by Peter Fritz Walter
Published by Sirius-C Media Galaxy LLC

113 Barksdale Professional Center, Newark, Delaware, USA

©2015 Peter Fritz Walter. Some rights reserved.

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

This publication may be distributed, used for an adaptation or for
derivative works, also for commercial purposes, as long as the
rights of the author are attributed. The attribution must be given to
the best of the user’s ability with the information available. Third
party licenses or copyright of quoted resources are untouched by
this license and remain under their own license.

The moral right of the author has been asserted

Set in Avenir Light and Trajan Pro

Designed by Peter Fritz Walter

ISBN 978-1-516959-72-3

Publishing Categories
Self-Help / Motivational & Inspirational

Publisher Contact Information

Author Contact Information

About Dr. Peter Fritz Walter

Pierre’s Blog
About the Author

Parallel to an international law career in Germany, Switzer-
land and the United States, Dr. Peter Fritz Walter (Pierre) fo-
cused upon fine art, cookery, astrology, musical perform-
ance, social sciences and humanities.

He started writing essays as an adolescent and received a
high school award for creative writing and editorial work for
the school magazine.

After finalizing his law diplomas, he graduated with an LL.M.
in European Integration at Saarland University, Germany, and
with a Doctor of Law title from University of Geneva, Switzer-
land, in 1987.

He then took courses in psychology at the University of Ge-
neva and interviewed a number of psychotherapists in Lau-
sanne and Geneva, Switzerland. His interest was intensified
through a hypnotherapy with an Ericksonian American hyp-
notherapist in Lausanne. This led him to the recovery and
healing of his inner child.

After a second career as a corporate trainer and personal
coach, Pierre retired as a full-time writer, philosopher, and

Pierre is a German-French bilingual native speaker and
writes English as his 4th language after German, Latin and
French. He also reads source literature for his research works
in Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, and Dutch. In addition, Pierre
has notions of Thai, Khmer, Chinese and Japanese.

All of Pierre’s books are hand-crafted and self-published,
designed by the author. Pierre publishes via his Delaware
company, Sirius-C Media Galaxy LLC, and under the imprints
of IPUBLICA and SCM (Sirius-C Media).
Our inner world is reality, reality even more real than
the apparent world; to call fantasy or fairy tale what
merely seems illogical means that one does not un-
derstand nature.


The author’s profits from this book are being donated to charity.

Introduction 11

Chapter One 17
Building a Manifest Identity 17
The Ego Matter 27
The Beauty of Difference 42

Chapter Two 47
Introduction 47
Leaving Paradise 54
The Affective Confusion 57
Fusion and Autonomy 60
Fusion and Love 65
Identity and Wholeness 71
About Inner Peace 74
Realizing Soul Power 78
The Power Quest 91
Inside-Out Power 96
The Power Taboo 100
Autonomy vs. Child Neglect 104

Chapter Three 113

Chapter Four 141
What is Soul Power? 141
Soul Reality and Autonomy 145
Freeing Your Minotaur 151
What is Soul Reality? 160
Soul Development 164
Defining Your Values 171
Soul Values v. Social Values 177
Patterns of Living 180
Walking Your Talk 185
Soul Values and Jazz Ballads 188
Soul Marginality 191

Chapter Five 197
Codependence and Emotional Abuse 197
What Means Oedipus Complex? 210
Is the Oedipus Complex Universal? 211
Criticism of the Theory 216
—1/8 Restricted Validity 216
—2/8 Cultural Conditioning toward Homosexuality 217
—3/8 A Distorted Psychosexual Base Structure 217
—4/8 A Mechanistic View of Sexuality 218
—5/8 Nature Fosters Copulation, Not Masturbation 219
—6/8 The ‘Oedipal Family’ Brings Perversion 220
—7/8 The Oedipal Theory is Pseudo-Science 221
—8/8 Oedipal Reality means Slavery for Children 222

Chapter Six 225
Castration or Permissiveness? 225
Are Masturbating Children Better Citizens? 227
The Dogma of the Autoerotic Consumer Child 230
Oedipal Hero 233


The Complete Oedipus Story 250
A Teaching Tale? 258
Narcissus and Oedipus 286
The Postmodern Mix 296



What is Autonomy?

Etymologically the term of autonomy results from
the Latin auto (own) and nomen (name). Autonomous
is thus one who has got his own name. It is equally
true that in ancient times the proverb ‘nomen est
omen’ was expressing a general truth. It meant that
the name is the destiny or in one’s name is contained
one’s destiny.

Those of you who have an idea of numerology
know that this is fundamentally true, and not mere
belief. In addition, initiates and psychoanalysts tell us
that we bring our names from the plane of life-
between-lives when we incarnate on the earth plane.

—See, for example, Michael Newton, Life Be-
tween Lives: Hypnotherapy for Spiritual Regres-
sion (2006).

We can thus maintain that autonomous is the per-
son who owns his or her destiny.

With autonomy we commonly associate freedom
of decision, freedom of speech, freedom of creative
living, freedom of profession and partner choice, and
freedom of religion. Yet autonomy is also a psychic
quality of freedom, more precisely inner freedom,
which comes about through the integration of the un-
conscious, the disentanglement of the psychic fusion
with the matrix and the acceptance of living in the

Without autonomy, there is fusion, symbiosis and
dependence. While for certain organisms, such as the
human newborn, symbiosis for a certain time is a bio-
logical necessity, this symbiosis is time-bound and
should gradually give rise to autonomy. While natural
symbiosis is needed for the first eighteen months of
the newborn, it should gradually come to an end after
that period. Unfortunately, modern culture is more or
less completely dysfunctional regarding this primal
movement from fusion to autonomy that should take
place, dynamically, in the growth process of the hu-
man baby.


What happens is that the necessary biological
symbiosis with the mother, eighteen months from
birth, is neglected for various reasons; many babies
suffer from a more or less stringent tactile deprivation
that will leave scars for their whole lives. In order to
compensate for the lack of care bestowed upon the
infant, as a guilt-reaction and for various other rea-
sons, the post-symbiosis condition is not better for
the child: instead of growing into autonomy most
children in our culture grow into codependence with
their parents and caretakers; instead of building a
gradually larger extent of autonomy, parents tend to
gradually entangle their children in a tight net of stiff-
ening dependencies.

A naturally raised child is typically more inde-
pendent and more autonomous than a child who is
rarely touched, or lacks affection and has become
neurotic. The frequently observed clinging behavior
of modern city children, their helpless, clumsy and ir-
responsible behavior, even as late as when approach-
ing puberty, their immaturity in handling sharp or
fragile objects such as knives or glasses show well the
blockage of their emotional flow, and the codepend-
ent entanglement with their parents.


There is a natural striving for autonomy built into
every growing life. A child of three years of age needs
more autonomy than a child of fifteen months of age.

For example, a toddler of eighteen months needs
more autonomy than a baby of five months. Many
parents ignore that babies, toddlers and pre-
schoolers, already before reaching the age of primary
school, need to develop autonomy.

Many adults believe that children grew through
magic shifts, like the one from babyhood to child-
hood, from childhood to youth and from youth to
adulthood. The first shift is believed to take place
around seven years of age, the next one around
twelve years of age and the final one around eighteen
years of age.

In truth, these shifts don’t exist in real life as all
growth is gradual and smooth. This is why all educa-
tion should be gradual and smooth.

While it is a good thing to have certain initiation
rites or ceremonies that mark important steps in the
growth of children, these rites are what they are: mark
stones that border an otherwise seamless road.


I arrive at a mark stone, I see the mark stone, I
touch the mark stone, I pass the mark stone, I re-
member the mark stone. My passing the mark stone is
gradual, and smooth in time, and the mark stone itself
is of lesser importance than my passing it.

What is important is that I constantly grow, that I
remain moving. We learn the basic movement into
autonomy during our first year of life, and not later on
during adolescence or when we allegedly turn into
that magic world of adulthood.

I do not belittle the important changes that take
place in the life of adolescents, and their sometimes
passionate focus upon getting more autonomy, nor
do I belittle the marking shift from adolescence into
final adulthood.

But often we observe that especially those adoles-
cents who have rather repressive and possessive par-
ents get onto the obnoxious track and really push it
through for every millimeter of increased autonomy.
There is a logic in every behavior and adolescents
who put high stress on autonomy have a reason to do
so. The reason is rooted in much earlier years, in the
years of babyhood.


There is no alternative to autonomy. To make
down or belittle children’s need for autonomy is to
open the door to emotional and power abuse large
scale. This form of child-abuse is not perpetrated by
the proverbial stranger, but by mothers, first of all

Chapter One


Building a Manifest Identity
A manifest identity is more than sexual identity or
gender identity. When I use the term manifest iden-
tity, I actually imply something much larger, more en-
compassing, and that impacts upon people around
us. Manifest identity is the facilitator of a social life,
and of our relationships.

What happens when you enter a relationship with-
out having an identity? You will be the proverbial fool,
coming over as a lunatic or daydreamer. Lacking iden-
tity is a big problem nowadays, but in the regular case
it’s never a total lack of identity, for the latter constel-
lation is typically the condition of psychotics, and thus
here we would be talking about true mental de-

But generally speaking, among young people to-
day, there is a greater lack of identity as this was the
case in the past, and still is the case within natural
tribal cultures.

Why is this so? I will answer the question bit by bit
in the following text, for it’s a complex matter.

My core message is that we need a certain amount
of autonomy for building an original and manifest
identity, which goes way beyond a mere sexual iden-
tity or self-identity. When I say identity I speak of iden-
tity that is built on our most personal and unique tal-
ents and capacities, and on our life’s mission, our soul

Building autonomy also implies to get away with
false identities and to realize soul power. What do I

I have encountered quite a few young men and
women who seem to suffer from a problem to build
their identity on top of their sexual attraction. These
men or women tend to have a low level of self-
knowledge, which is the characteristic of the boomer


While generally being rather intelligent and sensi-
tive, they lack out on a personal identity. They try to
compensate for this lack by adopting a certain life-
style, a certain group philosophy, or a certain choice
of personal characteristics they have seen deployed
by others whom they believe are successful.

The root of the problem is that they suffer from a
vacuum inside, and this vacuum is a lack of self-
knowledge. Instead of trying to find out who they
really are, and thus journeying form inside to outside,
they rather do the contrary, and go to search for truth
at the periphery. Instead of clearing their soul values,
they adopt certain social values they find fashionable.

Instead of accepting themselves, they crave for
gaining acceptance and recognition from others, and
instead of finding out about their own values, they try
to adopt for themselves the values that are accepted
on a group or community level.

Many of these young men and women, often
without realizing it, do suffer from their lack of identity
while they may be well accepted and even popular in
the particular groupings in which they are a member.


They try to do the impossible, that is, to be ac-
cepted as a no-name, to be recognized for certain
masks they are wearing and that are pleasing to the
group. With one word, they live their lives as if acting
on stage!

When I act my life out like an actor, I do not live my
life, for I do as if living my life. I call this condition liv-
ing a second-hand life. The qualities, the attitude, the
values and the lifestyle I display are not my own, can-
not be my own because I do not know, deep down,
who I am.

And when I do not know who I am, how can I know
what attitude, what values, what lifestyle fits my inner
makeup? The fatal misdirection in my life then comes
from searching outside what can only be found inside.

When you go around for identity shopping, you
will surely be successful. You will end up buying into a
second-hand identity or a multiple choice of second-
hand identities. This society, with its strong mercantile
makeup is set to lead you astray and get you to play
your passive role of an obedient consumer, a thankful
no-name, a willing credit card holder and money-


One of the hangers these young people use for
their identity is some or the other peculiar sexual ori-
entation; they thus are using their particular sexual
orientation as an identity-hanger. They actually seem
to believe in the myth that our sexual conditioning
was something that molds us for life.

I tried to help some of these unlucky youngsters
but so far I was not successful to win their trust. I
found them to be very defensive, while I could show
them with quite some evidence that sexuality is mov-


ing, changing and relative, and that it follows our
emotional predilections.

The reigning view of sexuality as something drive-
like and automatic was mainly forged by Sigmund
Freud (1856-1939) who considered sexual attraction as
an unconscious, and by and large uncontrollable
automatism, justifying his view with the argument that
sexuality belongs to those vital functions that are
regulated by the brain stem, and not the neocortex.

I believe this is one of the scientific errors Freud
committed, and that unfortunately was blindly taken
over by the modern psychological establishment.

Our breathing also is regulated by the brain stem,
and the functioning of our hormone glands, but for
that reason it’s not true that we can’t control, for ex-
ample by meditation, or by biofeedback, our breath-
ing rhythm or our hormone flow.

All spiritual traditions around the world show that
it’s possible to influence these vital functions. So why
should that not be possible regarding sexual condi-
tioning? What we are talking about here are not facts,
but beliefs—cultural myths!


What are the consequences of these collective be-
liefs in the minds of those who hold them for true?

These persons obviously take their sexual attrac-
tion not only for granted and eternally fixated, but
also as a hanger for their identity!

For reasons that we need to discuss further, these
persons, and they are many in postmodern global
consumer culture, inquire only superficially, or not at
all into who they really are as individuals. Instead, they
fetch a standard misnomer such as homosexual, les-
bian, pedophile or sadomaso (sm) for defining them-
selves as a person.

This process of self-labeling brings about many
undesirable results such as a scapegoat belonging
because such an attitude encourages projection.

But despite the awkward situation this creates in
the lives of these individuals, the need for a form of
belonging is so strong in the human being that in a
time where social contacts get more and more imper-
sonal, if not inhuman, many people are craving for
some sort of grouping they can sign up with. They say
‘Look, here I am. I am a green frog.’ What a green


frog is can be looked up on my blog, my web site, my
community, or the grouping where I belong to.

Instead of defining themselves as persons who has
feelings, they do all for society to assume that they
are one-dimensional, narrow-focused and obsessed
freaks who hide their feelings for coming over as
tough, strong and outgoing, and social. Instead of
maintaining a position of equity where they can de-
fine their own reality and value-system, they more or
less unconditionally subscribe to the standard mis-
nomer concepts defined by a materialistic and spiri-
tually ignorant society.

With one word, instead of being simple, honest
and vulnerable, they want to be heroes!

To brand your identity with standard labels forged
by mainstream establishment is really the death of
autonomy, and psychologically it means you simply
do not accept yourself! Instead, you let society decide
about it, either positively by embracing you, or nega-
tively by rejecting you.

For if you do not accept yourself, how can you ex-
pect others doing it for you? Thus, whatever others


think about your particular sexual attraction is only
important for you if you make it important for you.
And you make it important for you when you use
these labels and thus apply for your own life the
whole belief system in which these labels are imbed-

This means you put yourself in a psychological
prison, thus becoming a slave of public opinion!

Suffices to browse some forums on the Internet to
see what many young people worry and are talking
about day by day: public rumors, law enforcement
policies, personal or group tragedies, or what kind of
erotically loving behavior might be acceptable or not
be acceptable.

Instead of asking that question to their soul, they
ask other people, some of whom they hardly know;
instead of quietly and rationally pondering how to get
to live in cultures more akin to their personal desires,
needs and expectations, they go on criticizing global
consumer culture or become activists against what
they consider to be ‘the establishment.’


The questions they should ask, for example the
one who they are, as individuals, and what their intrin-
sic personal dream is, what their personal wishes are
and their vision for the future, go for the most part
unasked. While the whole problem truly is one of lack-
ing exposure, of lacking experience, of lacking oppor-
tunity with actually living their love!

To say it with Albert Camus, if you want to know
yourself, you should assert yourself! That means, re-
garding your love, you have to live it and then check
back the feedback you get from the universe, for only
then you can know if it’s okay or not to render your
dream as a lifestyle and go for it.

No book, no guru and no grouping can do that for
you. And no book can provide you a standard answer
for it. And if in a group each member is not able to
build personal identity that is strong enough to sur-
vive in a highly labeling society, it becomes evident
that a group composed of virgin individuals who use
the standard idiot labels for identifying themselves,
cannot as a group have a common tenor for propa-
gating their worldview, let alone assume some sort of
social power.


To begin building autonomy you must begin with
a No in many cases, and not with a Yes. This may be a
No to your parents when they perversely ask you to
stay living with them forever, or a No to society as a
whole when it attempts to interfere in your under-
standing of yourself.

You may take a retreat, stop watching television
for a certain time or go on a backpacking tour to In-
dia, whatever, but you have to begin defining your
own values, your own expectations for your life be-
cause you, and only you, are the author and the
owner of your life. When you say ‘I am a homosexual’
or ‘I am a pedophile,’ you refuse to assume this re-
sponsibility for your life and you discharge it upon so-
ciety, the group. That is, then, why the meta-group
has so much power over you, to a point to crush you.

The Ego Matter
There are people who haven’t got a fully functional
ego and who therefore need to build their ego, build
their self. I know that this sounds in apparent contra-
diction to spiritual teachings, especially those from


India, but this appearance is based upon a psycho-
logical misconception.

All spiritual teachings start from a premise to deal
with people who got a strongly built ego, and even
people who have got a hypertrophied ego, an ego
that is predominant and that is in the way of feeling in
toward the other, in the way of building true compas-

While this is not a problem for me and those like
me, because we are abundantly compassionate,
namely to a point to give up on ourselves at the
slightest occasion and put forward the point of ‘you
first.’ And in this respect we are surely a minority be-
cause most people worldwide live from a base para-
digm of ‘me first!’ This is why all those spiritual teach-
ings that admonish to do away with ego, or with self,
are written and elaborated for them, not for us.

In my activity of prisoner care I have once worked
with a Lebanese Shiite terrorist who shot a Frenchman
while hijacking an airplane. He was caught and got a
lifelong sentence, a man of only twenty-two years.


And after some sessions that served for warming
up and mutual trustbuilding, he began to talk about
himself and his former life. I was kind of astonished
because he already then added that interesting adjec-
tive, ‘former,’ in his conversations which showed me
that somehow he must have drawn a line to his previ-
ous terrorist activities.

The unusual thing about this man was that he
really had taken the Koran serious and after tedious
study over several months that was assisted by the
Imam, he did something very uncanny. He sent the
Imam out and asked for the Catholic priest to come.
And he told him that he had a few questions about
Christian religion.

As their dealings were completely confidential I do
not know what they were talking about, but fact is that
about six months later this young man was baptized a

And before that happened, and while he and me
were talking about his crime, he said that he was tor-
mented by the fact that he had killed another human.
He told me his whole life story, how still as a young
boy he was taught to handle a gun and sent to war.


He was fourteen years old when that happened.
And as he was so clumsy with handling the gun, he
said, and because he really did not want to harm an-
other, he was rather quickly taken by Israeli soldiers
and put in a concentration camp where he was ruth-
lessly and cruelly tortured.

I mean the man suffered that when he was still a
child. And it was during that treatment that he had
sworn lifelong revenge to Israel and all the countries
and all its supporters, among them the United States
and France.

—But, he added, now I see that I acted wrongly,
emotionally, without control, totally under the spell of
that experience that I was subjected to as a young
soldier, extrapolating it and generalizing it, and as a
result of that I killed a human being who had nothing
to do with that. And acting that way, I have also acted
contrary to the rules taught to us in our scriptures, the
Koran. And as the Imam did not want to admit that
and told me repeatedly that I was misunderstanding
the Koran and that in reality I had acted righteously
and for the good of the Islamic cause, I thought that
the Imam had a rather political, not a religious, if not a


fanatic view of the world, while I, as he added humbly,
tried to see things as they really are.

I was humbled. This young man filled me with
deep respect and awe—and not only me. He, who
had been the national monster in that country for
quite some time, dumbfounded and surprised the
general public to an extent I have never seen in any
other crime story. And I am pretty sure that to this day,
twenty years after these events, this man is free and in
full control of his life.

This story is beautiful because it teaches so evi-
dently that the human being, whatever happened,
and whatever we have done, is profoundly harmed by
harming another, deeply punished and relegated to a
state of suffering by the mere effect of karma, and
without applying any kind of moralistic rule to regu-
late life and human conduct.

Karma simply means cause-and-effect. It’s a spiri-
tual law that makes that we experience exactly what
we do to another, negatively and positively.

In having shot that man, and having done away
with all artificial justifications and political cover-ups of


a clearly intentional murder, the young Shiite prisoner
was simply entering in communion with his inner
spirit, with the universal mind in him, and that univer-
sal mind communicated to him the truth—the truth
that he had inflicted great suffering upon himself and
others by having done what he did. And because he
was truly religious and did not just fake something to
get away with a lesser punishment, he inquired into
his conduct and found the causes for it, but without
taking these causes for justifying what he had done.

And that was the way the man really experienced
inner freedom, and in this sense, he really understood
the sense of Christianity in its original meaning: you
are cleansed and forgiven when you see, with all your
senses and your soul, that you have done wrong, and
you admit it to yourself and your inner god, and you
repent it and feel that you are free of it. Then you are
free of it!

Now, if we humans, contrary to what most relig-
ions tell us, are basically good and decent people,
then let us see what is right and wrong in that doc-
trine that says that man became perverted because of
his ego.


Let us first see what these religious teachings
mean by ego, or by self?

These teachings basically affirm that while man has
a soul and a spiritual destiny, as well as inner guidance
through what they call higher self, there is a controller
instance built into that originally functional setup, and
that controller instance, they called the ego, or the
self. And that controller instance, they say, is artificially
built, a remnant of memories of the past, a matter of
conditioning, and as such not real, but an illusion.

I know that this sounds confusing, so let me in-
quire more deeply how all this is set in each other.
While religious teachings sometimes say simple
things in a complicated way, thus confusing us more
than enlightening us, the Indian sage J. Krishnamurti
(1895-1986) has given a clear definition of the egoic
self. He said that the ego simply is the total content of
thought and as such, the past. And that logically so,
when you want to live in reality, which is the present,
you must become free of the past. The ego, then, is,
as a total condensed version of our past and condi-
tioning, an instance that is at odds with reality.


Let us check if this is true and what it possibly
means for us. If the ego simply is the past, why do we
need it, and why do most of us stick to it?

If the ego simply is synonymous with the memory
matrix, why can’t we just forget the past, and begin
our life every day anew, to feel newborn every morn-
ing, and to die every evening as a healthy spiritual

In fact, Krishnamurti expressed it exactly in saying
that the sage dies every evening and is reborn every
day anew, so as to live in the eternal present. But let


me ask, is that really doable? Or is it just another fic-
tion, another trick, another spell, another magic of the

The adjustment that I propose you to do is quite
the opposite of the adjustments that the world of
egoists offers to you.

What I am telling you is to adjust yourself to your-
self, to adjust yourself to your own universe instead of
continuing to fit in the universes setup by others who
just joyously indulge in their square miles of ego,
thereby rendering little you, who happened to come
across, with their habitual superior smile to nothing-
ness and oblivion.

But we are not made for swimming in the soup of
our egos, we are not made for indulging in our thou-
sand and one achievements, for that’s nothing ex-
traordinary after all, as we all have received extraordi-
nary gifts—only with the difference that some got the
chance that the whole world talks about them, and
others got the chance that the whole world persis-
tently ignores them. What is it that some people al-
ways seem to stand in the spotlight and others in the
shadow? The answer is simple. The first group pro-


mote themselves and I dare to add, do nothing else
in their lives but promoting themselves so that really
the world will notice them one day, sooner or later.

And the second group goes on admiring those
‘geniuses’ and ‘successes,’ endlessly trying to figure
why they themselves are constantly overlooked and
relegated to the second order of humans.

The result of all this is immeasurable human misery
and frustration, which in turn causes rampant suicide,
depressions, and psychosomatic illness worldwide.
What is the deeper reason for this?

The deeper reason for this is that while society
judges so-called ‘selfish ambitions’ as bad and de-
structive, it has done nothing to really fight egoism in
the form of unfettered indulgence in egocentric be-
havior. In the contrary, the world kisses the feet of
those who with a smile and a sorry put themselves
first, always, and everywhere, and for the detriment of
society as a whole! Because it’s doubtful if these peo-
ple, who are in leading positions all over the globe,
are really caring for the common good because they
are simply not used to think beyond the miles and
miles of ego that they have built around themselves


during childhoods and youths in which they were
adored, pampered, and privileged in all possible

I don’t say that they intently want to hurt another,
forbid! They are generally decent and well-disposed
humans, and they care for another in just the same
way as all humans care! They are not conscious of
their ego-drive, while we, their opponents, so to say,
are too conscious of our egos, to a point to be self-

You see that the English language sees it correctly
and fully corroborates, by common language, what I
am saying here. To be conscious of your self, of your
blown-up ego, is the best way to get that ego down
to reasonable limits, because when you are self-
conscious, you are careful, you are restrained, you are
anxious to be adjusted and adequate.

Why do you want to build your ego? Let us have a
look what the ego, this controller instance is com-
posed of that everybody today tends to make down
while at the same time indulging in it. We already said
it is thought, conditioning, the past. But is that all?
No. These are rather the lesser important elements.


The most important function of the ego is that it
ensures that we can cope with reality and survive in
that reality. It’s its survival function.

What is the most striking in that function is the fact
that it helps us to adjust to the expectations of others
around us, the group, the community, the family, and
generally to what we call human togetherness.

More precisely, the ego is an instance that tries to
put up a balance between our inner urges and de-
sires, on one hand, and the necessity of social peace,
on the other. It’s like an ambassador between your
universe and the universes of others. The ego’s main
function is to ensure that humans can be social, and
this is truly a natural function, a function that nature
has created for good reason.

And for this very reason the ego can’t be a patho-
logical phenomenon, or a cultural disease as it is con-
sidered by most religious teachers.

I have done once a numerological study of the
sages that with most emphasis speak up against the
ego and admonish us in their eloquent philippics to


give up our ego-centered behavior so as to strive for
the common good.

The result of that study was that those sages had
the strongest egos that one can even think of. It was
then obvious to me that they had created their teach-
ings for themselves and those who are like them,
people who consist of universes of ego. There is only
one among them, the Indian sage Sri Aurobindo
(1872-1950) who was honest enough to admit this fact.

Sri Aurobindo repeatedly says in his writings that
his spiritual teaching was addressed not to psychotics
but to sane people, people who possess, in his words,


a strong, structured and functional ego, and not peo-
ple who have problems with their ego. And very wist-
fully he elaborated further that the ego could not be
overcome if the ego was weak, but only when the ego
was strong, because something could switch polarity
only if it had strongly built the opposite polarity.

Implicitly, and perhaps not very agreeably so,
Aurobindo said thus that people like myself belong to
the realm of psychotics, that we have insufficiently
built egos and that for this very reason we are going
to do long to attain spirituality—well, this option, if we
take his words serious, is simply excluded for us … I
guess Aurobindo used a trick to justify his own blown-
up ego and the egos of his venerable colleagues in

It must feel great to be considered a second Jesus
or postmodern Messiahs. And yet, Krishnamurti re-
jected this role while he was chosen for it. Krishna-
murti did not ask me to throw my ego out of the win-
dow as so many gurus before him. He even refused to
be a guru.

And he said that all was fine with ego, with sex,
with human mediocrity and with all the rest of the


human soup. And that the problem begins where an
oligarchy that labels itself arrogantly spiritual or relig-
ious, because they wear long coats instead of suits,
have several servants and admonish every day so and
so many people for ‘immoral conduct’ and an ‘unspiri-
tual’ life got power over us—to a point to crush us.

And I say this because I truly believe that the black
coats have a thousand times more power over us than
the whole of the police state with its blown-up bull-
dog chest.

The black coats have the real power, while the
modern state after all fakes a power that it does not
posses. While today, admittedly, people from a rea-
sonably intelligent vintage don’t run in churches any-
more, they continue to run to gurus, travel to India
and chastise themselves for this or that sin, such as
smoking, drinking beer or eating sugar, which after all
is simply human.

Today they don’t run any longer to the black coats,
but instead to the white coats, the fat and wealthy
Babas who preach their doctrines of ego removal for
spiritual reasons, and with vital commercial after-


Let them be spiritual, I have nothing against it, and
I have nothing against them, but my ego, the bit that I
have got of it, they won’t get—to be sure!

The Beauty of Difference
To accept life means to accept yourself. It does
not mean that you have to blindly adopt the collec-
tively approved forms of living. As a matter of fact, the
more we identify with collective personality patterns,
the more we veil our original being. Thus, to accept
life means to affirm our difference!

It is our difference that singularizes us; in fact, it
renders us unique among our fellowmen.

When we are unique, recognizing and affirming
our natural difference, we live with grace and our life
will be fulfilled. Then we are authentic. However, as a
consequence of our alienating childhoods, many of us
are striving for some sort of lifelong fusion or pseudo-
symbiosis with others.

Of course, as a newborn, we ideally lived in natural
symbiosis with our mothers, and this symbiosis was
necessary as a prolonged gestation.


Fact is however that many today are still as adults
in need of symbiosis through identifying with parents,
friends, a group, an ideology, which then becomes
fusion, cofusion, secondary symbiosis, pseudo-

Please note that I use these terms synonymously in
my work and in this article. Besides the term cofusion,
I also coined the term symbiotoholics, when I talk, for
example, about symbiotoholic parents. In fact, when
you unveil symbiotoholism you can see that it has
quite many traits in common with alcoholism. And in
fact, many alcoholics are also symbiotoholics, as the
addiction to substances and the addiction to people
share a similar etiology.

Much has been written about codependence and I
will therefore limit myself in this guide to the essential
points, as my special focus from the start of my re-
search was not partner codependence, but parent-
child codependence.

While some of my explanations may sound dry
and theoretical, they have a very practical impact
once you actually work on these problems and see


how difficult it is to dissolve your pseudo-symbiotic
bonds in order to build true autonomy.

Fusion is born from our longing for returning to
the nest, the matrix, the pedigree. The search for fu-
sion is deeply rooted in our need for emotional secu-
rity. Being scared of making the difference, we remain
shallow, lacking necessary touch with the depth of our
being; then we try to imitate others.

My point is that we long for perpetual fusion be-
cause we have been largely deprived of the essential
natural symbiosis we needed as infants with our
mothers. That babies suffer from this deprivation in
our culture, while for example in tribal cultures the
problem is unknown, has been elucidated in recent
years by psychological, sociological and anthropo-
logical research. There is now abundant evidence that
violence in our culture is primarily the result of our in-
fants being deprived of emotional attention and tac-
tile pleasure, and our youth being deprived of auton-

As a result, our natural psychosexual growth proc-
esses are impaired. The consequence is a society of
narcissistic giant babies who are hopelessly trying to


be ‘good boys’ or ‘good girls’ for their parents, sib-
lings, mates, neighbors or society as a whole.

Our fragmented emotional, sexual and bioener-
getic setup brings along sexual perversions, violence,
cruelty, self-alienation and a high rate of emotional
instability as well as a noteworthy incidence of autism
or schizophrenia that both are wrongly qualified as
mental illnesses.

I do not talk here about pathological cases but
about a problem that, at an underlying level, we are
all dealing with in our culture, and this because it is a
social or cultural phenomenon in all dominator cul-
tures. In thirty years of research about this complex
subject, I found that building autonomy is strongly
enhanced through acquiring self-knowledge, clarity
about our individual needs and a firm sense of per-
sonal identity.

Self-knowledge comes from listening to self, rec-
ognizing our needs and communicating them to the
outside world. When we disrespect our needs, we will
also tend to disrespect the needs of others. Hence,
respect begins with self-respect. We will have our


autonomous place in the community once we are in-
dividuals in the sense of undivided beings.

We become individuals through autonomy. In
other words autonomy works counter to fragmenta-
tion and brings about personal integration and inner

Before this can happen, we have to face our sym-
biotic needs and render them conscious. This, in turn,
means to face our most basic fear, the fear of aban-
donment, of solitude, of being truly alone. If we wish
to attain our original unity, we cannot avoid facing this
fear; a phase of more or less extended solitude seems
often necessary in this development.

Three phases characterize our growing into
autonomy and true interdependence with others, fu-
sion, individuation, and integration. Let us now have a
look at this process and what we can learn from it.

Chapter Two

Fusion and Individuation

A symbol for the process of individuation is the
cell division. Out of one complete pattern a new
complete pattern splits off. This new complete pat-
tern is not a part of the former pattern, but a new
whole organism.

This is so because, as we know today, nature is
programmed in holograms. In each cell the informa-
tion of the whole organism is coded. Every particle in
every sub-unit contains the genetic code of the entire

The holistic coding of life-sustaining patterns
made it possible that very complex structures could
arise, primarily because even multiple cell divisions do
not cause loss of genetic information.

This picture from genetics should help us grasp
the process of individuation that is part of our grow-
ing mature. All springs from fusion and goes toward
separation, and at the same time from simplicity to-
ward complexity. In the genesis we hear that God
separated the waters; the popular ancient Chinese
myths tell us that heaven and earth, yang and yin,
grew apart so that all life could come to existence.

Biologically, cutting the umbilical cord puts an end
to the baby’s fusion with the mother. However, the
human baby, as distinct from the other mammals,
cannot yet survive. Fusion has to be prolonged by
means of a symbiotic relationship with the mother, or
a mother surrogate, if the infant is to develop their full
potential of psychomotor skills.

When this primary fusion, that should extent over
the first eighteen months of the infant, is inadequate,
be it because the mother was physically not present,
be it because she was not up to her task as a care-
taker, we face that the person, once grown up, tends
to long for pseudo-symbiotic relationships with oth-
ers. What this means is that we unconsciously try to
heal the lacking primary fusion by repeated pseudo-


symbiotic relationships. However, since those persons
that are invested with the role of ersatz mothers and
fathers can never give the missed primary fusion, dis-
appointment and depression will invariably ensue in
those relations. In fact, most of the modern psychiat-
ric literature speaks here of a narcissistic fixation or

Yet most people and even many psychologists
have a wrong idea about what narcissism is. Narcis-
sism is a pathological lack of self-love, an impossibility
for the subject to love herself, a giant inner wound
that parents or caretakers have inflicted on the child
by non-attentiveness, lacking interest in the child as a
person or outright child neglect.

It’s a vicious circle in the sense that codependence
is a family curse even more than an individual addic-
tion. One of the reasons for parents being inattentive
and preoccupied with self-serving interests is the on-
going codependence they, in turn, live with their own
parents and the resulting incapacity to truly take care
of a new life that wants to grow into proprietary
autonomy and power.


All creation is destined to be autonomous and car-
ries in itself the will to achieve autonomy as a primary
life goal. The desire for autonomy can already be
made out in the behavior of the infant. In the case
where parents respect that will, the child grows into
true individuation because autonomy opens naturally
the way to self-knowledge. 

If however parents and the environment disrespect
the child’s striving for autonomy, the child has only
two possibilities to survive: killing off their emotions or
distorting the perception of their emotions. The first
defense behavior leads, in the extreme case, to emo-
tional numbness, compulsion neurosis and cruelty, the
second leads, in the extreme case, to schizophrenia.

Furthermore, the first kind of reaction can later
additionally develop into the cancer etiology, the
second into uncommon or outright perverse forms of

Authoritarian upbringing frequently demands from
children affective prostitution, a submissive attitude
targeting at the parents’ goodwill. This is not sexual
prostitution, but one that plays on more subtle levels,
affective, emotional—and where power is involved. In


families where ugly power games between parents
and children are daily reality, affective prostitution is
always present with the children.

Children who can manage to live within a sphere
of autonomy will later easily choose their profession
or partnership, for they know what they want. This
sounds simplistic, but it is really as simple as that.
Those who know what they want have much greater
chances to get it. 

But—we only know what we want if we know who
we are! Children who are raised by fearful and over-
protective parents lack self-knowledge, and thus do
not know what they want in life. This is so because
they had little opportunity to incarnate their wishes
and to find out about their limits.

Fearful parents tend to project their own wishes
and desires on their children: only if the children fol-
low their ancestors’ path of life, those parents feel se-
cure. Instead of giving their children the opportunity
to find out about themselves, anxious parents want to
make sure their children know, respect and model
their, the parents’ ways of life, the parents’ wishes and


desires, the parent’s hardships and the parent’s char-

Sensitive children who are born to narcissistic par-
ents are not able to develop their uniqueness, hence
what Alice Miller (1923-2010) called ‘The Drama of the
Gifted Child,’ title of one of her best books.

Pseudo-symbiotic relationships are, to repeat it, a
prime obstacle for growing into autonomy. Because of
the dynamic interaction of the psychic energies in
play, codependence cannot be ended by mere physi-
cal separation, for example the son’s or the daughter’s
moving out of the parents’ house. 

As long as the self is not individuated, symbiotic
attachment persists on the psychic level.


Ending a pseudo-symbiotic relation then auto-
matically results in the search for a new symbiosis,
which replaces the former one—and so on. 

The reason for our high divorce rate is that we try
to stage our missed babyhood symbiosis in marriage
and project the parent of the opposite sex onto our
marriage partner—which effectively sabotages every
marriage sooner or later.

It is obvious that our desire for eternal symbiosis
with our children is still more devastating than eternal
symbiosis with a partner. Children, with their natural
striving for autonomy perceive symbiotoholic parents
as persecutory and overbearing. That is why children
tend to develop anxiety as a consequence of their
feeling inadequate in front of their parents or the
symbiotoholic parent.

Symbiotoholics is the true reason of incest. Even
when no sexual interaction between parent and child
is involved, children of symbiotoholic parents have
difficulties to project their libido outside of the magic
circle of their family. By the same token, if a child has
enough autonomy, occasional sex between parents
and children will not necessarily lead to a sexual pa-


thology. It will rather be a form of natural while per-
haps unconventional body touch, a highly tactile
bond between generations.

On the other hand, even if sex is not part of the
game, emotional incest in the form of an ongoing
rigid demand for symbiotic partnership from the side
of a parent, or both parents, will be perceived by the
child as a real bother, and will in the long run handi-
cap their ability to stand on their own feet and be
recognized as what they are.

Leaving Paradise
Metaphorically, we can compare symbiosis with
paradise. Adam and Eve had to leave paradise. Why? 

They had to leave paradise for developing their
individuality, their autonomy. 

Paradises, strangely so, are no different from other
things in that they, too, have a shadow: positively, they
give us the almost complete illusion of security and
satisfy all possible desires. But negatively, they are
true prisons. The tree of knowledge was forbidden in
paradise to Adam and Eve—and we must add, even
in paradise! Or, more clearly put, it was forbidden to


them because they lived in paradise. To live with their
full potential, Adam and Eve had to follow the wis-
dom of the serpent. Eating the apple, they knew each
other as man and woman: they got to know about
their sexual identity.

It was also their discovery of sexuality since the Bi-
ble uses the old expression to ‘know another’ for sex-
ual intercourse. Through the fact of knowing the
other, recognizing the sexual identity of the partner,
we get information about our own sexual identity. This
is an important truth: love leads to self-knowledge
and is a part of our emotional growth process.

Without loving others, and I dare to specify, mak-
ing love with others, we will hardly get to know our-
selves. Through love we grow, we mature. 

Leaving paradise is exactly this, leaving the child-
hood of dependency implying a self-centered, narcis-
sistic way of being and behaving, and opening up to
true relationship where every partner is a whole
autonomous being. Love means relating and taking
responsibility for one’s love choices. All sentient be-
ings have to leave the nest of paradise. The fetus, de-
cided he to stay in the womb to avoid the trauma of


birth, would die right there! Adam and Eve, leaving
paradise, survived! Their leaving paradise was a birth,
a birth to life on earth, life in a body of flesh, created
by desire, an incarnated life.

The family tree and the phylogenetic tree both
symbolize the nest, the matrix. They are the symbols
for the hereditary roots of the person. But they are
also prisons and graves for the individual. 

This truth is pointed out in many religious scrip-
tures and Ramana Maharshi (1879-1950) expresses it
in the formula that we have to go beyond the confu-
sion that we are the body, that we should set aside
our unconscious or conscious identification with the


 Once we have found that we are spiritual beings,
sparkles of light in a universe of light or planets or
stars, as the natives say, we understand that the family
is only the nest and as such a kind of springboard
which should catapult us into life, into our own life.

The Affective Confusion
Taking dependency and people addiction for love
parallels the confusion between need and desire. Co-
fusion and confusion are not for nothing sounding so
similar; it’s obvious that both have to do with fusion.
Fusion means to melt something with something else,
to put two things in one pot.

Modern civilization with its inherent loss of initia-
tion rites, has created confusion and, with it,
cofusion. We are confused about our being fused.

Children are held immature for longer and longer
periods in a kind of extended childhood, as some-
what irresponsible and slavishly dependent beings
without autonomy and self-reliance. Most therapies
today are concerned with the basic problem that
masses of people never grow out of their original
symbiosis or that, rather in the contrary, they are de-


prived of it during babyhood and try to search for a
compensation in adulthood, clinging desperately to
their partners, parents or children.

In our high-tech cultures we can observe how eas-
ily people confuse pseudo-symbiosis with love, taking
the ersatz or compensation for the real.

Sometimes attempts of sensitive and intelligent
children for personal autonomy are punished and
harshly met with love-withdrawal or with threat. Some
parents react hysterically in the face of their children’s
natural demand of freedom because they themselves
never discovered their own essential life space and
live entangled in a network of dependencies, insecure
and immature.

Their children’s natural thirst for freedom and
autonomy is misunderstood as a lack of love for their
parents or family, and as such being perceived as a
threat. Truly, their children’s leaving the nest can be
deeply traumatic for parents who have these symbio-
toholic tendencies.

This is a real trauma and can produce all forms of
psychic and physical illness; it has for example been


discovered in alternative cancer therapy as one possi-
ble etiology of the cancer process, which is a disease
that starts years and years before the actual somatiza-
tion is visible to the physician in the form of a tumor
or else an alteration in the composition of the blood.

However, in popular culture rampant people ad-
diction is not perceived as pathological; it is even be-
littled in the psychological literature and specialized
media; else the problem exists outside the family, in
the partnership as well, while my own research spe-
cialized in parent-child codependence.

A long-lasting marriage or partnership may sud-
denly break off because one partner expresses a need
for autonomy that the other depreciates and misun-
derstands as a malevolent sabotaging of love and the
intimate bond. A fear to be abandoned, relict of some
or the other traumatic separation from the mother or
a parent during childhood, may become reactivated
in the partner who feels left alone and betrayed
whereas the other partner simply wanted to establish
a basis for creative space within the partnership.

This process, when it is lived consciously and un-
derstood as mourning, proves very positive for the


evolution of the concerned person, also with regard
to their future love capacity and creativity. After such
mourning, life will be lived fuller, with more energy,
more empathy, more completeness and more enthu-
siasm, on a higher level of happiness and integration.

However, if such an awareness building is re-
pressed, perhaps because the fears involved are too
disturbing or therapeutic help or counseling is not
available, the person will end one fusion in order to
search for another, as a compensation of the former,
which in turn will be but another sprocket in the chain
of compensations for the first lacking primary symbio-

Any such relationship cannot last because it is
based on an illusion.

Fusion and Autonomy
The end of fusion is the beginning of autonomy. In
fusion the self is hindered in its expression. It is not
autonomous since it defines itself ‘with relation to’—
namely the symbiotic partner. 

This is like a stone thrown in a pond which creates
waves only in the pond but not in the one who throws


the stone. To consider this mechanism energetically,
we have an outflow or loss of bioenergy here in one of
the fusion partners. And with the other partner we
have a gain of energy. We can see it as a closed en-
ergy circle in which both fusion partners are bound. 

The realized, unfusioned self, however, vibrates in
itself and feeds itself; it is self-sufficient and therefore
available for all beings, like the sun, like a flower
whose beauty is real not only for the eye of the lover,
but for everybody who passes by; or like a fountain
that produces fresh water endlessly, without waiting
for someone coming by to drink it.

Here we can say that the person’s reservoir of bio-
energy is fully at the disposition of the self. Connec-
tion to our self means connectedness to all beings, to
the whole universe.

The paradox is that the ego, once detached from
symbiotic interference is open to receive full guidance
by the self and can thus subtly bond with a far greater
range of beings.

Therefore, we can conclude that autonomy is the
condition for true interdependence with others. More


we are detached from partial attachment, more we
are attached to what is not partial.

By the way, since times immemorial this truth was
known by religions. Especially in India religious sects
have developed and practiced a doctrine of detach-
ment as an essential part of a religious lifestyle. 

However, when detachment is sought after and
cultivated, it will rather turn into its contrary and be-
come attachment. Only in developing passive aware-
ness of our manifold attachments can we bring about

Affective confusion means that I am melting with
you; as long as we are melted, how can we exchange
affection? How can there be exchange at all if we are
glued to one another? How can we give and receive
in a condition where there is not even a minimum of
distance, a minimum of autonomy?

It is difficult to imagine a person giving something
to another when both persons are tied to each other.
We stretch out our arm to greet, to give, to receive;
naturally, this gesture requires a certain distance be-
tween the persons—the distance of an arm length.


The role of some people we meet in life is to help
us detaching from alienating fusion, so that we can
build true autonomy. These people who catalyze in us
our true desire or mission are healers, therapists or
wistful lay persons who help us get free through their
love and devotion, their unselfish understanding and

Often these people went themselves through the
problems involved in fusion and have therefore
sharpened their awareness. They then got to know
that true love is something different from pseudo-
symbiotic attachment to others and that love gives
freedom, not attachment.

Jealousy is a problem of fusion. If we believe we
can possess another person or that love contained
such kind of possession instinct, we confuse love with
fusion. Love can be seen as the highest form of re-
spect in front of the difference of the other. It is there-
fore incompatible with jealousy.

Yet, life is seldom pure and often love is to be
found in impure forms, melted with jealousy or even
hate, pseudosymbiotic desires, sexual desires of vari-
ous kinds, sexual desires melted with pseudosymbi-


otic desires, and so on. This is how we generally per-
ceive love around us.

There rarely are the extreme forms of pure love or
pure fusion.

Conceptually speaking, there are two develop-
mental models for transforming codependence into
autonomy and partnership love.

—A linear model would see the process as gradual
change of a set of parameters into a set of different
parameters, the direction being from fusion to auton-
omy, and not reversed;

—A nonlinear model would rather assume cyclic
fluctuations in relationships where the degree of fu-
sion, on one hand, and the degree of autonomy of
the partners, on the other, alternates continuously
within the relationship.

The scientific investigation of codependence
could follow either of these models which would re-
sult in quite different research results and conclusions.
The future will decide what kind of model is going to
prevail. My work being a maverick approach only


shows the options, and perhaps a rudimentary cata-
logue of possible solutions.

Every possible relationship, seen in its continuity,
could be evaluated using one of these two develop-
mental models. The first model considers codepend-
ence as a developmental transitory step towards love,
while the second model assumes codependence and
love being in a dialectic exchange with each other.

I will not develop these models further in this book
and come to a pragmatic question: which is the influ-
ence of love upon codependence? Is love enhancing
cofusion or is it fusion-solving?

Fusion and Love
In every love relation the partners, consciously or
not, move toward more self-knowledge, more auton-
omy, and less cofusion. To repeat it, cofusion is a lack
of autonomy because of lacking self-knowledge.

A child that is not mirrored by his parents does not
develop a sense of the I-Am force in him or her. De-
pending for survival on their parents’ love, the child
will substitute their own self-image with the image of
one of the parents.


Primary symbiosis is a psychosomatic process. It is
obligatory for the newborn’s first eighteen months of
life if the child is to develop healthily.

Yet a mother who has not resolved the cofusion
with her own parents will unconsciously project her
narcissistic dependency onto the relationship with her

This is how cofusion is perpetuated over genera-
tions. Such mothers evaluate every little sign of
autonomy in their children as some form of love de-
nial and react with fear, bewilderment and and some-
times even aggression to the child’s desire to move
from the family toward the world. Thus unconsciously
these mothers attempt to move the child back into
the womb.

There is abundant proof for these facts to be
found in psychotherapeutic practice, especially the
writings of Winnicott, Otto Rank, Melanie Klein, as
well as Françoise Dolto and Ronald David Laing—co-
founder of the antipsychiatry movement—regarding
schizophrenic children.


It is in this respect significant how the mother
feedbacks movements of the child which are directed
away from her. The baby carefully observes and regis-
ters the mother’s feedback. The mother gives signals
that the baby can interpret as ‘Yes, I find it good that
you are yourself and that you show it to me,’ or ‘No, I
do not appreciate your being different from me and
feel insecure when you show it to me,’ or even ‘No, I
would like you to remain a part of myself, as it was the
case before you were born.’ 

It is obvious that in the two latter alternatives
these nonverbal messages of the mother do not sup-
port the child to gain autonomy, but rather inhibit the
child’s healthy growing up. Perception problems that
in extreme circumstances can lead to schizophrenia
are then the result. The schizophrenic delusions signal
and demonstrate the inner conflict. In psychosis the
whole ego is overwhelmed by energies that have be-
come disintegrated.

In a less pathological sense many people in our
culture find it difficult to identify their own energy as
distinct from the energy of others. Yet we can learn to


feel our energy by becoming attentive to our inner

Love begins with ourselves! Once we begin to re-
spect our more-than-physical needs, we learn to dive
into our own energy field. It is a question of passive
observation, through meditation or introspection, to
become sensitive and conscious for perceiving our
own intrinsic energy pattern.

From our dreams we know how this energy feels
like. In dreams we notably meet no physical beings,
but their energy bodies. Sensing their energy pat-
terns, we identify others.

This can be tested easily when you have forgotten
a dream and want to remember it after waking up. If
you have a vague remembrance of the dream figure’s
energy pattern and relax and focus on it, you once of
a sudden remember the whole of the dream. It seems
that dream memories are associated with energy pat-
terns involved in our dreams.

The fact that we perceive others as patterns of
light or energy shows that originally creation gave us
a sense for such perception, and that we lost it in our


busy world and lifestyle. With little exercise however
you can relearn this special extrasensorial perception
and it can help you identify where you are with others.
In observing attentively your feelings and thought
processes and their impact on energy patterns, you
apply the principles of universal love in your life and
achieve gradually more autonomy and identity. This
passive observation must however encompass the
whole process of life.

Spirituality is exactly this attentive observation.
Observation and attention without judgment are the
highest forms of spirituality!

This attentive observation must include your sub-
conscious thought processes because thought is a
process that happens on several layers of conscious-
ness. You can observe your subconscious thought
processes also by carefully taking note of your
dreams. Finally, you can do it by consulting special
devices such as the Tarot or I Ching oracle book, or
else by using astrology, geomancy or other divinatory

Then your awareness of ominous, parallel, syn-
chronistic events raises and you begin to grasp the


concept of synchronicity that Carl Jung (1875-1961)
developed years ago.

Once you can interpret the little omens you per-
ceive in your daily life, the little hints sent by destiny
and that we use to call meaningful coincidences, you
begin to gain more insight in the holistic pattern that
is woven into life as a whole.

Such intensity of consciousness requires a high
energy level. It is conscious use of your élan vital, your
vital energies, that leads to the dissolution of your
symbiotoholic urges, which restores your original
uniqueness, your singularity and your wholeness.


You may call this energy ‘love’ or give it other
names. The names are not the thing as the finger that
points to the moon is not the moon.

Identity and Wholeness
There are different ways to gain wholeness. Some
people choose therapy, others prefer artwork, pho-
tography, musical performance, science or try to culti-
vate themselves through religious devotion. Still oth-
ers use modern techniques of self-development.

And quantum physics, interestingly, has in recent
years proven to be just another way of understanding
the metalogic of this universe, and it amply demon-
strates what I am saying.

It does not matter which way you go, which path
you choose. Ancient cultures and today’s still surviving
tribal cultures know about the deeper meaning of life.
The initiation rites most of those cultures practice are
powerful means to cut the fusional bonds with our
parents or the family so as to root us into a larger col-
lective structure such as the clan or the tribe.

Since in our high-tech nations initiation rites have
been abandoned, and we have only rather insignifi-


cant substitutions in the form of diplomas, driver’s li-
censes, academic degrees and so forth, we have to
find new ways to initiation. Psychoanalysis is one of
them, for example, but it often disregards the spiritual

Psychoanalysis describes the growth of the child’s
autonomy in terms of their psychosexual develop-
ment. The sexual development of the child, according
to mainstream psychology, proceeds in certain
phases, such as the oral, anal, genital, latency phase,
and finally adolescence.

Yet I wonder if analysis alone can reveal the mira-
cle of sexual identity? It appears to me that identity is
the fruit of integration, and not of analysis. Integration
results in a higher level of consciousness and it cannot
be pursued by using merely rational thought proc-
esses, such as aligning certain behavior patterns on
the timeline of a person’s life.

I mean that we have to integrate our emotions in
our thought processes, and this without confusing
thought and emotions, and without defense reactions
that hinder this integration. For example, machismo
and obsessive maleness or femaleness are such forms


of defense. It is the foolish reject of our anima (in
males) or animus (in females), of all what is yin in yang
and yang in yin, female in male, male in female, cold
in hot or hot in cold. It is the refusal of our Moon en-
ergy, the archetype of motherhood.

This fear of the matrix or the archetypal expression
of it has produced the atrocities of witchhunts in the
past and the present and is found in mythology in the
negative female archetypes of Lilith or Kali. This fear is
the fear of life and of death. It is a neurotic fear of life.
Directly related to the fear of life is the fear of sexual-
ity as we encounter it throughout the course of patri-
archal history.

Every therapy catalyzes a process of inner alchemy
so as to transform retrograde yin into a positive yang
charge. There are many different forms or techniques
of therapy, but all have in common that they try to
help guiding us back to oneness and unity.

There is in fact no contradiction between the psy-
choanalytic theory and the spiritual truths as far as
spiritual teachings recognize the possible harmony
between our spiritual origins and our instinctual urges
as a fact of life.


Most religions provide projection systems for our
inner processes which work with symbolic representa-
tions supporting us in the alchemy of inner and outer
transformation. This means that religions are integra-
tive systems designed to lead us to unity!

Also the so-called esoteric practices like astrology,
numerology, the Tarot or the I Ching can help us inte-
grate our unconscious thought processes and feelings
to guide us on the way to a higher level of conscious-
ness that we may call holistic or integrative.

The integration of all what is hidden or occult in
our psyche, and awareness of karmic or conditioning
factors in our various life cycles leads to something
like an integrated mindbody consciousness that goes
far beyond mere intellectual or physical knowledge.

You could call this state of enlightenment ‘fusion
with your own self.’

About Inner Peace
Inner peace is impossible without inner freedom.
Inner freedom in its highest form is the realization of
an autonomous self. Inner bondage, by contrast, in its
most damaging form, is the unconditional surrender


to a spiritual, ideological or sectarian system that de-
mands absolute obedience.

Such a system may be represented by an ideology,
religion, sect or fanatic guru. It can also be a feature
of your own unconscious self. As long as you have a
problem with that on the outside level, this is a signal
that you have some problem with it inside as well.

Inner freedom begins with finding out what you
really want, what, in the depth of your heart, you de-
sire to realize, and what is your life’s mission.

Self-knowledge is the door to inner freedom in
that it gives you the tools that lead you out of your
labyrinth of pseudosymbiosis.

Without knowing who you are you let yourself over
to being guided by others. Such entanglement in the
energies outside of the self leads, especially in the
spiritual realm, to a more or less complete alienation
from your own potential of light, riches and abun-

Self-knowledge opens the door to the treasures of
your own light and your own truth which is available
to all of us as spiritual beings. But this treasure is in


your heart and, with many of us, unfortunately too
well shielded and therefore buried there.

Self-knowledge, by contrast, is a continuous proc-
ess of self-exploration. It namely gradually unveils all
the secrets of your being and your individuality that
will remain untouched by collective religious

Self-knowledge leads to comprehending the rela-
tivity of truth and the incapacity of man to grasp an
absolute concept of truth. This limitation of the hu-
man existence is inherent in every truth. Therefore, on
the human level all that is objective becomes subjec-
tive, because subjectively related!

Inner peace is the fruit not only of the insight in
your understanding of truth but also consists of the
capacity to trust this insight. On the other hand, inner
peace is only possible when you consciously refuse to
convert others into your truth; it’s only possible if you
leave others the freedom to undertake their own ex-
ploration, their own journey into the ‘pathless land,’
as J. Krishnamurti called it, and engage in their own
treasure hunt. Missionarism definitely is not spiritual,
but related to the hunger for power.


The question that then arises and that has been
asked throughout the existence of humanity is if indi-
vidual truth can in some cases act contrary to the so-
cial framework. 

This is perhaps the key question that every collec-
tive or state government confronts us with. It seems
that, throughout human history, most governments
were suspicious of the realization of truth through
self-knowledge or individual self-cultivation.

That is the true reason for humanity’s indulging in
mass indoctrination, mass education, mass religion,
mass manipulation—and mass obsession. Here we
see the primary reason why freedom and peace for
the individual has regularly been considered a threat
to totalitarian forms of government. And yet, it is ex-
actly this freedom to search for truth that is our hu-
man birthright as a spiritual being!

Inner peace can reign in you only from the mo-
ment you have replaced as it were the outer fusion by
the inner fusion which is fusion with your own self,
which makes that you are an individual (individus, lat.,


The problem of fusion is of paramount importance
not only in every form of spirituality, but also in a truly
responsible form of government.

Most religions try in some form to convey guide-
lines about how to achieve inner peace. The idea is
similar in all religious teachings. Islam and Christianity
consider inner peace as a direct consequence of be-
lief. It is doubtful, however, if inner peace will result
from mere belief, without a deeper understanding of
the psychological intricacies of life and living?

It seems that religions, instead of helping man un-
derstand his hidden nature, work with ideals, positive
pictures or models. However, ideals or models are al-
ways collective and disregard the individual, and indi-
vidual and unique wisdom of each and every human

Realizing Soul Power
A world with more freedom and tolerance is pos-
sible to the extent that we accept to be true individu-
als, undivided beings that are oriented toward the
whole of life; and to repeat it, this requires us to have
gained inner freedom and the will to preserve it. 


World peace depends on the fact that the group
of people who have reached this higher level of con-
sciousness steadily grows and helps not only shape a
new consciousness, but also helps building the outer
world in a new and different way. True liberation can-
not be reached by political, social or otherwise sensa-
tional breakdown of outer forms and structures.

All revolutions only lead to more chaos, more
bloodshed and suffering, more dominance, ignorance
and power abuse.

The only real change is a gradual, peaceful and
constant inner transformation of consciousness. We
are called upon to collaborate in this universal trans-
formation, which takes the form of individual trans-
formation going global. J. Krishnamurti has shown
with exemplary clarity the ultimate possibility and the
implications of such a psychological revolution!

However, spiritual evolution is not possible without
insight into our pseudosymbiotic bonds, our psycho-
logical striving back into the matrix. It must be ac-
companied by the gradual dissolution of our psycho-
logical umbilical cord that holds us entangled with the


To recapitulate, I start from the premise that power
is not an outside phenomenon, but originates in our
soul, as an inner vital drive projected outside in the
world. However, what we realize and identify as power
in the real world is not what it seems to be because
we often forget that power is first of all a projection of
the soul. What we see instead, are secondary powers.

Are they real powers? Perhaps on a merely worldly
level, but not on a cosmic, universal scale.

Soul power means to think and act in accordance
with cosmic laws and the state of consensus that the
universal spirit accords to our projects. This power, if
identified in the outside world, is not perceived as
power but as love. It is primary power our soul power.

Developing power in ourselves and others there-
fore is a process that acts from inside out. Power that
is built on the outside level without such inner con-
sensus is not power, but mere self-inflation. As such, it
is unstable and subject to decay.

Secondary powers typically are rigid, dominating
and unstable. Primary power, however, is flexible, re-
spectful and stable.


While most people foster a distorted understand-
ing of power and take it somehow for granted that
power is ‘abusive,’ those who are truly and positively
successful know that there is no way to high achieve-
ment without having healed and integrated one’s
natural quest for power.

Understanding and integrating soul power taken
as an inner asset is essential for triggering growth and
the development of our intrinsic soul qualities and
outstanding human abilities.

For most of us power is associated with worldly
riches, personal and social standing, some special
privilege, command over life and subordinates, and
all the rest of it.

There are gurus who reject worldly power while at
the same time exerting a much greater power over
their followers than the worldly approach would allow.

Such opinions are not only not true, they are not
only not spiritual, but they show how power is per-
ceived by most people, namely as a strange, alienat-
ing and dominating force that we either reject or ea-
gerly want to acquire. That is exactly why most people


live in an almost paranoid contradiction; while they
reject power, they are not aware that by so doing,
they reject their own soul power as well. Thus, they
throw out the baby with the bathwater.

And while they want to acquire outside power by
all means, they are not aware of the power they pos-
sess inside and which, striving for mere outside
power, they smash by non-attention. Unfortunately,
the result of this situation is that both the power-
rejecters and the power-seekers are blind to the ne-
cessity and the value of power!

The distorted image of their own power potential
makes them split the human race into the ‘oppressed’
or power-rejecters, on one hand, and the ‘oppressors’
or the power-seekers, on the other. They tend to ar-
gue that in life there is only one essential choice to be
made: to choose if you want to situate yourself
among the oppressed, or losers, rather than switching
to the side of the oppressors, or winners. Many peo-
ple unconsciously harbor this kind of inner program,
that is written in the language of either-or options. If I
do not want to be poor, I have to become rich. If I do


not want to be among the losers, I have to go for be-
coming a winner. And so on.

The blind spot of these philosophies is that they
exclude the tertium, the third alternative. In general,
when analyzing people with either-or philosophies,
you will see that they are torn up by fears, that they
are rather defensive and that their self-esteem is quite
low. If somebody else, a friend for example, tries to
put the finger on the wound and tells them about
their bias, they react either with aggression or call the
friend naive, or else jovially point out that ‘unfortu-
nately the world is essentially bad’ or ‘people are es-
sentially bad’ and that one had to ‘make sure to find a
place in the sun,’ cost it what it costs.

Now, if you see this clearly, you can approach the
problem from a psychological point of view. This al-
lows you to gain insight in the human nature by dis-
carding out quick judgments about what we think or
believe human beings are like. For truly, that kind of
general judgments are conditioned by our past expe-
riences and hurts. They are highly subjective.

True knowledge about the human nature is not
abstract and hardly to be gathered other than by pas-


sive self-observation. When you observe the phe-
nomenon of power or what you think it is, both at the
outside and inside level, you see that there is some-
thing you could identify as soul power, and something
you could call worldly power. Worldly power always is
a projection, while soul power is the true power.

What does this mean in detail? Let’s go slowly into
this, because it is a rather complex matter. The dan-
ger in this kind of analysis is to jump to conclusions
that are conditioned by the past, and by our habitual
and cherished convictions and ideas. To approach the
problem with a fresh mind means that we try to
change our point of departure; it is like changing the
observer, to use the terminology of quantum physics.

This implies that we look inside of ourselves to see
what power really is or how we usually perceive it. If I
do this now, supposing that you do it with me, what
do I see? I see that with all that I want, with all my de-
sire for fulfillment, for accomplishment, for recogni-
tion, for outside riches, I want essentially three things:

—Live my life without fear;

—Live in peace with the world;


—Realize love and happiness in my relationships.

When I see now that this is what I really want, what
then? Would I not inquire why I experience fear at all?
And would I not be astonished why I want to live in
peace? Peace—what for? I can’t buy anything for that.
And why should I realize love and happiness in my re-
lationships? What value has that?

Once I have the position that gives me power,
once I have the partner that really fulfills me, once I
have the car I ever dreamt of and the house that gives
me enough space and freedom to feel at home—
would I not feel satisfied and happy? Why should I
question this strange concept of power at all?

Of course, you can refuse looking at it. You are
free to do so. But once in a while, these questions
tend to come up anyway, if you wish or not, and a felt
sense of what you really desire comes up as well. And
then you are puzzled, because you wonder why you
should desire such commonplace childish things as
‘peace’ or ‘happiness’ in a world that you think has no
place for that.


When you look again, you may stop a moment
and see that the world hardly can have a place for
that, if you individually do not give it a place. The
world is at peace. The only creation that is not is the
human being. Agreed?

What you get to see in our media world is disem-
powering for the most part. I even go as far as saying
that you, in your role as a passive media and informa-
tion consumer, are per se disempowered! And as long
as you are disempowered, your perception of power
is distorted.

If you look with this distorted concept inside of
you, you see yourself through thick glasses, because
your perception is conditioned.

Most of us have been conditioned from early
childhood in the absurd belief that soul power is
negative, dangerous, abusive, conflicting, inhuman,
diabolic, perverting, unnatural and so forth. We were
told that there was a ‘Great Savior’ who came like a
sheep, held his cheek to his enemies to be beaten on
it and then agreed to be slaughtered like an animal,
and nailed to a cross. When we, with the impetuous
innocence of adolescents, replied that this man must


have been mad or had an unresolved masochistic
fixation, we were told that we were blasphemous and
sent out of the religion class.

This man, we were told, was Gee-Oh-Dee.

So what? What were we going to be, then? We did
not want to be slaughtered or hung on a cross and we
had no intention to hold the cheek to our enemi-
es—or teachers, to be beaten on it. So we had no
choice than believing as children that power must be
something diabolic!


This teaching is the core of the Christian dogma,
and it’s perverse, to be true! To educate young boys
in the belief that one had to be ‘submissive’ and only
think ‘pure thoughts’ is perverse, for it stiffens and suf-
focates the élan vital, it is abusive education, whatever
it is officially called, whatever ‘holy’ name it is given,
whatever religious or ideological dogma it is associ-
ated with!

And, then, the teachers, the parents, the grown-
ups, did they not have power? They were not behav-
ing like sheep, but rather like fools, contradicted each
other almost daily, were utterly inconsistent in their
actions, were brutal and abusive, forced us most of
the time to do things we did not want to do; they
were in no way respecting us in the first place.

So, honestly, how could we ever believe them
what they had written in their ‘holy’ black book? How
could we trust these adults who were not adult at all,
those teachers who did not walk their talk?

There was a bug in their compassion!

And what about our power? It had become a cari-
cature, as the freedom to secretly masturbate on the


toilet, or get some amusement with another little boy-
friend and sharing the secret, having sex in dirty
places. Yes it was that. If I look at it now, I find it either
ugly, grotesque, or I smile about it, but then invariably
conclude ‘Yes, that was our power, the only we had,
the only that was left for us within the utterly disem-
powering education they inflicted upon us.’

They did not care about how we could develop
our soul power in life, how we could make it in a world
where power is a social game, especially among men,
how we could handle this incredible potential that we
all have got, constructively and for the common good,
in this world. They did not care. They made war in-
stead, war with themselves, inside of themselves, and
in the outside world.

And all their authorities were unendingly busy
amassing money and justifying the mess they create
and always created, in a course of ongoing madness,
since five thousand years—are you aware of it?

Genocide, pollution, destruction, environment
disasters, children raped by soldiers and killed by na-
palm bombs, and so on—their daily news!


This was the way our identity, and our sense of
personal power was conditioned, was distorted,
veiled, messed up, and polluted.

While of course, everyone perceived that in a dif-
ferent way, there are common perceptions and many
parallels in the life stories of one and the same gen-
eration. For many thousands of my generation, which
is what is commonly called the hippie generation, sex
was considered a necessary outlet for developing a
sense of personal freedom, a deep feeling of togeth-
erness with others and somehow a gateway toward
real love— whatever that is.

We wondered what that was, real love, when we
were youngsters. It was a quite nebulous concept of a
stable fulfilled relation with a girl, and it had to be
with a girl and not with another boy, a relationship in
which there was love and tenderness, not just sex, re-
spect rather than cunning calculation, and a feeling of

Yet I have never seen, nor one of my comrades at
the time, that this kind of love relation really took
place anywhere. It was more something like the Holy
Grail, an ideal, a mental concept. And in our lives, it


did not realize, in our marriages, it did not happen,
and after we divorced, it did not happen either. Today
I know why it could not happen. It was an illusion, an
ideal, a nice dream.

For me personally, it happened after I took a dis-
tance to women and turned toward children, at the
time when the disaster of my marriage was no more a
secret between my wife and me. Then, it really did
happen, which signaled me clearly enough that I am
loving children, and furthermore, that real love exists,
and is not just an illusion. But real love is not conven-
tional, and it is, as Krishnamurti said before me, never

The Power Quest
Others realized other obsessions, for their power
quest is if a different kind. Observing this when I was
young, I really split the human race off into two dis-
tinct groups, the ones who long for soul power, asso-
ciated with the counterculture and the hippie genera-
tion; and the ones who long for social or material
power, associated with the establishment and the
older generation.


In my young adolescent thinking soul power was
associated with a secure sense of identity, with love,
and also sexual love, with sharing, giving and receiv-
ing, including the possibility to know others and one-
self through the physical embrace. I thought from
early in life that sex possesses a spiritual and poetic

Social or material power was associated with ac-
quiring or, to say it in Erich Fromm’s terms, with hav-
ing rather than being.

I identified soul power being on the level of To Be,
while social or material powers were on the level of To
Have. I concluded that materialistic modern global
society with its denial to raise us in accordance with
our soul continuum was essentially perverting us with
its sordid hypocrisy that is the shadow of its sunny,
joyful capitalism.

At age fourteen I was reading Plato, Hegel, Hei-
degger and Fromm, beginning to develop a literary
passion for Russian writers as well as Thomas Mann
and Hermann Hesse, yet based my conclusions
largely on observation and on trial-and-error. I was
well admiring Hesse’s writings but never took them for


granted—because I realized some major perceptional
errors related to his very obvious narcissistic hangup.

And my awakening took off when, at age eight-
een, I was starting to read the whole of Freud, Jung
and Reich.

Today I see more generally the importance of rec-
ognizing the quest for soul power in every human be-


ing, and to focus on diagnosing the manifold power
distortions most of us are torn up in, and which inhibit
the realization of our true and original potential.

This is the main reason I gave up a promising ca-
reer as an international lawyer and government func-
tionary after finalizing my law doctorate and devel-
oped a deep commitment for developing the human
potential, and the development of genuine creativity
that assists us in realizing our soul power and destiny.

Later, in my work with problem children I found
that their original quest for soul power is typically and
symptomatically negated by our societal environment
so that their power becomes twisted into nonsensical
or dangerous behavior, or else depression, which
equates fear of action.

Years later, to be true, working with adults in
groups, I saw that the problems adults have are es-
sentially the same problem children are confronted
with: it is the late or long overdue quest for realizing
their soul power for ultimately receiving recognition,
esteem and material fruits in everyday life.


The power quest is not something bad or non-
spiritual. In the contrary, power is an intrinsic part of

Without power there cannot be goodness!

In human history, all disasters that man has pro-
duced are the result of disempowering feelings, of
powerlessness, not of soul power.

Feelings of power create goodness; feelings of
disempowerment create emotional turmoil, chaos,
violence and cruelty.

To run for spiritual progress without having re-
gained your lost power only results in an endless and
frustrating nirvana search and eventually ends in con-

Spirituality begins with soul power, the power to
be yourself, integrated, to be whole, to be I-AM. To
Be. Many people do not see that and do not want to
do the tiring work associated with the quest for soul

Therefore they create dependency with those in
power, be it worldly power or the power of those who


dominate others with their arrogant spirituality that is
not spiritual at all. They think it was a sign of humility
to bow in front of those who exert power over them.

They confuse humility with a kind of cultured and
polite masochism that never learnt to contradict.

They can’t hold conflicting conversations or ex-
changes in a self-secured and constructive manner.
They surrender or they revolt, and this because
authoritarian thinking has distorted and dulled their
mind and their willpower, not because they were more
subjected to it than others, but because they allowed
it to happen. If we refuse, deep down in our eternal
self, to not being touched by any form of dominance,
we won’t be touched, and our soul power will remain

Inside-Out Power
While my previous explanations were actually
more concerned with what is not true power, we may
now want to look at what soul power really is about.

I think it is not too far-fetched to talk about inside
power and outside power. Under outside power I un-
derstand all we habitually and somehow indiscrimi-


nately associate with power, that is, the social stand-
ing, the big car, the large bank account, the yearly
promotion, titles and honors. These are powers, too;
however, some of the outside powers are the fruit of
our inside power, and some not.

Now, observing this in your daily life, you can turn
the question around and ask yourself ‘Well, do I have
power because I have all that, or was it because I have
power that I attracted all that? Do I gain inner power
through outside power, or is my inner power the
originator of all my outside powers?’

I think the second alternative is true. Let us find
out why. We all know examples of people who gained
fortunes almost overnight, and even those who do
this on a regular basis. We also know examples of
people who lost fortunes overnight by negligence or
because they had not learnt the wisdom that money is
an energy that stagnates if it is not in flow within the
human community.

If I win much from others, but do not give anything
back to others, not forcibly to the same people who
made me earn it, but still—my money flow will stag-
nate, and my soul development as well.


You also know people who never seem to get into
the positive spiral, and you know others who became
phenomenal successes.

The principles of success are spiritual principles.
They follow universal laws such as the law of vision,
the law of praise, the law of magnetic attraction or the
law of faith.

Most people live second hand lives: they imitate
others, they try to copy others that they idealize, and
they want to become someone they are not.

What I mean is that copying and becoming are not
the ways of Being, but obviously ways of Becoming.

Success comes from being, not from becoming. I
want to convey a deep experience of my life, an expe-
rience that was not gained in one day, but in more
than forty years and that was hurting at times, that
was deeply uncomfortable because I resisted.

It is the experience of self-acceptance. It is the ca-
pacity to see your reality as it is, without moving,
without distracting yourself, without running away
from it. Once you see who you really are, you can also
see that you are a creature subject to continuous


change. Then, and only then, you can open yourself
to the new reality that you may want to create for
yourself, and you can project yourself into this reality
by means of visions, prayers, power work and actions.

But if you refuse to acknowledge who you are, at
the very first moment of your new journey, you run the
risk to lose yourself on the way. Or you may get on the
track of complying with an ideal to live up to, instead
of simply living your life.

Most people try to realize their secondary power
by achieving social standing, recognition, financial se-
curity or social safety, academic honors, prestige or
lots of money as a standalone exercise. They may be
very busy doing that, very tough, very professional. I
do not say that they have no success, but I dare to say
that they cannot have ultimate, sustainable and re-
sounding success if they do not make the first step
first and realize their soul power!

This step begins with accepting yourself uncondi-
tionally, putting aside all mental or moral concepts, all
rules of education and upbringing, all what you have
absorbed from outside your center.


The Power Taboo
To develop this thought further, let me keep on
inquiring with you why most of us are blocked to real-
ize soul power.

I go as far as saying that in Western culture soul
power is thwarted as early as in childhood. The child,
in our culture, is denied autonomy in origo by the so-
cietal denial of erotic love among children. Thus, the
child in our culture truly is deprived of one important
emanation of the power of love, the power namely to
relate to others on a basis of shared pleasure. What
do I mean?

Every human being is primarily driven by pleasure,
pleasure being a major principle of life and of survival.
Newest research shows that this principle exists not
only for humans and animals, but equally for plants
and even molecules. Certain electrons seem to spin in
a certain direction and then another because the pri-
mal consciousness contained in them is able to sense
pleasure and displeasure.

In all the Holy Scriptures of the world it is said that
the Creator received pleasure or joy from His Crea-


tion. Traditional education from ancient times was
more or less ignorant about this fact or else tried to
exploit and dominate humans by consciously thwart-
ing the primary pleasure in the growing human life.
And indeed, only thwarted and disempowered indi-
viduals can be subjected to abusive terror regimes
where they murder and despise their own species!

In our culture soul power became a taboo,
whereas collective secondary power is praised and
worshipped. It is this patriarchal power taboo that still
haunts, disabling people from being whole and pow-
erful and contribute to humanity from within their
pleasure continuum!

What all therapies and coaching methods basically
try to achieve is to help the client develop a new and
strong pleasure of living! Without pleasure in living,
there can’t be success, there can’t be personal cha-
risma, there can’t be energy, and there can’t be
goodness. As long as the power taboo hangs like a
Damocles sword over our heads, we are stuck in what
some call karma, others call sin, and still others call


The greatest sin, logically then, is to deny soul
power, for soul power is the essence of our abilities,
the energized potential of our drives, our talents, our
genius. It is our true inner virtue. Yet in the lives of
most of us, this innate or primary power has been
thwarted during our childhood by an education that is
both ignorant and violent. Or this power has been suf-
focated by symbiotoholic parents who are stuck in
dependency or possessiveness, and who therefore
resist the repeated attempts of their children to gain
autonomy. Perversions, violence and abuse of all
kinds are the outflow of this single unresolved power
complex in parents and educators.

How then, in a society where the concept of power
itself is more or less outlandish, can the youth em-
brace their soul power without being trapped in the
awkward association of power with abuse?

We can experience the positive values of power
only if we are free to use our power, including our
sexual powers. If we can’t, our mental and physical
health will suffer from it; we will build a basically
schizoid attitude of either overpowering others or be-
ing overpowered by others, and thus will contribute


to uphold the eternal perpetrator-victim syndrome.
This is exactly what happens in our present ‘civilized’
societies. It is the result of the power-taboo for the
youth that is imposed by an ignorant, hypocrite and
manipulative majority that only cares for material gain
and that rejects the soul nature of all living.

When we face the problem honestly, doing re-
search on the roots of abuse, or gaining answers
through meditation or introspection, we will see that
the power taboo is a kind of magic spell. It is only a
problem for the one who believes in the magic, not
the one who defies and resists collective hypnosis.

To gain this freedom, it is needed to see that soci-
ety, imposing the power taboo on our youth, acts
abusively towards our offspring! Parents who thwart
their children’s power are abusive parents.

To see it means to be free from it. The power of
manipulation always ends with information! If you go
to a saint, a healer, minister or psychotherapist, you
will be asked why you came? When you say you came
because your power has been withdrawn from you or
that you do not own yourself, you will invariably get to
hear that this is an illusion.


You will be told that you own yourself always and
that you own your power, and that it is delusive to
think somebody, be it your parent or another person,
or society, could ever take it away from you.

In other words, thwarted power is thwarted only as
long as you believe it is thwarted. Once you destroy
this belief, you naturally feel that you own your power
and that there was not one moment you did not own

Autonomy vs. Child Neglect
Children who are not allowed to have free choice
relations, emotionally manipulated as they are from
their earliest days, will largely be unable to build a
manifest identity.

The main element, namely, that is the key for
building such an identity is autonomy. Without auton-
omy and a certain level of self-reliance, no manifest
identity can be built.

I have talked about child sexuality and how its
prohibition prevents the child from building a sexual
identity. But I would be reductionist if I’d be saying in
my books that non-coercive, pleasurable and early sex


was the only requirement to be met for growing into
real maturity, and a real identity.

More is required, and I’d say that prior to positive
sensual experiences, what is even more decisive for
children to grow into nonviolent humans is free
speech. Free speech is the starting point of culture,
which is why I am saying ‘culture is language.’

This is most often overlooked by modernist
authors and psychologists who stress the importance
of child sexuality. I am really the last one to contradict
them here, but it’s simply not all there is in life, and
prior to wanting sex, we want to be respected as be-
ings of culture, beings who come with an inborn thirst
to communicate!

Communication is so basic and so encompassing
that I can safely say that sex is just one form of it, a
nonverbal and randomly verbal form of communicat-
ing love and erotic attraction by means of two bodies
fondling, stroking, caressing, and interpenetrating in
various ways.

When parents let their children have sexual rela-
tions, as it is often the case in worker families, but at


the same time harshly prohibit children from talking
true language, forcing them to ‘shut up’ or to lie, or to
keep their sexual experiences secret, then those chil-
dren do not have a real benefit.

I have seen this myself as a child in a low-class
worker family where the father was drunk most of the
time and shouted at his children worse than a farmer
would shout at his dog. The children had sex often in
the staircase with neighbor children and I saw that as
a little boy and felt very jealous for it, because I myself
grew up very ‘protected,’ but one day the father in-
vited me to come upstairs, and I saw how he treated
his children. I was so shocked that I never went back

These children were forced to live two different
lives, one life when they were alone, with other chil-
dren, where they were rude, aggressive and sexual,
and another life, when they were around their father,
where they were meek, silent, pale and obedient, hid-
ing their true identity.

And the father was not permissive regarding their
sex play, he was just neglecting his children, which is
quite a difference; he simply did not care and proba-


bly didn’t allow them to do it in their flat, but only in
secret, in the staircase.

If such sexual experiences are positive for children,
I doubt it, which is why I am saying, parental permis-
siveness must be embedded in a democratic respect-
ful setting, where children are treated as full humans,
not obedient little toddlers and assault receivers.

Generally put, educational permissiveness is by no
means to be confounded with child neglect; the first
is responsive and responsible caretaking, the latter is

Responsible parents, if they allow their children to
be sexual, will not push them out in the staircase for
‘having a quiet moment’ and let them have their little
affairs in a totally uncontrolled and perhaps chaotic
manner where about everything could possibly hap-
pen. They will care in one or the other subtle way for
their children having such experiences in an environ-
ment that, if it’s not spied out and controlled, pro-
vides as yet some basic safety.

While most sexologists and psychologists today
agree that a sexual identity is a prerequisite for build-


ing a manifest self-identity, I would like to stress that
autonomy is required for building both identities.

Autonomy is vital for all beings in growth, and
many young people, while having the freedom to
have their laptops, to have their cinema, and their
birthday parties and outings, even have their girl-
friends or boyfriends, still suffer from lacking auton-
omy when they are brought up with a built-in worry

They worry about being recognized as what they
are, they worry about telling their name, and try to
hide behind fashionable brand names, they worry to
show their true face, they worry about being rejected
in groups and groupings, which is why they constantly
search to be accepted.

The worry trigger is the codependent relation with
their parents who educate them with a basically fear-
ful attitude that doesn’t really embrace life but that
loves to talk about ‘us’ and ‘they.’

When children are raised by parents who suffer
from a basic mistrust in life and others, and their gov-


ernment, they tend to constantly talk about ‘they’ and
‘us,’ more actually about ‘they.’

These parents, themselves meek and lacking civil-
ian braveness, educate their children in a constant
fear something ‘could happen to them,’ which of
course duplicates their own fear and clones it by rais-
ing another generation of ‘worriers,’ Instead of raising
warriors, they raise worriers, who gather socially with
others for the sole reason to share their worries, and
by talking constantly about them; as a result, they ac-
tually attract much misfortune in life.

Such a fearful attitude toward life and other hu-
mans, while it’s generally not seen as a pattern that
has to do with autonomy, is in fact the result of over-
protectiveness in the form of ‘Oh my dear child, if
anything happened to you, I would not survive it.’

Love is free in the sense that it is not a texture
weaved with worries; true parental love doesn’t fear
the child to be endangered and harmed at any mo-
ment of the day, and with any possible activity the
child likes to engage in. To repeat it here once again,
the typical clinging behavior of modern city children,
their helpless, infantile, irresponsible behavior, still


when approaching puberty, their immaturity in han-
dling sharp or fragile objects such as knives or glasses
show well their (unconscious) incestuous fixation, their
neurotic blockage and codependent entanglement
with their parents, and the early psychosexual dam-
age a life-denying and pleasure-hostile education in-
flicted upon them.

All this, to repeat it once more, shares one single
etiology, the lack of autonomy for children in a culture
that loves emotional entanglement because it serves
consumerism, as all consumerism is ultimately the
commercial exploitation of lacking identity.

The rhetoric about ‘fighting egotism’ as a cultural
obsession, and the sentimentality around all topics of
‘educating children to be selfless’ shows that ego is
about the greatest sinner in a culture that worships
selflessness as an ideal, exactly because it is structur-
ally selfish and based upon pure egoism.

One nation on earth consumes 75% of the globe’s
energy resources, and within that nation, there are
about six thousand people, or a few hundred families,
who basically have the whole of the world economy in
their hands.


These are facts that can easily be verified, and
they show with all too much evidence that egoism is a
substantial element in modern consumer industry.
Hence, the need to hide all this behind nice words
and phrases, because it sounds almost obscene.

In truth, a healthy ego is not a hypertrophied one,
not one that is boosted up into power hunger, but an
ego that is based on autonomy. Such an ego is
needed simply for building a robust self-identity, and
if it’s not built, many potential pathologies are the re-
sult. That is why I am saying that the ‘ego matter’ is
perhaps the greatest taboo in our ego-culture, be-
cause it’s the matter that needs to be hidden as a
matter of decency, as modern society is almost por-
nographically egoistic, and this is a fact of modern

Adequate parents and caretakers will not ‘fight’
the ego of the children in their care, but they will gen-
tly prevent egoistic pursuits in children when those
pursuits harm other people.

The difficult thing here is that with verbal admon-
ishments, almost nothing can be achieved. The only
way to help children build well-structured egos and


functional egos is that parents and educators care for
having themselves such kind of egos, and if they don’t
have them, engage a therapy or whatever to do this
work that is fundamental for sane education.

Chapter Three

Genius, Soul, and Narcissism

In my adolescence, devouring books about human
genius, Leonardo, Goethe, Einstein, Liszt and Pa-
ganini, I wondered what in essence human genius is.

I came to realize that genius is not just a boost of
our rational mind, our intellect, but that it somehow
has to do with a strong feeling of identity, and with
the flow and streamings of the bioenergy in the or-
ganism, and with what we vaguely know is soul.

As I was demonstrating in my book Creative Gen-
ius (2014), which contains a summary of my genius re-
search, human genius is really so broad and encom-
passing that it can’t be grasped with our intellect
alone, and it surely represents also some form of con-
nectedness with all-that-is. I do not wish to use relig-
ious terms here, so I remain with this general expres-

sion, connectedness, which is something that cannot
be deliberately triggered. And yet you can find this in
the lives of all real geniuses, be it in science, in art, in
music or in business, fashion, banking or even warfare.

Religions of course also speak about our connec-
tion with the divine, but they use not only a specific
vocabulary for expressing this truth, but also base
their teachings on both ritual and faith, asking their
followers to ‘believe’ in some or the other deity, savior
or saint.


This is not what I am talking about in this book. I
am talking about the individual religio, as derived
from the Latin relinquere, linking back. It is simply a
practice of silent contemplation, introspection or
meditation, that tends to remove the inner chatter by
going beyond the process of thought which links us
not to soul, but to the past.

This being said, when I talk about soul, I actually
denote the human energy field, the luminous energy
field that contains our true intelligence in that it con-
tains both the phylogenetic and ontogenetic memory
surface. I denote also creativity, imaginal thinking, as-
sociative thinking capacities, the skill of brainstorm-
ing, of coming up with daring and new solutions to
old problems.

In addition, I use the term ‘soul’ for ambience, for
aliveness in daily matters, for radiance also, for the
vibrant charm of lively children and emotionally sane

Then, it thus becomes a descriptor for the power
of life incarnated in a human being, the vitality of a
person, the grace of an individual, the imaginative
powers of a poet or a painter, the charisma of a pian-


ist, or the eloquence of an actor. For example, I re-
member musical performances and opera evenings in
my early years, when, as an adolescent, I was en-
chanted beyond measure not just by the music per-
formed, but the whole of the ambience in our opera
house, the vibrant radiations of the public, the
women’s perfumes that were fleeting-floating around
in the air like an ethereal smoke, the timbre of the
voices all around me, the swishing sound of the cur-
tain when it eventually opened, the cool air that burst
into the hall from the stage, the tuning of the orches-
tra with its resonant a, double a and triple a, and then,
like a revelation, the first measures of the orchestra
playing the overture.

All this, for me, is soul.

I also remember solo concerti I attended as a
young man, piano recitals or cello or guitar perform-
ances, and every time I had that strong remembrance
of a long-forgotten world of soul where all is vibration,
where all is radiance, light, fragrance, and vibrant life.

Also, when I think of specific pianists I adored in
my younger years, and I remember their charismatic
play, I would talk about soul. I associate here espe-


cially Marguerite Long whose play I first heard, as a
young boy, on 78 shellac records from my grandfather,
then also the young Arthur Rubinstein, Elly Ney, Wil-
helm Kempff, and Horowitz. I also associate here the
unique cello of Pablo Casals, and his interpretation of
Bach’s cello suites, the young Michel Béroff playing
Messiaen, the young Argerich playing Ravel, and the
baritone Hermann Prey singing Schubert Lieder, ac-
companied by Leonard Hokanson at the piano.

And even later, when I was already married, listen-
ing to Svjatoslav Richter playing Szymanowski in Paris,
Salle Gaveau, in 1982, was an intrinsic experience of
soul, so much the more as it was for me the first time I
listened to the music of this not very popular Polish

All these early experiences with musical perform-
ance connected me with soul, which was something
regularly absent in my life at that time, and were spot-
lights into the realm of creative experience that was
going to be my future, from about my mid-forties.

I think it is foolish to even try to define soul in our
very residual verbal language. I can convey those ex-
periences and I could convey the worlds of literature


where I discovered soul, as an adolescent, in the
works of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Gogol, Turgenev, Go-
ethe, Mann, Hesse, and especially Pearl S. Buck.

It is obvious that soul goes beyond the realm of
organized religion; it seems to me that soul is prior to
religion, in that it is an immediate outflow of the vi-
brant human, the creative human, the good human.

This is one of the reasons why soul can be found in
art, literature, music and musical performance rather
than in corporate life, because in the art world, you
can find authentic individuals, which means, persons
who do what they do for the very passion of it, not for
secondary, material or power reasons.

So we can say that in a way, soul has to do with
buoyancy, with a vibrant emotional life, with charisma,
with creativity, with human genius, with authenticity,
and with positive moral values, rather than opportun-
ism. And that is exactly why soul is real power. It’s the
power of the complete human, which seems so out-
landish to us modern city dwellers today only because
we have lost so much of it in our modern life, and be-
cause we have become fragmented humans. That is


why we need those artists, starlets and prodigies to
remind us of our true nature, which is our soul nature.

I do not want to spread simplistic formulas, but for
me the notion of soul has somehow to do with being
different, with differentiation.

Joseph Murphy, a widely recognized spiritual
counselor and author of bestselling books on what he
called scientific prayer, writes in his book Think Your-
self Rich (2001):

You are unique. There is no one in all the world
like you, because you are you. Your thumbprint,
the rhythm of your heart, the pattern of your
retina, the secretions of your glands, the infor-
mation encoded in every cell of your body are
different from those of any other person in the
entire history of our species. Infinite differentia-
tion is the law of life. (Id., 3)

Thomas Moore lived more than a decade of his life
in a monastery, then left it and wrote Care of the Soul
(1994), a book about developing soulfulness in every-
day life. However, this book does not follow today’s
tradition of easy selfhelp. It goes the other way, and
thereby touches you in a different manner than your


usual selfhelp book. Let us see what Thomas Moore
writes on the subject of soul:

Renaissance philosophers often said that it is
the soul that makes us human. We can turn that
idea round and note that it is when we are most
human that we have greatest access to soul.
(…) By trying to avoid human mistakes and fail-
ures, we move beyond the reach of soul. (Id., 4)

If the healing nature of love were properly under-
stood in our culture, we would not as a society suffer
from rampant depression and schizophrenia that
metaphorically show that most people have a vacuum
in their hearts, there namely where they should have
love. Moore writes:

The ultimate cure, as many ancient and modern
psychologies of depth have asserted, comes
from love and not from logic. (…) Often care of
the soul means not taking sides when there is a
conflict at a deep level. It may be necessary to
stretch the heart wide enough to embrace con-
tradiction and paradox. (Id., 5)

However when a moralistic approach is taken,
what happens is that an inner conflict is created which
results in people being trapped by alienating either-
or choices because the third option is not given (‘ter-
tium non datur’); this is the somehow fatal conse-


quence of Aristotelian logic that has subsisted, like a
virus, until today. It truly is a virus for it has trans-
formed naturally integrated humans into schizoid
angel-demons who act from a personal base para-
digm of compulsion, and not from a sane and inte-
grated mindbody. Moore shows with striking clarity
the pitfalls of moralism:

Moralism is one of the most effective shields
against the soul, protecting us from its intricacy.
(…) I would go even further. As we get to know
the soul and fearlessly consider its oddities and
the many different ways it shows itself among
individuals, we may develop a taste for the per-
verse. We may come to appreciate its quirks
and deviances. Indeed, we may eventually
come to realize that individuality is born in the
eccentricities and unexpected shadow tenden-
cies of the soul, more so than in normality and
conformity. (Id., 6)

Moralism not only bypasses the soul, but it also
bypasses life. It is actually a denial to accept our hu-
manity, by suppressing self-observation and invalidat-
ing inner movements, desires, conflicts and emotions;
it puts up one or the other dogma that says a person
ought to be green, yellow or red, or they are anath-


Moralistic people usually have learnt to ‘kill per-
versity’ in themselves, thereby killing life; it is through
this inner fight, this violence they do to themselves
that they create the soil for violence in the world.

This is exactly how the hero culture works, the pa-
triarchal rut that is based on repression and denial: it
teaches people to kill, by teaching them to kill off
their emotions when they are still in the cradle. Moore
says that from the perspective of the soul, perversity is
meaningful, and has to be embraced instead of being
discarded out and wiped under the carpet:

Care of the soul is interested in the not-so-
normal, the way that soul makes itself felt most
clearly in the unusual expressions of a life, even
and maybe especially in the problematic ones.
(…) Sometimes deviation from the usual is a
special revelation of truth. In alchemy this was
referred to as the opus contra naturam, an ef-
fect contrary to nature. We might see the same
kind of artful unnatural expression within our
own lives. When normality explodes or breaks
out into craziness or shadow, we might look
closely, before running for cover and before at-
tempting to restore familiar order, at the poten-
tial meaningfulness of the event. If we are going
to be curious about the soul, we may need to
explore its deviations, its perverse tendency to
contradict expectations. And as a corollary, we


might be suspicious of normality. A facade or
normality can hide a wealth of deviance, and
besides, it is fairly easy to recognize soulless-
ness in the standardizing of experience. (Id., 7)

Embracing perversity is one leg of the integrated
human, embracing suffering, or pain, or discomfort, is
the other. Moore explains:

If you attend the soul closely enough, with an
educated and steadfast imagination, changes
take place without your being aware of them
until they are all over and well in place. Care of
the soul observes the paradox whereby a mus-
cled, strong-willed pursuit of change can actu-
ally stand in the way of substantive transforma-
tion. (…) Renaissance doctors said that the es-
sence of each person originates as a star in the
heavens. (…) Care of the soul, looking back with
special regard to ancient psychologies for in-
sight and guidance, goes beyond the secular
mythology of the self and recovers a sense of
the sacredness of each individual life. This sa-
cred quality is not just value—all lives are im-
portant. It is the unfathomable that is the very
seed and heart of each individual. Shallow
therapeutic manipulations aimed at restoring
normality or tuning a life according to standards
reduces—shrinks—the profound mystery to the
pale dimensions of a social common denomina-
tor referred to as the adjusted personality. Care
of the soul sees another reality altogether. It
appreciates the mystery of human suffering and


does not offer the illusion of a problem-free life.
It sees every fall into ignorance and confusion
as an opportunity to discover that the beast re-
siding at the center of the labyrinth is also an
angel. The uniqueness of a person is made up
of the insane and the twisted as much as it is of
the rational and the normal. To approach this
paradoxical point of tension where adjustment
and abnormality meet is to move closer to the
realization of our mystery-filled, star-born na-
ture. (Id., 8)

For becoming whole inwardly and in our lives, we
need to embrace simplicity, and imperfection. Living
in a robotic culture, we can resist becoming robots by
embracing the ultimate truth that we are always im-
perfect. Moore has found a tremendously wistful tra-
dition with the Renaissance saints and healers that
warned, more than five hundred years ago, of the pit-
falls of perfectionism, which has become, in the
meantime, a real cultural disease in our high-tech na-
tions. More reminds Nicholas of Cusa:

Nicholas of Cusa, the great fifteenth-century
theologian who wrote a book about the impor-
tance of educated ignorance says we have to
find ways to unlearn those things that screen us
from the perception of profound truth. We have
to achieve the child’s unknowing because we
have been made so smart. Zen also recom-


mends not losing the beginner’s mind, so im-
portant for immediacy in experience. (Id., 9)

The two major problems young people experience
in our modern robot-society is narcissism, which is a
denial of soul and of depth, and thus something like a
habit of shallowness, and boomeritis, which is an in-
capacity for integrating learning content within the
whole of the person.

Narcissists are our school children who talk with
the eloquence of university professors about subjects
they haven’t understood a bit of; boomers are our
students who instead of digesting the knowledge and
making it a part of their own being build layers upon
layers of unconnected knowledge around themselves.
Moore shows that there is more to narcissism, in that
modern culture is profoundly narcissistic by its very
setup as a ‘scientific’ society:

Narcissism has no soul. In narcissism we take
away the soul’s substance, its weight and impor-
tance, and reduce it to an echo of our own
thoughts. There is no such thing as the soul. We
say. It is only the brain going through its electri-
cal and chemical changes. Or it is only behavior.
Or it is only memory and conditioning. In our
social narcissism, we also dismiss the soul as


irrelevant. We can prepare a city or national
budget, but leave the needs of the soul un-
tended. Narcissism will not give its power to
anything as nymphlike as the soul. (Id., 10)

I have offered free support to narcissistic and
highly problematic individuals for a period of almost
ten years, considering this as the social part of my
mission as a facilitator, and I found invariably that they
wait for society to accept them, instead of doing the
first step and accept themselves. Moore explains:

What the narcissist does not understand is that
the self-acceptance he craves can’t be forced or
manufactured. It has to be discovered, in a
place more introverted than the usual haunts of
the narcissist. There has to be some inner ques-
tioning, and maybe even confusion. (Id., 11)

I had myself a narcissism problem over many
years, since my childhood actually, and it was not
cured in an Erickson hypnotherapy, but I could cure it
subsequently, virtually by talking to the trees.

It was when, living in the Provence, I took the habit
to go for a night walk every day; I’d address speech to
some of the huge sycamores along a main street.
There were three of them I felt spontaneously at-
tracted to, and what I would do, late enough so that


no cars would pass by, was to put my left hand firmly
against the trunk of the tree, and talk to the tree, ei-
ther by thinking or by whispering my ideas.

Now, what happened to my surprise was that not
only was I greatly energized through this unique kind
of conversation, but I also got dreams where the tree
was talking back to me. And I learnt amazing depths
of wisdom from these dreams, and was very surprised
when I found the following passage in Care of the
Soul (1994):

I suspect that this is a very concrete part of cur-
ing narcissism—talking to the trees. By engag-
ing the so-called ‘inanimate’ world in dialogue,
we are acknowledging its soul. Not all con-
sciousness is human. That in itself is a narcissis-
tic belief. (Id., 12)

And indeed, through my talking to the trees, I got
a sudden interest in shamanism and went on a spiri-
tual quest that took me several years. I engaged in
tedious research about shamanism from 2002 and
went to Ecuador, in 2004, to drink the traditional sa-
cred Ayahuasca brew.

—See Peter Fritz Walter: Consciousness and
Shamanism: Cognitive Experiences in the Aya-


huasca Trance and their Theories of Causation
(Scholarly Articles, Vol. 4), 2015.

I left this initiation completely transformed and re-
gained the whole range of magical beliefs I once fos-
tered as a child, and this really has completely healed
the narcissistic condition. It is not surprising to learn,
then, that shamanic cultures, which are for the most
part tribal societies, do not know narcissism as an in-
dividual and even collective affliction. It is only in
modern affluent consumer cultures that we encounter
this problem.

Thomas Moore put a particular stress on the dan-
ger of collective narcissism and he investigates deeply
in the culture of the United States of America, to iden-
tify it as the model and prototype of a narcissistic cul-
ture. He writes:

Nations, as well as individuals, can go through
this initiation. America has a great longing to be
the New World of opportunity and a moral
beacon for the world. It longs to fulfill these
narcissistic images of itself. At the same time it
is painful to realize the distance between the
reality and that image. America’s narcissism is
strong. It is paraded before the world. If we
were to put the nation on the couch, we might


discover that narcissism is its most obvious
symptom. And yet that narcissism holds the
promise that this all-important myth can find its
way into life. In other words, America’s narcis-
sism is its refined puer spirit of genuine new
vision. The trick is to find a way to that water of
transformation where hard self-absorption turns
into loving dialogue with the world. (Id., 13)

When we wonder how present-day America is go-
ing to bring about this loving dialogue, we indeed
see that the puer spirit is strong. Not only is it strong
but Americans somehow like to choose their presi-
dents among puer personalities; this by itself may one
day result in a fatal outcome!

Mature cultures choose mature leaders, senior
personalities, people who have grown out of an ado-
lescence where Peter Pan was the dominating arche-
type. And it is very interesting to realize that curing
narcissism involves an expansion of boundaries:

Narcissus becomes able to love himself only
when he learns to love that self as an object. He
now has a view of himself as someone else. This
is not ego loving ego; this is ego loving the
soul, loving a face the soul presents. We might
say that the cure for narcissism is to move from
love of self, which always has a hint of narcis-
sism in it, to love of one’s deep soul. Or, to put


it another way, narcissism breaking up invites us
to expand the boundaries of who we think we
are. (Id., 14)

And here again, when we look at present-day real-
ity in the United States, boundary-dissolving sub-
stances, from DMT, over LSD to Marijuana have all
been declared illegal, which shows the degree of nar-
cissism at the top government level in the enlight-
ened nation. Only that the light seems to come from
the wrong source.

And the enlightened nation is an action nation. All
is action. When all is action, everybody is an actor.

Which means nobody is himself or herself, thus
everybody acts out his or her life, instead of simply
living it. This constant lack of time of the nation, which
is torn up in restlessness by its business values, busi-
ness standing for busy-ness, is one of the symptoms
of its cultural narcissism that is not even a present-day
phenomenon. When there is no more time taken for
soul, there is no more soul. Moore explains:

A neurotic narcissism won’t allow the time
needed to stop, reflect, and see the many emo-
tions, memories, wishes, fantasies, desires, and
fears that make up the materials of the soul. As


a result, the narcissistic person becomes fixed
on a single idea of who he is, and other possi-
bilities are automatically rejected. (Id., 15)

Peter Pan resisted to grow up; astonishingly
enough, Thomas Moore writes that growing-up is not
a cure for narcissism, in the contrary:

But the solution of narcissism is not growing up.
On the contrary, the solution to narcissism is to
give the myth as much realization as possible,
to the point where a tiny bud appears indicat-
ing the flowering of personality through its nar-
cissism. (…) Narcissism is a condition in which a
person does not love himself. This failure in
love comes through as its opposite because the
person tries so hard to find self-acceptance.
The complex reveals itself in the all-too-obvious
effort and exaggeration. It’s clear to all around
that narcissism’s love is shallow. We know in-
stinctively that someone who talks about him-
self all the time must not have a very strong
sense of self. To the individual caught up in this
myth, the failure to find self-love is felt as a kind
of masochism, and, whenever masochism
comes into play, a sadistic element is not far
behind. The two attitudes are polar elements in
a split power archetype. (Id., 16)

When we apply this truth to the Peter Pan nation,
we learn that we have to let them run where they run
and let them break even more glass everywhere in the


world, right? I am not sure if the author wanted to say
that because once of a sudden, after having ex-
panded into collective narcissism, he again speaks of
the individual affliction. Anyway, our daily news in the
hero culture really seem to suggest that Moore’s
analysis of collective narcissism, that is shared by
number of depth psychologists, would lead to an
abysmal accumulation of Peter-Pan like acts, per-
formed as a nation-narcissist on the world at large, in
order to gain depth.

I am not so sure if this psychological solution will
work out politically, because even the most optimistic
of Peter Pans around in the great nation may get a
hint of stretching the bow too much … and interna-
tional repercussions may not permit the Peter Pan Na-
tion to continue his puer game indefinitely …

Returning to the mere soul perspective, and leav-
ing political realities untouched, Thomas Moore

The secret of healing narcissism is not to heal it
at all, but to listen to it. (…) I am stuff. I am
made up of things and qualities, and in loving
these things I love myself. (Id., 17)


This is in accordance with the soul-based healing
approach that was prevalent during the Middle-Ages
and the Renaissance:

Robert Burton in his massive self-help book of
the seventeenth century The Anatomy of Mel-
ancholy, says there is only one cure for the mel-
ancholic sickness of love: enter into it with
abandon. Some authors today argue that ro-
mantic love is such an illusion that we need to
distrust it and keep our wits about us so that we
are not led astray. But warnings like this betray a
distrust of the soul. (Id., 18)

Interestingly enough, J. Krishnamurti approaches
fear, pain, humiliation and suffering in a very similar
manner. He often said in his talks that we should not
escape from what we consider as negative, hurtful or
humiliating in life, because if we do, there will be
scars, while when we stay fully aware and do not es-
cape the experience, there will be no scars.

Thomas Moore’s intention when writing his book
was to help people develop more soul in their every-
day lives; hence his idea of soul is not a religious con-
cept, but rather the missing part that most people
have discarded out of their lives and that would ren-
der them complete, if they got it back.


Thomas Moore does exactly that, he shows peo-
ple how to take back that missing part, that missing
soul, that missing inspiration and vibrant awareness of
their soul being.

But for doing that, he had first to show people that
they are lacking out on something, for most people in
our somewhat robotic consumer culture are not even
aware of their lack of the essential, they are not aware
of their stuckness in routines, of their inner void, and a
belief system that delegates responsibility toward
others, ‘scientific or medical authorities’ or ‘the gov-
ernment’ without seeing that they are responsible for
all their thoughts and actions, in the first place.

In this context, it is important to understand that
following soul also means not following external
sense-givers in the form of gurus or sects who tend to
impose their own spiritual understanding of life, and
take it for granted that their ‘followers’ adopt their
spiritual vision without questioning.

This, however, is a fallacy as the spiritual quest is
always individual, and cannot be duplicated.


Many gurus, for attracting followers, suggest that
they alone know the pathway to heaven, and the mas-
ter guru, Jesus, didn’t make an exception here, as he
also asserted that those who follow him, will ‘meet the
father in heaven,’ that he is the key and the doorway
to their salvation. Jesus may have sincerely believed
that and I don’t put up any judgment here, but I sim-
ply realize that he was a guru just as any other guru,
eager to attract disciples and followers, to spread his
word. This might be legitimate, while it would be
against my own spiritual principles, to be honest.

I believe that people should really roast in their
own hellfire, by accumulating their sins, to one day
feel strangled to a point to take another route.

This is, after all, how we learn, all of us, and this is
again not a judgment about the human nature. It’s
simply how we are. I have roasted in my own hellfire
long enough to one day wake up to another voice in
me who said: ‘Do you really want to continue this
pathway, as it brought you so many trials, so many
disappointments, so much conflict with people?’

And I replied, yes, right, I don’t want to continue,
so please show me another way. And it was shown to


me, and I was surprised that it worked, while I had
doubted it. This also taught me that the ultimate guru
is inside, it’s our own higher self.

This is why I caution you about religion, as it tends
to curtail your freedom to find out about yourself and
about your own heaven and hell, about your multivec-
torial and multidimensional personality, about your
genius, your uniqueness, your beauty, your ultimate
destiny within the whole of creation.

The most ancient of religions were always both
scientific and metaphysical because they knew that all
knowledge is limited; the myths and tales of old were
expressing the unknown realms of existence, showing
examples of how hidden connections can manifest
once the circular movement of thought is disrupted
by an unusual or tragic event.

For example, Taoism, the oldest known religion,
from ancient China, was scientific in that it was based
upon the I Ching, the Book of Changes, and the im-
mutable cosmic laws that this wisdom book embodies
and describes. So it is with Huna, the ancient science-
religion of the Kahuna natives in Hawaii.


—See Peter Fritz Walter, The Leadership I
Ching: Your Companion for Daily Guidance, 2nd
Edition, 2015.

Today, even popular science books mention the I
Ching as a unique example for a supremely intelligent
view of life that explains cosmic dependencies, rela-
tionships between things, events and people, and the
hidden connections we use to call synchronicity, and
that we express through binary-code mathematics.

The other element, that might be called the delib-
erate uncertainty principle, in those traditional relig-
ions, is divination, which is a form of exploration out-
side the realm of certainty, and that runs as it were on
probability calculation, extrapolating the present con-
tent of consciousness on a timeline into the future.


Ancient religious traditions were more wistful than
modern atheism and ignorance in that they saw that
there is no contradiction between the certainty of
knowledge, and scientific exactitude, on one hand,
and uncertainty as the tertium after thesis and an-
tithesis, on the other; in fact, they wistfully understood
that the relationship between both realms of human
perception is one of complementarity.

What divination does is to read our habitual and
repetitive thought patterns, and extrapolate them on
a virtual time line into the future. This is, then, what is
called ‘predicting the future’ without for that matter
assuming the future was in any form predestined.
There is no predestination because we can change
our thoughts at every moment, thereby changing our
future implicitly.

When you explore religion with a scientific mind-
set, you will find that much of what the hyper-
rationalists held to be superstition and magic is actu-
ally a realm of knowledge that belongs to perennial
science; it is actually a highly interesting field of study.
While magic certainly is a discipline in this Science of
Mind, as it has been called by Ernest Holmes (1887-


1960) in 1927, there are many other disciplines that a
spiritualist or spiritual-minded scientist, or else a sci-
entifically oriented theologian, may want to consider.
After Holmes, Joseph Murphy and Catherine Ponder,
in the 1960s and 70s, founded the Religious Science
churches in the United States, gave rise to a new way
of thinking, and a new way of praying that virtually
revolutionized our religious habits.

I believe affirmative prayer is not only scientific,
but that it is also a form of positive self-
empowerment; even assuming you are empowered
by a divine force or god, the empowerment comes


from yourself, in the sense of coming from your higher
self; after all, you are sitting down for it. In giving that
effort, while it’s kind of effortless to do this, you are
participating in the divine plan.

Thus it can be said that we are exerting a form of
participatory consciousness when we pray. It doesn’t
matter if you believe in a divine superpower or in your
higher self, your guardian angel, your heavenly par-
ents, your ancestor spirits, or whatever you call that
creator force; fact is that you, by an act of will, sit
down to pray.

By doing this, you create the thought forms that
are going to trigger a positive and creative response
from the universe provided what you wish to happen
for yourself or others is non-harmful, constructive and
ultimately in alignment with cosmic purpose.

Chapter Four

Developing Soul Power

What is Soul Power?
I define as soul power, primary power or self-
power the natural and non-abusive power of a basi-
cally sane human being. Soul power is the natural
power that the sane child develops when allowed to
grow into autonomy and self-reliance.

This is namely the case when the postnatal primary
symbiosis between mother and child during the first
eighteen months of the newborn was a positive expe-
rience for both mother and child, and when the
mother can allow the infant to gradually grow into
autonomy as the child widens the grasp and percep-
tion of the environment and thus gradually leaves the
condition of primary narcissism.

The development of soul power is however inhib-
ited in case that the primary symbiosis was impaired
and/or the mother is narcissistically fixated and pro-
jects on the child an ancestor or living parent, so as to
incarnate in the child a phantom spirit or split-self,
thereby obstructing the child’s bioenergy flow and the
flowering of the child’s own individuality and intrinsic

All growth starts in the womb, but that doesn’t
mean we have to get back in the womb every time we
want to grow; it doesn’t mean we should remain in-
quiring into the good or bad of our childhood.

It only means that a regard upon our childhood
may explain certain behavior patterns that otherwise
might seem very strange or outlandish. But that is
about all such a regard can bring. It cannot bring an
immediate healing, just by remembering one’s diffi-
cult childhood. But the awareness of the pattern that
was built in that early period in life is a good thing to
begin with.

The work for dissolving the pattern is not work on
the pattern itself, but on your soul values; what has
been blocked namely through your huge unfulfilled


need for attention and self-validation is awareness of
your soul values.

That sounds a bit convoluted but it’s really how it
is. A child who grows up in a warm and loving setting
where their needs are met and where they get atten-
tion and care has a natural connection with their des-
tiny, with their soul values, or what might be called
their life’s mission.

Whereas a child who grows in an environment of
neglect or abuse will be more or less alienated from
that awareness. Needless to add that I myself was
among the latter vintage, for otherwise I would not
have written this book and all the others, and I would
not today want to serve others who went through
similar trauma when they were small and more or less

Now first let us inquire what soul values are, and
soul reality. Soul reality is not personal reality in the
same way as soul coaching or spiritual coaching is not
personal coaching, and soul power is not personal


The terminological change was not motivated by a
desire for fanciful expressions, but is linked to how I
define my own role as a facilitator. The term ‘personal’
is after all forged from the Greek word persona which
means mask. Do you want to further elaborate your
social mask, or do you want to realize your soul real-

After having answered this key question for your-
self, you may look, and look carefully, what kind of
coach you choose, because that choice determines
the choice of the coaching method to be applied to
your self-discovery quest. I have been myself in a
value conflict through the reality of today’s ‘personal
power’ coaching. This was a creative challenge that
actively encouraged me to position my own niche in

I simply had to find out where and why I am differ-
ent from the personal power tanks. The solution came
as a surprise. After long reflection and observation of
that huge business called personal power training, I
saw myself exclaiming one day:

—But the hell, the soul is missing in all that!


And that triggered a new insight that helped me
get where in hindsight I was already: my own contin-
uum or soul reality. ‘The soul was missing in all that?’ I
pondered, then down-to-earth and curious. ‘What
does that mean, in fact?’

The answer came as a flash back in time. I remem-
bered information I had stored away in my mind long
before, and it seemed to be a whole mountain of in-
formation. And it was not new to me; already as a
child did I possess that knowledge. Then, tidbit by
tidbit, I scrambled it up again from my memory, and
puzzled it together to some kind of coherent whole.
Like one finds lost jewels after a long, long search.
This is why I do not speak of coaching, or of power
training, but of soul power and I do not call myself a
life coach. I may have grown into a shaman, in the
meantime. I do not know. My role is to be a facilitator
for helping catalyze the soul development of those
who read my books or listen to my audio books.

Soul Reality and Autonomy
Realizing your soul reality without autonomy is im-
possible. What is autonomy? Is it self-reliance, inde-


pendence, that is the absence of dependence or co-

It seems it is all of this, but more. Let us look at it a
bit more deeply.

There is a natural striving for autonomy built into
every growing life. When autonomy is withheld, self-
realization is impossible. Realizing your soul reality
needs a sufficient amount of distance, of non-
attachment, of independence from any other current
reality you perceive. Thus, for example, naturally a
child of three years of age needs to have more
autonomy than a child of fifteen months of age. A
toddler of eighteen months needs more autonomy
than an infant of five months.

Many parents ignore that babies, toddlers and
pre-schoolers, already before reaching the age of
primary school, need to develop autonomy. What is
essential to retain in this context is that we learn the
basic movement into autonomy during our first year
of life, and not later on during adolescence or when
we turn into that magic world of adulthood.


This is how it should. Of course it doesn’t go that
way in our culture, which is why I am doing what I am
doing. And if I thought that once a life is spoilt in
childhood, it’s spoilt forever, as 1970s child psychol-
ogy believed, I would not write this and other books
to help people develop autonomy and soul reality.

This being said, I am convinced that you can build
autonomy later on in life. I have done it. I never had
the chance to do it during childhood or adolescence.
I was hopelessly codependent with my mother, as a
child and even as a youngster. And I have been emo-
tionally and physically abused all over my childhood
and youth. So if I could do it, you can do it.

Often we observe that especially adolescents who
have rather repressive and possessive parents get
onto the obnoxious track and really push it through
for every millimeter of increased autonomy. There is a
logic in every behavior and adolescents who put high
stress on autonomy have a reason to do so. The rea-
son is rooted in much earlier years, in the years of ba-

When we talk about behavior, we always talk about
two things, the actual behavior and the way the indi-


vidual deals with behavior, or put differently, the way
behavior is learnt, unlearnt, and relearnt. This is why
babyhood is so strongly marking us. It’s not that we
could not change our behavior later, it’s because the
patterns of behavior acquisition, the way of learning,
unlearning and relearning behavior are imprinted
upon our memory interface as early as in babyhood.

To give an example. When I have learnt in baby-
hood that developing autonomy is a matter of dis-
tress, fight and humiliation, I have not only acquired a
codependent behavior pattern, but also a negative
imprint about behavior learning. Accordingly, for you
to learn autonomy later on, you also need to learn
how to learn behaviors, and how to relearn them.

That negative imprint is the fact that you experi-
enced learning behavior as humiliating and scary, and
the result of it is that later on in life, you will be at
pains with changing behavior. So you will tend to be
stuck in certain behaviors that are impeding you from
realizing your potential, that are enclosing you in a
shell pattern, that are keeping you low profile, that are
counterproductive to your growth, or that are simply
destructive for any form of human relations.


When this happens, and it has happened in my
life, then changing this unfavorable conditioning is
not easy; for people with a lesser amount of persis-
tence, it may be impossible.

But I am not superman. I have done it and there-
fore believe everybody can do it.

There is nothing more regrettable than human be-
ings who are limited in their potential simply through
a track on which they have been glued to in child-
hood and that they are unable to get away from.
Many of our historical human tragedies can be re-
traced to early childhood learning that was taking
place in an atmosphere of constant anxiety, intimida-
tion, humiliation, violence and depression.

You may suffer from one of the following irregulari-
ties, and if you do, this is an indication that you have a
problem with autonomy or that you have not devel-
oped sufficient autonomy for fully realizing your soul

‣ Clinging behavior;

‣ Pain and depression to let go of relationships;


‣ Few strongly symbiotic attachments;

‣ Addiction to certain people;

‣ Fear of being alone;

‣ Anxiety in public places (agoraphobia);

‣ Recurring destructive relationships;

‣ Constant hurt experienced in relationships;

‣ Strong and recurring feelings of powerlessness;

‣ Strong and recurring feelings of worthlessness;

‣ Problems with parents and/or children;

‣ The feeling of being dominated by others;

‣ Insomnia over extended periods of time;

‣ Recurring nightmares;

‣ Recurring panic attacks;

‣ General anxiety (life angst);

‣ Anxiety to be sexual with others (auto-eroticism);

‣ Urges to humiliate and subdue others;

‣ Urges to rape and sexually assault others;


‣ Strong timidity and inhibitions;

‣ Split of your loves in sexual and emotional;

‣ Drug dependency and suffering from it;

‣ Alcoholism and suffering from it, etc.

When you recognize some of your problems, or
some of your children’s problems in at least three of
the foregoing lines, then you might want to take the
opportunity and apply some of the advice I give in
this book.

Freeing Your Minotaur
The inner voices we disown work against us. When
you are blocked in expressing your most cherished
thoughts and feelings, you are far from realizing your
soul reality. You need courage and a good deal of civil
disobedience to get there. Most of us are blocked
against the carefree expression of our intimate
thoughts and feelings. Our cultural conditioning has
strongly emphasized that it was necessary to suppress
intimate thoughts or feelings entirely, or to at least
hide them in front of others.


What most of us learnt in the art class at school
was to draw something recognizable, something re-
lated to the visible reality, thereby implicitly declaring
worthless or inexistent our inner reality. That’s how our
soul values are shunned by a materialistic society that
hasn’t understood a bit of the real, and therefore is
caught in endless illusions.

This is so much the more grotesque as children
naturally live in different realities, the visible, touch-
able reality perhaps being the least important among
them. Children intuitively know that invisible realities
exist and that beyond, there are parallel realities that
we may be able to enter during altered states of con-
sciousness. Children do not express this in verbal lan-
guage, but it can clearly be seen from their dreams
and their drawings.

Repressing children’s natural and expressive emo-
tionality is still today the prevalent attitude in in the
majority of all public schools; it is damaging the soul,
and only renders children apt to fit into the standards
of consumer society. Consciousness-based education
is different; it recognizes soul values. Fortunately to-
day, there is a growing awareness of our need for a


holistically structured permissive education, both in
Kindergarten and higher schooling.

Most people in our culture deny the existence of
an inner reality, although their childhood experience
was telling them an entirely different story. But even
the remembrance of such experiences, which is of
course the best evidence you can get, most people
have repressed it. It was the price they paid to survive
in an inhuman mechanistic society! They have acted
like Faust and sold their soul to the devil!

However, there is another level of consciousness
and there is a world not less real than the one our five
senses can grasp. We only have to project our inner
images into the outside world to let them grow into a
new and better reality. Everybody can do that; every-
body is born a creator. Marc Chagall (1887-1985) af-

Our inner world is reality, reality even more real
than the apparent world; to call fantasy or fairy
tale what merely seems illogical means that one
does not understand nature.

The first thing to do is to let go, and give up con-
trol. Mental control stands in the way when we want


the universe to help direct our lives. Our hand, guided
by the universal spirit will produce marvels!

There is no need to interpret the images, forms,
symbols or colors that are going to be the result of
spontaneous art work. The therapeutic effect is di-
rectly triggered by the free and harmless expression
of your subconscious images and emotions. Re-
pressed images haunt us only as long as they are kept


in silence, but they lose their destructive energy once
they are expressed and humanized in language. All
that comes to the surface of consciousness will lose its
negative, harmful energy and transform itself toward
positive expression of our whole being.

Our ego, with its dualistic moralism, has a ten-
dency to let our shadow or Minotaur imprisoned in
the depth of our subconscious ocean. However, if we
liberate the Minotaur, its destructive energy will be
channeled into constructive outlets. This energy will
not be lost; it will henceforth be at the disposition of
positive and constructive goals in our life.

This is what Freud called the sublimation of our
asocial instincts. Freud only rediscovered what the an-
cient sages, the healers, hierophants and shamans,
the poets and astrologers, the alchemists knew since
the earliest times of humanity. It is what in myths and
popular tales is referred to as ‘the call.’


Theseus and the Minotaur

We are called upon liberating our shadow. The
Minotaur, in the old myth of King Minos, represents
our sadistic desires that are fed by stale, negative
bioenergy. The desires are not the problem; it is the
inhibition of pleasure that causes the obstruction. It is
the shadow that contains the pent-up energy that has
destructive potential.

Where does violence and our need for violence
come from? This is one of the key questions. Neuro-
logical research and sociology clearly came to the in-


sight that pleasure and violence represent mutually
exclusive energetic reactions in the human brain.
When pleasure goes down, violence goes up, and
vice versa.

The inner controller, as transactional analysis calls
that instance in us, is not a natural part of our psyche.
It is part of the secondary drive structure, a result of
our individual and social neurosis. It locks us in a mor-
alistic frame of reference, which drives us to belittle,
turn down, deny and condemn in self and others all
expressions of natural pleasure.

Functionally speaking, moralism is perversion in
that it turns natural life processes upside down. This
denial of pleasure is the reason of our violence—and
this not only on a personal level but also on a collec-
tive scale, on the societal and cultural level. The de-
nial of the pleasure function brings about an almost
unbearable destructive rage, a fact we can observe in
emotionally lively children when denied a candy or a
promised walk or a gift they were supposed to obtain.
This primal reaction of the brain is not a function of
age or maturity. It takes place in adults in exactly the
same way.


When you practice some form of spontaneous art
for handling your repressed emotions, the original
rage that is at the basis of sexual violence, and that
was at the beginning not sexualized but pure revolt,
pure rage, pure anger, becomes activated and gets a
chance to be expressed in both a non-sexual way and
a way that is not hurting anybody.

It usually happens that this snake which is curled in
a deep slumber inside of us suddenly raises up and
fills us with a burning stream of hate that we might
experience as both frightening and pleasurable. The
fright comes from the fact that we do not normally al-
low us to exteriorize extreme forms of negative emo-
tions; the pleasure comes from the bioenergetic dis-
charge that the awakening of the snake brings about.

This hate, this extreme anger, this unbearable rage
can then be expressed in a non-harmful way by heavy
strokes of wax crayon on drawing paper.

The colors may be extremely vivid with a heavy
dose of red, yellow or black, and the crayon may get
into pieces from the violence we put into the activity.
After the rage has been exteriorized that way, a natu-


ral state of calm and inner balance usually arises, like
a Phoenix from the ashes.

The process of adaptation to the norms and social
rules of society, is a dialectic one. Only by accepting
yourself and by putting yourself first, which means ac-
cepting your shadow as a part of you can you prepare
yourself for getting onto a new track. It is neither by
liberating the Minotaur suddenly and let him devour
all the young boys and girls he can get, nor by impris-
oning him for lifetime that we will find the way out,
but only by feeding the Minotaur in such a way that
he gradually transforms into a tame animal that later
serves us humbly yet powerfully with its vibrancy and
abundance of vital energy.

Or, to use less mythological and more psychologi-
cal terms, complete adaptation would result in con-
formity and dissolve our individuality: we would be-
come robots. Total refusal of adaptation, however,
would result in asocial and destructive actions and a
lifestyle full of extremes. Extreme action however al-
ways results in karmic drawbacks. It is thus only the
midway between the extremes, that I call flexible ad-


aptation, that is constructive both for the individual
and society.

The healthy ego is typically able to bring about
flexible adaptation to circumstances, no matter where
and when. Neither extreme repression nor a total and
unguarded acting out of our desires would lead to an
integration of those desires. The midway, however,
can realize this difficult transition because it bears
elements of wisdom. Therefore, the midway is the
fastest and most effective way of soul development
and, with that, to happiness, harmony and balance in
your whole life process. It is the key to supreme crea-
tivity and a life full of riches and love.

What is Soul Reality?
I reached the insight that all human development
basically focuses upon reality, and this in a twofold
way: coping with perceived reality and aiming at
building a certain form of personal or individual reality
that differs from the reality that is perceived.

When I look at childhood and education today
with this insight in mind, I note the following: there is
an overweight and focus upon perceiving reality and a


marginal or at best intellectual focus on building indi-
vidual reality. To put it in more relaxed terms: we are
taught to consume reality as we consume goods and
gods, and at the same time are lacking the most basic
information about the essential in life, that is how to
cope with our perception of reality, and how to con-
strue and bring about on the daily level our own cus-
tomized and unique reality despite of the reality we

I say ‘despite of’ because typically the reality we
are going to build, if we build one at all, is different
from the reality we perceive, or even fundamentally
opposes that reality. Genius is marked by exactly that

Gandhi would probably never have built his gran-
diose vision of a free and democratic India was he
not, as a lawyer and journalist, particularly exposed to
perceiving the political reality in India at that time.
Edison would not have invented the light bulb had he
not perceived the reality of living in a home with can-
dle or petroleum light as dim, dull or fade. Karl Marx
would not have pondered about a more egalitarian
society had he not been particularly exposed to per-


ceiving the reality of capitalism at his lifetime in the
form of extreme social injustice.

The human base setup, and this is proved by neu-
rological science in the meantime, is built around the
constant gain of pleasure combined with a constant
striving to avoid displeasure.

When ascetically-minded people still today, and
despite all scientific evidence, defend a morality-
based worldview, they fail to pay their tribute to the
destruction their belief system brought about in five
thousand years of moralistic patriarchy!

If it is true that pleasure brings about pain, as
Buddha, Krishnamurti and most other sages from In-
dia said, then why do we run for pleasure? An orgasm,
in some way, as a maximum amount of pleasure, is a
certain form of pain.

In addition, sages argue that all we are searching
for constantly renders us addicted and thus encloses
us in a vicious circle of dependence. From this rigid
point of view, all sexuality could be seen as a trap and
in last resort a debasement.


This is, in fact, the point of view of most religions,
even more apparently tolerant ones such as Bud-
dhism. And yet it is a point of view that is profoundly
contrary to life and life’s creational patterns of sexual
union, joyful interaction, the melting of opposite
forces and total communication through total copula-
tion in the form of an ecstatic cosmic dance.

Do what you will, you cannot really argue away the
fact that life proceeds by the up-and-down of pleas-
ure, by charge and discharge, by rock and roll, in a
sort of tidal movement, and not by a linear form of
nirvana boredom. I do not want to eat soup or pizza
every day. This is so evident that nobody really ques-
tions it. And yet this simple fact says all about life and
creative living, and about the necessity for human life
to provide pleasure on a constant basis.

This being said, I have to explain what I mean with
the expression ‘soul reality.’ What is that reality I am
speaking about? Why do I find soul reality to be im-
portant to realize for every human? Is this reality afar
from our every day life—a sort of mysterious personal
nirvana? To give the answer straight ahead: it is none
of this. It is not a reality that is afar from daily life and


it is not an artificial nirvana. It is our own individual
continuum, the reality created by our finest talents
and gifts and their realization. It is the career of our
soul! When I achieve living my soul values on a daily
basis, I am living my soul reality.

Soul Development
After this introduction, let me give you an over-
view over the work techniques you may apply for
yourself so as to trigger the realization of your soul
values in daily life. I would like to emphasize two basic
steps for liberating your soul, and discuss them below
more in detail; they are garbage removal and defining
your values.

The first phase or stage in realizing soul reality is
what I call garbage removal. It is developing aware-
ness of your conditioning, your status quo, your limi-
tations. How did you become the person that you are

Are you aware of your cultural, social and intellec-
tual conditioning, and further the individual or filial
conditioning you suffered? In this first stage we are
not working on changing anything at this condition


that represents your now-reality. We only try to get an
utmost level of clarity about what makes out this now-
reality and what were the factors, all the factors that
contributed to your being what you are—now!

The good thing about consciousness is that it is
self-cleaning. Once you gain consciousness about
what has to be considered as soul-garbage, this gar-
bage is instantly burnt and destroyed by the laser
beam of consciousness. Here, you also deal with the
influence of the media and how it affects your self-
image, or rather, how it contributed to the building of
your self-image when you were still a child?

If you think that only adults are affected by the de-
structive influence of the media, you only have to read
some research on the effects of television to convince
you of the contrary. In fact, it has become widely ac-
knowledged by now that the media, especially televi-
sion, and here more specifically the children’s car-
toons have a highly destructive and aggressively con-
ditioning influence upon the child’s mind and psyche.

You may say that you have no power to act
counter to such influences as they are collectively ap-
proved forms of entertaining children. But better than


revolting and coming up with value judgments, you
can go one step ahead and ask why children have to
be entertained at all?

If entertainment, the highly non-creative and pas-
sive form of audiovisual consumption is obviously not
fostering constructive growth in adults, how can we
ever let our children be immersed in such frivolous
soul garbage?

In my coaching work with children I have invariably
observed that children who are regularly watching
children’s cartoons in the morning right after getting
up and in the evening, right before getting asleep—
when their minds are especially receptive—display
without exception the following behavior abnormali-

‣ Insomnia;

‣ Hyperactivity;

‣ Extended bedwetting;

‣ Clinging behavior;

‣ Agoraphobia;


‣ Aggressiveness;

‣ Lack of cooperative behavior;

‣ High level of selfishness and egotism;

‣ Lack of creativity and highly imitative behavior;

‣ Lack of sensual and sexual expression;

‣ Lack of sparkling expression (dullness);

‣ Lack of spontaneity and gentleness;

‣ Laziness, obesity, vulgarity, frivolity;

‣ Sadistically blocked and dormant sexuality;

‣ Emotional blockage;

‣ Low emotional and erotic intelligence;

‣ Low level of creativity.

The best method for changing the pattern of me-
dia dependency is a total media diet.

However, this cure does not work when you im-
pose it upon your children and yourself continue to
be a media rat. It only works when you show the ex-


ample and yourself go through a media consumption

Stop your self-imposed television terror for one
month, for yourself and your whole family, including
parents, siblings and grandparents. Whoever does
not want to follow is free to leave your house.

I do not say you have to apply such drastic meth-
ods for your whole life and become a civilization hater
and forest hermit, beware! I say ‘one month’ and I
mean it. This month will be for most of you a terrible
experience, but also a terribly important period of
learning. And if you say, you will do it, but only regard-
ing the entertainment stuff but still watch the news,
you overlook that there are no news in this world, that
nothing is new that you get served in tee-wee, be-
cause if there is really novelty in any respect, it will
surely not appear in tee-wee as it will be filtered out
from broadcasting.

There is no purity in news production, there is no
value-free information, there is no objectivity in any
media production, also if it arrogantly comes over as
scientific and objective or what you want. All in the
media world is assembled, composed and produced


by highly biased human minds, in all media produc-
tion studios and tee-wee stations over the world,
wherever you go.

The other trap is searching for what some gurus
call ‘the reality,’ as if there was only one reality. The
very idea of one single reality is as fundamental a dis-
tortion of perception as is the idea of one single god.
If there was only one rigid dominant one-party reality,
personal reality would be an illusion, and personal
freedom would be utopian.

What we face in mass media production today is a
level of denial of complexity that borders insanity. Life
is unendingly complex, but media life, the artificial
mirror of it, is a reductionist soup that suggests to the
media consumer reality was flat, easy and linear, a
matter of plugging in to the right channel.

When we talk about the mass media, worldwide
news and mass entertainment, we talk about manipu-
lation and indoctrination. We do not need to even
think of personal freedom and individual expression
while these mass media pay constant lip service to
these values, in much the same way as the Church did
when it preached universal love and at the same time


persecuted, tortured, and burnt peasant girls it la-
beled as witches.

What we should develop is not an anti-attitude
against the mass media, or a medieval or retarded
mindset, or sectarian opinions, but watchfulness,
alertness, an attitude that just observes the undermin-
ing influences around us, without judging them as
good or bad. This, then, is also the best way to edu-
cate your children! See, when you apply extreme solu-
tions over a longer time, say you want to buy your
kids into a zero-diet media consumption, you baffle
the human nature and risk to cash in the opposite re-

Before doing something as foolish as that, apply it
first to yourself and see how long you can stand the
torture! Always heed the advice that only the middle
way pays in the long run while extreme approaches
lead to a drawback at the end of the day, and pro-
duce rather undesired results. Your kids are most
probably going to watch all those violent movies with
the families of their schools friends, and without you
ever knowing about it; at the end of the day you will


have less control over them, and you may be less
connected with them.

So the whole process needs to be initiated by a
firm decision that is carried out with constancy and
equanimity, and subtle understanding.

I hope I have been clear enough until here. When I
suggest you, for you and your family, trying out the
media diet I am proposing, this is only meant as a first
step in a larger and much more encompassing con-
sciousness opening process that is by no means
meant to restrict your basic freedom.

Defining Your Values
The second phase or stage is to fill the vacuum of
conditioning with new content, content that you cre-
ate for yourself, instead of taking values over from
others or the meta-group. Now you are going to de-
fine your own values. It may sound surprising for you
to have a power for defining your values independ-
ently of the values of the culture you are living in. And
yet, this is what really is understood by soul reality.
And not group reality. As we talk about a personal
soul, and not a group soul.


Soul reality without following your soul values is
impossible. You may never have pondered this. It may
seem even outlandish to you to ask such a question.
So, in the next paragraph, then, let us go directly in
medias res and ask:

‣ What, in general, are soul values?

‣ What are the values you wish to abide by in your

‣ How are soul values going to sustain your soul

‣ How are you going to find these values?

‣ What are the base patterns in your soul universe?

Most of the time most of us are not or only half
conscious of their soul values, while these values may
well drive us, unconsciously, and they may be even
fundamental for our lives. Soul values drive us even
when we are not conscious of them; the moment you
render them conscious, you begin to consciously in-
tegrate them in your decision making. That means
you are going to make better decisions, as they will
be more in alignment with what you really want, on


the level of your soul. What happens is that from this
moment, your soul values become creative.

It’s like with dreams. Everybody dreams. Every-
body has soul values, if conscious of them or not.
When you are not remembering your dreams, you are
still driven by those unconscious images; but when
you render them conscious you can deliberately use
all the creativity and the information your dreams pro-
vide you with on a daily basis!

To give an example. Let’s say that freedom of
thought is for you a fundamental social value. What
flows out from this social or constitutional value? Does
it affect your overall behavior? Does it make you be-
ing an activist? Does it make you become a social
fighter for safeguarding personal freedom?

When you look at it closely, you see that a social
value per se does not push you to take any specific
action, but rather forges in you a certain attitude, or
an overarching behavior structure. Thus, when free-
dom of thought is one of your fundamental social val-
ues, this does not mean that you will become an activ-
ist or street fighter for personal freedom. But it well
means that you are firmly convinced that without


freedom of thought we are not living in what we call a
democracy. Thus, we can conclude so far that, in gen-
eral, values bring about convictions and a sort of
overall attitude that builds an overarching pattern for
all our actions; on the other hand, we found that soul
values do not trigger actions without our willpower
coming in and playing its part.

You can also say that social values construe a cer-
tain base structure in society upon which people build
their social plans and achievements for the sake of all.
And you see, while social values and soul values are of
course two different pairs of shoes, the process is not
different for soul values. I will discuss the following
topics about soul values here, not excluding that
there are more:

‣ Soul Values v. Social Values

‣ Patterns of Living

‣ Walking Your Talk

‣ Soul Marginality

‣ Living Your Soul Reality

‣ What are Soul Values?


Now, let’s say you accept that you have soul values
set for your life, while you may not be conscious of
them, or not conscious of all of them. Can you find
out about your soul values, and how? And after you
have found out about them, can you change them,
erase old ones and install new ones, just like handling
computer software?

Yes, this is so, I say, and let me point out why. The
first process you are going to engage in is find out
about your values. I can help you catalyze this proc-
ess, but I cannot find the soul values valid for your
life—only you can. This is a consciousness process
that is highly individual and creative; it’s, to para-
phrase Krishnamurti, like a flame without smoke.

Consciousness can help you maintain the flame
burning, for a certain time. But please be aware that
you yourself are going to build that awareness of your
soul values, and that a facilitator cannot do that for

I had to build it regarding my own soul values. And
in my case it was a matter of thirty years of time to
build that awareness, which is partly why today I’m a
writer. It’s because I was an extremely conditioned,


alienated, codependent and emotionally and physi-
cally abused child and had to go a long way to get
back to my soul, and find my soul values.

And I had to suffer much violence that was used
by the adults, and also some of the children around
who tried to mold me according to their social behav-
ior patterns. All that created a lot of fear, a sort of
constant angst, and feelings of unworthiness, and it
took me many years to cope with that hangup. And
yet, while for me it took thirty years, it is not excluded
that you achieve the same result in thirty days only—
or less.

It all depends on how much society alienated you
from yourself through what we call education and
which is for most people in our society, unfortunately,
a rather traumatic experience.

Finding out about your soul values can be done as
a sort of meditation or inner dialogue, or else through
dialogue with me in a coaching relation. And my role
in our exchange is of course to hold back completely
with my own values and instead mirror to you what
you are expressing not only verbally but through your
whole being.


Soul Values v. Social Values

Your soul value mix may not be coherent. There
may be a hair in the soup, a bug in the system, a foul
egg somewhere in the kitchen. As you never con-
sciously made up your soul value catalogue, this is
something rather common to happen.

What am I talking about? Let me give an example.
One of your fundamental soul values may be the
natural equality of women, but for some reason you
acknowledge, share and endorse the social value of
‘male supremacy;’ evidently the two values cannot go
together without one value getting the overhand and
crushing the other.

Thus, in every daily situation where a question
about these values arises, you will experience a value
conflict. In such a situation, you need to decide which
of the two contradictory values you wish should pre-
vail, the soul value or the social value?

One you have to let go. This can be a difficult de-
cision to make, but please bear in mind that doing
this work triggers an enormous consciousness boost.
It is not a waste of time, but in the contrary a wise in-


vestment of time and energy to reach clarity about
your soul values and do away with cultural, social,
mental, moral, racial or other values that conflict with
your soul values. If the decision is difficult, then ac-
cept this inner conflict until you see the end of the

I once befriended a woman who lived a very inter-
esting, even intriguing and quite eroticized relation-
ship with her little daughter. And I saw that, as for this
woman creative living and constant renewal was as
natural as eating and drinking, her daughter grew into
a real creator person, a child who was constantly busy
creating things, changing things, destroying things,
and questioning things, a child who was hardly ever
interested in taking her meals as she was really im-
mersed in her creative reality. And then it became
clear to me that what I wished to realize as my major
professional goal was helping people to live creative
lives so that they are really immersed in their own soul
reality. And I saw that when I was able to help a parent
get there, quite automatically the child would have
the privilege to go the same way, as all education
mainly is teaching by example.


After this shift of focus, my soul development work
was much more exciting than before, and much more
meaningful! I think that often we found our endeavors
upon secondary values because we do not see the
larger primary values hidden behind them. And these
primary values, if we know this or not, if we are con-
scious of it or not, are invariably soul values.

When you see that developing your soul reality is a
continuum that without interruption goes from birth
to death and beyond death over several or many life
cycles, which is an insight that karmic astrology gives
us, then naturally you will work with both children and
adults without a predilection.

What is the difference between child and adult
other than a question of degrees of development?
Most adults who live alienated from their soul reality,
and who are deeply molded and manipulated by the
mainstream consumer paradigm, are actually on the
developmental level of small children. And a child as
conscious as a genius, a Mozart, Einstein, Picasso or
Rachmaninov is an adult already before reaching the
age of six.


This is so because these children live in total clarity
about their soul reality and their life’s destiny, and be-
cause they are immersed in this reality on a daily level,
and can by no means be turned away from it.

This example helps you realize that often when we
complain about lacking clarity in our professional or
private lives, we lack clarity about our soul values.
Once we have done our home work and made a value
check, we often see the light and can go to where the
break is coming from.

Patterns of Living

People change and with changing, their soul val-
ues may change as well. They also may obey to other
than soul values so as to free themselves from the in-
ner conflict of soul values contradicting social or cul-
tural values.

Changing a professional career often goes along
with, or is the result of, changing the values this career
was based upon. When you think that values is but
theoretical fuss, stuff invented by psychologists or
coaches and nothing tangible, you are perhaps not
aware to which extent your particular mindset, values


and beliefs are impacting upon your reality, thereby
constantly creating reality, and changing reality.

Our mindset is composed of both beliefs and val-
ues; the difference between them is that beliefs are
rigid and in most cases unproductive or counterpro-
ductive to creative living while values are living things
and subject to change and renewal. While beliefs are
holding us firmly bound in a limiting framework of
opinions, values are moving with life’s changes and
reflect our being bound by essential truth, which is
the reality of our soul.

You can say that beliefs are basically garbage
while soul values are productive assets for growth.
You want to get rid of beliefs as much as possible, but
you want to inquire into and develop your soul values
and grow in awareness of their existence and func-

Soul values are not an outcome of judgmental
thinking or a moralistic life philosophy. The good
thing about soul values is namely that they are part of
any possible mindset. They are like salt in the soup. A
soup is not defined by the salt it contains. Even with-


out salt, a soup is still a soup. But surely, a salted soup
tastes much better than an unsalted one.

Why are charismatic leaders so attractive? Why are
film stars and great musicians so popular? Why are
pop singers more interesting than your grandmother?
It’s because these people have strong soul values to
share with a lot of people. What they do in their lives
and careers is to condense certain soul values and in-
carnate them through their art and media presence.

Think only of Michael Jackson.

You may or not share his soul values. But that he
incarnated strong soul values and that many young
people shared in these soul values is without a doubt.
The same is and was true for people like Mick Jagger,
Paul McCartney, Elvis Presley, James Dean, Andy
Warhol, or Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. or Nelson

You may think that only certain chosen people
among the mass of uncreative nerds have the right to
display their soul values and invite others to share into
them. My answer is that choice is well the secret, but
the choice comes from the person herself.


There are no chosen people, true, but there are
self-chosen people. You are chosen because you
choose yourself as your sole leader and king in your

You can be a star tomorrow if you wish to. But you
also have to be ready to cash in the other side of the
medal; to be a media star, to be famous means to be
hyper-vulnerable and you have to put up your de-
fenses to avoid the worst. As a star, you are sitting on


the toilet in a bathroom without walls! It needs great
courage to live the life of a star and it is in my view not
at all an easy life.

But it is also true that being popular is a unique
opportunity for promoting your soul values world-
wide. It’s a privilege, but it has a price tag! When you
observe the life stories of stars, especially in film and
show, you see that they are almost addicted to their
soul reality, to a point they may overlook their daily
reality completely.

Love is one of the greatest soul values you can set
for your life. And love surely is a living thing and noth-
ing you can put in a book, in words and phrases, in
greeting cards and birthday wishes, nothing you can
accumulate and store away, or to keep frosted for the
next generations.

Love is fluid, and volatile, and yet extremely pow-
erful. Like water. Like a mountain. Like the shine of the
moon that so many people today overlook and call a
romantic fancy, because they have lost the perfume of
life and think they can store away love, accumulate
love and conserve love in the rose and blue colors
they paint their children’s rooms with.


And when you begin to put love in drawers and
label it good, bad or perverse, you are surely on the
track to hell. Because then you lost the meaning of
what love really is. Never mind that more than ninety
percent of your neighbors today are on that track, or
even your whole nation. It’s nonetheless so. When
many are deaf, deafness is not becoming a virtue.
When a whole nation is deaf, deafness is not for that
matter to become a sanctified human condition.

Walking Your Talk

Soul values are seated in your heart, and they are
part of the continuum of your heart. This means they
are not intellectual ideas or productions of your mind.
Soul values are subject to intuition, not to reasoning.

Hence, you cannot gain awareness of your values
by thinking about them, but only by receiving them in
your intuitive mind in a state of quiet meditation.

Typically, when you have found a value that your
soul has integrated, you feel for a moment a deep joy,
a joy so wonderful and light as if you were, for that
blessed moment, in heaven.


What makes the lives of great creators, artists, mu-
sicians and media stars so vibrant is their strong focus
on their soul values! They do not need to go out for
value-fishing, so to say, but have put their fish safely in
a box, to talk with the I Ching.

I do not search, I find, said Picasso (1881-1973),
and he did.


He created the foundations of what today we call
modern art and which has become a concept while in
Picasso’s life modern art was moving energy, living
soul reality expressed by constant creation, constant
renewal, constant finding new forms to express what
cannot be expressed.

When Andy Warhol (1928-1987) created his unique
art and personal style, he was labeled a pornographic
artist. Today Warhol is represented in the most con-
servative art galleries all over the world, and nobody
finds his art obscene.

I want to say that if you think your soul values are
squared clean little bugs with neat labels that you can
store away in your clutter box, you are misunderstand-
ing this book. You walk your soul values, as you walk
your talk.

And when you don’t, you are not letting your soul
reality emerge but remain fixated in what I call a
second-hand life, which is about the worst that can
happen to you. It means you are among the millions
of dead people in this world, people who do not
know when they died and believe they are alive be-
cause they consume!


Soul Values and Jazz Ballads

I suggest you to listen to a group of good jazz mu-
sicians playing a jazz ballad, and you intuitively feel
what I am talking about. The ballad or standard is an
old soup, an old long-forgotten song originating from


one or the other musical, one or the other film or just
a popular Hollywood tune. When you read the stan-
dard in the fake book, let’s say For Heaven’s Sake, you
begin to yawn. It contains basically the same jazz
harmonies as any other standard, a lot of alterations,
2-5 modulations, 13th chords that put the salt in the
soup, and the piano technique uses a mix between
stride style and swing, and a lot of locked-hand pas-

So now, then, is what I just described the soul of
that jazz ballad? The hell not. And when you hear that
ballad played by gifted jazz musicians, you are
amazed at every turn of harmony, at every little detail
of their personal rendition of the ballad.

The rendition is the essential thing, not the fact
that a ballad contains 2-5 walks without end. The ren-
dition is called rendition because it renders some-
thing, it renders the soul of the music.

The ballad is a jewel in the lotus, artfully wrapped
in technical reality, sixths, sevenths, repeated 2-5
modulations and endless styles, published in a fake
book in coded language that basically only jazz musi-
cians can read and set out in living chords.


With your soul values it’s the same as with playing
jazz ballads. You are not opening your soul’s fake
book and show people the page so that they are go-
ing to decipher the code. You are the one who is sup-
posed to do this work and what you present to the
outside world is a rendition of your soul’s reality. This
is what I call ‘walking your values.’ You set your values
out like a Renaissance musician sets out the basso
continuo in a Cantata, or a jazz musician sets out the
harmonies written in a fake book.

You interpret the code of your life and present it to
the world like a complete score, a perfect piece of
music. And not only that. You also play that music, the
music of your soul, to the world. Thus, you are the first
and most important performer of your reality music.
And that means, to stay with the example, that over
time you will assemble around you a whole orchestra,
people who come to walk in your trail, and who feel
attracted by your soul values because they, con-
sciously or not, have chosen similar soul values for
their cosmic life cycle.


Soul Marginality

Many people worry about the fact that their soul
reality might be considered as marginal from the
point of view of most of their contemporaries, or at
least the ones they know. Of course, all is marginal
that is not mainstream. Do you wish to be main-
stream? Do you consider big boring default as the
right software setup for you?

If yes, please don’t worry. But don’t work with me
then and don’t use my books. Because I’m not run-
ning on that spur and will mislead you from your com-
fortable main road. My soul work is destined for those
who are at pains with society, whose soul values con-
tradict the values of present mainstream consumer
society, those who are as it were on the side road of
creative marginality. This side road of today inevitably
will become the main road of tomorrow.

Let’s see how much power mainstream has over
you. Three percent of the total world population
spend seventy-five percent of all planetary energy re-
sources. Okay. But in number they represent a tiny


And the majority of the tiny three percent repre-
sent what we call ‘mainstream.’ While they have much
economic power, their position in the world is rather
vulnerable. Among them nine hundred billionaires,
most of which are residents of the United States of
America, dominate or hold in their hands the biggest
part of the world markets. Nine hundred people in
five billion, a tiny fraction.

Surely, these people have their hand in the magic
media box that defines mainstream values all over the
world. So, is that appealing to you as a bunch of val-
ues or rather pseudo-values, when you only look who
represents these values and how they came about?
And second, when you see the reality of that main-
stream world, do you really think it has much power
over you—if not you yourself grant it that power?

Perhaps this helps you realize that marginality is
quite a nice thing, and you may begin to appreciate
and embrace your marginality, your non-mainstream
values, your healthy criticism, your lucidity when un-
veiling the web of lies behind most of that main-
stream propaganda about a pretendedly clean and
nonviolent world that in reality is governed by highly


unclean and violent governments. Do you think you
can create a paper box when you have glue at your

When you let mainstream values regulate your life,
you are dead before you have even started out to live
your life. Most people in one or the other way are not
totally abiding by mainstream values but let a back-
door open in their mind for escaping when things go
too much contrary to their own value system. But they
are afraid to admit it. Westerners especially consider
values as a matter of privacy and keep their value box
sealed. Of course, they talk about their values with
close friends, but typically not in public or with

There is a strange fear around revealing personal
identity and values in Europe, and I am convinced that
this fear originates from the times of the Church’s In-
quisition and the brutality with which it has sup-
pressed, for centuries, the European intelligentsia. We
are still recovering from this first and largest holocaust
in human history.

For becoming whole inwardly and in our lives, we
need to embrace simplicity, and imperfection. Living


in a robotic culture, we can resist becoming robots by
embracing the ultimate truth that we are always im-

We are beyond 1970s psychology that saw all the
problems in the world rooted in our childhoods, and
that saw no way out of that dilemma. No, we can
change what we wish to change, always, only that
sometimes it takes a little longer, or it takes a little
more investment of time and energy to change the

The main problem here is duplication. You have
internalized the codependence pattern of your par-
ents, the pattern that they again took over from your
grandparents. And you will tend to give the pattern
again to the next generation, or children you are
working with as an educator, if you don’t build aware-
ness about it.

Building awareness is all you can do, and all you
need to do—the rest will be done by your conscious-
ness; this is so because consciousness is by nature
self-healing, self-renewing and self-reforming. But to
trigger that transformative process, you need to build
acute awareness of the pattern, of your entanglement


and of your behavior that as an automatism will tend
to entangle children you are with, your own or others,
in your own emotional stuckness.

You will tend to stiffen their emotional flow, be-
cause yours is stuck, and that will not be good for the
children, because emotional flow is about the one
most important thing in health, in creativity, in the
whole of human evolution. When the emotional flow
is blocked, all is blocked.

So the process is simple, but to go through is not
that simple, you see? The emotional stuckness will
dissolve by itself as a function of your fluid conscious-
ness, provided it is fluid. It is namely not when you are
codependent, but it can be fluid again once you see
the pattern.

Consciousness by nature is fluid, as children by na-
ture have an excellent emotional flow, generally a bet-
ter emotional flow than adults. But only if they are
raised with respect and were able to build autonomy
early enough. So it’s never too late, you can start to-
day with building awareness of your entanglements,
your codependent hangup, and thereby you trigger
the reformatory process.


When the emotional flow is stuck, negative energy
accumulates, and negative emotions can become
overwhelming. This is how emotions and sexual at-
traction become demonic, and here you see why I call
the natural emotional flow emonic. Your emonic flow,
then, has become a demonic stuckness. In such a
case, I speak of the Minotaur, the monster that King
Minos incarcerated in a tower, unaware that it was his
own shadow. Your shadow is always there but it be-
comes much stronger when you repress it, and refuse
to become fully aware of it.

Chapter Five

Overcoming Parent-Child Codependence

Codependence and Emotional
There is something like a gradual relationship be-
tween codependence and emotional abuse; both eti-
ologies are sharing a common root in that emotional
abuse is but the higher octave of parent-child code-
pendence, the worsening of a pathological condition
that in most cases goes unnoticed and is yet detri-
mental to the child growing into autonomy and self-

Needless to add that parent-child codependence
is way more devastating for the child than this may be
the case for any of the partners in a codependent
marriage or concubinage, simply because children’s
biosystem is so much more yielding than that of an

adult, and can thus more easily be imprinted with be-
havior patterns that, good or not, later will form the
overall behavior of the person.

Causative factors for parent-child codependence
that have been revealed in my own and other re-
search are:

‣ Mother did not really want the child;

‣ Mother cares more about her career than her

‣ Lack of healthy parent-child physical interaction;

‣ Parents leaving the child to babysitters;

‣ Insufficient eye contact in the mother-infant rela-

‣ Insufficient or no breastfeeding;

‣ Mother was breastfeeding but felt revulsion;

‣ Infant tactile deprivation syndrome;

‣ Shame-based identity of the mother and resulting
rejection behavior.

‣ Father left during pregnancy, after birth or not
long thereafter;


‣ Father is as good as never present, alcoholic or
practices progeny;

‣ Father refuses to take over any role in childcare;

‣ Father is abusive toward mother and/or the child,

There are many myths that distort and tear down
naturally wellbeing in relations between parents and
children, and these distorted popular views actually
foster and purport codependence instead of helping
to avoid it.

For example, contrary to popular belief, the
pathological codependence between parent and
child is not the result of too much physical interaction
and shared affection and tenderness, but in the con-
trary of touch hostility and prudishness. For example,
it has often been believed that a boy will develop a
codependent relationship with his mother when he is
‘too close’ to her, or when he sleeps with his mother
in the same bed. This is simply not true. The causes of
mother-son codependence are often depicted in an
overly simplified or even distorted manner. To begin
with, it is not through abundant shared pleasure, af-


fection, tenderness, and body touch that codepend-
ence is brought about.

It’s not through mother and son, or father and
daughter, sleeping together, taking baths together,
sharing nudity, and it’s not through their sharing a
naturally sensual and erotic attraction for each other.

In the contrary, if these elements were causative
factors in the etiology of codependence, any abun-
dantly sensual mothering or fathering would lead to
entrapping children in pseudo-incestuous relations.
But this is not the case.

If a mother is fully erotically present for her boy-
child, without being incestuous, and embraces him
sensually while giving him at the same time the nec-
essary amount of autonomy according to his age and
abilities, the boy will easily master his Oedipus Com-
plex and develop his fully functional heterosexuality;
he will then project his libido upon peer girls of his
age, or approximately of his age.

The same is true in the father-daughter relation
with regard to the girl-child’s mastering the Electra


Complex and projecting her sexual feelings upon
peers boys.

The French child psychoanalyst and therapist
Françoise Dolto (1908-1988) analyzed this problem in
the mother-son relation, in her book Psychoanalysis
and Pediatrics, and she writes:

There are boys who stay lovingly fixated upon
their mothers; their behavior is characterized by
the fact that they do not attempt to ‘seduce’
any other woman. If the father is alive, the two
men are constantly disputing, for the fact that
the boy does not detach himself from his
mother and searches out other love and sex
objects proves that the boy has not liquidat-
ed—in a friendship of equality with his fa-
ther—his pre-oedipal homosexuality. He will
therefore prepare for getting ‘in trouble’ with
his father through his difficult and provocative

When the father has left and the boy ‘dedicates
himself’ to his mother, this behavior can be ac-
companied by real social sublimations, which
are associated with the activities derived from
the repression of genital and procreative sexu-
ality, but this boy cannot behave sexually and
affectively like an adult. He suffers from inferior-
ity feelings toward men that he unconsciously
identifies with his father; he can also be a hyper-
genital who is always avid to get new sex part-


ners toward whom he will never build real at-
tachment, but he will show impotent in relations
with any woman he really loves, because this is
associated in his unconscious with the tabooed
incestuous object.

The messages those boys and young men are
typically bombarded with are, for example:

‣ You are egoistic …

‣ You are like your father …

‣ Think a little of your mother …

‣ I’m always sitting at home …


‣ You should have more gratitude for your mother

And when the boy is on the right track and really
develops a unique genuine interest, mother will have
enough reasons to tell him that he’s inadequate for it:

‣ Why do you spend so much time for this, it leads

‣ Stay with your feet on the ground, you have
grandiose ideas

‣ Like your father, big mouth and little essence …

‣ Others have done that before you, so where’s the
sense of it?

‣ You better spend your time taking care of your
old mother!

‣ Why don’t you follow my advice, you are just

‣ I always told you, but you know everything better!

Much evil in the world done by men has its roots
here, in a stiffening mother-son relation that deprives
the young boy for years of his vital energies, blocking
his emotional flow to a point of self-forgetfulness. This


is, then, the reason why these men one day explode,
so to speak, for thinking of themselves for one time,
and do something horrible, to a woman, a little girl, or
an elder.

And who goes to jail is always the boy, then a man,
and not his mother. And that, in my humble opinion,
should be changed.

Women are to be made responsible for being
abusive as mothers, not only men, as fathers! Women
always claim to not being given enough responsibility
under patriarchy, but most women bluntly deny their
abusive attitudes toward their sons in our society,
which is an abuse of responsibility, an abuse of power!

Of course, in the clinical and psychotherapeutic
practice, codependence does not in the first place
manifest as a parent-child problem, but as a husband-
spouse problem, and that is why it comes up in mar-
riage counseling and family therapy. And that is ex-
actly what makes it so intricate and difficult to heal it
in the therapeutic setting. What many practitioners
overlook is that the problem does not originate in the
partner relation but in the earlier parent-child rela-
tions that both partners went through and that they


project, as a matter of unconscious automatisms,
upon their partner. We all project our parent of the
opposite sex upon our spouse or husband, only that
there are two essentially different ways of doing that,
a conscious way based on the letting-go of the parent
(mourning), or an unconscious way based on entan-
glement, confusion and hate-love.

In the Freudian terminology of the Oedipus Com-
plex, the first alternative corresponds to what Freud
called a liquidated Oedipus and the second corre-
sponds to what Freud called an unresolved Oedipus.

The main problem in our culture is the mother-son
relation and as good as all our social and relational
problems flow out from this major distortion. Many
men project their controversial feelings toward their
mothers later on their spouses, girlfriends, and even
little girls they encounter, with the result that the am-
biguous, ambivalent, and hardly conscious feelings of
aggression they bear against their mothers is pro-
jected outward in society, and creates havoc in man-
woman and man-girl relationships.

This aggression in men comes about through the
combination of lacking autonomy in their boyhood,


absence of the father, demanding attitude of the
mother for the son to stay at home, strict education
with frequent humiliating punishment, isolation from
peers through motherly overprotection, attitude to
enclose the boy in an exclusive, intimate and emo-
tionally abusive relation, victim attitude of the mother,
and the explicit or hidden demonization of the boy’s
peer relations, friendships and social life.

A way out could be a certain persistence of the
boy in the face of such a situation, and a firmness to
be developed on his part that insists on his right to
maintain relationships with peers, teens and adults
other than tutelary figures and family, and that he asks
for a certain laps of free time, every weekend, for go-
ing out alone, and unmonitored.

This could give the young male the opportunity to
speak about his emotional pressures, about the hu-
miliation he suffers and his confused feelings, espe-
cially when the boy turns into adolescence and these
feelings of aggression begin to get sexualized and
become more or less violent sexual urges. While gen-
erally, with overprotected youngsters, a problem of
acceptance will occur at the beginning in any group


relation and a certain hostility may be experienced at
the start, it can only be beneficial for young people to
leave their nest from time to time to search out peer
company and also adult males and females, who may
be in state to support the young boy in his rightful
quest for autonomy and respect.

The advice that I give for such cases is to
strengthen personal autonomy, and to get into an in-
ner dialogue with the shadow, and the inner child, in
order to unveil the hidden distortions in the mother-
son relation that has been internalized and that can
be gradually rendered conscious through this kind of

The outcome of my now thirty years of research is
that all sexual deviance in men results from mother-
son codependence that has reached a level of gravity
to be qualified as emotional abuse, and which is to be
seen as one of the biggest relational problems of our
times, and of all times.

Unfortunately, modern psychiatry only very re-
cently began to get a hint of the emotional abuse pa-
thology; when I started my research, back in 1985,
there was not yet any book published on the matter,


while emotional abuse now is considered as the worst
and most long-term form of abuse, as it’s of all abuse
etiologies the primary etiology.

Yet relatively few books are published about it,
while whole libraries have been written on sexual
abuse and father-daughter incest.

Contrary to most psychiatrists, I came to think
through my research that the long-term psychic strain
and fixations sexual abuse causes is not typically re-
lated to the sexual experience, if there was any, but to
the following factors that are, or are not, present in
such cases:

‣ Suddenness of the experience;

‣ Behavior of the adult was in conflict with social
code or family attitude;

‣ Entrapment effect that led to immediate anxiety;

‣ Debasing attitude of the man of the type ‘I can
have all females I want;’

‣ Impossibility to speak up, that is, a milieu that
would endanger the child to talk to anybody
about the experience.


Much could be changed socially if anti-
abuse social work could be based on these research
insights. The focus is obviously wrong, as authors such
as Stevi Jackson, a feminist activist, and Alayne Yates,
an American child psychologist, have shown in their

The focus must be on fighting coercion, violence,
and entrapment, not sexuality, and our society should
eventually learn to accept all forms of sexual behavior
as a non-vulgar, non-harmful, non-debasing and crea-
tive human activity. Sexuality, after all, is a form of
communication, and it’s a social, not an asocial activ-

The problem in our culture is the lack of autonomy
children suffer from in the urban nuclear family. Chil-
dren do not grow through being codependent ersatz
partners of their parents, and yet this is exactly what
the present culture is doing with them, imprisoning
them in the nuclear family and depriving them of the
whole bunch of hairy folk they were hitherto exposed
to, when still growing up in the extended family and
also a good part of the day living in the street, without
being constantly monitored and followed up.


What Means Oedipus Complex?
Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), an Austrian neurolo-
gist and co-founder of the psychoanalytic school of
psychology believed that psychosexual growth comes
in three stages, the so-called oral phase (0 to 2 years),
anal phase (2 to 4 years) and genital phase (4 to 7
years), followed by the latency period (7 to 11 years)
and adolescence (11 to 16 years) and that the child
invariably passes through these stages.

In addition, Freud argued that the intrinsic setup
of the sexual drive structure was taking place through
identifications, especially the identification, during the
anal phase, with the parent of the same sex, that
Freud called homosexual identification and the fol-
lowing heterosexual identification with the parent of
the opposite sex, during the genital phase.

This latter sprocket in the psychosexual growth
process was called Oedipus Complex by Freud.

More specifically Freud and later psychoanalysis
require the child to successfully liquidate each phase
or fixation, and conclude that if a child was not able to
do such liquidation, the sexual energy would become


stuck in the particular phase where the development
was arrested with poignant consequences on sexual

For example it is argued that when a child does
not successfully liquidate the Oedipus Complex by
developing a strong heterosexual relationship with
the parent of the opposite sex, the child was likely to
become homosexual later on. Freud has found this
first for boys with regard to their mother, and later
added it on for the girl-father relationship, which he
called Electra Complex.

Is the Oedipus Complex Universal?
I think a number of intelligent and child-loving
people find it makes sense when Freud affirmed the
basic sexual nature of the child and infantile sexuality.
But my question is if this understanding really implies
that they see and acknowledge Western culture’s fun-
damental denial of the child’s affective, emotional and
sexual complexity?

As a parent, to allow one’s child to be sexual in a
culture that actually is against that kind of freedom,
really is a challenge; that is why only when parents get


the whole picture, they can do what needs to be
done. If parents are wishy-washy on this question, and
half-hearted, it makes it probably only worse.

When I was starting my research, I honestly had no
idea that children could have an authentic sexual life
in the sense of engaging in penetratory embrace, not
just in the sense of being autoerotic through mastur-
bation or mutual masturbation with a friend. I learnt
these facts through anthropological field work, ethno-
logical reports published by Bronislaw Malinowski,
Margaret Mead, and others, and through literature on
alternative childhood, and children in the counter-

In the absence of this vital and important knowl-
edge, Freud’s theory that children’s psychosexual de-
velopment was a process of libidinal identifications
was for me an attractive surrogate for the real knowl-
edge! And it is an attractive lie, for it justifies the exis-
tence of the holy consumer family with a child as the
main stage clown who is used and abused under the
pretext of his or her ‘infantile’ needs—while the reality
is that this psychological construct rather serves the
the parents’ needs for emotional security and the so-


cially sanctified and legally imposed prohibition of
children’s real autonomy through real erotic experi-
ence with people outside of the nuclear family.

The myth of ‘infantile sexuality’ is obviously a re-
ductionist and pseudo-scientific cover-up needed by
today’s mainstream child psychology to continue their
blinding out the fact that the child is a complete hu-


man from birth! It could appropriately be called child
sex mythology!

Freud was the avatar for what later became, and
today still is, the mainstream paradigm in child psy-
chology and education.

I critically reviewed Freud’s theory of infantile
sexuality and came to the conclusion that Freud’s
scheme is clearly detrimental to the child’s building
autonomy, by keeping the consumer child in pseudo-
fusional dependence on their parents, thus creating
codependence and perversion, and a fake hetero-
sexuality that covers up all the undealt-with secondary
drives that are produced by forcefully impeding the
child from living out their natural emosexual attraction
toward peers. My wake up call had come not from
psychology, but from the side of anthropology and
the insights I got through my studies of the human
field, the energetic functionality of the organism and
the nature of the bioenergy.

It was first of all through the anthropological find-
ings of Bronislaw Malinowski and Margaret Mead and
their observations of biologically healthy child-child
sexuality with the Melanesian Trobriand culture, and


other tribal cultures, that brought about a change in
my regard upon child sexuality.

We have two ways to create a new reality, in which
society, recognizing the child’s affective, emotional
and sexual complexity and high bioenergetic charge,
sets up new and comprehensive forms of child-

—by confining the child in an oedipal triangle
within the nuclear family, depriving them of non-
incestuous erotic relations, and thereby artificially rais-
ing their gerontophilic eroticism, while projecting this
eroticism exclusively upon the parents, and in turn
creating a striking conflict within the child’s psycho-
somatic setup; or

—by transforming mainstream culture and grant-
ing children their own domain of intimacy, outside of
the parent’s embrace, allowing the child to live their
affective, emotional and sexual complexity in free-
dom, thus helping the child to build true autonomy
and self-reliance.

The first alternative leads to the consumer child.


The second alternative leads to a complete hu-

To summarize, Sigmund Freud has significantly
contributed to consolidating what I call Oedipal Cul-
ture, to a point to have prepared the subtle ideologi-
cal soil for postmodern international consumer cul-

Freud has less significantly contributed to helping
the modern child consolidating their natural quest for
autonomy and self-reliance, and their birthright for an
unobserved realm of intimacy.

Criticism of the Theory

—1/8 Restricted Validity

The Freudian scheme of ‘infantile sexuality’ is only
if ever valid for cultures where child-child erotic rela-
tions are forbidden and structurally impaired, that is,
for patriarchal culture and postmodern international
consumer culture as the successor, in a new garment,
of the patriarchal rut;


—2/8 Cultural Conditioning toward


The Freudian scheme represents systematic per-
version of the child and implies the cultural condition-
ing toward homosexuality because identification is
not the natural way for the child to build his drive
structure, and to individuate, but a culturally condi-
tioned one, which is why I call this kind of culture also
Hero Culture, implying the child is molded after their
parents taken as cultural standard molds, and not in
relation to their own specific soul structure, content
and emotional setup.

—3/8 A Distorted Psychosexual Base


Building homosexual attraction before building
heterosexual attraction is not the way nature builds
our psychosexual structure, but is a pure projection
upon nature.

Small boys are erotically attracted to their mothers
and girls to their fathers, and not homosexually to-
ward their same-sex parents. This is so from birth, not


just from age four or five, as the Freudian myth as-
sumes. When, as this is admittedly often the case
within patriarchal cultures, children are well homo-
sexually fixated upon their same-sex parent, and re-
fuse to open up for embracing their parent of the op-
posite sex, exhibiting anxiety in front of anything
erotic, this is so because the child is narcissistic and

Needless to add that the neurotic child is of
course not the natural child; when this happens, it has
a reason, as it does not happen with children who are
educated with love. I have personally seen it over and
over with children whose parent of the same sex gives
only conditioned love, and where children lack emo-
tional constancy and security with their parents, or
even grow in disruptive and dysfunctional families.

—4/8 A Mechanistic View of Sexuality

Freud’s professional and private life philosophy
was patriarchal and at the same time materialistic, and
mechanistic. He had discarded out of his life any spiri-
tuality as well as his wistful Jewish tradition, and most
of his theories defy truly spiritual insights and truths.


The very essence of a holistic worldview, that sees the
hidden connections, was alien to Freud. This was one
of the reasons that his relational life was full of strife
and disruption, and ended in many painful separa-
tions and personal conflicts. It can be said, cum grano
salis, that Freud was abandoned later in his life by all
his real friends, which was one element in the etiology
of his atrociously painful death of jaw cancer. When
we consider that we are talking about love, and erotic
attraction, when we talk about the psychosexual
growth of the child, it denotes confusion to choose
Freud as the authority on the matter. He was not. That
Freud’s theories are slavishly followed till today has
political reasons, and is in no way to attribute to any
real insights he had. In fact, Freud’s psychosexual
theories are the ideological base justification for the
enslavement of the consumer child, with all that re-
sults from this cultural perversion.

—5/8 Nature Fosters Copulation, Not


Freud overlooked not only female sexuality, as the
feminist movement rightfully alleges, but he also


overlooked that the small child is not an autoerotic
freak and serial masturbator when being allowed to
have full relations with other children. Freud ignored
the real natural emotional and sexual growth proc-
esses in children, as they are amply demonstrated by
non-patriarchal cultures where children enjoy full sex-
ual freedom from early childhood. In these cultures,
children engage in sexual peer relations that are tol-
erated and encouraged, by not interfered with by tu-
telary adults, as shown by the ample research of
Bronislaw Malinowski, Margaret Mead and Wilhelm
Reich, and many others.

—6/8 The ‘Oedipal Family’ Brings Perver-


Freud’s system reflects the power structures of pa-
triarchal society; he just put names on things that
were already there. In fact, today’s global consumer
society is unthinkable without the conditioning
dogma of the Oedipus Complex, the resulting parent-
child codependence and the confusion it brings
about in the mind of the child. Truly, when natural
peer relations are forbidden to the child and because


autonomy and self-thinking abilities of the child are
replaced to a large extent by system-conform con-
sumer conditioning, the way is open for total addic-
tion in form of non-ending consumption. The result is
the perverse consumer child, and the so-called citi-
zen, that are both based on the massacre of the origi-
nal primal child that was naturally heterosexual—and
more generally so, sexual in the first place.

—7/8 The Oedipal Theory is Pseudo-


The theory of the polymorphously perverse infant
that was erected by Freud is a result of the mechanis-
tic science tradition along the lines of Jean-Jacques
Rousseau, La Mettrie, Baron d’Holbach, René Des-
cartes and others, which considered man being a ma-
chine and infants to be born as a tabula rasa. While
this view today is scientifically outdated and while we
know that infants are born with a full heritage of for-
mer incarnations and resulting imprints in the soul,
positivistic modern child psychology has to this day
not done the necessary shift from a blind mechanistic
and highly doctrinaire pseudo-science into a real ho-


listic science of the bioenergy. I have created this sci-
ence and call it Emonics (Emotional Identity Code

Emonics assumes that our emotional identity is a
soul imprint, which is the blueprint of our later indi-
viduality. It also assumes that all in life is a function of
the human energy field or quantum field. Hence,
sexuality is but flowing vital energy and has little to do
with the mechanistic assumptions ignorant sexology
and doctrinaire psychology as well as myth-ridden
psychoanalysis projected upon it.

—8/8 Oedipal Reality means Slavery for


Responsible parents raise their children in total
opposition to Freud and the cultural slavery that his
theories and the power structures of patriarchal soci-
ety require, and give their children ample opportunity
for peer-peer, and peer-adult, emotional and sexual
relations, by interfering as little as possible in their
children’s love lives, which includes avoiding both
emotional and sexual incest, while at the same time


encouraging the child to project their libido upon fig-
ures outside of the family framework.

Chapter Six

Oedipal Culture

Castration or Permissiveness?
My criticism of Oedipal Culture is inextricably
woven with my critique of Sigmund Freud’s ‘cultural’
concept of psychoanalysis, and here especially my re-
vision of his theory of the Oedipus Complex.

Many young parents believe psychoanalysis had
contributed to the liberation of the child; they tend to
think it was a professional vintage of permissiveness,
or a variant of permissive education. Nothing could
be farther from the truth. Freudian psychoanalysis,
applied to children is not permissive, it is normative; it
is actually a tool for forging the ideal consumer child
within a consumer culture based upon ordained con-
sumption. As such, it is an ideological pillar for the
functioning of a society that, as a matter of economic

necessity, needs to repress natural pleasure because it
replaces it by consumer pleasure.

Psychoanalysis is not permissive at all. It can be
proven statistically that the word most used in psy-
choanalytic publications is the word castration. Cas-
tration is a highly violent term that suggests the cut-
ting off of the male sexual organ or the infibulation of
the female sexual organ, the latter often also being
called clitoridectomy.

While psychoanalysis suggests to use a mythical or
metaphorical vocabulary, this vocabulary becomes
strangely real when it goes to take a measure that will
affect the long-term destiny of a child or a family. In
discarding out children who are judged as sex of-
fenders or social delinquents, psychoanalysis exerts
its full social power in that it can put people, not only
adults, but also children, in jail. The children’s jails are
cutely called educational rehabilitation centers, but
their regulating principles are the same as those of
jails for adults, however with the difference that in
child jails to this very day constitutional principles are
not applied, while those principles are well in place
for adult prisons.


This shows, more than anything else, the true atti-
tude of Oedipal Culture toward children, as it shows
the devil’s face of this matter called child protection.

Are Masturbating Children Better
Françoise Dolto (1908-1988), the late French child
therapist and psychoanalyst is very outspoken about
the benefits of masturbation but I interject that we are
not set in the world to masturbate, but to copulate
and lovingly embrace others. We are not set in the
world to engage in endless autoerotic self-
satisfaction, but to use our natural erotic desire for
building relationships.

In this sense, sexuality is social, a social factor, and
social behavior. Hence, people who are sexual are
more social than those who repress their sexual

Child development, as a whole, today cunningly
cheats about this fact and relegates the child to eter-
nal masturbation in the name of their own best. Chil-
dren are encouraged to develop the habit of mastur-
bation, instead of learning to make love with another


human, which is the real, and natural, form of loving
sexual embrace.

What a split paradigm this is! The child is encour-
aged to be autoerotic, which means narcissistic, and
to develop erotic fixations upon their parents, but vio-
lently, with all the police power of modern society,
withheld from engaging in what is most natural: to
embrace others lovingly, others who are not incestu-
ous objects, and thus peer children and adults other
than their parents.

I really believe that Western culture’s child-rearing
paradigm, whatever Dolto and others had and have
to say about it, is perverse, as it really puts life upside
down in the name of culture, morality or whatever
other fake arguments.

Dolto encourages professionals to take note of
the child’s sexuality to better serve the child, but what
does this service look like down the road? To trans-
form loving children into egoistic masturbators and
incestuously fixated psychopaths?

The functional organic troubles of children she
mentions in her books are often the result of love


prohibitions, not prohibitions to masturbate, but pro-
hibitions to have real love relations outside of the
family, and to have the basic freedom to build such
love relations in the first place. See the following

To prohibit the child to masturbate and sexual
curiosity means to force the child to pay unnec-
essary attention to activities and which normally,
before puberty, are unconscious or precon-
scious. (…) Developing consciousness prema-
turely in an atmosphere of guilt does great
harm to the development of the child because
it deprives the child of ways to use their vital
energies (libido) that is inherent in those spon-
taneous activities. Psychically healthy children
who have mastered the genital stage are toilet-
trained, graceful in their body and dexterous
with their hands, they talk well, listen and ob-
serve a lot, like to imitate what they see others
doing, ask questions and expect truthful an-
swers, and when they don't receive them, begin
to make up magical explanations.

It is of course true what Dolto says about the
negative effects of prohibiting masturbation. But the
trick is that the reverse argumentation is not per se
correct. To allow masturbation does not mean to give
the child real freedom for love. This is the logic error
here, and here is where society cheats the child and


argues from an irrational and mystical position that is
not factually verifiable. Dolto writes:

The truth is that normal masturbation does not
at all fatigue the child, but appeases the phallic
vital tension of which give his erections ample
evidence. Masturbation provides the child with
physiological and affective relaxation which
does not equal in intensity the orgasm of an
adult as there is no ejaculation (…).

The Dogma of the Autoerotic
Consumer Child
It goes without saying that for those who are
against all expressions of children’s eroticism, Dolto’s
ideas about child masturbation must sound somewhat
progressive or permissive.

But from the background of the larger picture that
I am trying to paint here, masturbation, while it’s good
of course and while many children need it just for get-
ting rid of their surplus bioenergetic charge, is not the
real thing what the child needs and asks for.

To repeat it, we are born to learn copulating, not
masturbating, and what children should learn instead
of becoming proud masturbators is to become hum-
ble partners in a real sexual embrace where set and


setting are correct, and where there is mutual respect,
dignity, love and acceptance. To say this, excuse me,
is not an apology for pedophilia, as such a social pol-
icy, once enacted, would naturally lead, just as in most
native cultures, to sexual relations among children

But as matters are in our culture, the basic resis-
tance against children as erotic beings is not even
child-adult sexual interaction, but even more so,
child-child sexual interaction. According to Freud’s
cultural preservation theory, to admit and endorse
child-child sexual relations is against the setup of our
culture. This dogmatic position of Freud is docu-
mented and led to a number of conflicts with his stu-
dents. It was the main reason for Wilhelm Reich taking
a distance to Freud, after the latter said regarding
Reich’s activism for the sexual liberation of children:

—Culture must prevail!

Françoise Dolto, when I interviewed her in 1986 in
Paris, put it in the following terms:

It is true that Freud was normative in this matter.
But why not? The task of psychoanalysis is not
to bring about a social revolution or changing


the cultural paradigm! We are here as psycho-
analysts to heal the neurosis, in the individual
case, that comes from the cultural repression of
the child’s sexuality. This is our task, not more
and not less. Freud has seen it in the same way.

When mothers do not encourage their children to
develop autonomy, they are on the best way to en-
tangle their children in a codependence where the
parent is the winner and the child the loser, and where
the child, in most cases without parent and child be-
ing really conscious about that, becomes the ersatz-
mate for the parent. While this mating is in most cases
not sexual, the consequences of mother-son code-
pendence are devastating.

I talk about emotional abuse in cases where the
parent has received clear signals from the child for
being granted more freedom and autonomy, but
does repeatedly not comply with this request, or even
actively cuts down or prohibits love and erotic rela-
tions of the child with persons outside of the family,
whatever their age.


Oedipal Hero
Oedipal Hero is a term I forged for an individual,
usually of male sex, who suffers from a specific pa-
thology that comes from a combination of unresolved
Oedipus Complex and a narcissistic fixation. In my
view, modern psychiatry has just begun to identify this
problem, and my approach to scientifically and psy-
chologically outline this pathology is therefore to be
seen as a pioneering work. Wilhelm Reich wrote back
in the 1930s:

The unarmored organism does not know an
impulse to rape and murder little girls, or to get
pleasure through violence. It is therefore indif-
ferent toward all moral rules that try to repress
such impulses. It cannot comprehend that one
has intercourse with another only because there
is an opportunity for it, for example being in
one and the same room with a person of the
other sex. The armored character, by contrast,
cannot envision an orderly life without coercive
laws against rape and lust murder.

While the true reason for repressing the child’s
emonic vitality is hardly ever discussed in international
consumer culture, the lifting of the veil behind so-
called morality used to be a strong domain of post-
revolution French philosophy.


Most people in modern consumer culture really
believe the main reason for inhibiting the child’s free
sexuality had to do with morality or with a concern for
protecting the child’s natural vulnerability. This cultural
and social naiveté strongly contrasts with other cul-
tures’ perspective, such as the French or Hispanic cul-
tures, and it stringently contradicts the life and love
philosophy of most tribal cultures.

French social historians such as Michel Foucault
and social philosophers such as Gilles Deleuze have
clearly demonstrated that the reasons for the child’s
emotional castration are to be found in the setup of
Western consumer economy. It has economic, and
not moral reasons why the Western consumer child is
relegated to forced orality and deprived of tactile

Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, in their philo-
sophical exposé Anti-Oedipus, Capitalism & Schizo-
phrenia, set out to formulate a detailed philosophical,
logical and ethical critique of Freud’s theory of the
Oedipus Complex.

To illustrate my own point of view, I will provide
here some quotes of this major philosophical and


psychoanalytic treatise by two great French social phi-
losophers. All the quotes are my own translation from
the French original.

People often believe that with Oedipus, it’s
easy, and you can take that for granted. But it is
not so: Oedipus presupposes an extraordinary
repression of desiring machines. And why, and
for what reason?

Does Oedipal imperialism only require to
abandon biological realism? Or has something
else, infinitely more powerful, been sacrificed to

The un-Oedipal nature of desire production
continues to exist, but is aligned with Oedipal
coordinates that translate it in ’pre-Oedipal’,
’para-Oedipal’ or ’quasi-Oedipal,’etc.

Since long I carry with me the idea to write about
what I perceive is a barely investigated behavior pat-
tern to be found among those raised since the baby
boom in the 1970s and 80s, and for the most part
without breastfeeding.

And they have suffered from tactile and sensual
deprivation in many other forms as well, as that gen-
eration was growing under the spell of a really mis-


guided pediatrics that in its life-denying ignorance
kept parents from touching their children.

Co-sleeping of parents and children, originally an
activity that forms part of the natural continuum, was
declared a crime, and assumed to be just another
form of covert incest they had discovered as the new-
est cry in fashionable popular psychology.

Parents caressing their children were blamed as
perversely sensuous and weak, as fondling and ca-


ressing was connoted with ‘spoiling the child.’ Sexual
permissiveness, while often declared as in for edu-
cated people, turned out to be a media bluff, as re-
searchers clearly unveiled.

This alienated child-rearing paradigm, Made in
USA, as so much of the same that is now exported
worldwide, was assiduously absorbed and cloned by
parents in Britain, Australia, Germany and France, and
to a lesser extent in Italy, Spain or Greece. In fact,
Mediterranean culture was always strongly in favor of
sensuality in the parent-child relation, and generally is
much more erotically intelligent as any country from
the Anglo-Saxon world with their debilitating history
of life-and-love-denying Puritanism.

Even today, while most of Spockian assumptions
have been found to betray the very core of healthy
nutrient childcare, Dr. Spock’s manual is still sold. And,
interesting coincidence, the Dr. Spock who wrote it
has not little in common with the character of the
same name in Star Wars. Both emphasize the priority
and supremacy of the intellect, and belittle, if not
deny, the innate intelligence of our emotions.


The star war plot explains that the Vulcans have
assessed themselves as being ‘too emotional,’ which
had created strife and turmoil in their relationships
and political dealings.

Mr. Spock in ‘Star Wars’

As a result and as it were as a remedy for their
high emotionality, they did away with emotions as
much as they could, developing something like a
Spartan attitude or lifestyle, which puts rationality first,
as something like a supreme value, and which assures
that in all their shortcomings, the intellect always got
the overhand over their emotions.


Facial expression, way of addressing others, verbal
communication and body language of Spock ex-
presses this attitude very concisely. His diction is short
and crisp, his remarks to the point, his empathy one
of polite and calculated aloofness, his critique biting
and always brilliant.

He is able to demonstrate to everybody around
that he’s intellectually superior, by nature, or by birth,
simply because he’s a Vulcan. But this attitude, we
know it very well among us other humans! And this is
one of the attitudes of the Oedipal Hero I am going
to talk about in this chapter, because attitude betrays.

Attitudes are sign posts, not just the little critter in
our daily relationships. In Star Wars, the hero is given
a three-fold expression, part being incarnated by
Captain Kirk, part by Spock and last part, the hero’s
shadow, by Darth Vader.

So let us take this as the starting point for inquir-
ing what Oedipal Culture is actually all about, and
what the role of the Oedipal Hero is in this strange


I would like to get closer to the truth about the
tragic character called Oedipus that Sigmund Freud
dug out from the Greek’s huge reservoir of mythology
for explaining the child’s psychosexual development.

To put it in straight terms, and to repeat it, I have
not just vague, but clear-cut objections against
Freud’s theory. Oedipus was not the starting point of
the human race. He was rather the starting point of
the decline of the human race.

I will show in this chapter that the man Oedipus is
not what is really interesting about him. He was pretty
much a victim of circumstances. So what actually
counts in Sophocles’ tragedy is not Oedipus, but the
strange circumstances that pushed him around like a
boat in heavy sea.

All tragedies have in common that the good will of
the hero does not positively affect his destiny—even
to the contrary. And here is a leitmotiv of this study:
it’s rather the hero’s too-goodness as it were that
throws him in the abyss, that makes him a prey of bad


This goodness is false, it’s the narcissistic shell that
hides the shadow. Further, when we investigate those
circumstances that made out of Oedipus’ life an end-
less series of twists and turns, and ended him up in an
impasse, we see that there is something like a curse
upon him, or his family. His father got the strangest
oracle one can ever think of; he was told he will be
killed by his own son. The horrified man set the baby
out on a mountain, for who wants to have it may take
it. And a shepherd had a good soul and took the
baby, and through his good deed, the baby landed in
the arms of a king’s family, while himself being from
royal origin.

The terrible fate is here, and that’s one vision of it,
that by the very will of Oedipus’ father, King Laius, to
avoid the fatal prediction, he was setting all in place
to fulfill it. The other vision of it would say: anyway, if
he had kept the boy, the prediction would have been
fulfilled as well.

Speculation does not help. We do not know. It was
as it was. He wanted to avoid the worst and aban-
doned the baby. That would be an interesting topic
for a poll, I guess, so see how many people would act


like him, and how many would take a different ac-
tion—and which action?

A psychological view of the story penetrates
deeper into the mystery of karma. To put it squarely:
nobody gets fatal predictions who has a good karma.
So who had the bad karma? First of all, the father.
Here is the key of the story. We have a father and a

Everybody says the son is the bad guy but the
curse was coming upon Oedipus through his father.
No curse comes from nothing, karma is cause and ef-
fect. And here we are at the very core of the character
that I came to call Oedipal Hero. He is the savior of
his parents in saving them, consciously or not, from
their family curse, their Verzauberung, their narcissism,
their undealt life issues, and their bad karma. And his
very mission to save them is his—misunderstood—he-
roism, what makes him a false hero.

Well, in this moment it should ring in your ears, as
it should appear obvious from this point of my expla-
nations that what the Oedipal trap in fact leads to is
narcissism, but I see that differently than mainstream


The difference consists in the fact that I see an en-
tanglement, a missing link between the tragedies of
both Oedipus and Narcissus that I have never seen
mentioned in any psychology or psychiatry treatise,
nor in any work on mythology. Generally, the two sto-
ries are explained as standing for different psycho-
logical complexities. This is of course generally true,
but that does not exclude that they can be seen to-
gether as well.

The astonishing thing is that when you do this, as I
did it for the first time back in 1992, when I wrote my
first sketch on this problem, you will see not just one
door, but a whole series of doors opening in front of
your eyes, and you will discover the whole why-and-
how our culture is so hopelessly entangled in parent-
child codependence, widespread emotional abuse of
children, a true denial of love, violence, self-
alienation, narcissism and widespread, and more or
less socially accepted schizophrenia.

And you will also begin to understand the true
etiology of pedophilia, a problem that until now is not
understood by Western psychiatry and sexology,
while a certain acceptance has been established in


the meantime for all sexual paraphilias. The fact that
pedophilia is misunderstood, and that adult-child
erotic relations are not socially coded, makes it easy
for political opportunism to creep in or even gain the
overhand and put up pedophiles as a new scapegoat
group that is to be sacrificed for the sake of public
order and other fake agendas that serve right-wing or
outright fascist leaders to hide their overall incompe-
tence and their pitiful spiritual ignorance to manage
political affairs in a highly complex world.

The political consequence, then, is to demonstrate
that the public is being misinformed, and perhaps in-
tently so, to believe that pedophilia was a family
curse, a genetic default, or another sort of mental de-
bility. All these assumptions have been voiced over
time, but they are what they are, hypotheses. In addi-
tion, self-labeled pedophiles added on to the confu-
sion by the very fact of their self-labeling. Their public
and online campaigns for acceptance of childlove
were not only hitting granite, but worsened their
overall condition as a sexual minority worldwide; this
is so because they steered public with the wrong


Instead of understanding that sexuality is not rigid
and eternally determined, this small but influential
group of pedophiles going public tried to gain social
acceptance in a similar way as formerly the homo-
sexuals, namely by affirming time and again they were
born ‘as such’. That very argument of course turned
against them in the long run, as it turned against the
homosexuals, while the latter still go on to believe
they had gained something like long-term social ac-
ceptance. In crisis situations and when polemics rise
because the reigning strata need a scapegoat for ob-
fuscating their pitiful corruption and political incapac-
ity, the homosexual cause will be torn up and blown
up again, and anarchy and chaos will again break
down the walls not of silence, but of their bars, shops,
cafés and houses.

The change of our attractions cannot be brought
about by coercion, not by imposing a behavior stan-
dard on certain people, not by force. Not by violence.
It can change by itself when the person begins to
weigh other love options, and takes chances in other
sexual avenues.


Sexuality is a matter of choice and predilection,
and first of all of emotional attraction that by and by
becomes sexualized. Hence, emotional choice primes
before it ever becomes a subject of sexual reasoning.
And here is where I deliberately contradict modern
sexology that in its mechanistic Cartesianism is unable
to grasp the primacy of our emotions, and the fact
that sexual attraction follows emotional predilection,
and not the other way around.

I have since long analyzed the public demonstra-
tion of pedophiles as the search for a fake identity,
which is just another manifestation of narcissism, but
it has to be seen that those who came up with these
slogans are a tiny minority within a minority. Contrary
to the standard assumption of mainstream psychiatry,
not all pedophiles are narcissistically fixated, and not
all pedophiles are rigid, exclusive and inflexible in
their love choices. Those who are, and who have been
at the forefront of the public discussion, are not rep-
resentative. They have to be blamed with the same
kind of ignorance as their opponents, putting up in
their public forums notorious assumptions about as it
were the ‘phylogenetic’ if not the ‘biogenetic’ etiol-
ogy of pedophilia.


It is so easy to blame the fate of birth for all our
misfortunes in life, and it is most often a denial of re-
sponsibility to accept one’s destiny. Destiny, contrary
to folk wisdom, is not a predestined fate, but pure po-

Nobody is born a mathematician, a genius, a ho-
mosexual or a pedophile, in the same way as nobody
is born a masturbator. There is potentiality for a cer-
tain pathway of self-realization, be it professionally, or
in love. Those pedophiles who told their story to the
public did this probably in an attempt to be taken for
what they are, in a naive hope society would finally
drop the debate and say ‘Well after all, if they are so,
and born like that, we should better accept them.’ Yet
society does not reason that way. Many social policy
makers are reasoning out ways to establish new
euthanasia laws that in their fascist worldview would
end for all times the problem of pedophilia in much
the same way is Hitler’s megalomanic idea of ‘total

Those narcissistic freaks who were at the forefront
of the debate of pedophilia, as the self-chosen repre-
sentatives for a community the contours of which can


hardly be defined in scope and quantity, have served
their own deficient egos, but they did a bad service to
the cause of loving children erotically. They brought
this cause down through their rigidity and their fear to
be homeless, having chosen the haven of pedophilia
addiction as their new home, as the hanger for their
fragile identity, because they never really cared about
their soul values and their spiritual belonging. This is
true narcissism, this denial of soul, this denial of com-
plexity, and here the pedophile propagandists and
their opponents, the Oedipal Heroes, have much in
common! And this is why, as a matter of holistic logic,
they had to clash. Because, if they know it or not, they
have much to share!

The truth? Not to be found on either side of the
ring, but in its very center, halfway between the ex-
tremes. The Oedipal Hero suffers from exactly the
same hangup as the pedophile, with the only differ-
ence that they repress their pedophile desire and pro-
ject it on others. The way out is not pedophilia or anti-
pedophilia, because it’s the wrong question. The right
question is to ask if the repression of children’s emo-
tional and sexual life is bringing anything positive to


children, or if rather the absence of such repression
brings the true benefit for children’s healthy growth?

Both the Oedipal Hero and the Propagandist Pe-
dophile are blind-eyed to see that the only tangible
and provable etiology of both the Oedipal fixation
and pedophilia is the emotional and tactile starving,
and the sexual deprivation of children and adoles-
cents, as it’s rampant in postmodern industrial bour-
geoisie since about the second half of the 17th cen-
tury. When the complexity of sexuality is understood,
and once it’s energetic nature is clearly seen, when its
changeable and fluid nature eventually has been ac-
cepted, we are one step ahead.

When the true etiology of pedophilia is defined
within a larger systemic interdependence with other
social factors, we are two steps ahead. When we see
that we do not need any polemics about pedophilia,
that we do not need to bother at all with this matter,
nor with homosexuality or any other sexual
paraphilias, we are at the point to recognize that what
we have to tackle is the education of our children, the
way we help them integrate their vital energies, the
way we look at them as complete beings, not dwarfs


who are limited, because of lacking growth, to ex-
press their emotional and sexual feelings. Then, as a
matter of systemic logic, when we have changed the
social and legal situation as a result of our insight in
the importance of preserving children’s emosexual
integrity, and our responsibility to do away with all vio-
lence in relating to children, be it educational, then
our culture as a whole will change.

And the problems of homosexuality, pedophilia,
sadism, masochism and what I know more sexual fixa-
tions will not be problems anymore. I do not imply
that these manifestations of the life energy will com-
pletely disappear, but a society that has eventually
accepted the child, and the child within, will be able
to accept sexual diversity as it accepts ethnic, racial
and social diversity.

The Complete Oedipus Story
What Freud did was to mutilate the Oedipus saga
for it is originally imbedded in a greater epic cycle,
the tragedy of the House of Thebes, as it is referred to
in mythology. The myth must include, to be fully un-
derstood, at least one generation before Oedipus,


and one generation after him. Without seeing the
family curse, how can Oedipus’ tragedy and suffering
be understood? And if it’s not understood, how can
the tragedy and suffering of the consumer child in
Oedipal Culture be understood?

The Oedipus saga is the account of a family curse.
It is about what the ancient Greek called ‘offending
the gods’, what Christians, Jews and Muslims call sin,
and what in modern language is called an abuse story.
The family curse aspect of the abuse was in this family
particularly heavy in that it went over several genera-
tions. But the expression family curse is inept as it
suggests something like an outside agent or a dubi-
ous notion of fate that triggers, like a Damocles
sword, people’s destruction. To believe this is an error.
It can well be made out, when analyzing this family
story, who the culprits were, and how what they did
triggered a negative response.

In case of that family, it is true, the behavior of our
heroes was particularly harsh and the response of the
universe was equally harsh, and even cruel. We have
to keep in mind that it is an extreme case, but it’s a
good moot court trial. It shows the principle. Liz


Greene and Juliet Sharman-Burke write in The Mythic
Journey (2000), p. 51:

The mythic history of the House of Thebes is a
dark one, and begins even before Oedipus
himself. Sin follows sin in this family, worse than
any television soap opera, and the line is
plagued by the curses of various offended
gods. The House of Thebes is the ultimate ‘dys-
functional family.’

My hypothesis is that Freud chose the Oedipus
saga as a metaphor for the psychosexual develop-
ment of the child at the onset of the genital response
because he knew or assumed that our culture is inces-
tuous in its very roots, and abusive, especially in the
parent-child relation. How else could a sane mind dig
in human mythology to find the most abysmal story
ever told about human vileness, and glue it on the
back of every innocent little child? And here the word
‘innocent’ virtually rings in my ears - because it
sounds false.

If ancient mythology is true, we are not innocent,
not even as small children, as we bear, each of us, our
individual and our family karma, if we want or not, as a
matter of universal law. But I won’t give a judgment


here, I won’t jump to any conclusion, and leave this
question open. Karmic astrology confirms what most
religions say, that is, there is both individual and fam-
ily karma every incarnating soul has to bear.

As far as I can see, the only philosophy that vehe-
mently contradicts this perennial teaching is the so-
called tabula rasa theory that probably originates
from Jean-Jacques Rousseau, but that may be much
older. This theory assumes that every child is an un-
written leaf, an empty table (tabula rasa); we have to
see that at Rousseau’s time, his theory was a fist in the
face of the Church, a very daring theory indeed. To-
day there is not much left of it and even fervent Car-
tesian biologists today assume that we inherit genes
or even gene mutilations from our genitors, if not a
whole range of so-called hereditary diseases.

Let us instead look at the details of the saga of
Thebes and see what water we can draw from it for
our question if Freud’s theory of the Oedipus Com-
plex bears truth and can be validated, or if it has to be
dismissed as a cultural projection upon human nature.
The authors write:


This tale is concerned with what the Greeks un-
derstood as the family curse—an offense
against a god which is punished through suc-
cessive generations. In modern psychological
terms, we might understand this as the passing
down of unresolved family conflicts. What our
parents have not dealt with, we may find our-
selves facing, and these ‘sins of the fathers’ will
in turn pass to our children if we do not deal
with them. (Id., 38)

Now let us look at the facts first. Laius, the King of
Thebes received from the oracle in Delphi a predic-
tion he might be killed by his own son, which could
actually have consoled him in a way because he was
childless and it was exactly for that reason that he
came to consult the oracle. So he could have rea-
soned, well, it was not meant to be, then. But what
did he? He first cast out his wife Jocasta. As she did
not know why her husband wanted to get rid of her,
she managed to get him drunk and made love with
the drunken man, and got pregnant.

This sounds strange, as the couple had been child-
less before, but anyway, it appears the invisible
threads of destiny were already at work. And Laius
was anxious then, and as soon as the child was born,
took the next chaotic step in unknowingly fulfilling the


oracle: he took the baby to a mountain, pierced his
feet with a nail and left him there, exposed to all dan-

Coincidentally, the protector spirit of the Delphic
oracle is Apollo, and the child-protecting gods were
with the Greeks equally Apollo, and his sister Artemis,
which is why they were infuriated, and it was this act
that triggered the whole series of tragedies to come.
The gods then let a shepherd find the baby who
named him Oedipus which in Greek means ‘swollen
foot’. By another turn of destiny, the baby got in the
arms of the Royal Family of Corinth where Oedipus
grew up in good and equal standing. One day, some-
how anticipating his destiny, Oedipus went to Delphi
to ask the oracle about his future, and got from
Apollo the terrible oracle he would murder his father
and marry his mother. In a chaotic streak of action that
reminds of his father, Oedipus did not return to Cor-
inth, determined to prove the god wrong. He took his
adoptive parents for his true parents and thought that
by simply not being around them any further, he
could avoid the fate. Apollo however was infuriated
about so much human willfulness and sheer arro-
gance, and the next turn of destiny was again a blunt


fulfillment of the prediction. As a strange turn of
events, Oedipus happened to meet the chariot of
King Laius, but he did not know it was his father. Laius
told the young man to step off the road, Oedipus
shouted a rude reply, and the king let the chariot roll
over Oedipus foot, thus opening the old wound.

In a fury, Oedipus flung Laius on the road and
drove the horses over him, thus murdering, unknow-
ingly, his father. In addition, what was considered a
particularly heavy crime in ancient Greece, he left the
dead corpse to lie unburied in the dirt. Here, the myth
seems almost unbelievable. When we consider that
Laius was a king, how could it be that he was attacked
so easily by a youngster who happened to cross his
way, without enjoying any protection from the part of
the chariot driver and other staff?

Coincidentally, Laius had been on his way to Del-
phi again, to find appeasement for having abducted a
young boy for sex, whereupon the gods had sent to
Thebes an ugly monster, which settled at the city gate
asking every passenger a riddle: ‘What being, with
only one voice, has sometimes two feet, sometimes
three, sometimes four, and is weakest when it has the


most?’ Oedipus, who went to Thebes straight after
the murder of his father, guessed the right answer and

—Man, because he crawls on all fours as an infant,
stands firmly on his two feet in youth, and leans upon
a staff in his old age.

The monster vanished and Oedipus was made
king of Thebes, and he married Jocasta, his own
mother, without of course knowing what he was do-
ing. But his glory did not last as a blind seer arrived at
the court and declared that King Oedipus was the
murderer of Laius. Nobody believed him but the
Queen of Corinth then spread the information about
Oedipus’ origins. Jocasta committed suicide, and
Oedipus blinded himself and, pursued by the Furies,
cursed his sons (and brothers) Eteocles and Poly-
neices, and went into exile.

And here we see the curse taking over the next
generation. After many years of wandering about the
world, guided by his daughter-sister Antigone, Oedi-
pus died, but peace did not come to the House of
Thebes. Both Eteocles and Polyneices died in the war
that broke out over the succession to the Theban


throne. And Antigone was sentenced to death be-
cause she had released her dying brother’s spirit
against the order of her father Creon. Polyneices’ son
attempted to regain the throne, but lost the battle
and Thebes was sacked.

A Teaching Tale?
Is this old myth perhaps a teaching tale? To begin
with, I wonder if we can trust the authenticity of the
tale. There are at least three incidences where the
plot is against common sense, when we consider the
custom of the times it originates from. And inde-
pendently of that context, the credibility of the tale is
weakened by lacking probability. These incidences

—A patriarch who casts his wife out will not possi-
bly invite her again for sharing a meal with her. How
could Jocasta get her husband drunk if he did not re-
voke his repudiation and invited her to join him
again? And if he did, her act of forcing him to copu-
late with her to get her pregnant when he was drunk
is at least equal in low spirits to his harsh act of repu-
diating her. In ancient patriarchy, an act of repudiation


did not need to be justified in any way. Every man had
the right to cast his wife out at any moment. And of
course, he equally had the right to take her again if he
repudiated her in a hot temper. If the story says they
were sharing a meal and wine was consumed, this
means that he had taken her again, and thus the
harsh act of repudiation was forgotten. To construe an
evil act out of the repudiation as such, as Liz Greene
and Sharman-Burke do in saying he had to inform his
wife about the reason of casting her out, is a typical
trap-reasoning of modern psychologists, who inter-
pret meaning into old myths, instead of taking mean-
ing out of them.

—A royally bred and educated young man infuri-
ated about a king’s chariot, reacts rudely and because
the chariot doesn’t make way, gets hurt, and as a re-
taliation bluntly murders the king, tearing him from his
chariot like a street robber would do, and then
mounts the horses to treat him in the dust? Wait a
moment, this may fit in a Hollywood story, but it
doesn’t fit in that time and place. A king was not driv-
ing his own chariot, and he was not being driven in
any kind of chariot, but a royal chariot, and he had a
horseman, or several horsemen, for doing that, and


there were a number of other people around who
would have prevented the young man from tearing
the king down in the gutter and then let the horses
tread him in the ground.

—A king abducting and ‘raping’ a young boy?
Wait a moment, once again, and look at what boylove
means in ancient Greece, and what abduction means!
And here, a look at the original text would be needed
for what the authors call ‘rape’ is again something
that is most of the time interpreted into old myths.

The abduction of noble boys was prohibited by
law in ancient Greece, but not the abduction of slave
boys. Abduction was at that time a frequent means
for having a fortnight of intercourse with a pubescent
boy. This kind of abduction was not, as today, fol-
lowed by murder. In the regular case it was followed
by setting the youngster free after giving him a more
or less important gift that depending on the social
status of the lover could be a substantial remunera-

As a matter of fact, abduction was frequently in
old patriarchy the foreplay of a marriage as well; this is
true for both Hebrew culture and ancient Greece and


Rome. The only obligation a lover had when abduct-
ing a girl for sex was to marry her, or to pay a com-
pensation to the father in case he did not. When the
lover was a king, he certainly had the right to enjoy
sex with young people, as this was the custom of the
time, and under the laws of the place he could get a
problem only if he had abducted a noble boy and did
not give the boy an important present, nor offered
any recompense to the father. Without considering all
these details, to construe out of Laius’ boylove an of-
fense against the gods, as the authors reason or
worse, to call this act a crime in the modern sense of
the term, is quite far-fetched and is, as I pointed out
before, just another ‘intropretation’ of an ancient tale
that betrays the bias of the interpreter.

I have to resign here from further speculations as I
got long ago a strong feeling that this myth was con-
strued as a teaching tale, and as such would not to be
qualified as a myth that grew organically within a cul-
ture, to reflect the mores of that culture. This story is
either misconstrued or it was reconstrued later on to
fit the morals of our modern epoch.


What I intuitively feel is that the story teaches that
patriarchy as a social paradigm is dysfunctional and
creates havoc in all possible relationships, parent-
child, husband-spouse, and ruler-citizen. I feel that the
actors on the stage are not playing their own selves,
but social roles. The roles they are playing are cultural
clichés. The question I was asking to myself when I
once read this tale for the first time was: ‘How would I
react if I received such an oracle?’

And I found I would reason ‘What have I done that
I receive such a bad and fatal oracle?’ With this quest
for self-knowledge, namely, I would try to find out who
I am, what my roots are, what my parents have possi-
bly thought or felt when they conceived me, and what
the circumstances were of my birth. Had Oedipus
asked these questions, he would with some probabil-
ity have returned to Corinth to seriously find out the
truth about his origins by questioning his adoptive
parents. And if he had been honest, serious and
committed, there is again a chance they would have
told him the true story. And with this opening of his
consciousness, the spell of the oracle would have lost
a lot, if not all of its power.


The very act of inquiry, the quest for self-
knowledge is exactly what appeases the anger of
even the most revengeful gods, and this is why above
the gate of the Apollo temple in Delphi, visible for
everyone who visits the oracle, is written:

—Know Thyself!

Ancient patriarchy as today’s consumer culture,
which is but a modernized vintage of it, are against
the inner quest, and do not teach young people what
self-inquiry means and how it can be carried out. And
this is, after all, the greatest pitfall of this cultural per-
version we use to call patriarchy.

And to come back to Freud, I must note that I am
not ahead in my inquiry why he chose this tale for ex-
emplifying the child’s psychosexual growth. I can only
guess that Freud chose this tale for exemplifying the
modern child’s neurosis, or potential neurosis, the
modern child’s cultural and individual neurosis that
namely results from a deeply schizophrenic cultural

Françoise Dolto, who was internationally reputed
to be one of the foremost child therapists, capable of


healing psychotic children, said in one of her work-
shops on child psychoanalysis that most young psy-
choanalysts forget about the fact that only the neu-
rotic child is incestuously fixated upon their parents,
or the parent of the opposite sex, but not the normal
and psychically healthy child.

If I could, I would ask her: ‘What about the per-
centage of children born in modern consumer culture
that are really psychically healthy in the sense that
they are fully sexual without being psychosexually at-
tracted to their parents?’ My own guess is, perhaps
ten percent.

So I am back at where I started, knowing what I
knew before, that is, that a culture is mad that ar-
ranges family in a way that incestuous fixations are
going to be a problem. That they are rampant in our
culture was indeed Dolto’s view, and her view was
based upon almost lifelong professional experience.
In her book La Cause des Enfants (1985), she writes:

In the nuclear family of today, especially in ur-
ban areas, the tensions and conflicts are much
more explosive, and this is so because they are
underlying. Today, the number of persons a
child is in touch with is more restrained than


formerly. In the 17th and 18th centuries, the child
could transfer their incestuous feelings toward
other women than their mothers who enjoyed
to play little funny sex games with little boys or
young people of whom they were not the
mother. (Id., 40)

So what am I to do? Blame psychoanalysis?

That sounds like blaming the messenger for the
message he brings. Freud analyzed his culture. He did
not create a new culture. He did not want to change
what he saw was an insane culture that brings more
evil than good with its moralism, its wars and taboos.


He said his mission as a psychiatrist was to heal those
who suffer from the pathologies this culture quite in-
evitably brings about, not more, and not less. But I do
not need to follow Freud here, but can become an
activist for a new society where children enjoy sexual

I can take the position that Wilhelm Reich at the
time took against Freud, who admitted and recog-
nized his cultural imbeddedness. Reich argued that
we are not the victims of the culture that brought us
about, but that we bound to help changing a culture
we see is based on principles that stir madness and
chaotic behavior in humans. I personally agree with
Reich, while Freud was not wrong after all. He only
was conservative. That was his choice.

I am ahead one step, a tiny step though.

I know that I can heal people who suffer from the
pathologies this culture creates, and I know also that I
can help changing this culture.

And more importantly, I know that for doing the
latter, I cannot harness the power of psychoanalysis.
As a matter of common sense, for changing my cul-


ture, I must go beyond analyzing it, or proving it
wrong. I must show a better way, and I do this first of
all by changing myself. What does that imply?

I already mentioned one part of it: find out who I
am, what my origins are, what my individual and fam-
ily karma is. And also, what my talents are, my unique
gifts, what my creative potential is like, if it’s mathe-
matical, visual, literary, or artistic, if it’s good for a ca-
reer in design, in painting, the performing arts, in sci-
ence, or in philology, or if I am manually gifted, to be-
come an artisan, or a pianist.

The next part would be to see what my spiritual
orientation is, what I personally understand under the
word spirituality and what I can take from the waters
religions offer, or what I cannot take from them. I may
choose to craft to my own religion, my own liberal or
not so liberal spirituality.

And what happens when I do that? I not only gain
self-knowledge, I also help changing my culture. Ex-
plain it as a morphogenetic response or in any other
way, fact is that all we individually achieve is an
achievement also for the whole of our culture. Thus
we impact upon culture, and, incrementally help that


culture to reform itself, to change, to transform into a
better, more conscious and more harmonious culture
in the future.

For example, when I have suffered early child
trauma, I will seek out advice and try to cope with
what I see are consequences of my fixation, and I may
become aware of the fact that this deep early hurt
created anxiety and a constriction of my emotional

So I need to get to terms with my body and my
bioenergetic setup, by trying to have a harmonious
sex life that is as much as possible free of hurt in-
flicted to others, as much as possible free of anxiety,
and as much as possible free of compulsion. So I will
not obey to what society tells me because I know it’s
wrong and abject because it’s society’s setup itself
that has brought about abuse in the first place; hence,
I will opt for free and consenting erotic relationships
that I feel are okay for me and my partners – whatever
their age. This is the way of the true hero. In the next
sub-chapters I am going to explore the more convo-
luted ways of the Oedipal Hero. And then you may
see for yourself which is the better way for you. You


can choose what kind of hero you want to be, a true
hero or a false hero. Oedipus was the latter.

The true hero integrates self-knowledge, the fake
hero, or Oedipal Hero, does without. That’s really the
only difference.

But that tiny difference in our inner setup, in our
basic worldview, our attitude, our orientation, you are
going to see in the following pages, makes a huge
difference in the world, in what the person brings
about, as fruits, as karma.

To condense it, I’d say that the true hero creates
human progress and evolution while the Oedipal
Hero creates denial, stuckness, stifled evolution or
devolution. Why this is so is quite easy to understand.
The true hero’s mission, as it is based upon conscious
choices brings about an increase of humanity’s con-
sciousness. The Oedipal Hero’s mission, as it is based
upon unconscious choices is to decrease humanity’s

In still easier terms, the true hero brings more light
to the shadows, while the Oedipal Hero brings more
shadow to the light. You could also say that the Oedi-


pal Hero is the counterplayer to human evolution, and
was historically always prominent in times of fascism,
political restoration, religious tyranny and the retro-
gradation of true spirituality into fundamentalist relig-
ious fanaticism.

It may still not be clear what an Oedipal Hero ac-
tually is, so I need to further elucidate what character-
izes a man or woman who actually is an Oedipal Hero.

As a matter of terminology, the woman-type, ac-
cording to the Freudian expression, should be called
Electra Hero, but I may simplify matters, or rather re-
strict the topic to the male vintage of our Oedipus.

I think it’s wiser to leave it over to a woman to write
the other half of the story! I namely argue with the I
Ching that self-restraint is a virtue rather than a vice as
far as knowledge is concerned. To be true, I am not
possessing the emotional knowledge to write the
other part, especially with regard to our hot melting
sexual feelings; a man can only speculate how a little
girl experiences love for her father, and here is where
science finds its natural limitation. Science is not ob-
jective and will never be, and a man who explores a
woman’s sexual universe will never be a real scientist!


This is why, at this point of the study, I am going to
deliberately restrict the scope of this part of the
guide, and explore further on about the male vintage
of the Oedipal Hero only. And hereby, I imply that
there is of course a female version of the fairy tale,
and I do invite female authors to venture into writing
the other half of the moon.

And there is still another difference. The mother-
son relation can hardly be compared with the father-
daughter relation because the male is more fragile on
a psychic level, and therefore mother-son co-
dependence is more devastating for healthy psy-
chosexual growth of a boy than is father-daughter co-
dependence for the psychosexual growth of a girl.
This is recognized by most psychologists, psychoana-
lysts and psychiatrists today; this insight also is part of
perennial science and it is not a sexist view.

The male and female sexes are not construed in
the same way on the psychic level, a fact that has
been demonstrated time and again in times of crisis,
war and social upheaval.

Women simply are stronger and more psychically
robust than men. They live longer, are less prone to


heart disease, chronic fatigue and depression disor-
ders, and can cope better with stress, both in the
work place and at home. Of course, as always, excep-
tions confirm the rule.

I think to advance theoretical reasoning and intel-
lectual deductions on what characterizes the Oedipal
Hero would be a tedious endeavor. Instead, let me
discuss the problem by using teaching tales or exam-
ples. As I do not wish to importunate anybody, I will
construe examples from living material, leaving it over
to the reader to see parallels to any known person of
the past or of present times.

To begin with, the main characteristic of the Oedi-
pal Hero is his lack of self-knowledge. He ignores his
true identity. He does not know anything or very little
about his roots, and has build a worldview that is not
unlike a torso. He has left out from his basic life phi-
losophy all that would betray his true identity, so he
rejects astrology, divination, and also any kind of
lesser esoteric knowledge that could inform him
about himself. In one word, he rejects truth, true
knowledge, and construes a science that delivers him


the half-truths that comfort him in his pitiful spiritual

In the same way as Oedipus did not reason after
receiving the oracle for finding the truth of that
strange prediction within himself, and thus within his
destiny, he goes out to save the world from evil, and
here is where his pseudo-heroic quest starts. In the
same way as Oedipus did not even think of journeying
to Corinth to investigate his origins, the Oedipal Hero
murders his father, metaphorically speaking, by deny-
ing his origins and his karma.

He betrays himself, and his biological, spiritual and
genetic roots by reasoning that he ‘never had a fa-
ther,’ that he was growing up ‘in a females-only
household,’ that he had ‘nothing in common’ with his
father, as his father was in his words ‘a lost soul,’ ‘a
drinker,’ or a ‘social freak,’ ‘clochard’ or ‘inept’, a ‘se-
cret homosexual’ or ‘hidden pedophile,’ an ‘eternal
student,’ ‘hopeless philosopher,’ ‘eternal abuser’ or
simply, ‘somebody who should never have married
and put a child in the world.’ All these variations of
the theme ‘father’ surge up in dialogues with Oedipal
Heroes, which are often dialogues with those who ei-


ther got a problem with society, with rules, with
authority, or who are on a spiritual-only track.

The latter group of males is interesting because in
rejecting their father, they more precisely reject life,
the juice of it, pleasure, sensuality, and emotional in-
telligence, replacing rich life experiences by a rigid
and dogmatic system of fundamentalist beliefs. Thus
we got the social-inept, the home-sitters and misan-
thropes, the revolted ones who want to blow up the
system, if they call themselves anarchists or terrorists
or whatever, and we got the dictators and tyrants who
want to punish the world as a projective act for pun-
ishing their inadequate fathers. And we got the child
killers who want to punish little girls or boys for not
being ‘nice enough’ to them when they play out their
unresolved father imago with the implicit but un-
voiced question ‘Am I not lovable?’ and we got, last
not least, the social activist for any ‘good cause’ for
teaching the world what ‘real and unconditional
goodness’ is all about. All of them are Oedipal He-
roes, only that society in its eternal mysticism finds the
latter vintage okay and all the other vintages not okay.
Society, while not reflecting about the difference, wor-
ships the positive Oedipal Hero while it despises its


negative counterpart. Society somehow understands
that both characters have in common that they had a
hard childhood, but mainstream society sees a sign of
strength and virtue in the fact that a person denies his
wound instead of understanding that real strength is
to acknowledge one’s wound.

Society does generally not see that both the posi-
tive and the negative Oedipal Hero are hurting oth-
ers, only that the criminal, the schizophrenic and the
terrorist do it openly and as it were honestly, and the
fake hero, the social activist who throws his weight
around as a dire persecutor, fundamentalist, spy,
world puritan and ruthless policeman does it covertly
and in a projective manner. He hurts those he slaugh-
ters in the name of ‘doing good.’

The sane mind does not need to save anybody. He
does not need to go out for wars against prostitution,
child abuse, women’s rights or whatever hits his mind.
He accepts the world because he accepts himself.
And he accepts himself because he has accepted his
origins, his father, and his karma.

The main characteristic, thus, of the Oedipal Hero,
compared to the true hero is that he does not know


who he is and why he does what he does. He believes
he is doing good for others and the world, following a
rather mechanistic scheme of values and good-and-
bad judgments he has internalized when he was the
good boy for his mom. As a result, his behavior code
is rather rigid, and his mindset is judgmental. He sees
the world divided in the good guys and the bad guys,
like in a movie, and his political opinions are following
this black-and-white scheme of extreme judgmental-

The psychological reason for the Oedipal Hero be-
ing often simplistic, harsh, clear-cut, dry and judg-
mental in his evaluation of the world, and human ac-
tion, is that he needs to defend the insight that life’s
complexity is smarter than him, telling him, one way
or the other, the fake-reasons he is acting for, and
what his true motivations are. He intuits that this, in
turn, would get him quite automatically on the track
of self-inquiry, and that he would by and by find out
about his origins, and his karma.

The truth is that life always guides us to gain more
self-knowledge and a person must really be rigid be-
yond reason and judgmental and projective in their


overall attitude that the natural quest for self-
knowledge is completely silenced. This means the
person needs to invest vital energy to uphold the de-
nial structure and the array of projects it has created.

And here we are at the core of the etiology of neu-
rosis as Freud and others have described it. It’s a de-
nial of desire, the desire for knowledge that is inher-
ent in all living, and it’s this denial of knowledge that
is the true reason why the person denies sexual en-
gagements, because sex with others brings knowl-

While masturbation or autoerotic sex doesn’t.
Only intercourse brings this knowledge; it is highly
significant that the word is also used for denoting so-
cial intercourse. It brings knowledge both about our
mate and ourselves. This truth is beautifully expressed
in the Bible where sexual intercourse is described as
‘carnal knowledge’ or when it is said that a man is go-
ing to know a women when he goes in to his wife or
concubine. It has often been said that the Hebrew’s
prohibition of masturbation had procreational rea-
sons, but it may also have been an encouragement to
seek intercourse in the sense of ‘going out and multi-


ply’ as a matter of social communication, instead of
staying home and masturbating one’s soul off in
dreadful solitude.

The number one reason why free sexuality was his-
torically forbidden to slaves is that it brings knowl-
edge. In ancient Greece, for example, boylove, the
erotic and passionate love of adolescent boys, was
permitted only to noble men, not to slaves. A slave
who would arrogate to engage in a love relation with
a boy would have been jailed.

Another well-known example is the Christian
Church. The taboo on sexuality outside the marriage
bed and procreation was a powerful aid in the
Church’s quest for spiritual dominion and control; the
Church enforced this taboo draconically, by using
threat, persecution, torture and deliberate murder,
during the Inquisition. The result was a populace that
was highly ignorant, and is in wide parts still today, for
example about natural contraception, while before
the holocaust committed by the Inquisition, this
knowledge was freely available from midwives and
witch doctors.


By the same token, the rationale behind the child
being today prohibited to engage in sexual relations
with peers and adults outside of the family is to keep
children ignorant as long as possible in order to safe-
guard consumer culture’s dominion and to insure that,
as they are starved emotionally and sexually, they be-
come avid and brainless consumers. The present
stronghold of multinational business over people’s
bodies and minds would be impossible to maintain if
children grew up knowledgeable about natural copu-
lation from early in life.

And here we may further understand that the
Oedipal Hero really is a masturbator in every sense of
the word, sexually, and also metaphorically in the
sense of rubbing himself against himself, thereby
avoiding the warm company of others.

This latter characteristic forms part of his self-
enclosing narcissism, and is not evidently related to
his Oedipal fixation. The Oedipal Hero is a brilliant
masturbator also in front of others, when it goes to
hold speeches where he can ejaculate all his poison
against his particular scapegoat target.


The other main characteristic of the Oedipal Hero
is that, much to his own ignorance, he is a repressed
pedophile. He has strongly repressed and con-
demned his pedophile urges, to a point to forget his
initial attraction somewhere around adolescence and
early adulthood. Instead of asking what makes him
desire children, and because of fear and guilt, he pre-
fers to shut the door to that inner world and rejects
the whole of that itching need for closeness with chil-
dren; this is how, as a matter of bioenergetic retro-
gradation, he becomes a pedophile-hater and perse-

The pedophile differs from the Oedipal Hero in
that he is conscious of his desire for emotional and
sexual closeness with children, and he more or less
accepts it. But there are also pedophiles who have
not really accepted the choice they have made un-
consciously, cursing their fate to be among a sexual
minority that is the most despised of all; these half-
cooked pedophiles are often also half-cooked Oedi-
pal Heroes.

I have known a number of exemplars of this vin-
tage and saw them invariably engaged in humanitar-


ian activities for destitute, poor or orphan children,
but they strongly condemn in themselves and others
every hint of erotic attraction for a child, and when
they see other pedophiles acting out, they strike, and
denounce them!

All Oedipal Heroes, fully or half baked, have in
common that they are out to prove the world how
strong, good, righteous, courageous, tough and de-
termined they are, and they tend to emphasize that
they do not do what they do for selfish reasons, but
for ‘making a difference,’ for helping ‘change the
world,’ or making ‘a significant contribution.’ It is the
rhetoric of selfishness being bad, and altruism being
good, of egoism versus altruism, of ego versus be-
yond, and all the simplistic spiritual gimmick we know
from fundamentalist religions.

They have as it were customized that rhetoric for
justifying their persecutor if not terminator spirit that
lets them be eternally on guard, like the proverbial
baboon, with an erect phallus, to spy out the bad
guys and punish them by painful anal rape—at least in
their fantasies. (Most of them will do male rape within
the range of legalized persecution, thus in most cases


by calling law enforcement, but some of them do
rape physically, when they happen to be in jail and
can spy out sex offenders). As a matter of fantasy, and
because they repress a good part of their genitality,
they are often regressed into anality, which makes
them not very cosy to have around, as they are never
relaxed, always constipated, dutifully busy, always on
guard, always ready to strike, always charged with
emotions they have never learnt to handle.

In their relations with women, these males are
most often rough, as they are confused about what
tenderness means, and believe a ‘real man’ had to be
smelly, rough and always ‘on top,’ also sexually. At
home, they hardly ever take care of the children as
they believe indoor activities are for females, and that
males have to win the bread – most of the time.

They most of all abhor imposing females, and a
female is dominating already for them when she
doesn’t want to follow but got her own opinions.
Then, she is found ‘opinionated’. When she refuses to
be beaten for daily little critter, she is found ‘emanci-
pated.’ When she likes beauty and an aesthetic home,
she is called ‘extravagant.’ When she is tender, sweet


and caring with the children, she is called ‘a hen.’ Be-
ware she is a beautiful woman; she will be constantly
supposed to have an affair! And when she did have
an affair and is found out, she is called ‘a loose cunt’
and cast out.

Oedipal Heroes are often to be found in rough
sports such as boxing or car racing, and they defi-
nitely are the species that populates our gymnasia,
and that need to order extra size for the suit, simply
as a matter of muscular hypertrophy. They prefer
bodybuilding over mindbuilding, and they are in-
creasingly to be found in politics, where mind was no-
toriously never asked for. Intellectually Oedipal He-
roes tend to be mediocre, while they may invest a
good time in learning and study, even when adult.
When around brilliant people, people at home in
academia, or geniuses, they tend to feel inadequate,
inferior, ridden with a complex to be intellectual infe-
rior, not smart enough, or to lack conversational abili-
ties, which results in their poor attitude when around
on parties, receptions or gala diners.

Regarding manners, they are rather unpolished
and tend to come and go in company, so as to have


some backup in case they commit a faux pas. They
abhor to dress well and then go alone to a reception,
or they simply avoid it. They are the stuff of dreams of
naive country girls, and they have made their fame on
the back of that kind of populace, especially in Holly-
wood drama. Their clumsiness when being around in
good society is taken for the charm of the eternal
youth, the adolescent charming guy, the Peter Pan of
the fairies, the puer archetype.

They have helped decisively in forming the Ameri-
can Dream, and in the glamorous world of Hollywood
movies they are stage requisites. The hidden side of
the Oedipal Hero’s glory, his glorious goodness, is his
abysmal violence. In most cases, Oedipal Heroes are
aware of their problem with controlling their anger,
their violent outbursts and temper tantrums, and their
overall rather revengeful behavior. As if they waited
for an opportunity to get mad and run amok, so as to
prove themselves that they are real men.

The other side of the moon is well to be seen in
the movie Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde that shows the
schizophrenic nature of the Oedipal Hero in a beauti-
fully staged and orchestrated manner. Here the good


doc, there the bad dick, two sides of the same medal,
as the good citizen transforms into the bad animal-
man in a matter of seconds.

Nature is indeed revengeful to those who repress
their true nature, and they are controlled by the inner
selves they disown. In repressing our pedoemotions
or, generally speaking, in replacing love by moralism,
which is the bad choice the Oedipal Hero did and
where he acted against his better nature, his better
knowledge and his higher consciousness, he became
deeply fragmented, to a point, in some pathological
cases, that the personality splits apart and two sepa-
rate split personalities emerge.

But what the film shows, and what good psychiatry
can equally demonstrate, the split is already there in
the Oedipally fixated character, and as a matter of cul-
tural choice, this split is also part of our culture.

Which is why I call it an Oedipal Culture.

While we see Oedipal Heroes acting out on the
public stage virtually every day, as they are so popular,
and increasingly popular, we see only their light, and
not their shadow. We see only what they do and say


officially, not what they do and say in private, and be-
hind closed doors.

We are not supposed to know about it because we
would be shocked!

Narcissus and Oedipus
This brings me to explain the narcissistic hangup
of the Oedipal Hero, his extreme narcissism. The
authors of The Mythic Journey talk about the ‘tragedy
of narcissistic love’.

In understanding the Oedipal Hero’s narcissism,
we will understand his destructiveness, and more spe-
cifically, we will begin to see why he is out to destroy
love wherever he meets with it. Liz Greene and Juliet
Sharman-Burke write:

This sad myth from Greece tells of passion and
rejection, and shows how retaliation and re-
venge, far from bringing relief, only increase the
agony. More importantly, it implies that if we do
not know ourselves, we may spend our lives
seeking this knowledge through self-
obsession—which means that we are not able
to offer love to others. (Id., 42)


Narcissism really is not what most lay people un-
derstand under this header. It is not selflove, but the
very contrary of it.

Narcissus was deaf to the whispers of the nymph
Echo not because he loved himself too much, but be-
cause he was self-obsessed.

Self-obsession is not selflove, it is a compensation
of their inner vacuum, which is a lack of self-
knowledge, and also a total lack of true spirituality. It
is a loss of soul. We cannot love another when our
lives are soulless, and meaningless, when we lack
spiritual orientation in life, when we don’t know who
we really are.

Narcissists, and also those who have the double
affliction of an Oedipal hangup together with a nar-
cissistic fixation, that is, Oedipal Heroes, are under-
standing many things under the header of love. They
understand that it may allow one to control another,
to take advantage of another, to be comforted in
lonely moments, to have a wife that bears children, or
children who care for one in old age—which are all
utilitarian concepts of love.


He may foster other concepts of love, but they are
all not love, but conceptual molds for something they
do not understand. They are fingers that point to the
moon, but not the moon, as the Zen saying goes. And
what most narcissists most want when they say they
love somebody is fulfillment, satisfaction, emotional
and sexual, and often also material satisfaction. ‘I
have one wife and two children. I have a family. I have
a home. I have company. I have security. I have com-
fort. I have.’

The Oedipal Hero is fully on the side of what Erich
Fromm called To Have and very little or not at all on
the side of To Be. He believes a life of true To Be is
reserved to artists, children and life coaches. For him,
love must have a reason. And if it has none, he will
give one to it. The Oedipal Hero virtually bathes in
conceptual thinking; the idea that life may be some-
thing to be truly perceived only when doing away with
all concepts and put up a direct connection is an alien
idea to him.

I have got the proof of these facts many times in
my life, in relations with Oedipal Heroes, most of the
time those who worship a social ideal, and who are


violently against alcohol and consciousness-altering

These people regularly suffer from depressions,
experience constant drawbacks in relationships, and
most of them complain about hard-to-control sexual
urges. When I suggest to them to once go and look
over the fence of their senseless activism by going on
a discovery journey, either by using Ayahuasca or by
doing some real spiritual work on their etheric bodies,
I get the answer that they are invariably ‘against eso-
terism,’ ‘against new ageism,’ ‘against drugs’ and
‘against daydreamerism.’

The ending -ism most often appears in their dic-
tion. One wrote about my Encyclopedia, he found it
quite good but could not understand my ‘mysticism
and spiritualism,’ as he expressed himself. When I
pointed him to his need for love in his relationships,
and affirmed that love given was most often returned,
he said he had no sense for ‘so much lovism.’ And in
subsequent mails he would come up with reasons why
love does not exist and can never exist with the hu-
man race, that love was but a ‘religious idea’ or an in-
tellectual concept, and nothing real.


The most offensive of Oedipal Heroes, in my view,
are the spies. I have discovered a number of them in
the rings of the pedophile movement, and what is
typical about them is that they want to appear more
pedophile than pedophile to attract the attention of
those who are really pedophile. They themselves, be
they outright police spies, be they half-baked pedo-
philes who are not clear about their feelings and how
they can cope with them, constantly are to be found
in search of contact with pedophiles, usually via online
forums and mailing lists, where they implore their ‘af-
fliction’ and ask others how to cope with it, or if sui-
cide was perhaps the best solution?

What they are really searching for is love and un-
derstanding. They want to be loved and chose to mix
with one of the most persecuted minorities so as to
get attention and consolation of their inner empti-
ness, and their more or less total spiritual ignorance.
They may have felt an attraction once to a little boy or
girl, adolescent or child, and derive from such a single
event a conclusion of ‘being a pedophile’ while they
otherwise completely ignore what this means and im-
plies. Which is just another typical habit they often
engage in: jumping to conclusions with a tidbit of


knowledge, or in total ignorance of what they are ac-
tually talking about.

The reason is boomeritis.

They pick up whatever they find fashionable and
cool, be it something others frown upon, if only they
can make a difference by indulging in it and pretend-
ing to be this-and-that. So doing will for a certain
while fill their inner emptiness; they have something
to gossip and rant about.

As to the facts, I have largely expanded about
what is, and what is not pedophile attraction in other
publications; the fact of having a one-time or transi-
tory sexual attraction for a child by no means implies
the person to being pedophile and still less to being
‘a pedophile.’

I have particularly elucidated that we all have pe-
doemotions, which means loving feelings for children
that may or not become sexualized.

While pedoemotions are universal, pedophiles are
special in that their sexual attraction has crystallized
into something exclusive; their emosexual focus is on
children, and here even more particularly upon a spe-


cific age group and gender of children, not just chil-
dren as a generic group. Pedophile attraction is not
random, but specific.

A modern-day subject Oedipal Heroes rant about
is pedophilia, or rather what they project upon it. And
it’s no better when it’s about their own supposed pe-
dophilia, when in truth they are hooked up in a shal-
low normalcy and are looking for a girlfriend, a young
women, but dare not approach one, coward as they
are. Interestingly so, Sigmund Freud must have known
some exemplars of this vintage, but he was gross and
unscientific when generalizing that male pedophilia
generally was but cowardice to approach an adult fe-
male. In that general sense, Freud’s statement is
blunder, but with regard to this specific group of
Oedipal Heroes I mentioned, it is true.

Oedipal Heroes bear their narcissistic wound often
in public, like one bears an amulet; this is especially
today the practice in the United States and in the
American media world; narcissism, as it’s the fashion-
able affliction of a whole nation, has become a sign of
class. Thomas Moore says in his book Care of the Soul
(1994) that America has a great longing to be the New


World of opportunity and a moral beacon for the
world. And further:

It longs to fulfill these narcissistic images of it-
self. At the same time it is painful to realize the
distance between the reality and that image.
America’s narcissism is strong. It is paraded be-
fore the world. If we were to put the nation on
the couch, we might discover that narcissism is
its most obvious symptom. And yet that narcis-
sism holds the promise that this all-important
myth can find its way into life. In other words,
America’s narcissism is its refined puer spirit of
genuine new vision. The trick is to find a way to
that water of transformation where hard self-
absorption turns into loving dialogue with the
world. (Id., 45)

In a way, narcissists suffer not only from their own
emotional starvation, and their inner lack of love, but
also, and more importantly, from the love and the
emotions they try to attack, invalidate and make down
in others. This terrible reductionism breeds destruc-
tiveness that they pay for by being increasingly nihilis-
tic and depressive, the older they get. Accordingly,
Thomas Moore observes:

Narcissism has no soul. In narcissism we take
away the soul’s substance, its weight and impor-
tance, and reduce it to an echo of our own


thoughts. There is no such thing as the soul. We
say. It is only the brain going through electrical
and chemical changes. Or it is only behavior. Or
it is only memory and conditioning. (Id., 46)

The authors of The Mythic Journey (2000) com-
ment that ‘The unhappy love lives of many public
icons testimony to this voracious hunger for love
which is meant to replace what was missing early in
life—a sense of being real as oneself.’ In a society that
has since long lost every notion of what love truly is,
because it has killed love, it is no wonder that it has
become a fashion to speculate love was just a con-
cept, and there was nothing behind but rhetoric, and
that what religions suppose is love is not.

Many males in our sensually deprived postmodern
neo-patriarchy believe love to be a mere concept, a
word, a religious idea, or a rose-colored birthday card,
because they really never experienced how love feels!
As children they were not loved, not desired, because
they had busy parents, parents who were interested in
money-making, science or banking, but not in the
children they procreated.

Thus, here is their huge narcissistic wound, as they
grew into a life that was basically felt as cold and hos-


tile, as they have felt their parents to be eternally ab-
sentminded, when they really needed their warmth,
their closeness, their touch, their kisses, their strokes
and fondling, their love expressed by the body—and
not by nice-sounding verbiage. Many of them had
probably as parents those gossiping monsters that
American commercials lavishly portray as the nation’s
model parents.

In fact, this vintage obviously coins the mold for
the mass of shallow-minded individuals who are hos-
tile to touch as they suffer from the culture’s bias that
assumes that ‘all touch is somehow sexual.’ They thus
embody the politically correct American parent who
keeps his hands safely in his pockets! Noli me tan-

I think it would be a miracle when in such a culture
a family is not habitually violent, not schizophrenic,
not touch-hostile, and where a single child can grow
into a healthy and joyful autonomy and self-reliance. I
want to see that child! You can search for it as the
proverbial needle in the hay. For of course the collec-
tive picture of a society assembled of a majority of
Oedipal Heroes, mixed of the male and female vin-


tage, is not your usual healthy collective, but a mad-

The Postmodern Mix
In this last sub-chapter, I shall elucidate how the
Oedipus and Narcissus sagas hang together, and how
this has given the intrinsic taste to today’s postmod-
ern consumer culture, which I call synonymously
Oedipal culture, hero culture, paranoid culture, par-
aculture, incest culture, rape culture, murder culture
or abuse-centered culture. I shall focus in this analysis
on how the violent impulse comes up to abduct,
sexually penetrate and murder young children, and
how it is related to both the Oedipal and narcissistic
fixations playing in synch, which, then, gives the spe-
cial postmodern mix of violent moralism.

This problem has never been understood by psy-
chiatry. In the case of the German child killer Jürgen
Bartsch, even today German psychiatric authorities
exhibit the nonsensical theory of Bartsch having been
at the same time ‘a pedophile, a pederast and a ho-
mosexual.’ Which is about as saying that a cauliflower
is composed of a tree, an apple and a pear.


As long as Western psychology, psychiatry and
sexology do not recognize the primacy of the emo-
tional etiology in sexual paraphilias before jumping to
look for the culprit in the sexual setup of the person,
nothing will be understood here, not even in the fu-

I have drafted an approach to healing sexual sa-
dism that focuses on a bioenergetic view and that ac-
knowledges that in every sexual attraction the prime
motivating force is emotional, and not sexual in the
first place. It is this emotional predilection that in
some cases becomes sexualized, or charged with
sexual energy. The healing of the sadistic affliction,
then, is brought about through reactivating the natu-
ral emotional flow in the organism. Thus, when I want
to understand sadism and violent sex crime that is an
outflow of this sadism, I must focus on the emotional
setup of the person, and inquire if emotions are flow-
ing, or if the emotional flow is blocked.

In fact, sadism can only be understood when the
fact is seen that emotions, as a condensation of élan
vital or life force, naturally flow in the healthy organ-
ism, and are changing in a kaleidoscopic way, and that


every blockage of this flow brings about a violent
outburst because the energy will free its way to full
discharge. (If the latter is also prohibited by the per-
son’s superego, the person will not be a sadist but
grow a cancer or throw a heart disease).

I shall develop further along the lines of the Nar-
cissus legend and ask a few questions. According to
the myth, Narcissus fell in love with his own self-
image. Was he never loved by anyone, or why did he
feel such an urge to fall in love, an urge so strong that
in absence of any tangible other love object, he chose
himself? Since his childhood, his beauty had been
admired by everyone.

Narcissus himself, however, who has never seen
himself in the mirror, was unaware of his identity. One
day, when he walked at the border of a lake which was
a virgin lake as no animal had ever drunk from it, and
no tree ever plunged its branches in it, and no human
had ever seen it. Here, the youngster felt a sudden
fatigue. He sat down at the lake and bowed over the
water for drinking. And, for the first time, he saw his
double. Fallen in love with himself, the myth says, he
spent hours in melancholy and in regretting that he


would never be able to possess his twin sister, which
was his living self-image. Eventually, concludes the
tale, Narcissus could not stand the agony of this im-
possible love and ran a knife in his heart, bursting out
in: ‘Farewell, beautiful love that has no hope.’ And on
the place where his blood fell on the ground, white
narcissi grew that had red hearts.

This for the legend.

On first sight one may think that this is a story
about vanity. But in reality the legend stands for the
discovery of identity. What is identity? Identity can be
defined operationally, as it’s very difficult to give an
overall definition to it, about as difficult as it is to de-
fine love. Functionally speaking, identity is character-
ized by the fact that all what we can discover in an-
other, we must have discovered in ourselves first.

And the end result of this self-discovery is identity.
This means that we cannot perceive the qualities of
another if, and as long as, we ignore our own. Narcis-
sus’ apparent egocentrism is truly the first step, and a
necessary one, in his self-discovery, which is catalyzed
by the discovery why he is lovable. Selflove is the
condition for our capacity to love others.


This psychological insight must be put in relation
to education and the child’s relationship with the
mother. It is not haphazard that in the legend, the
mother took all kinds of precautions to avoid the child
discovering himself in a mirror! Such as Narcissus’
mother are mothers who have never time and atten-
tion for their child.

The mother is the mirror of the child’s ego. The
ego can develop only in a child whose mother is able
and willing to mirror that ego.

A narcissistic mother cannot do that. This is why
children who have narcissistic mothers, also called
witch mothers, do not know who they are, and their
ego development is deficient.

Such kind of mothers search in their children what
they, when they were young, searched in their par-
ents: they try to mirror themselves in their children,
thereby changing the roles, and the rules, in that they
burden the child with an ability a child cannot have,
namely to be a parent for their own mother. This re-
sults in the child as a later adult having in turn a defi-
cient ego. As it is already obvious after this short ex-
planation, narcissism is by definition generational,


really a family curse, to use the old term, and here it’s
correct, but not for the Oedipal hangup.

The problem of narcissism is especially virulent
with single mothers who got a single male child, and
when the father of the child is absent forever or most
of the time. Here then, in this constellation, as I have
shortly outlined earlier in this study, the Oedipal han-
gup comes in and makes itself felt.

When the boy cannot identify with his father dur-
ing the Oedipal phase, the boy will develop an Oedi-
pal hangup. That means the boy will cling to his
mother in an unhealthy and neurotic manner that will
negatively infringe upon his emotional and psy-
chosexual development.

In the legend, Oedipus killed his father and mar-
ried his mother. He however did this unconsciously,
for he ignored his parents. The tragedy was triggered
by the father, not the son. If we say it was fate, and
only fate, we in last resort deny responsibility. An
Oedipal fixation becomes a problem for a little boy
especially in case the mother is a home-sitter, a
woman who has abandoned any hope to find a viable
partner, and thus projects her erotic wishes on her


son. This may be expressed in erotically seductive be-
havior, but in most cases these women are actually
erotically blocked on a conscious level. The problem
here is that the boy won’t leave the home in search of
a partner and that the constant emotional demands
of the mother trap the boy in a pseudo-incestuous
and co-dependent partner relation where he be-
comes the ersatz for the partner the mother denies
herself to find.

The fact that such a relation remains platonic is in-
significant compared to the impossibility for the boy
to truly build autonomy. In this constellation, what
happens is that the boy’s striving for autonomy either
faces explicit demands of the mother to stay close to
her, or is charged with guilt and a growing rationaliza-
tion of the situation that will be expressed by the boy
in the wish to ‘protect’ the mother, to save the mother
from any harm she suffered previously with men.

Typically in this entanglement situation, the
mother tells her son in all length and width the misfor-
tunes she suffered in her love life, thereby invoking in
him a self-defeating judgment about himself, his own


maleness. This negative judgment of the male can be
coarsely expressed in the slogan ‘all men are swines.’

In my own case of codependence with my mother,
all this was aggravated further through the fact that
my mother put me in homes where I was cruelly mis-
treated, without caring too much about the violence
inflicted upon me on a daily basis. This resulted in a
particularly strong contradiction between the life I was
leading during the week, in the home, and the life I
was supposed to live with her, during the weekend; it
gave her a basis for justifying her over-protectiveness,
and the home sweet home philosophy she spun
around it. I had to be compensated, she reasoned, for
the ‘bad home’ in having a ‘nice weekend’ with her
and she would, as always, be ‘very generous’ to me,
and it was this so-called ‘generosity’ that she always
forwarded as a shield in situations of conflict, when I
namely wanted greater autonomy.

I was of course not unconscious of this sordid en-
tanglement, and here I certainly differed from other
youngsters in that I was actually so conscious about it
that I actively wished to break out of it and repeatedly
thought of running away from home. I was often furi-


ous against my mother and had a strong sense of the
injustice she was doing to me, but I could not express
this anger other than by thinking of myself as being a
bad boy.

Later on in life, when I was already married, actu-
ally not so much later, as I married young, I re-
proached my mother to have overprotected me in a
way to keep me away from life, thereby invalidating
my striving for autonomy, and my quest to make love
experiences with girls outside home and school. Her
answer in that and other very similar situations was
one of viciously attacking me as an ungrateful nerd
who was ‘just like his father and uncles,’ while she had
‘sacrificed herself always’ so that I could have a de-
cent life because if I had been under the tutelary
authority of my father, I would have ‘run the streets to
find food.’ That she regretted the bad experiences I
made in the homes but that she had ‘always been
much more generous than any other parent’, for
compensating me a little for the hurt suffered in those

When I asked her, at age eighteen, to study in
Paris, she replied she was not going to finance my ‘in-


terest for luxury’ and that if I wanted to study there, I
should ‘find my money in the street.’ I stayed and
studied in my home town. Similarly for the subject to
study. I preferred to become a musical teacher or re-
cording engineer, but she insisted law was the best
for me to study. I gave in while I knew that I had a
passion for music, and for children, and would have to
force myself onto law. Which I did for the next twenty

Typically, emotional abuse does not imply a sexual
interaction between parent and child. In the contrary
will the mother carefully avoid touching the boy, and
it’s this avoidance of touch much more than anything
that rings the alarm bell in the boy’s unconscious. Why
does my mother never touch me, he reasons? And
correctly so. Why do these mothers never touch their
sons, I thus ask again, as the answer is in the ques-
tion? Emotional abuse is so much ingrained in patriar-
chal culture, and the role of the mother-saving Oedi-
pal Hero is so common in our culture that most peo-
ple never even once reflect about the perversity of
such a family constellation!


Easy body touch is not something fostered in this
kind of milieu; in the contrary. It is something fostered
in healthy families, where parents have a functional
love and sex life. It is the conflict between the never-
talked-about and repressed, and the prudishness that
results from this repression, on one hand, and the
open or implicit possessiveness of the symbiotoholic
parent, on the other, that triggers in the child an un-
conscious sexual response for the parent. The for
most people uncomfortable truth is that if the incest
had been acted out sexually, the psychic tension at
the root of the co-dependence would not pent up
and no Oedipal fixation would result from it.

Men have given open testimonials on television
who had consenting intercourse with their mothers,
and the astonishing result was that they had the most
fulfilling sex life with adult females later on in life; of-
ten in these constellations the future wife will have an
excellent relationship with the first woman the boy
enjoyed sexually, his mother. It is emotional incest, not
sexual incest that really creates havoc in a boy’s psy-
che because his biological male identity is gravely
impaired through the exclusiveness of his relation with
mother; and guilt and shame is the result of it be-


cause the boy knows that he should rather look
around for a girl of his age or even an older woman,
and that it’s time to leave his mother and the nest be-

I see in this ungainly attitude of narcissistic moth-
ers toward their sons the real core of the problem of
emotional abuse because it creates a flagrant contra-
diction. When the boy wants to go out and look for
friends or a girlfriend, the mother will tend to keep
him away from life, arguing he was still ‘too young and
unexperienced’ to just go on his own, that there are
dangers involved in such a quest, or perverse strang-
ers waiting to get him around the corner. But when it
goes to care for mother because she is sick, de-
pressed, or had a bad day, then boy is big enough to
play the gigolo, and to be around mother, and at her
feet for any service she may need, and boy is big
enough then to understand when mother talks about
her past and her ‘bad experiences with men’. This
contradiction creates rage in the boy because he sees
that the mother just uses him for her purposes and
plays power games with him.


From a bioenergetic point of view, it has to be
seen that the Oedipal conflict is traumatic for the
child because of the denial of sexual fulfillment it im-
plies, while it triggers so much longing in the child. It’s
a real torture for the child, a real trauma, and it has
been admitted by psychoanalyst Françoise Dolto that
in most cases children lose their pre-Oedipal memory,
which only confirms my assumption that the Oedipal
construct in Western culture brings real trauma to the
child as it results in amnesia. In her book La Cause des
Enfants (1985), Dolto writes:

Memory in adults erases all that belongs to the
pre-oedipal period. That is why our society has
so much difficulty to accept infantile sexuality. In
past centuries there were the nurses who knew
it. Parents, however, ignored it. (Id., 47)

Freud namely found that amnesia, the loss of
memory subsequent to the trauma-triggering situa-
tion is in most cases the indicator for trauma having
occurred. Hence, Freud concluded, when we find
childhood amnesia in a patient, this can be taken as
direct evidence for the etiology of trauma to be af-
firmed for that situation in question. This is in my view
the reason for the strong aggressiveness toward the


parent of the same sex, in the Oedipal situation. It’s a
visceral reaction of the biosystem that comes from
sensual and sexual deprivation and that is caused by
the exclusiveness of the parent-child relation in gen-
eral, and parental and societal prohibition of children
having sex with peers, in particular.

Children need and want a sex life, much like
adults, while the sexual acts children perform or at-
tempt to perform may be of a lesser complete nature,
but this difference does not alter the psychosexual
importance of childhood sexuality.

When, as in our culture, children are prohibited
from engaging in sexually explicit and healthy peer
relations, or relations with adults other than their par-
ents, they will be trapped, if they want or not, in a
gerontophilic attraction toward their parents.

This cultural setup that is obviously against nature,
results in the triangular relationship between parents
and one or two children that is so typical for the mod-
ern urban family. In this strongly exclusive and triangu-
lar relationship, the child is coerced into an ambigu-
ous love-hate relation with their parents; what fuels
the child’s aggressiveness toward the parent of the


same sex is not, as Freud supposed, a situation of ri-
valry for the single available sex partner, often coined
colloquially as ‘two men desire one woman’ or ‘two
girls desire one man,’ but more generally a rage to
have been denied the vast realm of potential sex
partners of same or different age, outside of the fam-

And the aggressiveness, therefore, of the child is
not exclusively directed against the parent of the
same sex, but against both parents, while it has to be
noted that the child’s organism will not allow the child
to gain consciousness of this rage because of mere
survival reasons. The child’s cognitive apparatus will
build in a justification factor that leads to the child’s
reasoning on the lines of :

—Well, I am supposed to love my parents, and be
exclusively loved by my parents, as society does not
allow me to love other people, and does not allow
other people to love me in the same way as my par-
ents love me. Society says it’s dangerous for me, as
other people may want to abduct and kill me as they
cannot love me in the same pure manner as my par-
ents do.


Here is where the whole system of lies and be-
trayal starts to distort the perception and cognitive
grasp of love by the consumer child, in this bias that
society puts up, and that it strongly fuels through its
abysmally violent anti-pedophilia debate! And what it
leads to is that because children cannot for survival
reasons express the rage against their parents and
society, they will turn this rage against themselves,
and become narcissistic and auto-destructive, if not

Even children who do not develop a pathology will
remain with strong guilt feelings, often all their life
through, regarding sexuality and all forms of erotic

I guess Freud’s reasoning here is true insofar as
when the parent of the opposite sex is present, the
child can project some of the aggressiveness upon
him or her. But here, contrary to Freud, I assume that
because of survival reasons, this acting-out of aggres-
siveness toward the parent of the same sex, for ex-
ample through straight talk, or by hitting the parent, is
such perilous an action for a child that this will be
done only when he or she can be sure of the support


and unconditional love of the parent of the opposite

This is a precarious situation for a child in any kind
of family, and I believe that generally Freud’s reason-
ing here was quite theoretical. As a general rule, chil-
dren do keep true to respecting their parents even to
a point of self-denial, except a minority of children
who incarnate with a very strong ego and character. I
have indeed observed that the number of children of
the latter vintage is growing over the last decades,
but at the same time, the situation of the child in con-
sumer culture has become more and more tough, and
alienating, to a point that children are today as much
under state control and supervision as nuclear weap-
ons, foreign embassies, top secret material and spies.

This is a potential root for more domestic violence
because to enclose children in homes and schools
that function pretty much like prisons is not what a
caring state will do who loves their child citizens. We
are facing a major social and political pathology here,
if we can face it at all.

In my experience, most people in Western culture
blind these facts simply out of their consciousness in-


terface, and this because of sheer fright of the conse-
quences of any vital action to the contrary.

Freud’s cultural bias is notorious and I will not
need to write pages about that as it has not only been
analyzed in modern biographies and recent psycho-
analytic literature, but it was the true reason for the
clash between Freud and Reich, Freud and Jung,
Freud and Adler, Freud and Rank, Freud and Klein,
and Freud and Fromm.

The clashes were of course personally tinted, and
in each case, there was a personal drama behind the

What is significant however, and common to all of
these deep relationships is that none of them was
solved peacefully; this already is a hint as to the unruly
nature of Freud’s authoritarianism. And the material
speaks for itself, as we have really a large body of evi-

The clash between Reich and Freud was particu-
larly revealing, and Freud’s cultural bias, for one time,
was explicit and coined into the dictum ‘culture must
prevail’. Freud rejected Reich’s activism for child sex-


ual rights, despite the fact that it was he himself, who
had for the first time in Western social history openly
declared that the human child is sexual from birth.
Freud reasoned Reich with the argument that the psy-
chiatric profession had to accept the basic setup of
society including its denial of the sexual rights of the
child, and that the psychiatrist and psychoanalyst had
to cure the psychic malformations resulting from the
cultural distortion of the natural sexual function, but
not more. In other words, they had to restrain from
any social activism because otherwise, as Freud
thought, society would be thrown into chaos.

The Oedipal situation, as I coin in one term the
whole of the emotional, tactile, sensual and sexual
deprivation of the child in modern consumer culture,
is a real trauma. It creates havoc in the child’s psyche
and one of the undesired results of this pathology is
that it leads to a link between sexual desire, aggres-
sive rage and fear, which can lead to sexual deviations
later in life. Typical for these deviations is namely that
the person can discharge sexually only if acts of sa-
dism are inflicted upon the mate, or conversely, the
masochistic suffering of acts of sadism is experienced
during the mating game.


When adult males project their unconscious Oedi-
pal mother imago on little girls, they may experience
emotional and sexual attraction for them, but they
also may at times experience the same rage they felt
toward their mothers, but that they repressed. This
repressed rage, then, may become sexually charged.
This may, or not, depending on the level of con-
sciousness of the person, lead to a violent urge to
punish little girls by beating them up and/or by forc-
ing oral, anal or vaginal intercourse on them, or by
abducting them for this purpose. It has since long
been established by psychiatry that these urges, be
they acted out or not, have their origin in an unre-
solved Oedipus Complex.

The person will have greater control of this afflic-
tion if he does not fight it but tries to understand his
behavior, and his emotional confusion. And here we
see again the difference in behavior between the true
hero and the Oedipal Hero.

The true hero will first of all acknowledge the de-
sire, be it hard to accept, and hard to live with, and
cope with, even if the desire is so virulent that it can


never be acted out without really hurting and harming
the child physically, or emotionally.

This is, to repeat it, not the case with a pure sexual
attraction, as in that case a way can be found in most
circumstances to abreact sexually without actual
penetration, but only in the aggravating case that the
desire is charged with violence in such a way that
penetration is needed for coming off, and even
worse, that the child has to be beaten, made suffer
and cry and give signs of expressing the pain, typi-
cally by screaming, for the sadist being able to dis-
charge orgasmically. It goes without saying that for
any child, whatever their age, and even an adult, the
latter experience is not a particularly nice one, while a
tender sexual encounter with an adult without pene-
tration may go along with a child, even a completely
innocent boy or girl, if only there is no pain, no vio-
lence and no threat, and most importantly, no coer-

The problem is that most Oedipal Heroes in one
way or the other suffer from sexual sadism, as a sim-
ple result of the rage they repressed when they re-
peatedly wanted to build autonomy and were held


back by their possessive and narcissistic mothers.
While society has developed in recent years quite a
permissive attitude toward sadomasochism when it
occurs between consenting adults, this form of sexu-
ality remains highly problematic when an adult traps a
child into his sadistic affliction, and perhaps by ex-
pecting the child to be masochistic ‘by nature’ in or-
der to justify the offense.

Whatever one may think in this respect, it can
hardly be denied that our society must show more re-
sponsibility in working out future social and legal poli-
cies for preventing sexual violence against children.
The present situation is not satisfying, as it only fo-
cuses upon enforcing time and again criminal pun-
ishments, which has never been an effective social
policy; one may begin to look at how the situation of
the Oedipal Hero could be cognitively grasped and
understood, and how, as a result of these insights,
methods could be developed to help the afflicted
men to grow beyond their fixation.

In this endeavor, one focus should certainly be to
help the individual to accept to be loved, to be
touched, to be kissed and fondled, to begin contem-


plating himself in a mirror while experiencing feelings
of power, selflove, admiration and healthy self-pride.

An important element of the therapy would be to
dissolve the muscular and characterological armor,
and this by suggesting the person to experience sex-
ual intercourse with a young woman in a loving and
tender way, while the focus should be on enjoying the
hot and melting energy flow as it streams through the
body, once the armor has been dissolved.

My research showed that no coercion can help
with sexual sadism, but only tolerance, and again tol-
erance, and teaching the person actually to be toler-
ant with himself. Tolerance means patience first of all,
as any progress will be incremental, and rather slow in
the beginning. With dissolving the character armor,
the entire belief system of the Oedipal Hero will bit by
bit fall in ashes, and when the mind is enlarged, the
body will decrease in size, as a matter of inverse pro-

I mean that any pattern of obsessive body-
building, obesity, heavy drinking or chain-smoking will
vanish by itself, once the armor begins to fall apart.


On the other hand, I am not in the rings of those
who believe that curing the symptoms will do the job,
which is why I am firmly opposed to any kind of quick
fixes in this respect. Only a holistic, and inside-out
approach can do.


Abrams, Jeremiah (Ed.)

Reclaiming the Inner Child

Allen, Abel Leighton

The Message of New Thought

Allen, James

As a Man Thinketh, 1902

Arntz, William & Chasse, Betsy

What the Bleep Do We Know

Down The Rabbit Hole Quantum Edition

Bachelard, Gaston

The Poetics of Reverie

Bandler, Richard

Get the Life You Want

Barron, Frank X., Montuori, et al. (Eds.)

Creators on Creating

Boldt, Laurence G.

Zen and the Art of Making a Living

How to Find the Work You Love

Zen Soup


The Tao of Abundance

Bordeaux-Szekely, Edmond

Teaching of the Essenes from Enoch to the Dead Sea

Gospel of the Essenes

Gospel of Peace of Jesus Christ

Gospel of Peace, 2d Vol.

Branden, Nathaniel

How to Raise Your Self-Esteem

Butler-Bowden, Tom

50 Success Classics


Byrne, Rhonda

The Secret

The Magic

Campbell, Joseph

The Hero With A Thousand Faces

Occidental Mythology

The Masks of God

The Power of Myth



Capacchione, Lucia

The Power of Your Other Hand

Cassou, Michelle & Cubley, Steward

Life, Paint and Passion

Chopra, Deepak

Creating Affluence

Life After Death


The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success


The Spontaneous Fulfillment of Desire

Diamond, Stephen A., May, Rollo

Anger, Madness, and the Daimonic

DiCarlo, Russell E. (Ed.)

Towards A New World View

Dürckheim, Karlfried Graf

Hara: The Vital Center of Man

Zen and Us

The Call for the Master

The Way of Transformation

The Japanese Cult of Tranquility


Edmunds, Francis

An Introduction to Anthroposophy

Erickson, Milton H.

My Voice Will Go With You


Complete Works 1.0, CD-ROM

Fensterhalm, Herbert

Don’t Say Yes When You Want to Say No

Flack, Audrey

Art & Soul

Freud, Sigmund

The Interpretation of Dreams




Ghiselin, Brewster (Ed.)

The Creative Process

Goleman, Daniel

Emotional Intelligence

Gordon Wasson, R.

The Road to Eleusis

Goswami, Amit

The Self-Aware Universe


Grof, Stanislav

Ancient Wisdom and Modern Science

Beyond the Brain

LSD: Doorway to the Numinous

Realms of the Human Unconscious

The Cosmic Game

The Holotropic Mind

When the Impossible Happens

Grout, Pam


Hicks, Esther and Jerry

Manifest Your Desires

The Amazing Power of deliberate Intent

Hofmann, Albert

LSD, My Problem Child

Holmes, Ernest

The Science of Mind

Jaffe, Hans L.C.



James, William

Writings 1902-1910


Koestler, Arthur

The Act of Creation

Krishnamurti, J.

Freedom From The Known

The First and Last Freedom

Education and the Significance of Life

The Essential Krishnamurti

The Ending of Time


Laing, Ronald David

Divided Self

R.D. Laing and the Paths of Anti-Psychiatry


The Politics of Experience

Leadbeater, Charles Webster

Astral Plane


The Inner Life

Liedloff, Jean

Continuum Concept


Lusk, Julie T. (Editor)

30 Scripts for Relaxation Imagery & Inner Healing

Maisel, Eric

Fearless Creating

McCarey, William A.

In Search of Healing

McKenna, Terence

The Archaic Revival

Food of the Gods

The Invisible Landscape


True Hallucinations

McNiff, Shaun

Art as Medicine

Art as Therapy

Trust the Process

Miller, Alice

The Drama of the Gifted Child


Moore, Thomas

Care of the Soul


Murphy, Joseph

The Power of Your Subconscious Mind
WEST NYACK, N.Y.: PARKER, 1981, N.Y.: BANTAM, 1982

The Miracle of Mind Dynamics

Miracle Power for Infinite Riches

The Amazing Laws of Cosmic Mind Power

Secrets of the I Ching

Think Yourself Rich

Murphy, Michael

The Future of the Body

Myers, Tony Pearce

The Soul of Creativity


Myss, Caroline

The Creation of Health

Naparstek, Belleruth

Your Sixth Sense

Ostrander, Sheila & Schroeder, Lynn

Superlearning 2000


Ouspensky, Pyotr Demianovich

In Search of the Miraculous

Pearce Myers, Tony (Editor)

The Soul of Creativity


Ponder, Catherine

The Dynamic Laws of Prosperity

The Healing Secrets of the Ages

The Millionaire from Nazareth

The Millionaires of Genesis

Rank, Otto

Art and Artist

The Significance of Psychoanalysis for the Mental Sci-

Rosen, Sydney (Ed.)

My Voice Will Go With You


Ruiz, Don Miguel

The Four Agreements

The Mastery of Love

The Voice of Knowledge

Schwartz, Andrew E.

Guided Imagery for Groups

Shinn, Florence Scovel

The Game of Life and How to Play It

Shone, Ronald

Creative Visualization


Stein, Robert M.

Redeeming the Inner Child in Marriage and Therapy



Steiner, Rudolf



Stone, Hal & Stone, Sidra

Embracing Our Selves

Szasz, Thomas

The Myth of Mental Illness

Tart, Charles T.

Altered States of Consciousness


Whitfield, Charles L.

Healing the Child Within