Psychoanalysis

Psychoanalysis is an exploratory mode of discourse, rather than a form of psychotherapy. Analytic discourse forms a social bond in which the unconscious is freely explored. While psychoanalysis can be applied to psychotherapy (and other disciplines), its pure form is a non-clinical encounter that does not seek the diagnosis or treatment of a symptom.

As such, psychoanalysis articulates a radical position that assists the subjective agency of the individual, rather than an objective treatment of illness. Therefore, psychoanalysis operates within a phenomenology of radical healing, or a confrontation with the real.

I adopt an integrative approach to psychoanalytic work that draws on the insights of its progenitors, Freud and Jung, as well as their successors, Lacan and Hillman. This is to say that I appreciate (and make use of) the psychoanalytic tradition as a whole—Freud’s (re)discovery of analysis, Jung’s alchemy of individuation, Hillman’s deconstruction of Jungian theory, and Lacan’s surrealism. However, the root and gravity of my orientation resides in Lacan, so I consider myself a Lacanian Analyst.

Jacques Lacan (1901-1981) was a Parisian psychoanalyst who declared a “return to Freud”. Described as the “Picasso of psychoanalysis”, Lacan’s philosophy is summarized in his famous aphorism, “The unconscious is structured like a language” (Lacan, 2006).

Lacan developed Freudian theory into a topological model of the unconscious, comprising three registers: the real, the symbolic, and the imaginary. The imaginary is the register of images and meaning; the symbolic is the register of language; and the real forms an ontological core that exists prior to images and the symbolic order of language.

Lacan articulates the universal and radical core of analysis by placing the analytic situation beyond the clinical gaze of psychiatry and psychotherapy, and into the discovery of analytic discourse.

Lacan, J. (2006). Écrits (B. Fink, Trans.). W.W. Norton and Company.

Lacan views analysis as a co-creative act in which the analyst/analysand relationship is not a hierarchical or subject-object dichotomy. Rather, analysis is an intersubjective dynamic where the analysand becomes the analyst. In his discourse, Television, Lacan (1990) gives his definition of the analytic situation:

“What I call the analytic discourse is the social bond determined by the practice of an analysis. It derives its value from its being placed amongst the most fundamental of the bonds which remain viable for us”. (Lacan, p. 14).

Later in this discourse, Lacan compares the analyst to the historical function of the saint: “There is no better way of placing [the analyst] objectively than in relation to what was in the past called: being a saint” (Lacan, p. 6).

I interpret Lacan’s words as an articulation of the sacred context of analysis, where the analyst functions as confidante and priest. With this, Lacan is also orienting analysis to its origin in the intersection between medicine and spirituality via its shared concern for the alleviation of existential suffering.

In Asian medical traditions, the role of the physician is conceived in priestly terms, where the healing function represents a bridge between the sacred and the profane. Therefore, analysis is a sacred art that happens in an inner temple.

Lacan, J. (1990). Television. W.W. Norton and Company.

The conception and practice of analysis does not truly originate in eighteenth-century Europe. The phenomenon of analysis can be traced to the Indian philosophical school of “Upanishadic Advaitism”.

The Upanishads are a collection of oral teachings given from master to disciple, an ancient “discourse of the master”. The discourse of the master is characterized by great utterances, or mahavakyas, the uttering of which initiates the disciple into a three-fold gnosis of listening (śravana), hearing (manana), and seeing (nididhyasana).

This process was described by Ramana Maharshi as the practice of jñana-vichara, or “gnosis through inquiry”, also described as atma-vichara, or “self-inquiry”. “Inquiry” is not a question posed by a querent for the sake of an answer. “Inquiry” is an appeal to the question itself, a return of the repressed, traced to the “I”-thought. Therefore, inquiry is the ancient form of analysis. As it is said in the text, Pancadasi, “By a thorough analysis of ‘Atman is Brahman’, the direct knowledge ‘I Am Brahman’ is achieved”.

Thus, the process of listening, hearing, and seeing describes a revolution in the subject—a transference from Brahman-as-Object to Brahman-as-Subject.

Analysis is a conscious process, a form of inquiry in which the subject becomes conscious of itself, in its seeking and desire. The culmination of analysis is nididhyasana, the perception of perfect knowledge, the pass in which analysand becomes analyst.

“Nididhyasana is so called when, instruction about the uniqueness of the Atman is justified by (proper) reasons viz. the Sruti, (the instructions of) teachers and (one’s own) experience (of the same)”. (Suresvaracharya, 1988).

The Atman is the Real. By inquiring of itself, the subject finds itself in the real, and thus realizes. Analytic discourse maintains the mahavakya of the subject’s own speech until its symbols and images are heard and seen in the real. Therefore, the culmination of analysis is the realization of analytic discourse: a dialectical transmission of truth and reality.

Suresvaracarya. (1988). Suresvara’s Vartika on Madhu Brahmana (K.P. Jog, Trans., S. Hino, Trans.). Motilal Banarsidas.

I bring to psychoanalysis the orientation of Asian medical, astrological, and spiritual traditions, traditions which are the spiral origin of analytic discourse.

Analysis is offered in person or via Zoom. If you are interested in working with me, send an inquiry to info@somaraja.com or use the form below. You can also schedule a free preliminary meeting with me at this link to discuss desires and intentions, and see if we are a good fit.

Frequency, number, duration, economic exchange, and other questions are determined in each unique case.

NOTE: Psychoanalysis is not an alternative to psychotherapy or counseling, nor does it constitute a form of medical treatment. Psychoanalysis is for individuals seeking a conscious process for radical self-understanding in the context of a unique relationship.

The Myth of Analysis

The Knee of Listening