Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

DHARMA CAFE

Sparks of Light : Faith, Hope and R.D. Laing

R.D. Laing was an iconic figure of the sixties. Unconventional, controversial, and
undeniably brilliant, how people viewed him then— or remember him now — is itself a
kind of historical rorschach test. Since his death, in 1989, he has been praised,
plagiarized, imitated, vilified, and increasingly forgotten. Dan Burston, perhaps Laing’s
most astute biographer, thinks it important that we remember him.

Though few of his readers were aware of it, R.D. Laing combined a rare appreciation
of Asian wisdom with a heartfelt immersion in Christian spirituality—a trait that he shared
with older contemporaries like E.Graham Howe and Alan Watts. Nowhere is this more
apparent than in an interview he did with George Feuerstein, entitled “Sparks of Light”,
which first appeared in 1983 in The Laughing Man magazine. When William Stranger
approached me to write something about R.D.Laing for Dharmacafé.com, I asked him to
assist me by reproducing this interview, which is reprinted below. Why? So that readers can
get a glimpse of Laing at his best, and gain a deeper insight into his religious and spiritual side.
My initial plan was to write a series of brief reflections on various remarks made by Laing,
and I myself was not prepared for the lengthy commentary that gradually unfolded as I
reflected on the various things he said there. But the more I thought about them, the more
fraught with significance his remarks became, and as a result, my commentary grew longer
than the interview itself.

Some people may feel that by going on at such length, I am trying to upstage the
Master. If so, however, they are approaching this commentary in the wrong spirit.
Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, the Yoga and Buddhist sutras, with which
Laing was intimately familiar, often go on for pages about a single line of text. Such
commentaries imply that the text is worthy of sustained reflection, not something to be read
and passed over in a hurry. Does that mean that I approach Laing’s words as if they were
“holy writ?” No, indeed. Like the spiritual traditions in which he was so deeply versed, Laing
was full of contradictions, and bringing those contradictions to light is a perfectly legitimate
and respectful undertaking if we use the awareness of them to reflect with greater depth and
clarity on the issues at hand, rather than making them the basis for a hostile deconstruction of
his work. I hope that this free flowing meditation on Laing’s interview with Feuerstein will
help to consolidate Laing’s hold on posterity, and demonstrate his continuing relevance to
spiritual seekers in our time. Let us begin with the interview itself.

While the Scottish psychiatrist R. D. Laing has gained worldwide professional renown
for his work with schizophrenia, he has also won popular regard for his vehement social
criticism. He contends that society, in general, is founded on denial of self and
experience, rather than the discovery of reality in its fullness and wholeness. He has
strongly objected to the modern trend toward depersonalization, especially as it appears
in psychiatry in the guise of scientific objectivism.

To Laing, schizophrenia is not a diagnosed condition, but a political label. A person

branded “schizophrenic” is invalidated as a human being, and his or her experience is
dismissed as “crazy.” However, from L.aing’s point of view, the regression
accompanying a nervous break-down (or schizophrenic episode) is a healing process
that if allowed to occur naturally will result in the reintegration of the personality.

1 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

Many methods of so-called therapy actually interfere with or abort this natural healing
process. Thus, Laing has proposed the method of “anti-psychiatry”, or the attempt to
provide a situation where people can, under guidance, come to better understand
themselves outside the “ceremony” of psychiatric treatment.

His exploration of the inner world of schizophrenics has led R. D. Laing to consider the
similarity between certain kinds of apparent madness and valid spiritual experiences. In
fact, he holds that schizophrenics, through their firsthand exploration of the “ inner
world”, actually have more to teach psychiartrists than the reverse. Consequently, he
has conducted an ongoing investigation into the nature of spiritual experience both in
himself and in his clients. This spiritual aspect of his experience and thought is explored
in the following interview, conducted at The Ojai Foundation by Georg Feuerstein of
The Laughing Man staff. Laing’s forthright and thoughtful observations are remarkable
for their overtly religious (Christian) language.
Born in Glasgow, Scotland, R. D. Laing was educated at the University of Glasgow,
receiving his M.D. in 1951. He was director of the Langham Clinic in London from
1962-65, when he co-founded the Kingsley Hall Clinic, an experimental “anti-
psychiatric” clinic for those under-going schizophrenic episodes. Among the books he
has authored are The Divided Self (1960), The Self and Other (1961), The Politics of
Experience (1967), and The Facts of Life: An Essay in Existential Biology (1976).

TLM: You have inspected your life perhaps more intensively and systematically than
most people. What has been your most valuable discovery from this process of
inspection?

LAING: That hope is justifiable. In Christian language, the highest values are faith,
hope, and charity or love, and the most important of these is love. However, love can
become darkened or disappear, and we may not always be aware of love in our hearts or
believe that it exists in the world. How strange it seems that there should be love at all in
this world. That love exists at all seems more a bonus than an essential feature of the
universe.

But human life is only dust and ashes without love. If you investigate and inquire into
the world without love, you don’t find anything worthwhile. If you look at a tree or a
frog or anything at all without the eyes of love, then you obtain only loveless, heartless
knowledge. When such knowledge is ac-cumulated and applied to practices of scientific
technology, it becomes the most destructive form of knowledge ever discovered. Even
the worst black magic cannot vie with the destructive capacity of science. Its very
method is to destroy what it looks at in order to discover its elements.

When we start to doubt, hope is the anchor that binds our faith to love. I am speaking in
the vocabulary of Christianity. It is a pity that this vocabulary is so degraded. The first
English translation of what is now called “the holy ghost” was by John Wycliffe, who
translated it as “our healthy spirit.” That is the manifestation of Divinity within and
through our own nature. All our natures, with this healthy spirit are sparks of light in
the same fire. That immediately unites us. That companionability in the light of our
healthy spirit—which is light and love and the way and truth and life—is what I have
become less embarrassed about affirming in the course of the last thirty years or so.

TLM: Would you say that psychiatry is suffering in its models, approaches, and overall
ethos from the ill effects of a materialist ideology?

LAING: Yes, very fundamentally. It even includes a schizoid spiritual materialism.

Many psychiatrists think they fervently believe in God, yet hold the theory that thoughts
are epiphenomena of the brain. Of course, how we articulate the nature of the brain’s

2 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

relationship to our spirit is a very deep problem of language and insight. But by and
large, we have a materialistic psychiatry and a materialistic humanism rather than
cosmic consciousness. In the end, psychiatrists cannot even be humane unless they see
Man’s place in the whole scheme of things.

TLM: Apart from writing books or giving lectures that challenge the scientistic ideology
that obviously rules our civilization, what do you propose as reasonable counter-
measures for yourself and other people like yourself?

LAING: Prayer is very important. I think the most important prayer is a prayerful
waiting or attentiveness that doesn’t specifically ask for anything. Mother Teresa
recommends what I imagine is the most useful prayer. It consists of simply listening to
the silence of ones own heart. I don’t think one can do any better than that.

One can serve the world and humanity by stopping what one realizes one should not be
doing, even if one can’t think of anything else to do. Many people say, “If we stop this,
what will we do?” We simply don’t know what we will do. If we arc lost in a dark wood,
we never discover where we are until we realize we are lost. What do we do, when we
don’t know what to do?

TLM: Do you feel that prayer is effective because you transform yourself by praying, or
do you have a sense that prayer can actually affect the world?

LAING: Yes, I believe that the material world is contained within the world of the
Spirit, which has final, triumphal mastery of the situation at all times. I don’t think
anything happens to materials except what Spirit allows.

TLM: What, then, do you feel is the highest potential of Man?

LAING: The highest human potential is to glorify the Spirit, for the Spirit to manifest
itself through us. I think that comes by the grace of the Spirit. The very cooperation of
Man with God is God-given. The end of life is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. The
token of that perfect accomplishment is beatitude.

I don’t like to go so far as to talk of actual union with God or becoming God. Such
expressions tend to encourage Man’s vanity and spiritual ambitions. You find people
saying, “What’s the point of being a bank manager if, through meditation techniques,
you can become God in less time than it takes to get through business school’?” I would
much rather speak of being a slave of God, in whose service is perfect freedom.

TLM: You wrote in The Politics of Experience that in order to adapt to the world the
child abdicates its ecstasy. Master Da Free John argues that ecstasy is our native
condition, out of which we project our sense of human dilemma.

LAING: Yes, I think ecstasy is the native condition of ordinary mind. Our conditional
mind has covered it over. What we take to be our ordinary mind is an aberration. The
whole world is magical. Every child is aware of that until persuaded otherwise.

TLM: Would you say this loss of ecstasy is inevitable?

LAING: No, I don’t at all think it’s inevitable. I think it’s an aberration of our
civilization.

TLM: Do you feel that there have been civilizations before ours where people actually
maintained this state of ecstasy from childhood through adulthood?

3 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

LAING: Without any doubt, our civilization is unusual in its manner of culturing out
everything transpersonal, along with all the fairies and spirits and so forth. But you
have to go back to Aeschylus and the Greek tragedians, where you find a sense of the
time before history was written down. You have to go back to Homer, and Homer just
gives us the transition from all that went before. In The Origin of Consciousness in the
Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind Julian Jaynes points out that in the Old Testament
and in Homer practically all the major figures heard voices and saw visions as well as
dreamed.

TLM: Experience figures very large in your work and presumably in your life. But
experience presupposes an experiencing subject, or the ego. Therefore, no experience
can be truly transcendental, since the ego is still in place. What is your view on that?

LAING: I don’t think that such a thing as the ego exists. The ego is a cultural
hallucination. The “ego” is a name for a coherent set of mental operations that enable us
to function in our society. We draw a circle around those operations and think it is a
thing with which to identify ourselves. We must disidentify ourselves from the ego and
see it as a process, a systematic, reasonably coherent set of operations. What we caII our
ego we know to be always changing, impermanent, transient, but still we persist in this
hallucination. The transcendental perspective is both immanent and transcendental. So
one must simultaneously get into oneself and out of one’s ego. It is a return to
ordinariness, as in the ox-herding cycle of Japanese Zen Buddhism. A mountain finally
becomes a mountain again, a tree a tree, a river a river.

TLM: In that “experience” of enlightenment, is the ego still in place somewhere? Are
people functioning on the egoic level?

LAING: Yes, it is a residue.

TLM: Consider an alternative to your definition of the ego. Master Da Free John
defines the ego as the mechanism of identification with the body-mind, rather than as
something essential to functioning. That opens the possibility that this mechanism comes
to an end. One can still function in the world, but be identified with the All-Identity of
everything. Do you concede that possibility?

LAING: Absolutely. What I am saying is not an objection to what you are saying, but
simply a discussion of how we use words. I am inclined to reserve the word “ego” for a
product of that process of identification. You would use the word ego for the process of
identification itself.

In the etymological sense, Nirvana is sometimes delineated as “nir” being “no” and
“vana” being “spinning.” Thus, Nirvana is the end of the spinning and weaving of this
product by turning mental and physical processes into a sort of web with which one
identifies oneself. Another way of expressing that transcendental-immanent experience
of oneself is the metaphor of the circle whose perimeter is infinite and whose center is
nowhere.

Some people might first discover this by sitting cross-legged for a long, long time until
this identification with the body and with what we call our mind evaporates. Then
everything is as it was before, but without that identification.

TLM: Here is a quote from Master Da Free John’s Work: “Heartfelt release of fear is
the secret of passing through the spiritual process without going mad.“1 What is your
feeling about that? Fear is a major theme in psychiatry, as well as being a major theme
in all kinds of spiritual testing.

4 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

LAING: Temptation has not so much to do with being drawn into all sorts of bad
thoughts as it does with being intimidated by the worst sort of terrors and demons that
can be presented to oneself. In the Buddha’s last meditation before he achieved
enlightenment, he was beset by demons and his only response was to touch the Earth.
That fearlessness is the final release from anything that can be thrown at one. It goes
beyond the need to be courageous.

I still get frightened myself. I cannot claim that I am not afraid of anything, but I am in
the next best position: I am not afraid of being afraid.

TLM: That quote continues, “You will find no peace until you have realized love,
sacrifice, and self-surrender. You must surrender to God literally and release your fear.
Such surrender is the foundation of religious life and spiritual practice.” 2

LAING: Absolutely.

TLM: “Surrender is the mechanism of transformation, heartfelt surrender to God, and

the great Mechanism in Nature that quickens the surrender of human beings is a human
individual who can act as Spiritual Master, an individual who is transparent to the Life
of God and who can enter into relations with devotees.” 3 What is your feeling here?

LAING: If one is surrendered completely to God, then one has no fear of death, no fear
of what anyone can throw at one, and that is tantamount to peace. Again, in the English
translation of the Greek New Testament we find, “Blessed are the poor in spirit.” In the
original it reads “Blessed are the spiritual beggars,” those who are completely empty-
handed. That emptiness is synonymous with surrender. In surrender, you lose
everything. If one is surrendered to God, one cannot find any consolation or satisfaction
in anything else but God. That brings complete peace, complete emptiness, and total
service. All these words — peace, love, blessedness, fearlessness — are simply different
facets of the same diamond.

TLM: One last quote: “The first obstacle, and the primary obstacle, to spiritual life is
the relationship to the Spiritual Master. It is also the fundamental condition, content,
and source of spiritual or real life.” What is your response to that?

LAING: This is a paradox. Spiritual teachers are a God-given grace in this world. All
spiritual teachers tell their students, “Don’t cling to me.” When a woman put her hand
out to touch Jesus’ robes, his response is often translated “Don’t touch me,” but the
original meaning is “Don’t cling to me.” There is also the metaphor of the good
shepherd. But the whole point of the shepherd is to help the sheep to realize that they
are not sheep. Attachment to a teacher is one of the more subtle obstacles in spiritual
life.5

TLM: In another sense, the guru could also he an obstacle insofar as there is
misunderstanding of what surrender to the Spiritual Master means. Therefore, there is
an immediate reaction to the idea of Spiritual Masters. The ego by nature does not want
to surrender to anything, least of all another seemingly human being, God-Realized or
not.

LAING: I wouldn’t regard anyone as a true spiritual master who non-paradoxically

demands of disciples that they surrender to him. One can get a touch of something one
had not glimpsed from the presence of another person who is further advanced in the
spiritual path than oneself. It has always been recommended to spend time with
spiritually awake people.

TLM: What do you feel is the reason for that?

5 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

LAING: Once again, to put this in Christian terms, Jesus says, “When two or three are
gathered together in my name,” not in the name of Jesus but in the name of Christ,
“then there I am.” There seems to be a sort of spiritual force field, like a magnetic field,
that is set up.

TLM: Would you say, then, that a Spiritual Master can serve a genuine function for
people who have a spiritual appreciation?

LAING: Oh, yes.

TLM: Did you ever have any association of this kind?

LAING: I have associated with a number of holy men. It is impossible for me to imagine
what my life would have been like without meeting and spending quite a lot of time in
the company of such people. But I have never felt any inner impulsion to surrender
myself to a guru. However, if some people feel they need to do that, then I think it is
perfectly appropriate for them to do so. A genuine spiritual master would not be able to
exploit that for his own egoic advantage. It has been said that if you go to a guru with a
pure heart, that purity of heart will protect you, even if the guru turns out to be an
impostor. It will do the guru harm, not the disciple.

TLM: Do you feel there are people around now who actually have Realized God and are
empowered to lead other people to the same Realization?

LAING: I have not personally met any such one. I have met a number of people I would
regard as servants of God.

TLM: You are saying you have not actually met somebody whom you felt was
God-Realized. Is that, perhaps, the reason you did not have that impulsion to surrender
to a guru? If you had met Jesus, would you have followed him? As he said, “Follow me.”

LAING: (pause) I hope so. Yes, definitely.

TLM: That is an honest answer.

1. Da Free John, Compulsory Dancing (The Dawn Horse Press), 1980) p.91.
2. Ibid., p. 92
3. Ibid., p. 28
4. Bubba [Da] Free John, 71 The Method of the Siddhas, rev. ed. (The Dawn Horse
Press, 1978), p. 240.
5. The spiritual relationship between Adept and disciple is a paradoxical one. To relate
to the Adept as a parent figure, cultic idol, or Gocl-substitute only undermines the
spiritual process, depriving the disciple of responsibility. Rather, the Adept must be
recognized as the transparent Agency of the Being-Consciousness that is the true
identity of all beings and things, including the disciple. In that case, the disciple’s
surrender to the Adept provides the spiritual connection to the Iiving Force of
Consciousness that directly instructs the disciple and quickens his Awakening.

[This article originally appeared in The Laughing Man magazine, vol. 5, #12, pp. 19-21.
It is used by permission of The Dawn Horse Press. All rights reserved.]

Before we comment on the interview itself, it may be helpful to know the following. A year
or so before his death in August 1989, R.D. Laing was living quietly in Going, Austria, when
he confided the following dream to his friend and follower, Theodor Itten. He dreamt he was

6 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

“in” a soccer match, but that he was “both sides.” In other words, he did not identify with
any individual player or team member, i.e. a captain or a goalkeeper. Nor did he adopt a
corporate identity, becoming one team as opposed to the other. Instead, his description
conveys the impression that in some sense he was everybody, on both sides, if not implicated
in the action, the game itself (i.e. the offensive and defensive maneuvers from both sides of
the field).

Unfortunately, Laing said no more about this intriguing oneiric interlude. Beyond
identifying it as a football (soccer) match, he did not describe the visual palette of the dream,
nor report on the affect that accompanied it. Finally, he left no “free associations” by means
of which we could interpret it, nor resolve the questions it begs—“If you are both sides, then
the whole notion of winning becomes moot, doesn’t it? If you are both sides, then no one
wins or everyone wins—correct?”

Even in the absence of such information, however, several interpretations are possible. As
I pointed out in The Wing of Madness: The Life and Work of R.D. Laing, books like Sanity,
Madness and the Family, The Politics of Experience and The Politics of The Family were
filled with scathing critiques of the nuclear family, giving rise to the widespread impression
that Laing was basically opposed to the family. Nevertheless, beginning in 1972, Laing,
denounced revolutionaries who neglected their wives and children in the interests of building
“the revolution”, and defended the family against the growing tide of counter-cultural and
ideologically inflected contempt for family life, baffling and antagonizing many former
friends and supporters in the process.

A similar reversal took place with respect to his stance on psychiatric drugs. Laing’s first
book, The Divided Self, published in 1960, was a sustained attempt to make the process of
going mad “intelligible” to ordinary, educated people. It was mercifully free of the jargon of
mainstream psychiatry, psychoanalysis and behaviorism, the dominant approaches in the
mental health field at the time, because Laing felt that reliance on such language gets in the
way of understanding patients as suffering human beings, rather than deepening our
understanding of them. As the sixties unfolded, Laing’s broadened his critique of mainstream
psychiatry well beyond its theoretical models, to include various involuntary “treatments”,
like drugs and electroshock, and became so vehement that he was often accused of being an
“anti-psychiatrist”–a label he always rejected, by the way. But toward the middle and end of
the eighties, Laing’s stance, though still critical, became more conciliatory, and he reached
out again to many old psychiatric colleagues in an effort to engage them in dialogue. Perhaps
inevitably, as he did this with increasing frequency, certain inconsistencies between his earlier
and later positions came to light, disconcerting some of his followers from previous decades,
who wondered where he really stood on the issues, and why he no longer opposed the
(voluntary) use of psychotropic medication, provided patients were fully informed of the risks
entailed in this approach to treatment.

Thomas Szasz, whose reputation as “the gadfly of psychiatry” during the 1960’s was
gradually eclipsed by Laing’s, remained remarkably consistent in all his basic positions as the
decades unfolded, and would no doubt interpret Laing’s dream as an endopsychic
perception–or a spontaneous symbolic self-representation—of Laing’s muddle-headedness
and opportunism, of his tendency to embrace or espouse both sides of an issue; in other
words, to equivocate, or to revel in ambiguity when it suited his purposes. After all, by
Szasz’s account, Laing is everywhere–and nowhere–and does not have to commit himself to a
position or to “take a side”. While Szasz’s appraisal of Laing is exceedingly harsh, any
reasonably alert person can find some evidence of this tendency in his writings and public
pronouncements. Consistency was not his strong suit.

A Freudian might say that Laing’s dream represents the fulfillment of a childhood wish –
perhaps the desire to see two adversarial parents (and their respective families) reconciled; a

7 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

wish that is eminently understandable, once you delve into Laing’s family history.
Alternatively, for a Freudian, it might represent Laing’s wish to finally overcome his own
intensely competitive nature. After all, whatever else he was, Laing was nothing if not
competitive. A few months after he reported this dream, he died on a tennis court, playing
vigorously against Robert Firestone, a much younger man, in 105 degree heat — and beating
him soundly, too! Several months before the dream in question, Laing told Theo Itten that he
was engaged in planning an international “Olympics of the mind.” Sadly, nothing came of it,
although Laing invested considerable energy in this project. The point here, however, is that
the “Olympics” metaphor implies that someone who achieved international stature in the
fields of philosophy, science, etc., must have undergone rigorous training and expect to meet
his or her peers in a competitive arena.

Unlike Freudians, who focus on early childhood experiences and internal conflicts,
Jungians examine the dreams of middle-aged and elderly people looking for evidence of
personal integration as the maturing psyche prepares for eventual death. That being so, a
Jungian would probably say that the overt lack of an egoic identification and the rejection of
any corporate identity suggest that this dream is really about the process of individuation ,
one in which the self becomes integrated through a conjunctio oppositorum , which, in
Laing’s case, is represented idiosyncratically through the interplay of two opposing (male)
teams, rather than the more conventional archetypal symbolism of male/female intercourse.

Which interpretation is correct? Perhaps all—or none! People who have studied
Laing’s life and thought in depth will be hard pressed to embrace or repudiate any single
interpretation unreservedly, because they all fit certain aspects of his protean personality. But
by the same token, none of them really do him justice, or capture all the facets of his
mercurial temperament, his fierce competitiveness, his subtle and sophisticated mind, and,
finally, his desire to transcend his internal conflicts, including the conflicts between
individualism and collectivism, competition and co-operation that the dream fragment he
shared with Itten probably calls attention to. Quite apart from any interpretation we may
offer, the dream itself does not do Laing justice, because while it sheds light on his internal
conflicts, it does not adequately reflect either his loving or truth-loving dispositions, both of
which were deeply embedded in his psyche, and as much a part of his personal Gestalt as his
other traits and vulnerabilities.

By contrast, thankfully, “Sparks of Light” reflects Laing at his best, and contains many
of his most profound reflections on spirituality and love. But as the editor of the interview
points out in the preamble, this is not what his readers had come to expect, nor was it
delivered in his usual style. Had Laing quoted a Vedanta sage, a Buddhist preceptor or
William Blake, no one would have blinked an eye. But the surprise—indeed, astonishment
–that most readers felt when Laing gave voice to an explicitly Christian religious sensibility
calls for explanation, and the dream of the soccer match is really very illuminating in this
regard.

Readers of The Wing of Madness already know that Laing’s life and character were a
study in contrasts. Depending on circumstances, and his frame of mind at the time, Laing
could be disciplined or debauched, cruel or kind, courteous or rude, aristocratic or a man of
the people. He also oscillated, at various times, between extremes of optimism and pessimism,
diffidence (or reticence) and lurid exhibitionism, leading many people to conclude—quite
mistakenly—that Laing was merely manic depressive, or “bi-polar.” Bi-polar? Not on your
life, though the term “polypolar”, which I just invented for the occasion, would furnish a fair
description of his complex personality. While I do not deny the existence of bi-polar disorder,
nor underestimate the damage it can do, the term “bipolar” has become too popular, too
diffuse and too clichéd in psychiatric discourse and contemporary culture. Besides, the effort
to reduce the various contradictions in Laing’s life and work to the manifold expressions of a
single (biological) substrate betrays a deeply impoverished (and/or overly inclusive) view of

8 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

creative and unconventional people, and the role which tensions and polarities (of various
kinds) play in potentiating creative intellectual and spiritual work.

In any case, if you survey his life as a whole you will find that at various times, and in
various ways, Laing straddled the boundaries between psychiatrists and mental patients,
between radicals and conservatives, and between modern and postmodern epistemologies.
But he also straddled the often adversarial boundaries between theists and atheists, mystics
and scientists—a fact that is reflected in the disparate appraisals one gleans from his intimate
friends an co-workers. Some of his oldest and closest friends, including his adolescent chum
John Duffy, whom I met in Glasgow in 1992, knew Laing only as an outspoken atheist—a
man of the Left who was smitten with Sartre, and had nothing but contempt for pious souls
and their self-deluding notions. Duffy, who met Laing at age 16, dismissed his religious
utterances in later life as being a kind of poetry at best, hinting obliquely that Laing’s lapses
into religious rhetoric might have been opportunistic or insincere, or possibly expressions of a
passing weakness.

Sydney Briskin, a social worker who helped found the Philadelphia Association, and who
personally helped to negotiate the lease of the famous (and infamous) Kingsley Hall, saw
Laing precisely the same way as Duffy–as an atheist, and a man of the Left. Briskin was
stunned when Laing used the public auditorium at Kingsley Hall in the Fall of 1964 to deliver
a thundering sermon in the old Calvinist style –and without a trace of irony, either. During the
late 1970’s , having long since left Kingsley Hall, Laing occasionally delivered sermons in his
neighborhood Church, usually with great vigor and conviction.

How to explain this seeming anomaly? Well, first let us note that Laing’s interests and
activities in the Christian sphere were not known to the majority of his readers, and that
Laing himself acknowledges the comparative oddity of his religious musings by admitting that
he was finally expressing himself in a Christian idiom that he had become “. . . less
embarrassed about affirming in the course of the last thirty years or so.”

Why embarrassed? Well, to give Laing the benefit of the doubt, it is true that during the
Cold War era, when Laing rose to prominence, people tended to regard anyone who spoke
often and earnestly of their faith outside of their immediate circle as being somewhat odd and
ill-educated. That is no longer the case, at least in the USA. However, whatever prevailing
attitudes were at the time, the fact remains that this statement also conveys the misleading
impressions that though his reluctance to speak about it had diminished in the last few
decades, for reasons that are not given, his faith had been constant throughout. This is simply
not so, and is belied by many other things he said, both before and after this interview was
given. Indeed, reviewing all his pronouncements on spiritual and theological questions over
he years, the cumulative impression one gets is that he spent most of his adolescence and
adult life as a reluctant and sometimes deeply anguished agnostic who longed for the
consolations of faith, but could not overcome his doubts and misgivings sufficiently to affirm
what he desired, sometimes ambivalently, sometimes whole-heartedly. This is probably the
real source of his “embarrassment.”

What kind of Christian was Laing when he was not overwhelmed by doubt? Before
answering that question, it is instructive to note that as a teenager, Laing was exposed to two
different kinds of Christianity–the Evangelical-cum-fundamentalist variety of Calvinism, and
the older “Celtic Christianity” that arrived in Scotland with Brendan the Navigator (484-578
C.E.) and St. Columba (521-597 C.E.), both of whom had a role in the building of Iona
Abbey on the Isle Iona, in the Lower Hebrides. By the age of 14, Laing claimed, he had
emphatically rejected the former, Evangelical form of Christianity in favor of the latter, Celtic
variety, at least for a time. This claim is born out by his on again/off again relationship with
the Very Reverend George MacLeod (1895-1991 C.E.), who like Laing, incidentally, was a

9 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

native of Glasgow who rose to the rank of Captain in the British Army. McLeod was the
founder of The Iona Christian Community, which is an ecumenical Christian community
based on the Isle of Iona in the Lower Hebrides and dedicated to the preservation of Celtic
Christianity and the erasure of world hunger and poverty. Though few people outside of
Scotland are aware of it, Laing spent many days there over the course of his career. Indeed,
in the early 1980’s, Laing pondered the possibility of situating a foundation to be called St.
Oran’s Trust on this fair island.

Laing’s embrace of Celtic Christianity is also evidenced his insistence in his remark that
we are all one in the Universal Fire. Indeed, he says, our individual souls are nothing but
“sparks” emanating from this universal fire. Classicists contend that the idea that the soul is a
“spark” of a Divine Fire probably originates in the Orphic religion, but gets taken up by Plato
in the 4th century B.C.E., and subsequently, by the Stoics and neo-Platonists in the
Hellenistic-Roman era. While originally a school of pagan philosophy, Neo-Platonism and the
emanationist approach to theology later took on Jewish, Christian and Islamic forms, and, as
we survey the history of Western spirituality, we find the imagery of the soul as a Divine
spark as a common idiom for mystics of all three traditions.

Another striking feature of his talk with Feuerstein, is that when asked to share the fruits
of a lifetime of introspection, Laing responded that he discovered “that hope is justifiable.”
The term “hope” does not surface often in Laing’s work, and though he vigorously repudiated
the suggestion, many reader—friends and critics alike—found The Politics of Experience to
be an angry and eloquent expression of overwhelming despair. If so, of course, Laing had
clearly recovered some of his optimism in the interim. Meanwhile, the suggestion that hope is
justifiable, and that this represents a hard won discovery on his part, says a great deal about
him personally.

That being so, it is also instructive to note that Laing tries here—and not for the first
time—to link the idea of love to the project of scientific inquiry. Laing often despaired of
getting psychiatrists to see that viewing their patients primarily or exclusively through the
lenses of the natural scientific attitude is profoundly dehumanizing. The idea that science is
(or ought) to be informed by a loving, reverential attitude toward nature was self-evident to
someone like Einstein, but is odd and incongruous to most scientists, so Laing justified this
linkage by pointing to the destructive potential of scientific research that lacks this basis. He
said:

If you investigate and inquire into the world without love, you don’t find anything
worthwhile. If you look at a tree or a frog or anything at all without the eyes of love, then you
obtain only loveless, heartless knowledge. When such knowledge is accumulated and applied
to practices of scientific technology, it becomes the most destructive form of knowledge ever
discovered. Even the worst black magic cannot vie with the
destructive capacity of science. Its very method is to destroy what it looks at in order to
discover its elements.

Though Laing’s readers often found these remarks strikingly original, the fact remains that
they are a close paraphrase of ideas expressed by Jewish philosopher Martin Buber in the
1930’s. Laing was introduced to Buber’s critique of scientism by his mentor, neurologist
Joseph Schorstein in 1949. But Laing was evidently determined to co-ordinate Buber’s
critique of loveless science into a specifically Christian message, which emphasizes the
centrality of prayer and service. Admittedly, these are also Jewish values, and Buber also
anticipates the reservations Laing expressed about certain features of mystical theology.
Laing said here, for example, that

I don’t like to go so far as to talk of actual union with God or becoming God.
Such expressions tend to encourage Man’s vanity and spiritual ambitions. You

10 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

find people saying, “What’s the point of being a bank manager if, through
meditation techniques, you can become God in less time than it takes to get
through business school?” I would much rather speak of being a slave of God, in
whose service is perfect freedom.

Jews and Christians both stress God’s transcendence. But where Buber (and Jews
generally) differ from Laing (and most Christians) is in the use of the idiom of slavery. Jews
speak of being God’s servant, or alternatively, his willing and active collaborator in the work
of Tikkun Olam—the repair or restoration of the world through acts of love and justice. The
eventual consummation of this holy mission (in the Messianic time) is often depicted by
Jewish mystics as the eventual return of the Holy Sparks to the Primordial Fire. But in the
meantime, from the Jewish perspective, God liberated the Jews from slavery in Egypt
precisely in order to serve him, and permitted a whole generation of former slaves to perish in
the wilderness because the slave mentality is inimical to the worship of God. Service to the
Lord is essentially the act of a free man or woman, so the notion of being “a slave of God” is
somewhat incongruous to the Jewish mind. The Hebrew Bible (and accompanying
commentaries) leave no room for doubt on this score. God does not want slaves, whose work
is—by definition—coerced. Besides, even the most intimate I-Thou relationship does not
preclude conflict, and Jacob famously wrestles with the angel, refusing to surrender, before
finally being accepted by God and embracing his personal destiny. He was thenceforth known
as Israel, which means “he wrestled with God”—which is evidently what Laing did for much
of his adult life.

Having said that, however, Laing’s reluctance to speak of “becoming God” prompts us
to reflect that in Western religious traditions, the condition of religious (and of interpersonal)
communion in love—or indeed of any kind of genuine intimacy—is the inexorable
separateness and singularity of selves; a theme that Laing broached in existential and
phenomenological terms many times. In Self and Others, for example, Laing spoke with great
eloquence about the sense of unqualified privacy and the incommensurability of one’s
personal being that accompanies the experience of one’s being-for-oneself, citing the Catholic
poet Gerard Manley Hopkins to underscore his point. In The Politics of Experience, Laing
continued in this vein by emphasizing that although people experience one another as
experiencing the world or themselves in certain ways, no one has direct access to the
experience of another person. Conversely, he maintained my self is my experience, and my
experience, in the final analysis, is myself.

George Feuerstein was alert to the apparent paradox of discussing certain kinds of
mystical experiences and practices from the standpoint of the separateness and singularity of
the self, and raised the issue indirectly as follows:

FEUERSTEIN: But experience presupposes an experiencing subject, or the ego.

Therefore, no experience can be truly transcendental, since the ego is still in
place. What is your view on that?

Significantly, Laing replied:

LAING: I don’t think that such a thing as the ego exists. The ego is a cultural
hallucination. The “ego” is a name for a coherent set of mental operations that
enable us to function in our society. We draw a circle around those operations
and think it is a thing with which to identify ourselves. We must disidentify
ourselves from the ego and see it as a process, a systematic, reasonably coherent
set of operations. What we call our ego we know to be always changing,
impermanent, transient, but still we persist in this hallucination. The
transcendental perspective is both immanent and transcendental. So one must

11 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

simultaneously get into oneself and out of one’s ego. It is a return to ordinariness,
as in the ox-herding cycle of Japanese Zen Buddhism. A mountain finally
becomes a mountain again, a tree a tree, a river a river.

Laing’s words here are quite illuminating. Whereas Feuerstein equates the experiencing
subject with the “ego”, as many philosophers do, Laing speaks of “disidentifying ourselves”
from the ego, which implies that ultimately we have—or more precisely, that we are –selves
that are separate from our egos. Similarly, he speaks of the need to “get into oneself and out
of one’s ego”, implying that the less self-estranged we are, the less caught up we are in
“cultural hallucinations.” And though he does not say so in quite so many words, it follows
from this that the self and the ego are not two different terms for the same entity, as many of
us imagine, but fundamentally different entities, the ego being a “cultural hallucination”, the
self being our authentic ground of experience.

In stressing the difference between the self and the ego, Laing was joining with a small
but important group of psychoanalytic thinkers for whom the distinction between the self and
the ego is pivotal to understanding transcendental and psychotherapeutic experience - C.G.
Jung, D.W. Winnicott, E.Graham Howe, and oddly enough, Erik Erikson, who is still widely
misinterpreted as an “ego psychologist.” In this sense, perhaps, Laing and Feuerstein were on
different wavelengths and talking past one another, since Feuerstein seemed to assume that
the ego and the self are synonyms through out this brief exchange.

The interview between Laing and Feuerstein ended on an odd note, too. Feuerstein
inquired whether, or to what extent, Laing’s personal contact with “holy men” had motivated
him to surrender himself completely to a spiritual teacher or guru. Laing responded by saying
that

LAING: I have associated with a number of holy men. It is impossible for me to

imagine what my life would have been like without meeting and spending quite a
lot of time in the company of such people. But I have never felt any inner
impulsion to surrender myself to a guru. However, if some people feel they need
to do that, then I think it is perfectly appropriate for them to do so. A genuine
spiritual master would not be able to exploit that for his own egoic advantage. It
has been said that if you go to a guru with a pure heart, that purity of heart will
protect you, even if the guru turns out to be an impostor. It will do the guru harm,
not the disciple.
FEUERSTEIN: Do you feel there are people around now who actually have
Realized God and are empowered to lead other people to the same Realization?
LAING: I have not personally met any such one. I have met a number of people
I would regard as servants of God.
FEUERSTEIN: You are saying you have not actually met somebody whom you
felt was God-Realized. Is that, perhaps, the reason you did not have that
impulsion to surrender to a guru? If you had met Jesus, would you have followed
him? As he said, “Follow me.”
LAING: (pause) I hope so. Yes, definitely.
FEUERSTEIN: That is an honest answer.

What neither Laing nor Feuerstein stated, at this point, is that from a Christian perspective,
Jesus was not just some “God Realized” holy man, or a particularly potent and charismatic
guru, but God incarnate. But by the same token, surrendering to God is entirely in keeping
with the Christian ethos, so Laing could not possibly have answered “no” to this question
without nullifying everything he said prior to that point in this same interview. Meanwhile,
without actually saying so, Feuerstein himself appeared to be hinting that Jesus was merely a
supremely gifted “spiritual master”—a stark difference in perspective they politely agreed not
to broach here. So the real point of this exchange, perhaps, is that while dancing around this

12 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

controversial issue, Laing was politely expressing some reservations about the potential
pitfalls of personal charisma among gurus of one sort and another, hinting at the potential
dangers of egoism and exploitation (on the part of the guru) and eventual disappointment (on
the part of his followers.)

Nevertheless, Laing and Feuerstein were on exactly the same wavelength when it came to
decrying the dangers of scientism and materialism in contemporary culture. In this context,
Feuerstein extracted a rather stark and startling statement of faith from Laing, as follows.

LAING:. . . the material world is contained within the world of the Spirit, which
has final, triumphal mastery of the situation at all times. I don’t think anything
happens to materials except what Spirit allows.

This statement can be interpreted in various ways—theologically, philosophically and

metaphysically. At the very least, it represents a clear and resounding repudiation of the
materialist interpretation of history and of human affairs that many of Laing’s erstwhile
friends and followers continued to cling to. But a statement like this also lends itself to a
psychological interpretation. Among other things, perhaps, Laing’s emphasis on the Spirit’s
“final, triumphal mastery of the situation at all times” is an expression of resurgent optimism,
and a vivid expression of what Erikson called basic trust—an affirmation of the basic
goodness and trustworthiness of the cosmos, in spite of the manifold horrors and privations
we undergo individually at the “material” level. Statements of this kind do not always have
this meaning, of course. Depending on circumstances, the statement that everything that
happens is allowed by the Spirit - presumably in the service of our ultimate redemption—can
be plausibly construed as a call for resignation, indifference or complacency in the face of
(possibly preventable, and certainly horrific) events. Ever since the Holocaust, for example,
Jews, and increasing numbers of Christians, wonder how God could have let this catastrophe
happen, and point out that saying it happened with God’s full knowledge and consent are
making God complicit in unspeakable depravity. Similarly, saying that hurricane Katrina was
“permitted” by God because of the sinfulness of New Orleans’ residents—a la televangelist
Pat Robertson—is a travesty of what Laing was trying to say. So, however people are
tempted to interpret this statement of on a philosophical or spiritual plane, experience
compels the conclusion that, odd as it sounds, a statement of faith like this can be an
affirmation of faith, a technique for blaming (and perhaps vilifying) the victim, or a thinly
disguised wish fulfillment fantasy that covers up an underlying hostility or intolerance.

Having said that, it is clear from context that Laing was not calling for resignation,
indifference or complacency in the face of evil, because he begins his remarks with the
observation “that hope is justifiable,” and goes on to emphasize the importance of love,
prayer and service. And though Laing would have rued the comparison, given his distaste for
American “ego psychology”, his musings on this point are entirely in keeping with Erikson’s
claim that hope is the virtue characteristic of “basic trust”. As Erikson often pointed out,
hope is the foundation of all other “virtues.” Sociability, self-esteem and self-discipline
seldom flourish in a climate of pervasive mistrust, which distort human development and
human relationships in myriad ways. And though he couched them in the language of
existential phenomenology, Laing addressed similar kinds of issues when he talked about
ontological security and insecurity and the schizoid patient’s fear of authentic self-disclosure
in The Divided Self.

That being so, it is important to point out that Laing’s childhood was fraught with
experiences that provoked a profound sense of mistrust, especially in relation to his mother.
As a result, perhaps, in adult life, he was seldom as certain of the presence of some sort of
Providence or Divine oversight at work in the course of unfolding events as he appears to be
here. Had his childhood been less harrowing, and his adult life less fraught with conflict,
controversy and the blandishments of fame, Laing might have been able to cultivate a

13 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40
Life Cycles Psychology http://www.dharmacafe.com/life-cycles/print/sparks-of-light-faith-hope...

steadier, more consistent faith, and would probably have lived a longer, more temperate and
more fulfilling life as a consequence. But by the same token, if he had done those things, he
might never have had those remarkable insights into the minds of the mad that riveted the
world’s attention on him for a brief but memorable span of time.

Daniel Burston, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Psychology who holds doctorates in

Psychology (1989) and in Social and Political Thought (1985) from York University in
Toronto. He is also an Associate of the Center for Philosophy of Science at the
University of Pittsburgh, and on the Advisory Board of the C. G. Jung Analyst Training
Program of Pittsburgh, the Advisory Board of Janus Head, and the Editorial Board of
the Journal of the Society for Existential Analysis. His books have been reviewed in
numerous journals and newspapers, including The New York Times Book Review, The
New York Review of Books, The Economist, The New Statesman, and many other
magazines.

He is the author of The Wing of Madness: The Life and Work of R.D.Laing, The Crucible
of Experience: R.D. Laing and the Crisis of Psychotherapy, and Psychotherapy as a
Human Science. Dr. Burston’s most recent book is Erik Erikson and the American
Psyche: Ego, Ethics and Evolution.

by By Daniel Burston on September 15 2008

Article at:
http://www.dharmacafe.com/weblog/archives/sparks-of-light-faith-hope-and-rdlaing/

14 z 14 2011-04-06 14:40