Suzuki points out, has been described by Hua-yen, a

Chinese school of Mahayana Buddhism, using the metaphor ofIndra's Net:

75
 Far away in the heavenly abode of the great god Indra, there is a wonderful
net that stretches out infinitely in all directions....[There is] a single glittering
jewel in each "eye" of the net, and since the net itself is infInite in all
dimensions, the jewels are infInite in number....[I]n its polished surface there
are reflected all the other jewels in the net, infInite in number. Not only that,
but each of the jewels reflected in this one jewel is also reflecting all other
jewels, so that there is an infInite reflecting process occurring. (p. 109)

The understanding of the ego as an integrated structure composed of multiple

sub-structures and functions wherein development takes place is a perspective

very much in line with current object-relations theory and ego development

psychology. Epstein (1988) shows this connection between Buddhist ego

psychology and the psychoanalytic understanding of ego:

It is the "independent I under its own power" .. ,that is revealed through

meditation to be lacking in "inherent existence" (Hopkins, 1984, p. 141) and
"merely designated in dependence upon the aggregates of mind and body"
(Gyatso, 1984, p. 163). Thus, in accordance with a modem object relations
view of the self-concept as a "fused and confused...constantly changing series
of self-images" (Jacobsen, 1964, p. 20), the "I" experience is revealed to be a
constantly changing impersonal process, increasingly insubstantial the more
carefully it is examined. As a result, the self-concept that was
once experienced as solid, cohesive and real (see Guenther, 1974, p. 139)
becomes increasingly differentiated, fragmented, elusive and ultimately
transparent. This is the cardinal concept of "anatman," "the idea of persisting
individual nature" (ibid, p. 207) that is destroyed through meditative insight.
(p.62)

The ego in Buddhism, as perceived by some contemporary Western

psychologists, while understood to be an integral structure composed of multiple

sub-structures and functions is, nevertheless, perceived as transient, insubstantial,

and elusive. In what follows, the ego will be examined from the perspective of

integral psychology.

76
 CHAPTERS

THE EGO IN INTEGRAL PSYCHOLOGY

Integral psychology has its beginnings in the writings of Sri Aurobindo (1872-

1950) during his forty years in Ponticherry, India (1910-1950) while developing

what he termed an integral yoga. Aurobindo wrote extensively. Through the

concentrated and sustained practice of yoga, Aurobindo was able to observe a

wide spectrum of psychological processes within his own experience and to

record these experiences. Aurobindo's system of integral yoga is also known as

the philosophical system of Purnadvaitavada, or integral non-dualism. This

philosophy provides a framework for reconciling the ontological and existential

dimensions of reality and postulates Consciousness as the basic structure of the

psyche. Spirit and nature are understood as equally real, yet complimentary

opposites. Cultivation of awareness in one's own inner and outer being through

the reconciliation of self and ego leads to integral self-realization.

Indra Sen, noted by Herman (1983) to be the first person to use the term

'integral psychology', used this term in his seminar given at the Sri Aurobindo

Ashram in Ponticherry, India in the 1950s. Sen (1986), commenting on Sri

Aurobindo'g explanations of the integral personality, states:

Integral Psychology means the psychology of the Integral Personality, and

Integral Personality means a personality with its conscious, subconscious and
superconscious domains integrated into a powerful personality, a personality
of wide and large capacities of Knowing, Feeling and Willing. But our
ordinary personality is a thing of reactions to environmental stimuli. (p. 30)

77
 Literature in integral psychology is very limited. Agha-Kazem-Shirazi (1994)

provides an overview of the integral psychology literature in his dissertation, Self

in Integral Psychology. He identified various theories concerning the self and

discussed their common features in terms of three spheres of consciousness:

egocentric, psychocentric, and cosmocentric. In integral psychology, egocentric

consciousness refers to the embodied aspect of a person. Psychocentric refers to

the realm ofthe psyche which is non-physical, yet there is an experience of

individuality. In the cosmocentric sphere, the self is experienced as one with

cosmic consciousness. Concerning the relationship of the egocentric and

psychocentric spheres of consciousness, Shirazi says,

Through the dynamic process of integral self-realization a gradual shift from

ego-based to psychocentric consciousness takes place. Initially ego-based
personality obscures the subliminal Psychic Being. This condition is due
primarily to the fragmented nature of ego-based personality, which creates a
dualistic division between the I and not-I, or subject and object of experience
(A-K-Shirazi,2001)

Psychic transformation involves a shift from the egocentric to the

psychocentric sphere of consciousness. This shift occurs as the Psychic Being

comes forward to help transform the ego. This transformation is often difficult

due to the divisive, conflicting and complex nature of the egocentric

consciousness as it reacts with the outer environment. Before taking up a

discussion of the psychocentric consciousness (Psychic Being) and its role in

psychic transformation, it is necessary to first clarify the way the term "ego" is

used in integral psychology. What is the nature ofthe ego in integral psychology?

The ego's function is to organize the experiences and actions that constitute the

mental, vital, and physical formations of consciousness, or the outer being in Sri

78
Aurobindo's terms. At the physical level, Consciousness embeds itself in the

physical world. This is selfs physical face, or physical identity. At the vital level,

Consciousness embeds itself in its emotional properties oflove, hate, joy, anger,

fear, etc. This is the emotional or vital face of Consciousness. At the cognitive

level, Consciousness identifies with mentaV rational structures and embeds itself

in its conceptual or rational formations. This is the conceptual self or conceptual

face (self·concept).

Concerning the nature of ego, Shirazi (1994) says,

In integral psychology the ego is considered to be the organizing principle of

embodied consciousness. It is the agent that is in charge of a person's unique
way of existing and operating in the world. Ego-based consciousness is
relatively conventional and inflexible, thus limiting the sphere of conscious
awareness. The ego primarily divides human experience into the I and [the]
non- 1. This division principally limits the expanse of self-consciousness, and
the individual becomes unaware of the Self, or the ground of personal
existence on the one hand, and Being, the ground of all existence, on the other
hand. (p. 142)

The ego is the principle of embodiment, and is essential to our Nature and

existence as individuals. The ego allows us to separate out from the unconscious

mass of Nature and to experience life as unique and independent beings.

Chaudhuri (1977) stressed uniqueness as an important principle in integral

psychology. According to Chaudhuri, every individual has a unique course of

development in life, a unique Svadharma, that is to be fulfilled and not suppressed

or denied. Uniqueness is that aspect of being which is distinct from all other

aspects. Every object and every event in nature is unique. No two snowflakes or

no two drops of rain are exactly the same. In terms of individuality, each

individual is distinct from all other individuals. Just as no two persons have

79
exactly the same fingerprints or the same facial features, etc., no two persons have

exactly the same psychological disposition. Chaudhuri (1977) argued that the ego

and the uniqueness associated with individuality should not be suppressed or

destroyed through meditative or other religious practices. He stressed the need

for healthy ego development and the fulfillment of natural body needs, not

suppression of the ego or the natural drives.

Integral psychology affirms the value of individuality and the importance of a

healthy ego development. However, the ego is not the locus of a true

individuality. The ego serves to centralize and individualize the outer

consciousness and action. It is a temporary construction that is best supplanted or

transformed by a wider consciousness or self. Dalal (2001) quotes Aurobindo:

The ego or "I" is not a lasting truth, much less our essential part; it is only a
formation of Nature, a mental form of thought-centralization in the perceiving
and discriminating mind, a vital form of the centralization of feeling and
sensation in our parts of life, a form of physical conscious reception
centralizing substance and function of substance in our bodies. (p. 128)

The ego as a principle of embodiment ofthe outer being contains, confines and

limits our mental, emotional, and physical experience. Without limitations and

boundaries our life would dissolve in the boundless. Aurobindo writes,

In the Ignorance Nature centres the order of her psychological movements, not
around the secret spiritual self, but around its substitute, the ego-principle; a
certain ego-centrism is the basis on which we bind together our experiences
and relations in the midst of the complex contacts, contradictions, dualities,
incoherences of the world in which we live; this ego-centrism is our rock of
safety against the cosmic and infinite, our defence. (Quoted in Dalal, 2001, p.
381)

80
 Paradoxically, the ego, while being our "rock of safety" in one sense, is

simultaneously the entity that bars the gate to a larger freedom. Aurobindo also

stresses this negative side of the ego:

The ego is by its nature a smallness of being; it brings contraction of the

consciousness and with the contraction limitation of knowledge, disabling
ignorance, confinement and a diminution of power and by that diminution
incapacity and weakness, scission of oneness and by that scission disharmony
and failure of sympathy and love and understanding, -inhibition of
fragmentation of delight of being and by that fragmentation pain and sorrow.
(Dalal, 2001, p. 127)

At the level of the ego or surface consciousness, Being limits and differentiates

its operations in order to accommodate the successful evolution of physical,

emotional, and mental functions. The ignorance, contraction, smallness, etc.,

associated with ego arise not because limitations are inappropriate to

development, but because the individualized will clings to the security of these

limitations that seem to provide a haven against the unknown cosmic infinity.

This clinging tendency when taken to an extreme has negative results because it

contracts or restricts our capacities and powers to grow. This view is supported by

the Knoblauch & Falconer (1986) study presented earlier which showed that a

strong relationship exists between ego-grasping behaviors and Western

categorization of dysfunctional behavior. Dalal quotes Aurobindo:

We see that there is one indivisible Matter of which our body is a knot, one
indivisible Life of which our life is an eddy, one indivisible Mind of which
our mind is a receiving and recording, forming or translating and transmitting
station, one indivisible Spirit of which our soul and individual being are a
portion or a manifestation. It is the ego-sense which clinches the division and
in which the ignorance we superficially are finds its power to maintain the
strong though always permeable walls it has created to be its own prison. Ego
is the most formidable of the knots which keep us tied to the Ignorance.
(Quoted in Dalal, 2001, p. 127,381)

81
 Integral psychology, together with the support of traditional psychologies, can

help us discover and establish an integral awareness that promotes clarity and

cohesiveness in personality. Aurobindo says,

In the outer surface nature mind, psychic, vital, physical are jumbled together
and it needs a strong power of introspection, self-analysis, close observation
and disentanglement of the threads of thought, feeling and impulse to find out
the composition of our nature and the relation and interaction of these parts
upon each other. But when we go inside, we find the sources of all this
surface action and there the parts of our being are quite clearly distinct from
each other; it is as if we were a group-being, each member of the group with
its separate place and function, and all directed by a central being who is
sometimes in front above the others, sometimes behind the scenes. (Quoted in
Sen, 1986,p.366)

The present investigation focuses on understanding the relations or

interactions between the egocentric, psychocentric, and cosmocentric being. A

brief discussion of the major structures that constitute these parts of being now

follows.

82
 CHAPTER 6

PARTS OF BEING AND PLANES OF CONSCIOUSNESS

According to Sri Aurobindo, there are two systems that are simultaneously

active in the organization ofthe being. One type of organization can be depicted

as "concentric" and the other as "hierarchical." The concentric system spreads

out like a series of rings (Fig.6.1). The hierarchical system is like a set of stairs

(Fig. 6.2). The concentric system is made up of the outer being (physical,

emotional, mental), the inner being (physical, emotional, mental), and the Psychic

Being. Levels of consciousness are depicted as a hierarchical system extending

from the subconscious and sub-physical level up through the manifest physical,

emotional, mental, and higher mental levels to an overmind and supermind.

Beyond this is the Sachchidananda or "Existence-Consciousness-Bliss".

Sachchidananda cannot properly be called a level, but is rather an enlightened

state of bliss. The cosmocentric sphere is well above the ordinary psychological

states and can only be very briefly outlined here. (For a discussion of these higher

states of consciousness, see Dalal's (200 I) research).

The Outer Being

According to Sri Aurobindo, the physical, vital, and mental spheres make up

the three major divisions of the outer being. Each of these planes of being has its

own distinct type of consciousness. These divisions, though autonomous and

83
independent, nevertheless tend to become mixed and confused in the outer nature.

The embodied ego that we know as our ordinary personality is strongly influenced

by interactions with the environment. This point has been much stressed by Freud

and later ego psychologists, as shown in the above literature review. The outer

being of the individual is filled with contrary movements, conflicts, divisions and

tensions, and with a confused and shifting order that is characteristic of the nature

and complexity of the outer surface environment. At the outer surface level,

consciousness is veiled by the obscurities rising from the movements, reactions,

and stimuli associated with the outer physical, vital, and mental world. As

Consciousness projects its powers and influences through the states of Matter,

Life, and Mind that envelope or embed it, a multitude of problems arise.

Ghose (1972b) distinguished three stages of the vital or life nature as it

operates in Matter:

Life is really a universal operation of Conscious-Force acting subconsciently

on and in Matter; ... In this operation there are three stages; the lowest is that
in which Vibration is still in the sleep of Matter, entirely subconscious so as to
seem mechanical; the middle stage is that in which it becomes capable of a
response still submental but on the verge of what we know as consciousness;
the highest is that in which life develops conscious mentality in the form of a
mentally perceptible sensation which in this transition becomes the basis for
the development of sense-mind and intelligence. It is the middle stage that we
catch the ideal of Life as distinguished from Matter and Mind, but in reality it
is the same in all the stages and always a middle term between Mind and
Matter, constituent of the latter and instinct with the former. (p. 186, Vols. 18-
19)

As the Life nature evolves through Matter in the above three stages, the

reference is oriented toward the outer environment, as stated, and the vital

impulse becomes widely differentiated as to functional applications,

combinations, and reactions to environmental stimuli. Each of these three levels

84
has both a lower and a higher capacity for expression of impulses (Fig. 1). There

is a lower-physical and a higher-physical, a lower-vital and a higher-vital, (tenned

'sub mental' above), and a lower-mental and a higher mental (Ghose, 1993).

The higher vital, central vital, and lower vital natures consist of desires and
passions and of things that belong to the sensations, of fear, anger, and other
feelings. The higher vital is distinguished from the middle and lower vital by a
mental-vital relationship that gives a mental expression to the emotional nature, to
desires, love, passions, anger, etc. The central vital is the field of the stronger
vital longings and reactions such as pride, ambition, fame, and the various
passions. The lower outer vital is concerned with smaller desires such as the
desire for food, for quarreling, tendencies to blame, sexual desire, little wishes,
etc. The outer physical vital turns entirely upon physical things, is full of desires,
and is occupied with seeking pleasure associated with the physical plane (Dalal,
2001).

Figure 1

The Concentric System ofConsciousness

Outer Being
(physical, Vital, Mental)
Inner Being
(physical, Vital, Mental)

Psychic Being

Author's image.

85
 Table 3

Aurobindo's Hierarchical System ofConsciousness

Sachchidananda The One Divine Being with a triple aspect of Being (Sat),
Consciousness (Chit) and Delight (Ananda).
Supermind Integral Truth Consciousness. Knowledge by identity. Does not
accumulate knowledge based on appearance, reflection, or
phenomenal divisions. Non-reflective identity.
Overmind Global Consciousness. Evolutionary consciousness at its highest
level. Impersonal. Brings the actions and uniqueness of things to
their highest level and power.
Intuitive Mind Automatic discrimination of the orderly and accurate relation of
truth to truth. More closely bound to knowledge by identity than
the Higher Mind or Illumined Mind. Contacts the truth behind
appearances and meets with the consciousness in the object.
Illumined Mind Effects a more direct integration than the Higher Mind and works
more by vision than by thought. Contains the substance of Truth
and not only its form or figure. Descends from the central Being
and not through the linking and building of cognitive and
emotional ladders.
Higher Mind Cognition and the ratiocinative mind have their origin in the
Higher Mind. Characterized by an inner subtle vision that can see
wholes of experience. Awareness is not relational or based on
logic and does not need to build on ideas to reach a conclusion.
Not based on logic or cognition but sees things in a single view.
Mind The part of nature that deals with cognition, intelligence, and
ideas. Contains the vital mind occupied with force, achievement,
growth, etc., and the physical mind that is concerned with the
contact with outward life and things.
Vital The Life-nature made up of desires sensations, feelings, passions,
etc. Contains the higher vital that gives mental expression to the
thoughts and emotions, the central vital concerned with passions
and desires of various kinds, and the lower vital occupied with
food desire, small desires, little wishes, etc.
Physical The physical consciousness is not mere unconscious Matter. It has
an energy, a secret consciousness of its own that is independent of
the mind. The body can obey or fail to obey and is made up of
many autonomous functions.
The Inconscient The part of the being that is below the mental, vital, and physical
consciousness ofthe individual being. It includes the larger part of
the physical mind, the vital being, and the body-consciousness.

Author's image.

86
 Whereas the vital consists of feelings, desires, sensations, etc., the mind is

characterized by cognitions, ideas, and intelligence. Although mind has its own

unique plane of existence and distinct type of consciousness, as do the vital and

physical planes, there is a 'physical mind' at the level of the outermost being. At

this level the mind is concerned with physical things and with the mental

experiences associated with the outer world and does not go beyond this. The

outer mind may also turn toward the vital and express the vital nature. This is

termed the 'vital mind'. The outer or surface being is frequently characterized by

physical and vital cravings and by a mental grasping for power, knowledge, and

identity.

The Inner Being

What we know as the outer being is only a surface self. The surface being is a

small part of our being. There is a subliminal being that includes an inner

physical, inner vital, and inner mental that stands behind the outer physical, outer

vital, and outer mental being. Concerning the inner being, Ghose (1994) says,

Psychology is the science of consciousness and its status and operations in

Nature andif that can be glimpsed or experienced, its status and operations
beyond what we know as Nature. It is not enough to observe and know the
movements of our surface nature and the superficial nature of other living
creatures just as it is not enough for Science to observe and know as electricity
only the movements of lightening in the clouds or for the astronomer to
observe and know only those movements and properties of the stars that are
visible to the unaided eye. Here as there a whole world of occult phenomena
have to be laid bare and brought under control before the psychologist can
hope to be master of his province.

Our observable consciousness, that which we call ourselves, is only the

little visible part of our being. It is a small field below which are depths and
farther depths and widths and ever wider widths which support and supply it

87
 'm to wmch it has no visible access. All that is our self. our being, -what we
see at the top is only our ego and its visible nature. Even the movements of
this little surface nature cannot be understood nor its true law discovered until
we know all that is below or behind and supplies it-and know too all that is
around it and above. (pp. 333-34)

The outer being is conscious of the outer mind and senses. But the inner being

is in touch with universal forces that are occurring both within us and around us.

No rigid wall distinguishes the inner physical, inner vital, and inner mental from

the outer physical, outer vital, and outer mental planes. While these categories are

useful for understanding and differentiating the workings of the inner and outer

physical, vital, and mental nature, the movements of these various natures should

not be inflexibly categorized. Aurobindo cautioned against attempts to rigidly

classify consciousness:

It must be remembered that while this classification is indispensable for

psychological self-knowledge and discipline and practice, it can be used best
when it is not made too rigid and cutting a formula. For things run very much
into each other and a synthetical sense of these powers is as necessary as the
analysis. (Sen, 1986, p.366)

The inner being opens into a larger and wider psychocentric consciousness,

here termed "Psychic Being." The Psychic Being is the innermost consciousness,

wider even than the universal physical, vital, and mental forces that are embodied

as personality. The Psychic Being shares an integral relationship with the higher

levels of being, but is more accessible to psychological investigation as it stands

immediately behind the surface being. It is the Psychic Being that is most

responsible for psychic transformation. A discussion of the Psychic Being and the

manner in which it comes forward to effect the reconciliation of the inner and

outer being now follows.

88
 The Psychic Being

While it is the ego's function to centralize and organize the experiences and

actions of the physical, vital, and mental formations (embodiments) of

consciousness, the ego is itself an agent of a much wider organizing principle,

here termed Psychic Being. The term Psychic Being refers to the psychological

and holistic process that is the soul or root of personality, connected to the body

but not belonging to the body since it is greater or wider than the body,

comparable to the way the physical world is in the body but does not belong to the

body. The Psychic Being stands behind the ego as an integrating center, growing,

evolving, and functioning as a continuous experience of the psyche. Ego

functions are autonomous and continuous because they are an integral part ofthe

Psychic Being which is inborn and present in Matter, Mind, and Life which are

also autonomous powers in Being. The physical, emotional, and mental planes

have been established in the earth consciousness by evolution but they Il exist in

themselves before the evolution, above the earth-consciousness and the material

plane to which the earth belongs" (Ghose, 1993, p.51). Matter and Mind are

extensions of Consciousness, or Consciousness in particular stages of its

evolution. Reflective consciousness that is associated with the ego nature is a

mode of operation of Consciousness in the world of duality. Consciousness is the

primary self, formless in the essential Being, but consciousness takes on a

reflective character as it evolves through a Nature characterized by opposites or

duality.

89
 The tenns "soul" and "Psychic Being" are sometimes used synonymously. This

use is slightly misleading, however. Whereas the soul is the eternal and unborn

psychic essence, the Psychic Being is the soul-personality or individualized form

developing from life to life whose end is to become a fully conscious being. The

Psychic Being is the emerging and evolving individual. The unique inner

character or inner substances that make up each individual has developed over

many generations and is passed along through the evolutionary process. The

Psychic Being, although self-existent, and unborn and eternal in nature, does not

contain the fullness of the soul. The soul of the individual is a spark of the Divine

Being and contains all the possibilities of the Divine within it. This soul spark is,

Ghose (1972c) says, "at first an undifferentiating power of the Divine

Consciousness containing all possibilities which have not yet taken form, but to

which it is the function of evolution to give form" (pp. 282-83). The Psychic

Being on the other hand, emerges as the soul's evolutionary function in the

individual nature and gives form to the individual in the natural world. The

evolutionary function of the Psychic Being is characterized by an upward

spiraling movement that carries an intrinsic ability to organize, rank, differentiate,

and consolidate the history and predispositions of each individual so that every

disposition and every movement fmds its appropriate level and expression.

Briefly recapping, the physical, vital, and mental natures are highly

autonomous and have their own unique principle of organization and line of

development. The ego is the principle of embodiment that serves to centralize

and individualize the outer consciousness and actions. As the inner being opens

90
 increasingly through an inner physical, inner vital, and inner mental being, the

sense of ego is influenced by a wider consciousness that is a true individuality or

Psychic Being. The manner in which the Psychic Being comes forward to

reconcile the inner and outer being will now be discussed.

Reconciliation of the Inner and Outer Being

The view of a holistic, autonomous creative power, a higher secrecy that

stands behind and within the psyche and supporting the ego as agent, highlights

the Psychic Being as a central construct in integral psychology. Moreover,

because the Psychic Being is present as an intrinsic root construct in personality it

has the capacity to come forward in an evolutionary manner to reconcile the outer

and inner natures.

The Psychic Being is a luminous self-existent individuality that opens

increasingly to a wider Consciousness or Being that is both hierarchical and

concentric in structure as shown above. Moreover, the subliminal awareness of

the Psychic Being is relatively transparent compared to the denser spectrums of

the physical, vital, and mental formations and is more like a fence than a wall

(Ghose, 1972b, Vol. 18, p. 541). The transparent (holistic) nature of the Psychic

Being supports the reconciliation or integration of the inner and outer being.

The Psychic Being is initially subliminal, but in the course of development it

must be allowed to come forward so that the individual can attain a greater

awareness and harmony in his or her nature. This advancement of the Psychic

91
 Being to include and govern the surface or frontal nature is a key directive for

integral psychology, which necessitates its reconciliation with the ego.

Psychic Integration

The ability of a central power in the psyche that can synthesize or consolidate

the complex and powerful currents, contrarieties, divisions, and capacities of the

physical, vital, and mental being is essential to stable and healthy development at

all stages of personality organization. If this ability to synthesize breaks down, or

isolates the force that works within it, extreme divisions and conflicts in

personality organization may give rise to a variety of psychological disorders.

The association of lack of synthesis with ego pathology was brought out by

Engler (1984), Kohut (1977), Kernberg (1975), and others in the literature which

found that the most severe clinical syndromes such as infantile autism, symbiotic

and functional psychoses, and borderline conditions, represent failures, arrests or

regressions in establishing a cohesive, integrated self or self-concept. Moreover,

the problem of fragmentation, alienation, and unhealthy division in ego

psychology is consistent with other findings in the literature, in particular with

Federn's (1928) statement that the ego must be conceived as a "continuous

experience of the psyche and not as a conceptual abstraction," (p.283), and with

Klein's (1976) view that "an integrating center beyond the ego is necessary." It is

also consistent with the view of ego as representational agent (Rothstein, 1981), in

the sense that an agent does not act from its own power, and that ego structures

are themselves signatures or agents of more inclusive powers of the psyche.

92
 Earlier in the study, it was shown how Hartman consciously applied a dialectic

process or integral model in his work with ego psychology. Hartmann's model

also affirms the need for a synthesizing power in the psyche. Briefly recapping,

Hartmann's work contributed to ego psychology's evolution from an instinctual or

drive model, to a contrasting self-concept model, to an intrasystemic model.

Hartmann went against the prevailing Freudian notions of his day that saw the id

and ego in opposition. Hartmann explained ego development in terms of

"intrasystemic ego conflicts" involving an upward spiraling cycle of increasing

differentiation, integration, and then differentiation again. That is, Hartmann

understood ego conflicts to be intrasystemic, where the oppositions led to

synthesis and were in this way essential to the integral development of the

individual. Hartmann's contributions helped ego development psychology evolve

from the libido dominant view that characterized Freudian psychology, to a more

integrated or intrapersonal spectrum of largely autonomous and inborn functions

that did not directly originate from the id's contact with the environment and that

were less locked into the concept model. The drive theory and the self-concept

theory can be seen as opposing or contrasting sides of the dialectic (a) Life and

(b) Mind. Integral psychology also emphasizes the contrasting dynamics of Life

and Mind but adds (c) Consciousness as the overarching reality that reconciles

Life and Mind in a wider synthesis. In brief, the findings in the literature of ego

psychology confirm the need for a center of integration in the psyche and not a

need for an analytical power alone.

93
 Unity in Diversity

Whereas Western models focus predominantly on an "outer being" and a

mental-conceptual reality principle to explain the ego, Eastern religious and

philosophical traditions see the self-concept model as an obstacle to a higher

consciousness and focus on methods or techniques for transcending the ego. The

integral approach presented here reveals that matters are not that simple. No

single line of development can account for the complex structure that is the ego.

The ego cannot be fully explained by a drive model, a cognitive or conceptual

model, or by a transcendental model alone. Rather, a spectrum of integral

realities are involved in the ego's development, that when unified result in a

process of integral self-realization. These spectrums are characterized by both

discreet and continuous degrees. The distinction between discreet and continuous

degrees will now be stated.

94
 Discreet vs. Continuous Degrees

In Western psychology the ego is exclusively a somatic ego. Ego psychology,

as well as general psychology, has developed its disciplines using methodologies

from the natural or physical sciences. Pre-personal, vital, and mental lines of

development, while distinct as to function and quality, emerge from a pleromatic

fusion that is intrinsically or ontologically material. In the 'matter as fundament'

view, developmental lines of the ego proceed from this single (discreet) material

or physical base and build hierarchical levels holistically in a continuous line from

the physical ground. Knowledge is constructed out of sensory input. A sense of

self is also fonned through internalizing sensory input to fonn a self-concept

through the use of images, cognitions, memories, self-representations, feelings,

etc. that flow in from the natural environment and interact with the interpersonal

environment which also has matter as the ground. The ego develops out of the

material ground as an organ of adaptation, a reflective or self-conscious center or

subject that appears to be separate from other subjects or from objects in the

environment. Even archetypes are understood to be physical or "carbon" at core,

as was stated earlier in the literature (Jung, 1956/1970).

Integral psychology understands the matter somewhat differently. Integral

philosophy is grounded in the Eastern Vedantic tradition where Being is

comprehended as multidimensional fullness. The physical dimension is one of

many discreet realities that emerge or evolve from a cosmocentric Reality that in

essence is Consciousness or Being. The physical is a mode of operation of this

cosmocentric Being. It is not the only mode of operation. The vital and mental,

95
as well as higher mental and spiritual, are other discreet modes of the operation of

Consciousness. The discreet realities that descend and evolve from

Consciousness are not distinct modes on the physical continuum. As declared in

the Upanashads, "Being is on the one hand indeterminable (nirguna), and on the

other the creative source of all determinations (saguna)," (Chaudhuri, 1974).

Integral psychology provides a comprehensive framework in Being, which is the

source of all things, yet no thing in particular. This frameworks results in the

capacity to integrate the conventional psychologies of the West that emphasize

the outer or physical person, with the Eastern psychologies that give precedence

to the inner person or Psychic Being whose ontology is a Reality inclusive of the

physical being and not originating with the physical reality.

Physical, vital, and mental modes of Consciousness, then, have their own

unique (discreet) continua that are simultaneously unified and differentiated.

Each discreet degree extends from the cosmocentric Being, through the Psychic

Being, to the Egocentric or embodied Being The physical sheath is constructed

in such a way that it serves as a container for other modes of Consciousness, such

as vital, mental, higher mental, and spiritual modes, that must necessarily support

life and development in the outermost or surface being. The vital, mental, and

higher mental operations are restricted while functioning at the outer or physical

level, as any higher function is naturally restricted as it supports the functions

below it. The body ego is joined to a wider physical environment, the vital ego to

a universal vital nature, and the mind to a wider mental nature. Body, vital, and

mind preexist as independent, integral, and autonomous realities in Being that are

96
 continuously evolving through the universal operation of Consciousness Force

that is the Psychic Being. Standing above the ordinary mind are additional

degrees of higher mind, illumined mind, intuitive mind, overmind, and

supermind. These degrees were outlined earlier in the literature and are included

here (Figure 2) under the suggested single title, "transmental" degree, a term

designating all states of consciousness above the ordinary mind.

Figure 2

Multiple Egos

EGOCENTRIC BEING

TRANSMENTAL
EGO
PSYCHIC
BEING MENTAL
EGO

VITAL EGO t Discreet Degrees

(I>escent-J\scent)

PHYSICAL
EGO
~
PREMORDIAL

Author's image.

The notion of discrete archetypal levels that permeate the physical but that do

not originate in the physical may resolve some of the problems associated with

the claim that higher development must always proceed rationally through

97
universal cognitive structures (structural-hierarchical paradigm). Consciousness

contains all possibilities that have not yet taken form. These potentials or

archetypes manifest as discreet realities, pre-physical, physical, vital, mental, and

transmental.

At the pre-ego level the instinctual drives and vital impulses are characterized

by obscure, stubborn, and mechanical movements formed by impressions of

habitual desires, nervous reactions, irrational and repetitive movements, and dull

but powerful tendencies and dispositions that impress themselves upon the body

consciousness. At the deeper levels ofthe subconscious, the movements do not

consist of ideas or conscious reflections as at the waking level, but functions as a

fluid substance of these things (Dalal, 2001).

Previous cycles of existence have conditioned the evolutionary development

that now stand ready to emerge as a new individuality. The unfinished business

of previous cycles is present as physical, vital, and mental predispositions. Until

the rational and other ego centers gain some prominence and guidance by the

Psychic Being, (becomes psychocentric), the instinctive powers of the pre-ego are

able to maintain considerable control over the egocentric orientation. Integral

psychology advocates penetrating the dark regions of the subconscious and

bringing the light of mental scrutiny and insight to these regions, transforming the

animal nature and raising it to a higher level. In this way the egocentric

orientation is loosened and with further transformation can be dissolved into an

integral self-realization.

98
 Although penetrating the relatively darker states of the unconscious is essential

to transfonnation and healthy development, a too direct confrontation with the

wild or blocked energies and archetypes of the unconscious without a finn

foundation in the higher nature, might set the course of psychic transfonnation

back. This kind of confrontation would not help to discover the natural way of

transfonnation but could plunge the individual into the dull, clinging, and torpid,

or else explosive and automatic compulsions of the animal drives and archetypal

energies. Therapies associated with rebirthing, psychedelic drugs, and holotropic

breath work discussed above should be carefully evaluated to detennine if the

degree of benefit outweighs the risk involved with the confrontational aspect

associated with these therapies. Submersion into the lower subconscious states, if

not supported by the direct experience of higher states, leads to stupor and

ignorance of the nature, not to higher awareness. The pre-personal should be

approached from above, not from below.

The untamed forces of the unconscious veil the Psychic Being's operations,

and unruly movements of the surface environment limit the integrating influences

of the Psychic Being. However, these movements do not disturb the Psychic

Being. This is perhaps the most pervasive difference in the Psychic Being and the

surface nature. It is essential to learn to discern the influences of the Psychic

Being. However, few people have developed a large capacity to discern the

distinctions between the inner and outer natures, and even more so an ability to

distinguish the innennost Psychic Being, because it is mostly through a

99
mentalized perception and understanding that they know or feel them (Ghose~

1993).

Psychic Transformation

As the innermost consciousness or Psychic Being comes forward~ the sense of

ego is subsumed by a wider or integral consciousness or Being as shown in

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Ego Integration

Psychic Being Egocentric Being

PSYCHIC
TRANSFORMATION

Author's image.

100
 The body, vital, and mental ego become expressions or agents of higher or

more universal forces in the psyche that are continuously evolving. In this

process, the 'knots1 or fragmentations and distortions of the physical, vital, and

mental ego that are brought about by conflicts, divisions, and reactions to outer or

surface conditions are dissolved and make way for the emergence of a true

individuality. A relatively limited focus opens to a wider awareness. This

dissolution of the ego is not extinction or suppression. Rather, it is a process of

transformation whereby the reflective separative consciousness that is the ego .

becomes increasingly conscious and whole. The consciousness that emerges is

an integral consciousness, not an exclusive mental construction. Logic, division,

and analysis associated with cognition and ratiocination remain, but shift to the

background as the Psychic Being comes forward. The manner in which

wholeness contains and govems its separate parts or constituents can be seen

everywhere in nature, as shown by Smuts above (Wilber, 1990). For example,

when speaking it is common to focus on the meaning that is being conveyed and

not on the words themselves. If the speaker shifts his or her focus to the words or

syntax while speaking (fragments), the speaking becomes disjointed or

interrupted. The ability to understand the meaning of words and not only the

words themselves is this same process of wholeness at work in the psyche. In a

similar way, by analogy, when awareness shifts from an egocentric to a

psychocentric perspective, the egocentric consciousness is dissolved yet continues

to remain, now guided by the more inclusive psychocentric awareness.

101
 When the egocentric and psychocentric consciousness are aligned, with the

psychocentric consciousness leading the egocentric consciousness, structuring

proceeds naturally and individual development progresses in a balanced way.

This reconciliation leads to healthy self-esteem and if consistently cultivated and

maintained, to integral self-realization. However, when the egocentric

consciousness obscures the psychocentric consciousness, the individualized will

clings to the security of the limitations or structures that seem to provide a haven

against the unknown cosmic infinity. Because of this need for security, the

egocentric consciousness has an affinity toward an exclusive or rigid fixation at

the level in which it is embedded. Without the dual movement of the

cosmocentric Being, aspiring from above and evolving from below, the Psychic

Being's ability to move to the front is hindered and held fast by the egocentric

orientation. Unless this pattern is reversed ego integration is likely to proceed

badly and result in a diminished capacity or potential for psychic transformation.

Integral psychology seeks to aid the individual in bringing the integral truth

consciousness of the Psychic Being into the mind-body configuration with the

purpose of transforming the mental, emotional, and physical nature. The lower

instincts as well as mind and reason are not transcended in the sense of being by-

passed, but are raised to a higher level or new dimension in Being. In this sense,

it is better to speak of transformation of the ego than transcendence of the ego. In

the process of transformation nothing is lost. The ego that is taken up by the

integral consciousness or Psychic Being is not suppressed, marginalized, or

102
transcended, but is transformed so as to bring out the full potential and Truth

Consciousness of body, life, and mind.

Psychic transformation is consciousness-in-evolution, consciousness growing

and evolving in awareness. However, natural psychological development alone

does not lead to psychic transformation. Psychic transformation is not defined by

an increased capacity for reasoning, by ethical perfection, or a by a change into a

more subtle or ethereal spiritual nature that is opposed to the material (Dalal,

2001). Moreover, psychic transformation does not result in a feeling of being

shackled to the material nature. Rather, psychic transformation is effected

through a dual movement of ascent and descent. Consciousness ascends through

matter and mind to the higher planes and descends from the higher planes into the

lower planes where it drives out darkness and ignorance in the nature. As

Consciousness evolves, individuality takes shape out of near-indiscriminate force

and substance ofNature. In this process, the egocentric and the cosmocentric

realities are united by means of the psychocentric, which reconciles the two

apparent extremes by coming forward and taking its rightful place in the natural

evolution. Through the forward movement of the Psychic Being, all functions of

the inner and outer being, thought, feeling, will and desire, physical movements,

etc., become instruments or expressions ofthe higher or more universal forces.

That is to say, through a reconciliation ofthe spiritual and material dimensions,

the nature is transformed into a revealing instrument of the Psychic Being where

the mental, vital, and physical, now free of ignorance and discord associated with

the separative consciousness, become more closely aligned with the integral Truth

103
Consciousness. The reconciliation of the material and spiritual dimensions does

lead to dissolution of ego. However, this dissolution is not extinction. It is

transformation, whereby the ego is absorbed, as it were, into a greater fullness in

Being. Individuality continues to exist, although in a new or radically

transformed state (Figure 4).

Figure 4

Integral Self-Realization

Author's image.

104
 CHAPTER 7

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

This study sought to reconcile, as far as possible, a debate between specific

Eastern mystical traditions and Western ego psychologies concerning the

appropriate place and function of the ego. First, the problem of the study will be

briefly restated along with an explanation of how the methodology was used to

address the problem. The key fmdings of the study will then be discussed.

The controversy taken up by this study asks whether the ego is something to be

cultivated and developed, or whether the ego should be transcended and

eventually annihilated. From a Buddhist perspective, for example, the attempt to

preserve a sense of self or ego is the cause of our deepest suffering. Buddhism

seeks to free humanity from the illusion that is ego and to deconstruct the false

ideals that cause us to cling to a personal identity. In Buddhism, the suffering

associated with clinging to personal existence is a form of psychopathology. This

view hardly seems tenable from the perspective of Western psychologists who are

concerned with helping an individual grow a healthy sense of self. Ego

suppression is perceived as unhealthy. Western psychotherapists understand the

failure to develop a cohesive and integrated selfto be the chief cause of severe

clinical syndromes such as borderline conditions, schizophrenia, or psychosis. An

outcome of these two seemingly irreconcilable positions is the tendency for

Eastern mystical traditions to bypass developmental tasks in an attempt to

105
transcend or annihilate the ego. On the other hand, Eastern mystical traditions

view Western psychologists and psychotherapist as failing in their ability to

cultivate a transcendent dimension in human consciousness.

This study addressed the above issue by constructing an integral approach that

permits diametrical and conflicting positions to be viewed as complimentary

opposites. This was achieved by presenting the ego as a consciousness that

consists of multiple levels or spheres. When these integral realities, including

apparent contradictory realities, work together in unity a process of integral self-

realization occurs.

In order to gain a contextual awareness of the problem, five fields of study that

are centrally concerned with the ego were selected. First, a perspective of the ego

in depth psychology was examined from the writings of Freud, who also first

coined the term "ego," as well as from other early psychoanalytic theorist who

built on Freud's findings. An understanding of depth psychology was needed to

get at the root of the problem, especially the unconscious forces that influence our

behavior. Next, a survey of the literature in psychoanalytic ego psychology was

done. Psychoanalytic ego psychology is especially concerned with the formation

of the self-concept. The study sought to discover if the ego is formed by

identifications with the environment or if there is some hidden and mysterious

intrinsic property that gives formation to the ego. A survey of the field of

transpersonal psychology provided a third perspective of the problem.

Transpersonal psychology, although grounded in Western psychology, has many

articles and studies that advocate transcending the ego. The study sought to

106
 know if transpersonal psychology might bridge the gap between the Western

tendency to affinn the ego and the Eastern tendency to transcend or negate the

ego. Next, the literature on Buddhist psychology was examined. The Buddhist

doctrine of "no self' suggests a sharp contrast to the central role that the "self'

plays in Western psychology. By casting light from two sides, the sides of "self'

and "no self', a better perspective of ego might be realized. Finally, a survey of

the literature on integral psychology provided a fifth perspective of the problem.

Integral psychology affirms the value of the ego. At the same time, the ego is not

the true individuality but is a temporary construction that is governed by a wider

consciousness or self. The study, then, sets forth five perspectives of the ego

drawn from the East and the West. First, a summary of the fmdings from each of

these perspectives will be stated. Then, a critique of the findings will be made in

order to arrive at a higher synthesis and contribution. This discussion will then be

followed by some suggestions for future research and closure.

Psychoanalytic Theory

Key Issue: Identifying with the properties ofobjects is a principal mechanism in

egoformation.

Freud was the first to use the tenn "ego" as a psychological concept.

Surprisingly, he used the concept of ego to refer to a dark power in the psyche, a

power of censorship. In psychoanalytic theory, the ego develops, not as the

unfolding of natural structures in the psyche, but as an emergency mechanism

developed to control pathological energies. Freud understood the ego to be a kind

107
of elaborate flood control system that displaced or sublimated powerful instinctual

energies~ particularly sexual energies. If not diverted, repressed drives or

energies~ like floodwaters~ create havoc in the psyche. In his clinical work, Freud

observed cases where overwhelming unconscious energies were translated into

hysterical behaviors and turned toward oneself in the form of reproach or

hysterical punishment. Such self-punishing hysterical behaviors sometimes

resulted in blindness and various forms ofparalysis. Freud's structural theory

made up ofthe id, ego~ and superego outlines an extraordinary mechanism of

psychic engineering created by the individual to circumvent repression and to

achieve psychic equilibrium. Freud's use ofthe term "ego" as a diffusing

mechanism to displace pathological energies marked the beginning of ego

psychology.

Ego formation in psychoanalytic theory is grounded in a complex mechanism

that Freud termed "identification". Identification occurs as a means of separating

from objects by registering the desirable quality of the object internally. In the

early stage of development, the infant is in a state of symbiosis and experiences

the larger world as part of self. In time, the inevitable process of separation

begins. The individual must seParate out from the symbiotic state. However, the

regressive pull ofthe libidinal bond is very strong and cannot be easily resisted.

In order to escape this problem, the individual creates a substitute for the libidinal

bond by identifying with the properties of objects and subsequently constructing a

self-concept from these identifications.

108
 The self-concept is an abstract construction, essentially a defusing mechanism

created by the organism to control and displace sexual aggression (libido). At

first, the aggressive energies are directed toward objects. Psychic tension,

especially tension associated with object loss, accompanied by powerful electrical

energies spreads across the psyche. In time, the infant learns to abandon the

psychic tension by identifying with the object. The infant discovers the ability to

gain a sense of enrichment by taking the object into itself and acquiring the

properties of the object within his or her inner structure. In psychoanalytic terms,

the infant regresses to the primitive oral phase and 'devours' the object, a process

Freud termed "narcissistic identification". By identifying with the objects or

properties of objects, the desirable essence of the object becomes registered or

retained in the person's internal structure. Identification with the object in this

oral sense breaks the libido tie with the object and diffuses the highly charged

psychic environment. Memory plays an important role in this process.

Memories, often charged with heavy emotional energies, are linked together not

entirely unlike the many frames in a modem video sequence. The memory frames

are pieced together to form a consistent and enduring self-representation. In this

manner the object is set up in the ego. The subject's own ego is then treated like

the object that has been abandoned. The breaking ofthe libido tie with the object

and setting up the object within the ego gave rise to the superego and became the

foundation that would later develop into the structural theory. Moreover, the

process by which an object is set up in the ego, thereby building character and a

109
self-concept, provided a basis and starting point for psychoanalytic ego

psychology.

Psychoanalytic Ego Psychology

Key Issue: The ego is an autonomous agent ofadaptation with a variety of

substructures andfunctions.

Since Freud, theoretical and academic trends have moved away from regarding

the ego as an exclusive product of drive maturation. Emphasis among ego

psychologist has shifted from the belief in an ego controlled by the id and the

environment to a more or less autonomous ego that deals with intrapersonal

processes as well as the environment. The ego is now understood as a substructure

of the personality dermed by its functions. The ego and the id are separate

differentiations, no longer distinct realities on the same primal or libidinal

continuum. Many structures differentiate out ofthe life matrix and develop along

separate lines, including ego, id, and other capacities.

The ego functions primarily as an agent of adaptation, an evolving construct

understood in terms of the functions it performs. As an agent of adaptation, the

ego is equipped even from birth to organize and synthesize highly complex

functions. To this end, the ego is necessarily endowed with a variety of

substructures and functions that are uniquely equipped to deal with intrasystemic

conflicts. The id and the ego are not always in conflict, however, as Freud

believed. Ego conflicts are intrasystemic, arising out of ego functions that oppose

one another, yet contribute to the integral development of the individual. Ego

110
development occurs in an upward spiraling cycle of increasing differentiation,

integration, and then differentiation again. Visual and verbal symbols playa

critical role in the adaptation process. Symbolic processes associated with mental

imagery, memory, and language help the organism to distinguish self and

environment as well as to cope with the environment. These fundaments

established the groundwork upon which ego psychologists would build diverse

theories.

Assigning the role of agent of adaptation to the ego has opened a kind of

'pandora's box' of possible interpretations regarding the nature ofthe ego and the

functions it performs. Many, perhaps most, ego psychologists are defining the

ego primarily as an abstraction or content of the mental apparatus. They are

building on, expanding, and revising the metapsychology of Freud. From this

perspective, the ego is a composite representation forged out of select memories

from our past encounters with the object environment. The ego or conceptual self

is literally constructed out of our experience with the world of objects.

Another perspective from the literature expands the view ofthe ego as a

conceptual self. The ego is more than a passive abstraction. The ego is also a

dynamic experience that includes yet transcends the conceptual content of the

psyche. In this view, the ego can be conceived in a variety of ways, both as a

continual experience of the psyche and as an abstraction or content ofthe mental

apparatus.

In sum, the ego in psychoanalytic psychology is being examined and re-

examined in new ways. Ego psychology is evolving. On the one hand, the ego is

111
understood as a substructure of the personality defmed by its functions. From

another perspective, the self-concept, the representational component of the ego,

is coming to be understood as one substructure within the ego, equal to but not

necessarily superior to other substructures that deal with intrasystemic conflict.

Finally, in addition to functional and representational perspectives of ego, a third

perspective is emerging. The ego is also understood as a continual experience of

the psyche, an integral center responsible for organizing both functional and

representational components ofthe psyche. Together, these perspectives point to

the ego as an autonomous and evolving agent of adaptation.

Transpersonal Psychology

Definitions used most frequently in the literature to defme transpersonal

psychology include the phrases "beyond ego or personal self' or 4'transcendent

states of consciousness". However, different authors assign various meanings to

these terms. This study found three perspectives of"beyond ego" to be most

prominent in transpersonal psychology. These three perspectives are best

represented in the writings of Washbum, Wilber, and Jung. Key fmdings from

these authors will be presented here.

112
 Dynamic-Dialectical" Paradigm

Key Issue: The ego arises as a mechanism ofrepression, a pathological

construct that is healed by a regress to the original vital nature.

Following Freud's structural model, Washburn depicts the ego as an elaborate

defense mechanism developed to ward off or displace the overwhelming impulses

and drives of nature. In an effort to counteract the powerful forces ofthe

instinctual nature, the ego commits a first act of self-alienation. Washburn terms

this first act, "original repression". Through original repression, a basic polarity

of Ground-ego is established. The non-egoic pole is the id, the seat of dynamism

and source of all biophysical, instinctual, and affective potentials. The egoic pole

is a body and mental ego, a differentiated individuality. The egoic pole develops

in relative independence from the non-egoic pole, which lies repressed and

submerged as the dynamic unconscious. The appearance ofthe egoic pole marks

the beginning of a long and difficult process of self-alienation from the Ground.

In the dynamic-dialectical view the primordial Ground, not the ego, is the true

self. The ego arises only by repressively alienating the vital life ofthe id. The

ego dissociates from the non-egoic pole by forming an operational center that

utilizes cognition, rational volition, and controlling functions. That is, the

organism utilizes the abstract processes associated with memory, imagery, and

cognition to construct a buffer against the powers of the dynamic Ground. This

abstract buffer is the self-concept. However, the self-concept is a false posture of

exclusive self-identity, a partial and distorted reality out of touch with its proper

ground. Unfortunately, since the ego is born through this act of self-alienation, it

113
 is subject to all kinds of conflicts, self-doubts, and guilt, an unstable operational

center untrue to its higher power and subject to existential anguish. Even so, the

Ground remains the principle reality or true self of the ego's life, both as the

source from which the ego grows and to which the ego must return.

The ego must "regress" to the Ground in order to be healed from its

ontological crisis. This regress is the key developmental task from the

perspective ofthe dynamic-dialectical paradigm, a process Washburn terms

"regression in the service of transcendence".

Wilber provides an alternative view of ego formation and transcendence. In

his structural-hierarchical paradigm, Wilber challenges the theory of an ego

alienated from its natural roots and in need of regeneration by regress.

Structural-Hierarchical Paradigm

Key Issue: The ego is a transitional structure, a level-specific identification void

ofany relations to a self

In order that higher levels may occur during the course of human development,

it is necessary for higher structures in the psyche to naturally incorporate lower

structures, building upon them while at the same time preserving them. This view

is termed "structural-hierarchical". According to the structural-hierarchical view,

ego structures do not originate as pathological functions designed by the organism

to repress or displace natural drives, as discussed in the dynamic-dialectical and

earlier Freudian models. Instead of repression, a selective filtering is used to

prevent the organism from taking in what is inappropriate or what it doesn't need.

114
Repression arises only when the organism forcefully restricts awareness and

processes necessary to a particular level of development. Drive repression theory

does not adequately explain ego development from the structural-hierarchical

point of view.

According to the structural-hierarchical paradigm, there are structures of

consciousness, but no separate self in consciousness. The ego emerges, not as a

basic structure such as Ground, body, or self-concept. That is to say, the ego is

not an enduring physical or mental constituent or self of an individual. Rather,

the ego exists as a "locus of identity" that is constantly shifting in the course of

development. Building on Piaget's cognitive psychology, the structural paradigm

defines the basic developmental levels as physical, sensoriperceptual, emotional·

sexual, phantasmic, representational mind, and rule-role mind. Each

developmental level is a locus of identity. Although the structures themselves are

fixed and remain, as the need for food or the need to visually perceive the

environment remains, the ego as locus of identity shifts with each new

developmental level. As the body differentiates from the pleromatic fusion of the

Ground, consciousness identified with the body to form a body-self. As more

complex forms emerged, the locus of identity shifts from a body·selfto an

emotional-sexual self, then to a language self, a representational or conceptual

self, etc., each locus of identity being a level-specific identification of a particular

developmental level. In order to acquire a new locus of identity and to advance

on the developmental ladder, it is necessary to dis-identify with the level from

which we are advancing. For example, before we can utilize the rules of formal

115
logic and form a "rule/role" mind identification, we must first be able to let go of

our exclusive identity with the more limited cognitive expressions ofthe

"representational mind". The representational mind, unlike the rule·role mind,

can as of yet only form sYmbols and representations ofthings and classes but

cannot operate on or coordinate those representations.

The structural·hierarchical paradigm provides a ladder·like ascent from lower

to higher developmental states and culminates in the transpersonal state at the top.

A number of important questions and controversies were brought out in the

literature that is broadly captured in three issues. First, it is unclear to reviewers

how a developmental psychology can be without a real and consistent sense of

self. A second debate concerns the nature oftranspersonal states, whether they

are pre-personal as stated in the dynamic·dialectical Paradigm, or transpersonal as

presented in the structural-hierarchical paradigm. A final controversy concerns

the functional capacity of cognitive structures to support transpersonal states and,

more broadly, whether any single developmental line is sufficient to account for

or explain the development oftranspersonal awareness. Presently, a third

transpersonal perspective ofthe ego will be summarily stated from the view of

analytical psychology.

116
 Analytical Psychology

Key Issue: The ego is nature becoming aware ofitselfin a self-reflective

process.

Analytical psychology provides a psychosomatic perspective of ego

development. The mind and body are different aspects of the same reality. At

the deeper layers of the psyche, the mind loses its uniqueness and becomes

increasing collective, eventually universalized and is extinguished in the body's

materiality. Being ultimately physical, the entire life cycle ofthe ego is pre-

programmed not unlike the way a flower is programmed in the seed through

which it emerges. This underlying seed-like form is the self, an a priori

fundament or archetypal reality, an organic nucleus that controls the behavior of

inorganic matter. The self governs the ego, which unfolds by direction of

autonomous functional systems as basic as cell division, manifesting as numerous

predispositions that govern the individual's thinking, feelings, conceptions, and

behaving. The self, in contrast to the personal psyche, has contents and modes of

behavior that are more or less the same everywhere and in all individuals. Since

the self constitutes a common psychic substrate identical in every individual, it is

understood to be a "suprapersonal" nature.

The ego, on the other hand, is 'pre-figured' in the self. The form of the world

in which the ego exists is already inborn in the individual, just as the need for

water, air, light, salt, and carbohydrates is inborn. In the same way, birth and

death, parents, children, wife, etc., are inborn and exists as psychic aptitudes.

These psychic aptitudes are referred to as 'virtual images'. However, psychic

117
aptitudes do not acquire solidity, influence, or consciousness until there is an

individual encounter with empirical facts, which then quicken the aptitude to life.

Until this time, the virtual images remain unconscious.

Ego consciousness in analytical psychology is the personification ofthe

unconscious, a process of self-reflection whereby the unconscious self becomes

aware of its own face. The ego awakens the unconscious instincts to their own

reality and process by matching ideas or images already implanted in the mind

with external events perceived through the senses. That is, the mind appears

inwardly as a series of images reflecting the vital activities taking place within the

body and larger environment. The ego's task of making the unconscious

conscious is the primary purpose of psychic evolution in the view of analytical

psychology.

When the biological process proceeds normally and the self archetype

manifests without distortion at the ego level, every individual becomes what he or

she was destined to become from the beginning. In analytical psychology, this

process is termed "individuation". The ego, however, is unable to fully actualize

the self archetype consciously or blindly. The mirror image that self reflects at

the ego level is not the whole of reality. Self involves a far more inclusive

foundation than can be perceived by the ego consciousness. For this reason, the

ego is not always easily persuaded to submit to self. As self becomes

increasingly aware of its own process in being, a certain amount of fragmentation,

and distortion of the self-actualization process inevitably occurs. Every

individual faces a life-long struggle to achieve some resolution of the dissonance

118
between the needs of the conscious personality and the dictates of the self. The

self is increasingly constrained by the circumstances of the growing individual,

particularly by the individual's culture, parents, and relations. To a greater or

lesser degree, we are all only a "good enough" image of the self. This struggle is

an inevitable part of the individuation process. The extent of the distortion

between the self and the ego aspect of the self that is made conscious creates the

gap between neurosis and mental health. More specifically, a psychic imbalance

occurs in the ego-self axis when the ego consciousness inflates its own needs and

sense of uniqueness above the needs of the self. The needs of the self include

the needs of all individuals as well as the needs of the biosphere to a great extent.

In this sense, "individuation" is not to be confused with "individuality". The

unique, ego-inflated individual is not the self-actualized personality. The former

implies a kind of 'totalitarian' expression with the ego at the center of the

universe, while the latter suggests a sense of wholeness and harmony in being.

The sense of fulfillment associated with individuation cannot come from outside

the person, from social structures, wealth, and other external sources but is an

expression or actualization of an inner Reality. Clinging to resources that lie

outside in matter, rather than living naturally from the self, creates a "cramp" in

consciousness and hinders the process of individuation.

Our summary now shifts from transpersonal psychology to the ego in Buddhist

psychology as discussed by Western psychologists and psychotherapists.

119
 Buddhist Psychology

Key Issue: The ego is an integral network ofnon-self-existentfunctions.

The doctrine of anatman (from Sanskrit, "no self') is central in Buddhist

teaching. From a Buddhist perspective, the idea that one wills or thinks from

oneself is an illusion. The ego has no real basis in the sense of being self-evident

or self-present. That is, the ego is a 'no-thing-of-itself'. This does not mean,

however, that the ego has no existence, or that the ego should be annihilated.

Rather, non-self-existence implies that the ego does not exist 'of itself'. That is,

the ego does not come into being or remain in being of itself. The ego, like all

realities is non-self-existent and constantly changing, analogous to waves of the

sea that do not exist of themselves, but continually appear and disappear as part of

a larger environment.

The outcome of a non-self-existent ego has not been adequately delineated in

Western psychological terms. Contemporary theorists have a tendency to equate

the ego with the self-concept or the rational mind. The ego-self has come to be

understood as a continuous undertaking to objectify oneself, to make oneself real

by grounding oneself in a self-existent reality. However, Buddhist practitioners

understand any attempt to objectify the sense of self to be a futile undertaking.

Clinging to the notion that one's essential Being is something objective leads to

suffering, particularly to experiences of loss, since objective realities are transient

and non-enduring. Consciousness cannot grasp itself anymore than an eye can

see itself or a hand can grasp itself. Therapy, from the view of Buddhist

120
 psychology centers on deconstructing the false sense of ego as a self-existing

reality.

Many scholar-practitioners are missing the subtle meaning of ego

deconstruction as taught in Buddhism. The ego has come to represent everything

that must be let go of in the process of meditation. Some Western scholars who

emphasize Buddhist meditation are proposing developmental schema in which

meditation and experience develop "beyond" the ego. But deconstruction of ego

does not imply abandonment of one's objective reality or sense of being a unique

life form. On the contrary, awareness of essential Being enhances the perception

and experience of one's uniqueness.

Deconstruction of the ego sense is often described in the Buddhist literature as

a state of "emptiness", from the Sanskrit sunyata. The English translation

"emptiness" however, does not fully convey the meaning of sunyata. The

Sanskrit root "su" means "swollen," as something inflated or swollen with

possibility. The emptiness achieved through ego deconstruction is not

annihilation but an empty essence or formless spiritual potential, a 'no-thing-in-

itself' that enables everything to be fully what it is. Change and development is

possible only because things are "sunya. "

An ego form that is at the same time "empty" and "full" presents a paradox or

seemingly contradictory statement that is nonetheless based on acceptable

premises in Buddhist thought. In the West, the mind is often equated with the

process of thinking, or thought of as a separate substance such as heart, mind, or

body. There is a tendency to equate one's ego or self with the rational faculty, as

121
in the Cartesian dictum, "I think, therefore I am." In this sense, it is possible to

think of the mind as substantive or full with fonn. But the mind can also be

understood as a larger or universal mind-medium through which the rational

faculty is but one aspect. In this view, the mind environment is larger than any

specific object and provides a landscape in which these objects stand out,

analogous to the way a whole is greater than its parts and by its inclusiveness

defines the meaning of these parts. In this sense the mind is also empty. Three

examples taken from physics, linguistics, and music were found to illustrate this

point.

In physics, sub-atomic particles and the space surrounding them reveals a

quantum field or fundamental physical entity that is present everywhere in space.

The particles appear as concentrations of energy that come and go, losing their

individual character while dissolving into the underlying field. The quantum field

can be compared to the wholeness of the mind environment and the particles can

be compared to the individual functions within the mind environment.

In a similar analogy, the empty space in speech associated with commas,

periods, hyphens, etc., plays a critical role in shaping and defining the course of

communication. If we stop to analyze these transitive parts, they lose their

meaning, like seizing a spinning top in order to catch its motion. In a similar way,

identifying with, grasping at, or reflecting on transitive structures does not realize

the essential Being.

Music provides a final analogy of the way fonn and emptiness combine to

create an ego-mind environment. In music, the meaning and contour of a melody

122
 derive from the intervals between the notes. Melody is usually thought of as a

sequence of notes. However, it is just as much a sequence of spaces marked off

by the tones. A single tone has little meaning, but as soon as two tones are

sounded a unique relationship emerges. The interval of a third has a very

different feeling quality than the interval of a fifth. The notes themselves are of

secondary importance, since any pair of notes ofthe same interval will sound

similar. In brief, form is emptiness: the melody is a pattern of intervals that marks

offthe tones. Yet, emptiness is form: the patterns make up a unique melodic

progression that can be sung and remembered. If we ignore the emptiness that

defines the mind environment and emphasize the rational or conceptual aspects of

the environment, we may narrow our field of awareness similar to the way a

musician would limit his or her awareness of melodies by focusing exclusively on

notes.

To sum up, from the perspective of some Western psychologists and other

scholars, a Buddhist perspective of the sense of ego means that the ego is lacking

in inherent existence. It is a constantly changing impersonal process, an elaborate

matrix of functions that is discovered to be increasingly insubstantial the more

carefully it is examined. Essentially, the ego is a mental construction or web that

is spun in order to create the appearance of a solid base that can protect us from

the fearful sense of "groundlessness". The ego blocks out or ignores the larger

mind environment ("emptiness") in exchange for the more rational aspect of the

environment ("form"). This exchange results in a false sense of self and the

beliefthat "I am my thoughts", whic4 is accompanied by a level of anxiety and

123
occupation with defending this self and its territory. In order to resolve this

problem, the false sense of self must be removed. Since the ego is not a stable

solid structure, it cannot be transcended in the sense of being left behind or burnt

out. Rather, it is the false view of one's reality as self-subsisting that is targeted.

This perspective must be deconstructed so that reality can be revealed "as it is",

that is, as non-self-existent.

Integral Psychology

Key Issue 1: The ego is an agent ofthe Psychic Being, an evolutionary

consciousness that centralizes and individualizes the outer consciousness and

action.

The ego cannot be fully explained by a drive model, a cognitive model, or by a

transcendental model. No single line of development can account for the complex

structure that is the ego. Rather, a wide spectrum of integral realities are involved

in the ego's development. The ego's function is to organize these diverse

experiences and actions that together constitute the mental, vital, and physical

fonnations of the outer nature. The ego is best defined in this broadest sense as a

principle of embodiment.

As a principle of embodiment, the ego contains or confines our mental,

emotional, and physical experiences. The mental ego is a centralization of thought

in the perceiving and discriminating mind. The vital ego is a centralization of

feeling and sensation. The physical ego organizes the substance and functions in

124
 our bodies. Each of these formations of nature is highly autonomous and has its

own unique principle of organization and line of development.

Although the ego is the organizational principle of the mind, emotions, and

body, it is not the locus of our true individuality. The ego is a temporary

construction that undergoes continual transformation and is supplanted by a wider

consciousness or self, termed "Psychic Being". Integral psychology distinguishes

three levels of Being: egocentric, psychocentric, and cosmocentric. At the

cosmocentric level, the ego opens into the vastness of an inclusive wholeness or

unity. At the egocentric level an opposite or contractual movement occurs. The

relationship of the cosmocentric Being and the egocentric being is the relationship

ofthe Whole and one individual member ofthe Whole. The body, vital, and mind

are joined to the universal forces ofthe Psychic Being. The body ego is joined to

a universal physical environment, the vital ego to a universal vital nature, and the

mind to a wider mental nature. The body, vital, and mind formations preexist as

independent, integral, and autonomous realties that are continuously evolving.

A degree of egocentrism is inevitable and necessary in our psychological

development. Individuality takes shape out of near-indiscriminate force and

substance of nature. The egocentric orientation allows us to separate out from the

unconscious mass ofNature and to experience life as unique and independent

beings. As the life nature evolves through matter, emotion, and mind, the

reference is oriented toward the outer environment, and the vital impulse becomes

widely differentiated as to functional applications, combinations, and reactions to

environmental stimuli. The ego binds together and distinguishes these

125
experiences and relations in the outer world. Without egocentric limitations and

parameters our life would dissolve in the boundless.

Key Issue 2: The ego consciousness is obscured by reactions to environmental

stimuli and by contrary movements and divisions in the outer nature and must

evolve in order to emerge as a true individuality.

Integral psychology affirms the value of individuality and a healthy ego. Ego

consciousness is constantly evolving through a power of integration present

everywhere in nature. In the individual, this power is a holistic root construct or

Psychic Being. The ego is an extension or agent ofthis holistic force, which joins

the outer being ofthe individual to an even wider cosmocentric Being and

maintains the developmental link between them. The Psychic Being is analogous

to a seed form that maintains a steady balance between unifying mental, vital, and

physical formations in the individual and in differentiating them. By means of

this intrinsic core construct, the inner and outer natures become unified and a

continually upward spiraling or evolutionary development of consciousness

occurs.

Problems arise, however, when the egocentric posture clings to the security of

limitations that seem to provide a haven or rock of safety against the infinite.

When egocentrism dominates the consciousness, the egocentric posture becomes

excessively rigid and unyielding. The ego posture contracts, as it were, and this

contraction results in incapacity, schisms, weakness, ignorance, excessive

126
limitations, and other problems. The individual becomes less receptive to

promptings of love, empathy, and understanding.

In addition to the rigidity brought about by defending against fears of the

unknown, the egocentric consciousness is often obscured by reactions to

environmental stimuli, but especially by physical, vital, and mental cravings.

Some desires are closer to the mental, such as the craving for social ambition, or

greed for wealth or power, or the mental grasping for knowledge and identity.

Other desires are closer to the body, such as the desire for food or sex. Fear,

anger, pride, and passion, etc., also contribute to the veiling or obscuring ofthe

ego consciousness. An analytic approach is needed to observe, analyze, and

disentangle the movements (knots) of the mental, vital, and physical

consciousness, to discover the composition of the nature and to know how the

different parts ofthe nature interact with each other.

In order to accomplish an effective analysis ofthe powers, environmental

reactions, and desires that obscure the egocentric consciousness, the aid of an

integral truth consciousness or Psychic Being is needed. Unfinished business

from previous cycles of existence has conditioned the evolutionary developments.

Inherited physical, vital, and mental dispositions are present as powerful and

stubborn habitual desires and irrational movements. Since these dispositions are

frequently not in our conscious field of awareness, they are able to influence us

and control our behavior. Integral psychology advocates penetrating the dark

regions ofthe subconscious and transforming these hidden powers. This is

achieved through a dual movement that inspires from above and evolves from

127
below. As if descending from above, the Psychic Being brings a holistic and

intrinsic capacity to differentiate, rank, and consolidate the history and psychic

predispositions of each individual so that every disposition and every movement

fInds its appropriate level and expression. At the same time, an evolving

movement is effected from below as a relatively limited focus opens to a wider

awareness. Every individual has a unique psychological makeup. However, a

true individuality cannot be realized apart from the relationship to a larger

wholeness or collective environment, analogous to the way a flower cannot bloom

apart from its integral relationship with the leaf, stalk, root, and wider

environment This teaching is expressed in integral psychology's triadic principle

of uniqueness, relatedness, and transcendence. The consciousness that emerges in

this dual movement is an integral consciousness, not an exclusive mental

construction. The mental scrutiny and insight associated with logic and division

clarifIes distinctions but shifts to the background as the reflective separative

consciousness that is the ego becomes increasingly conscious and whole. When

the egocentric and psychocentric consciousness are aligned, individual

development progresses in a balanced way. The egocentric divisions, conflicts,

and surface reactions are dissolved as it were into a wider psychic awareness and

a true emerging individuality.

128
 Discussion

A greater reconciliation of Eastern and Western perspectives ofthe ego can be

achieved by advancing knowledge of multiple ego centers. Outer physical,

emotional, and mental ego centers are individualized modes of operation of more

universal centers that are integrally united. Western ego psychology can expand

its view of the ego to include a far wider terrain by understanding the way outer

and inner mental, emotional, and physical ego centers are joined. Similarly,

Eastern psychology and religious traditions can benefit by bringing the awareness

associated with transcendental states into the distinct functions and processes

associated with the various ego centers in order to better understand them.

The discussion that now follows focuses on the way in which the summary

views from the study contribute to a holistic understanding of ego psychology.

Taken together, these views suggest that multiple ego centers exist as distinct

realities in a unified environment. This thesis will be used to provide a holistic

framework to guide the discussion. Table 4 gives a brief snapshot ofthe key

issues ofthe study.

129
 Table 4

Multilateral Perspectives ofthe Ego

Psychoanalytic Psycholo2Y
Identification with the properties of
Identification with Objects objects is a principal mechanism in ego
formation.
Psychoanalytic Ego Psychology
The ego is as an autonomous agent of
Autonomous Agent of Adaptation adaptation with a variety of
substructures and functions.
Transpersonal Psychology
The ego arises as a mechanism of
Dynamic-Dialectical Paradigm repression, a pathological construct that
is healed by a regress to the original
vital nature.
The ego is a transitional structure, a
Structural-Hierarchical level-specific identification void of any
Paradigm relations to a self.
The ego is nature becoming aware of
Analytical Psychology itself in a self-reflective process.

Buddhist Psycholo2Y (Western)

The ego is an integral network of non-
Non-Self-Existence self-existent functions.

Integral Psycholo2Y
The ego is an agent of the Psychic
Psychic Being Being, an evolutionary consciousness
that centralizes and individualizes the
outer consciousness and action.
The ego consciousness is obscured by
Embodied Consciousness reactions to environmental stimuli and
by contrary movements and divisions in
the outer nature and must evolve in
order to emerge as a true individuality.
Author's image.

Each of the views listed in Table 4 reveals a unique perspective of the ego.

The ego is understood to be a mechanism of repression, an agent of adaptation, a

130
transitional structure, an evolutionary consciousness, an embodied consciousness,

etc. The present discussion focuses on providing an integral perspective of the

ego by considering how the ego is a combination of all of these things. This will

be achieved by discussing the ego from the perspective of diverse ego centers that

are holistically related.

An Integral Ego Psychology

When Freud introduced the term "ego" about a hundred years ago, he was

referring to a function in the psyche that regulated the disruptive energies of the

id. Since that time our understanding of the ego and its role in psychological

development has greatly evolved. The ego is now understood to be a unifying

principle organizing a diverse domain in the outer nature. Our knowledge of the

ego is continually expanding through new discoveries. The evolving nature of

ego psychology and the different ways that we understand these changes and

respond to them can be seen in the findings of the study and will be briefly

revisited here.

The view of the ego as a self-concept or mental construct continues to

dominate ego psychology. This perspective is strongly tied to psychoanalytic

psychology. The dynamic-dialectical paradigm proposed by Washburn brings the

view of an abstract mental ego to its extreme by presenting the conceptual ego as

'ontologically deficient'. The conceptual selfis an abstraction, powered by

repression. The abstract self allows an individual to distance him or herself from

overwhelming instinctual energies of the unconscious. Although psychoanalytic

131
psychology probes deeply into the unconscious psyche and vital forces of nature,

it is essentially an environmental model. From the psychoanalytic perspective,

ego formation is based on internalizing images from the environment, combining

object representations and self-representations, and setting these images up in the

ego in the form of a self-concept.

Ego psychology has evolved considerably since its inception and the view of

the ego as a conceptual abstraction is finding its place alongside various other

perspectives. First, psychoanalytic ego psychology expanded the representational

view ofthe ego by introducing diverse theories involving symbolic processes

present in thinking, memory, language and perception of self and others. As these

theories flourished, the ego came to be perceived as a substructure ofthe

personality defined by its functions. Psychoanalytic ego psychology introduced

the ego as a specialized agent of adaptation that is endowed with a variety of

functions, but particularly a synthesizing function. The emphasis on the ego as an

agent of adaptation helped ego psychology evolve from an individual interacting

with the environment by external behavior to an ego system of personality

uniquely equipped to deal with intrasystemic conflicts as well as the environment.

A more profound shift occurred in ego psychology, however, when Hartmann

introduced the idea that many structures, including ego, id, and other capacities

differentiate out ofthe life matrix and develop along separate lines. Prior to this

time, ego capacities were widely understood to be distinct realities on the same

primal or libidinal continuum. This realization represents an important milestone

in the evolution of ego psychology. The ego began to be viewed in a number of

132
 ways. A 'Pandora's Box' of ego potentials arising from a holistic life matrix

opened.

Ego psychology continues to evolve within the comprehensive theoretical

framework of integral psychology where all aspects of human personality are

understood to be inseparable, non-linear, and interdependent aspects of being.

Integral psychology is a psychology of the integral personality. The integral

personality is distinguished from the ordinary personality by a higher capacity for

integration. Whereas the ordinary personality is characterized largely by

reactions to environmental stimuli, the integral personality is a personality with a

wide capacity of knowing, feeling, and willing. The ordinary personality is

relatively egocentric and inappropriately closed off from the link to its higher

potentials. The integral personality is more widely integrated with subconscious,

conscious, and superconscious capacities.

Integral psychology greatly expanded the scope ofego psychology by linking

the ego to a more internal Psychic Being. For integral psychology, the ego is not

a substructure ofthe personality, originating as one ofmany capacities in the life

matrix. More accurately, the ego is a principle of embodiment or a formation of

nature. Emotional, mental, and physical realities are distinct modes of operation

of Consciousness or Psychic Being that centralizes and individualizes the outer

consciousness and action. Consciousness is the fundamental Reality in integral

psychology. The ego is the manifestation ofthis Reality in the outer nature.

Each ofthe psychologies reviewed in this study assigns a reflective quality or

function to the ego, although each perspective understands the reflective process

133
in a unique way. The theoretical perspective of psychoanalytic psychology and

the dynamic dialectic perspective of transpersonal psychology emphasize the ego

as a conceptual self or self-image. The conceptual self is reflective in that it is a

representational self built up from selfand object representations formed through

interactions with the environment. In early psychoanalytic theory, the ego is an

extension or face of the id. As shown. psychoanalytic ego psychology broadens

this view to include many more symbolic processes and functions that are present

in language. memory. perception. etc. These processes are mostly reflective and

help the individual cope with internal and external conflict. In the dynamic-

dialectical paradigm. as with the earlier psychoanalytic model, the ego originates

as a repressive function to control the id. In this model, the reflective function of

the ego is an abstract center of operational cognition and rational volition

responsible for setting up a false posture of exclusive self-identity.

Analytic psychology expands the psychoanalytic understanding of the ego to

include a wider psychosomatic field. In analytic psychology. the ego is nature

becoming aware of itself in a self-reflective process. The body and mind are

different aspects of the same thing. The ego is the reflective function in the self

archetype. which is grounded in the substance of both inorganic and organic

matter. Ego consciousness is the means, or mirror. by which the unconscious

becomes aware of its own face. That is. the reflective function is the means by

which the unconscious becomes personified or self-realized.

The reflective nature of the ego is also evident in the Buddhist perspective and

in the structural-hierarchical paradigm of transpersonal psychology. There is no

134
 separate self in these psychologies, however. The ego is a reflective

consciousness in that each level of development creates a consciousness of itself

by reflecting its own properties at its own unique level. There is no other self-

existing ground or nature to strengthen or to annul the reflective ego

consciousness. In the structural-hierarchical paradigm these levels are

predominantly cognitive. Each level is a locus of identity. At the prenatal stage,

for example, a sensoriperceptual self appeared. At a later stage the self appeared

as a rule or role mind locus of identity, etc. Each locus of identity is an awareness

or consciousness of itself at a particular developmental level. This perspective is

very similar to the Buddhist concept of anafman, or a 'no self where the idea of a

persisting individual nature is destroyed through meditative insight. From the

Buddhist view, the "I" experience is understood to be a constantly shifting

impersonal process. The aggregates of mind and body are concentrations of

energies or states that appear as perceptions, cognitions, or substantial physical

realities. Upon close examination these aggregates are revealed as transitive

structures where a reflective ego consciousness develops around each unique

structure and in this way creates a false sense of self or substantive being.

These fmdings show that the ego is perceived in a variety of ways. The ego

consists of many lines of development that are continuously evolving. Drive

models, cognitive models, psychosomatic models, transcendental models, etc.,

each reveal a frame of the ego picture, but not the total picture. The diversity

associated with developmental lines has given rise to various interpretations

regarding the demarcations of the ego and defmitions of the ego boundaries. This

135
 study addresses this problem by presenting the perspective of multiple ego centers

that exist as distinct realities in a unified environment. In this sense we can speak

of a physical ego, a vital ego, a mental ego, and a higher or transmental ego. That

is, the ego has a physical face as it embeds its operations in the physical world

and reflects the unique properties of the physical. The ego has an emotional face

as it embeds or extends its operations as love, anger, fear, or kindness. The ego

appears in a conceptual face (self-concept) as it embeds its operations in

conceptual or rational structures. At the higher mental centers, the ego functions

are embedded in the higher faculties of intuition, vision, and holistic illumination.

Physical, emotional, mental, and higher mental ego states are inseparably linked

within a holistic environment. These multiple ego centers function collectively as

the organizing principle ofembodied consciousness and serve to centralize and

individualize the outer consciousness and actions.

The Way Ahead: Ego Transformation

The ego is an embodied surface consciousness subject to constant change.

Change is inevitable because individual ego functions are themselves intrinsic

aspects of more universal and more holistic powers in the psyche that are

continually evolving. Physical, emotional, and mental ego centers are

individualized modes of operation of more universal physical, emotional, and

mental environments. The physical body is joined to a wide physical nature with

properties that range from gross matter to sub-atomic processes and subtle energy

fields. The vital-life nature of the individual is joined to a life force present

136
 throughout nature. In a similar way, the mind of the individual develops from

lower to higher intelligence and has the potential to develop intuitive powers and

other subtle mental abilities in what appears to be a universal mind-medium. A

process of ego transformation occurs as the individual modes of operation grow

and evolve under the influences of their more universal environments. Ego

centers are powerless to effect transformation apart from the inner forces that

guide and sustain their movements, much as a plant or flower cannot grow

without the sustaining power of the earth from which it rises. Without the

constant flux of mental, vital, and physical energies, there could be no growth or

transformation and no life.

Problems arise when ego psychologies interpret the ego from the perspective

of a single line of development, a single theoretical perspective, or from the view

of a single ego center. In this writer's view, conflicting perspectives of the ego in

the East and West are largely due to attempts to broadly interpret the ego while

adhering to theoretical perspectives that are relatively restricted. The ego cannot

be adequately understood from the perspective of a drive theory, a cognitive

theory or a theory of transcendence, for example. The ego is all of these things

and much more. The central conflict addressed in this study concerns whether

the ego is to be transcended and annulled in favor of a higher awareness, or

retained and nourished as a necessary means to developing a healthy and cohesive

sense of self. First an example will be given that shows a restricted perspective

of transcendence as applied to the problem in this study.

137
 Ego transcendence is a central concept in transpersonal psychology.

Transcendence in the context of transpersonal psychology as well as Buddhist

psychology implies a state that is "beyond ego". However, it is quite possible for

transcendence to occur as a nonnal and natural function in any of the ego centers

without annulling or marginalizing the ego functions within that center.

Transcendence does not necessitate leaving any developmental stage behind and

does not imply overcoming a state of ignorance in exchange for an

undifferentiated state of enlightenment, although the term is frequently used in

this sense. Rather, transcendence implies a context of wholeness that is greater

than the sum of any ofthe parts within a given ego center. Growth processes

within the physical, vital, mental, and higher mental centers are in a constant state

of flux and depend upon the natural movement oftranscendence in order to

develop and change. The defInition oftranscendence as a state void of

differentiations is limited in scope. It can just as easily be defmed as the context

within which differentiations exist.

A second example of restrictions being placed on the interpretations oftenns

concerns the way the term "cohesive sense of self' is interpreted in the East and

West traditions. Western psychological traditions embrace a cohesive sense of

self, while Eastern mystical traditions perceive a sense of self as a state of

ignorance and are therefore concerned with deconstructing the self-sense. This

conflict can be resolved by broadening the way "cohesive sense of self' is

currently being understood and used.

138
 The meaning of a cohesive sense of self is not restricted to a primordial ground

self, a psychosomatic self, a conceptual self, or a consciousness self as discussed

in this study. A cohesive self can also imply an integral and stable sense of Being

that is not uprooted by constantly shifting processes in the transient nature. A

stable sense of Being is not restricted to a conceptual model or to a physical

ground model or to any single model, as all of these models represent natural

process that are in a constant state of flux. The wholeness that is a stable center

will not rely on any physical, vital, or mental constituents to create lasting

stability. A cohesive sense of Being is also not found in the absence of, or

transcendence of, natural phenomena. Rather, a wider theoretical premise for a

cohesive sense of Being presupposes stability as the integral fullness of all of

these constituents in the midst of fluctuating conditions.

Ego transformation presents a challenging new field of study for ego

psychology. Ego transformation psychology can bridge the East and West

theoretical perspectives and provide a common platform for the exchange of

meditative and scientific practices. Eradicating the ego is neither desirable nor

possible. Transcending the ego by annulling it is not the true goal ofthe Buddhist

teaching. The health of the ego is inseparable from the physical, vital, and mental

health of the organism. To remove the ego would be to remove that which is

embodied, namely the physical, vital, and mental bodies. For this reason, the ego

and the vital life energies should not be censored, suppressed or marginalized.

The knowledge of multiple ego centers together with an understanding ofthe

process of transformation within these centers can reconcile the opposing

139
 theoretical perspectives of East and West concerning the outcome of the ego.

Western psychology must expand its theoretical horizons and better acknowledge

the way change is occurring at all levels of reality. This change should not be

understood as a source of instability and uncertainty, but as the essential

ingredient ofpositive growth and inner enlightenment. On the other hand,

emphasis on ego transformation can provide Eastern practitioners with a

psychological model that acknowledges unceasing change and is therefore non-

self-subsisting. An emphasis on ego transformation within multiple ego centers

that are holistically related does not require the belief in a self-existing reality or

the annulling of such a reality.

Questions and Suggestions for Further Study

Ego transformation as discussed in this study, as well as in integral psychology

generally, suggests that an individual can increase his or her level of psychic

renewal. Some of the outcomes of ego transformation are an increased psychic

equilibrium, an increased psychological capacity, and a level of regeneration of

energies. The process of psychic renewal is minimally outlined in integral

psychology at present and needs to be expanded, clearly mapped, and made

readily understandable and available to a wide public, similar to the way

opportunities to improve physical health are made available. Further studies of

ego transformation in integral psychology are needed to better understand and

map the process ofpsychic renewal. What would a psychological baseline

designed to identify and measure psychic renewal look like?

140
 Additional studies are needed to clarify the characteristics of a transformed

ego. This study asserts that the ego is an integral aspect of a wider cosmocentric

environment or Psychic Being. As the Psychic Being comes forward the ego is

transformed. In the process of ego transformation, the ego is not by-passed or

left behind but is taken up by the more inclusive cosmocentric reality. In this

way, both transcendence and transformation are involved in the ego's

development. Studies are needed to better defme ego transformation and the

processes and changes involved? For example, what is emotional transformation?

What is mental transformation? What is physical transformation?

A third suggestion for further study concerns a need to better understand

psychic evolution and the deep forces that sustain it. Specifically, additional

studies are needed to help clarify the nature and structure of the Psychic Being

and to determine its influences on ego structures and processes. What kind of

studies would be best suited for this task, and how would these studies be

conducted? For example, a study on psychic evolution might be done in integral

psychology that draws on depth psychology, current research on psychological

predispositions, genetic patterns, etc., in the West, combined with a study of

Eastern yoga doctrines or interviews with Eastern yoga scholar-practitioners who

may be experiencing or observing inherited psychological states or conditions in

their practice. Integral psychology's principle of 'unity-in-diversity' could be

used as a theoretical construct to guide these studies.

141
 REFERENCES

Agha-Kazem-Shirazi, B. (1994). Selfin integral psychology. Ann Harbor, MI:

UMI.

Agha-Kazem-Shirazi, B. (2005, January). Transformation ofPersonality in

Psychosynthesis, Analytical Psychology, and Integral Psychology. Paper
presented at the 4th integral psychology conference, Auroville, India.

Berube, M. (Ed.). (1983). American Heritage Dictionary (2nd ed.). New York:
Dell Publishing Co., Inc.

Blank, G, & Blank, R. (1994). Ego Psychology in Theory and Practice. New
York. Columbia University Press.

Boehm, D. (1982) Wholeness and the implicate order. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul.

Bruner, J. (1964). The course of cognitive growth. American Psychologist,

19(1), 1-15.

Buddhaghosa. (1975). The path ofpurity. Pe Maung Tin (Trans.). London: Pali
Text Society.

Capra, F. (1975). The Tao ofphysics. Berkeley: Shambhala.

Chaudhuri, H. (1974). Being, evolution, and immortality: An outline ofintegral

philosophy. Wheaton, Illinois: Theosophical Publishing House.

Chaudhuri, H. (1977). The evolution ofintegral consciousness. Wheaton,

Illinois: Quest Books.

Cortright, B. (1997). Psychotherapy and spirit: Theory andpractice in

transpersonal psychology. Albany, New York: State University of New
York Press.

Dalal, A.S. (Ed.). (2001). A Greater Psychology. New York: Jeremy P.

TarcherlPutnam.

Dasen, P. (Ed.). (1977). Piagetian psychology: Cross-cultural contributions.

New York: Halsted.

142
Engler, J. (l984a). Vicissitudes of the self according to psychoanalysis and
Buddhism: A spectrum model of object relations development.
Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought, 6(1), 29-72.

Engler, J. (1984b). Therapeutic aims in psychotherapy and meditation. Journal

of Transpersonal Psychology, 16(1),25-61.

Epstein, M. (1988). The deconstruction of the self: ego and egolessness in

Buddhist insight meditation. Journal ofTranspersonal Psychology, 20(1),
61-69.

Epstein, M. (1993). The varieties of egolessness. In R. Walsh & F. Vaughan

(Eds.), Paths beyond ego (pp. 121-123). New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.

Fedem, P. (1928). Narcissism in the structure of the ego. International Journal of

Psycho-Analysis, 9,401-419.

Freud, S. (1953). The Interpretation of Dreams. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.),

The standard edition ofthe complete works ofSigmund Freud, (pp. 1-
338). Harmondsworth: Penguin. (Original work published 1900)

Freud, S. (1958). Mourning and melancholia. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The
standard edition ofthe complete works ofSigmund Freud, (vol. 14, pp.
243-258). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1917)

Freud, S. (1961). The ego and the id. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The
standard edition ofthe complete psychological works ofSigmund Freud,
(vol. 19, pp-13-68). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published
1923)

Freud, S. (1962). Civilization and its discontents. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.).
New York: W. Norton Company.

Ghose, A. (1970). Essays on the Gita. Pondicherry, India: Sri Aurobindo

Ashram.

Ghose, A. (1972a). The Synthesis of Yoga. In Sri Aurobindo Ashram (Series

Ed.), Sri Aurobindo Birth Centenary Library (Vols. 20-21). Pondicherry:
Sri Aurobindo Ashram Birth Centenary Library.

Ghose, A. (1972b). The Life Divine. In Sri Aurobindo Ashram (Series Ed.), Sri
Aurobindo Birth Centenary Library (Vols. 18-19). Pondicherry: Sri
Aurobindo Ashram Birth Centenary Library.

143
 Ghose, A. (1972c). Letters on Yoga. In Sri Aurobindo Ashram (Series Ed.), Sri
Aurobindo Birth Centenary Library (Vols. 22-24). Pondicherry: Sri
Aurobindo Ashram Birth Centenary Library.

Ghose, A. (1993). The integral yoga. Twin Lakes, WI: Lotus Press.

Ghose, A. (1994). Essays Divine and Human. Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo

Ashram.

Ghose, A. (1989). The Psychic Being. Soul: Its Nature, Mission and Evolution.
Selections from the Works ofSri Aurobindo and the Mother. (l989). Twin
Lakes, WI: Lotus Press.

Guntrip, H. (l969). Schizoidphenomena, object-relations, and the self. New

York: International Universities Press.

Hartmann, H. (1950). Comments on the psychoanalytic theory of the ego.

Psychoanalytic Study ofthe Child, 5, 79-96.

Hartmann, H. (l956). The development of the ego concept in Freud's work.

International Journal ofPsychoanalysis, 37, pp. 425-437.

Hartmann, H. (1958). Ego Psychology and the Problem ofAdaptation. New

York: International Universities Press. (Original work published 1939).

Hartmann, H. (1964). Essays on ego psychology. Oxford, England: International

U. Press.

Herman, P. E. (l983). Integral psychology. In Vern Haddick (Ed.),

Transcendence and transformation (pp.95-102). Lanham, MD: University
Press of America.

Inhelder, B.; & Piaget, 1. (1969). The Early Growth ofLogic in the Child. New
York: W.W. Norton and Company.

Jacobson, E. (1964). The selfand the object world New York: International
Universities Press.

James, W. (1890). Principles ofpsychology. New York: Henry Holt.

Jung, C. (1963). Memories, dreams, reflections. London: Kegan Paul.

Jung, C. (1966). Two essays on analytical psychology. In G. Adler and R.F.C.

Hull, (Eds. and Trans.), The collected works ofe.G. Jung(vol. 7, pp. 1-
119). Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Original works published
1917 and 1928)

144
Jung, C. (1968). The archetypes of the collective unconscious. In G. Adler and
R.F.C. Hull, (Eds. and Trans.), The collected works ofe.G. Jung (vol. 9
pt. 1,451 p. (pp. 3-41). Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Original
work published 1934-1954)

Jung, C. (1969). Psychology and religion West and East. In G. Adler and RF.C.
Hull, (Eds. and Trans.), The collected works ofCG. Jung (vol. 11,699 p.).
Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1938)

Jung, C. (1970). Mysterium conjunctionis. In G. Adler and RF.C. Hull, (Eds.

and Trans.), The collected works ofe.G. Jung (vol. 14, 702 p.). Princeton:
Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1956)

Jung, e.G. (1972). Structure and dynamics of the psyche. In G. Adler and RF.C.
Hull, (Eds. and Trans.), The collected works ofe.G. Jung(vol. 8, pp. 283-
342.). Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Original work published
1927)

Kellman, P & Spelke, E. (1983). Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy.

Cognitive Psychology 15(4), 483-524.

Kelly, R (1988). Revisioning the mandala of consciousness. In D. Rothberg &

S. Kelley (Eds.), Ken Wilber in dialogue (pp. 117-130). Wheaton, Illinois:
Theosophical Publishing House.

Kemberg, O. (1975). Borderline conditions andpathological narcissism. New

York: J. Aronson.

Kemberg, O. (1980). Internal world and external reality: object relations theory
applied. New York: J. Aronson.

Kemberg, O. (1982). Self, ego, affects, and drives. Journal ofthe American
Psychological Association, 30(4), 893-917.

Kemberg, O. (1984). Object-relations theory and clinical psychoanalysis. New

York: J. Aronson/1995.

Kemberg, O. (1987). An ego psychology-object relations theory approach to the

transference. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 56(1), 197-221.

King, P., & Neal, R (1968). Ego psychology in counseling. Boston, Houghton
Mifflin.

Klein, M. (1975). The psychoanalysis ofchildren. A. Strachey (Trans.). Oxford,

England: Delacorte Press/Seymore Lawrence.

145
 Knoblauch, D. (1985). Applying Taoist thought to counseling and psychotherapy.
American Mental Health Counselors Association Journal. Special
Attitudes toward counseling and mental health in non-Western societies,
7(2), 52-63.

Knoblauch, D. & Falconer, J. (1986). The relationship of a measured Taoist

orientation to Western personality dimensions. Journal ofTranspersonal
Psychology, 18(1), 73-83.

Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis ofthe self: a systematic approach to the

psychoanalytic treatment ofnarcissistic personality disorders. Madison,
CT.: International Universities Press

Kohut, H. (1977). The restoration ofthe self. New York: International

Universities Press.

Kornfield, J. & Rothberg, D. (1988). The mandala of awakening. In D. Rothberg

& S. Kelley (Eds.), Ken Wilber in dialogue (pp. 154-164). Wheaton,
Illinois: Theosophical Publishing House.

Lajoie, D. R., & Shapiro, S. 1. (1992). Definitions of transpersonal psychology:

the first twenty-three years. Journal ofTransPersonal Psychology, 24(1),
79-98.

Lichtenberg, J. D. (1975). The development of the sense of self. Journal ofthe

American Psychoanalytic Association, 23(3), 453-484.

Loy, D. (1992). Avoiding the void: The lack of selfin psychotherapy and
Buddhism. Journal ofTranspersonal Psychology, 24(2), 151-179.

Mahler, M.S., Pine, F. & Bergman, A. (1975). The psychological birth ofthe
human infant. New York: Basic Books.

McDonald-Smith, M. & Rothberg, D. (1988). Bringing awareness back home:

toward an integrative spirituality. In D. Rothberg & S. Kelley (Eds.), Ken
Wilber in dialogue (165-178). Wheaton, lllinois: Theosophical Publishing
House.

McIntosh, D. (1993). Cathexes and their objects in the thought of Sigmund

Freud. Journal ofthe American Psychoanalytic Association, 41(3),679-
709.

Meissner, W. (1970). Notes on Identification: 1. Origins in Freud.

Psychoanalytic Quarterly 39(4),563-589.

146
Noam, G. (1990). Beyond Freud and Piaget: Biographical worlds-interpersonal
self. In T. Wren (Ed.), The moral domain: Essays in the ongoing
discussion between philosophy and the social sciences (pp. 360-399).
Cambridge: MIT Press.

Nyanatiloka, B. (1972). Buddhist dictionary: manual ofBuddhist terms and

doctrines. Colombo: Frewin.

Roseman, S. (1955). Some unresolved problems in ego psychology. Journal of

General Psychology, 53,231-263.

Rothberg, D., & Kelly, S. (Eds.). (1998). Ken Wilber in dialogue. Wheaton,
Illinois: Theosophical Publishing House.

Rotheberg, D. (1998). How straight is the spiritual path? Conversations with

Three Buddhist Teachers. In D. Rothberg & S. Kelly (Eds.), Ken Wilber
in dialogue (pp. 131-145). Wheaton, Illinois: Theosophical Publishing
House.

Rothstein, A. (1981). The ego: an evolving construct. International Journal of

Psycho-Analysis 62(4), 435-445.

Sen, Indra. (1986). Integral psychology: The psychological system ofSri

Aurobindo. Ponticherry, India: Sri Aurobindo Trust.

Shweder, R., Mahapatra, M., & Miller, J. (1987). Culture and moral
development. In J. Kagan & S. Lamb (Eds.), The emergence ofmorality
in younger children (pp. 130-204). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Smuts, J. (1926). Holism and Evolution. New York: Macmillan.

Stem, D. (1985). The interpersonal world ofthe infant. New York: Basic Books.

Stevens, A. (1982). Archetype: A natural history ofthe self London: Routledge

and Kegan Ltd.

Suzuki, D. T. (1996). Swedenborg: Buddha ofthe north. West Chester, PA:

Swedenborg Foundation. (Original work published 1913).

Washburn, M. (1988). The ego and the dynamic ground: A transpersonal theory
ofhuman development:. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Welwood, J. (1976). Exploring mind: Form, emptiness, and beyond. Journal of

TransPersonal Psychology, 8(2), 89-98.

147
Wilber, K. (1977). The spectrum ofconsciousness. Wheaton: Quest.

Wilber, K. (1980). The atman project. Wheaton: Quest.

Wilber, K. (1995). Sex, ecology, spirituality: The spirit ofevolution. Boston:

Shambhala.

Wilber, K. (1990). Eye to Eye: The questfor the new paradigm (Expanded).
Boston, Massachusetts: Shambhala Publications, Inc.

Wilhelm, R. (1950). The I Ching or book ofchanges (C. F. Baynes, Trans.).

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

148