توضیحاتی در مورد مقاله

What can psychoanalysis learn from Sufism?

Ali Yansori

INTRODUCTION

Sufism’s understanding of the psyche is often uncannily analogous to psychoanalysis. Sufism incorporates a wide range of concepts and phenomena that are not unlike those found in psychoanalysis (e.g., dream analysis, shadow, displacement, transference, superego, ideal ego, ego‐ideal and defence mechanisms). However, despite the apparent similarities at first glance, Sufism fundamentally differs from Western psychoanalysis in both nature and goal, which makes any similarity superficial. Therefore, rather than emphasising the parallels between the two, the aim of this paper is to present Sufism as a tradition that has independently developed its own approach to the psyche. This exploration seeks to ask whether Sufism can offer inspiration to psychoanalysis and whether Western psychoanalysis might learn from Sufism in certain respects.

As long as the ego glows like fire,

Where can a contented heart be found?

Attār, The Conference of the BirdsFor the sake of clarity, it must be emphasised that Sufism is a rich tradition with a long and complex history; this paper, however, is specifically concerned with Persian Sufism, as exemplified by figures such as Attār, Rumi, Hāfez, Arāqi and Maqrebi. The focus on Persian Sufism in particular is due to its longstanding engagement with the workings of the psyche. To read someone such as Attār or Rumi is, in effect, not merely to read poetic literature or spiritual teachings, but to gain insight into the operations of the psyche. When reading Persian Sufism, it is important to bear in mind that the primary aim of these writings is not to produce beautiful poetry for its own sake, nor to impart theory for theory’s sake. Rather, the fundamental aim of all Sufi writings is soteriological. This soteriology is not merely a theoretical construct but rather a practical path aimed first and foremost at liberation through self‐discovery. The soteriological goal is achieved by attaining psychological insight through introspection. Since introspection often entails analytical engagement, Persian Sufism ultimately shares certain aspirations with Western psychoanalysis—such as the processing of trauma and the cessation of psychological suffering. While the aspirations of Sufism are undeniably spiritual—culminating in the non‐dual, experiential realisation of the One—it is essential to emphasise that this spiritual aim cannot be realised unless the Sufi comes to a deep and thorough understanding of the workings of their own psyche.

Perhaps a good place to begin is by mentioning Javād Nurbakhsh, who served as the Master (Pir) of the Nimatullahi Sufi Order from 1953 until his death in 2008. (The conventional translation ‘Master’ is unfortunate, as it is at odds with the spirit of Sufism; pir simply means ‘old person’.) The reason for including Nurbakhsh in this paper is straightforward: the Nimatullahi Sufi Order, whose lineage traces back several centuries to Shāh Ni’matullāh Wali, has been one of the most influential Sufi orders in the Persian speaking world (see Rahbari, 2020, p. 417). Moreover, Nurbakhsh’s works such as Del va Nafs offer the most systematic psychological account of Sufism’s approach to the psyche authored by a Sufi master who was also attuned to the psychoanalytic movement. Additionally, apart from being the Pir of the Nimatullahi Sufi Order, Nurbakhsh was a psychiatrist who obtained his degree from the Sorbonne and was a professor of psychiatry at the Tehran University School of Medicine. Therefore, he is more than qualified to discuss both Sufism and the human mind.

Relying on centuries of Sufi literature, Nurbakhsh explains that for the Sufi, there are six stages in the development of the human psyche (see Nurbakhsh, 1994, pp. 6–7). Obviously, a discussion of such a complex system would distract from the aims of this paper; therefore, I will name just the two most psychoanalytically relevant: the ego (nafs) and the heart (del). I argue that the unary system of ego psychology—which, as the name suggests, gives primacy to the ego—is in sharp contrast with its Sufi counterpart. This contrast reflects not only the fundamentally different objectives of Sufism and ego psychology but also, naturally, their differing methodologies. According to the Sufi perspective, one key reason why the ego (whether that of the analyst or the analysand) must be bracketed and ultimately overcome is that the ego (nafs) is inherently ignorant (see Nurbakhsh, 1992, p. 12). Nurbakhsh draws a distinction between the ‘particular intellect’ and the ‘universal intellect’: the former is associated with the intellectual operations of the ego, while the latter is rooted in the heart and referred to as ‘heart‐consciousness’ (see Nurbakhsh, 1978b, p. 214). In terms of methodology, there is one especially crucial difference between Sufism and ego psychology, as Nurbakhsh points out: ‘Sufism is the school of inward illumination and not of discussion’ (Nurbakhsh, 1978a, p. 204). Whereas psychoanalysis maintains that the analytic process can be clearly defined and systematised, Sufism holds that ‘what concerns inward illumination cannot be expressed in words’; more specifically: ‘The goal of Sufism is knowledge of Absolute Reality, not as learned men explain it to us through logic and demonstration but as it is in itself’ (Nurbakhsh, 1978a, p. 204).

It is worth noting that certain movements within Western psychoanalysis are indeed aware of the limitations inherent in frameworks such as ego psychology. Interestingly, some of the criticisms that could be levelled against ego psychology (or any school that gives primacy to the ego or to an ego‐based notion of the ‘self’) from a Sufi perspective are quite similar to those developed by Jacques Lacan. While the terminology differs, the underlying message remains remarkably similar. For example, just as in Sufism, Lacan characterises the problem of the ego as one of ignorance and misrecognition, calling it ‘Méconnaissance’ (see for example Lacan, 2006, p. 565). Moreover, Lacan distinguishes between the type of intellectual thought that takes place in the Imaginary Order—the domain of the ego, governed by univocality—and the expansive, equivocal thinking associated with the Symbolic Order. What Nurbakhsh refers to as ‘heart‐consciousness’ is closely analogous to Lacan’s understanding of the ‘unconscious’ as encountered by the subject in relation to the Other during analysis. As for aim and methodological approach, strong parallels can also be drawn between Lacan and Sufism: Beyond the obvious—the shift from a dyadic ego‐to‐ego interaction towards introducing the figure of the big Other into the dynamic of analysis—Lacan explicitly highlights the ultimate aim of psychoanalysis through reference to the Hindu dictum ‘Thou art That’ (see Lacan, 2006, p. 81). If one adopts the Advaita Vedantic interpretation of this phrase, Lacan appears to root psychoanalysis in a non‐dual realisation, though expressed in secular terms. Elaborating on the influences of Eastern thought on Lacanian psychoanalysis would lead us beyond the primary aims of this paper; I therefore leave this topic as an open invitation for others to explore further (for a detailed discussion of the influences of Eastern spirituality on Lacan—particularly on his conception of the mirror stage—see Yansori, 2026).

The reader might wonder why I am not mentioning the id and the superego. The reason is that, first of all, ego psychology does not seek to strengthen either. Secondly, in the Sufi model, the ego is further divided into four ‘stages’ (or ‘levels’), two of which are analogous to the Western psychoanalytic models of the id and the superego. Therefore, from the Sufi perspective, the id, ego, and superego in the Freudian structural model of the mind are really just different gradations of the same phenomenon called ‘nafs’. Many schools of psychoanalysis (e.g., ego psychology, object relations and self‐psychology) are not well equipped to ward off certain challenges simply because they cannot escape the trap of the ego. No matter how much they believe otherwise, all solutions psychoanalysts devise are based on clinging to some part of the ego—the very thing causing problems in the first place. Yet, what looks like breaking away from the ego to the Westerner is clearly recognised as the ego in disguise by those versed in spirituality. Sufism (and other traditions such as Hinduism and Buddhism) can offer a break from this pattern. To illustrate the challenges and failures of Western psychoanalysis, I will focus on the topic of ‘love’ to show how its treatment differs in Sufism and psychoanalysis.