Corresponding Text Section
Chapter 2: The Psychological Foundation of Miracles 2
2. True and False Forms of Possession
The truth is that the Attraction of the Love of the Divine is irresistible at all levels, and the acceptance of this totally unavoidable truth by those who have temporarily rejected it is only a matter of time. This acceptance is the true Possession in both meanings of this word: as possessing and being possessed by. You should consider whether you want to wait to accept It, because you can return to the Divine now if you choose. But to do so you must release yourself from the fear of losing control, because it is in insisting on your own control that keeps you from accepting superconscious control and returning to the Divine.
The fear of losing control, which is the fear of possession, takes many forms. Your understanding about the real meaning of Possession – which is your acceptance of the irresistible attraction of the Love of the Divine – needs to be clarified to release it from any fear elements. Fear of possession is a distorted response to true Possession. Possession is therefore a concept that has been subject to numerous distortions, which we would do well to explore to clear up any fear remaining in your mind with regard to such distortions.
The first fear of possession is falsely identified in a person’s mind with the body only: their body and/or the bodies of others. If this occurs, sex is particularly likely to be impacted adversely. Possessing versus being possessed sexually, in the sense of “conquering” and being conquered, is apt to be the filter resulting from this form of distortion, just as seducing versus being seduced is apt to be the filter when these roles are reversed. Since neither the active nor passive roles of this type of body-only possession will be experienced as satisfying in themselves, and both will be associated with fear, this interpretation of possession is particularly vulnerable to psychological sexual confusion.
Second, from a somewhat similar misperceptual reference point, erroneous possession can be associated with possessing or becoming possessed (preoccupied or obsessed) with things. This is essentially a shift from the first type of fallacious possession that dealt with the body only, and is usually due to an underlying fear of associating possession with people (due to their unpredictability, inclination to become emotionally harmed, etc.). In this sense, this shift of misperception can be an attempt to protect people, similar to certain superstitions such as knocking on wood, protecting a person’s real name by using an alternative name for them, etc.
These first two fear-based forms of possession are likely to become compulsive for several reasons:
a. They represent an attempt to escape from the true Possession drive, that is, the irresistible Attraction of the Love of the Divine, which cannot be satisfied through bodies or things.
b. They set up substitute goals in place of the Divine that are usually reasonably easy to attain.
c. They appear to be relatively harmless, and thus seem to allay fear. It is also fairly easy to find a partner who shares the illusion of being preoccupied with or possessed by bodies or things.
The fact that these types of possession usually interfere with good interpersonal relationships can be misinterpreted and justified as a lack of sophistication on the part of the other person (rather than the self), and this induces a false feeling of confidence in the pseudo solution, based on reliability rather than true Validity (a concept discussed previously). Thus, there are any number of relationships that are actually established on the basis of the first form of misconceived possession – possessing or being possessed by or with bodies – and other relationships that hold together primarily because of joint interests in possessing or being possessed by or with things.
d. The manifestly external emphasis that both of these forms entail seems to be a safety device, and thus permits a false escape from much more basic inhibitions with regard to letting go of attempted conscious control of one’s life and giving this over to superconscious control, through being truly and fully possessed by Love. As a compromise solution, the illusion of interpersonal relating is preserved, along with the retention of the emotionally-safe “distance” component. This kind of psychic juggling leaves the person with a feeling of emptiness, which in fact is completely justified, because they are acting from scarcity. They then easily become more and more driven in their behavior to fill the emptiness.
If either of these two types of fallacious possession are invested with extreme belief, it may lead to sexual misconduct or sex crimes in the first case, or theft in the second. The kleptomaniac is a good example of the latter.
Generally, three types of emotional disturbance result from these two types of false possession, or fear of and protection against losing control:
a. The tendency to maintain the illusion that only the physical is real. This produces depression.
b. The tendency to invest the physical with non-physical properties, such as value, power, mystery, sentimentality, etc. This is essentially a form of fantasy or a belief in enchantment magic, and tends more toward anxiety-proneness.
c. The tendency to vacillate from one to the other, which produces a corresponding vacillation between depression and anxiety.
Each of these types of emotional disturbance result in self-imposed spiritual starvation, which always results when you deny your true Source of Abundance and Nourishment.
A third type of distorted possession is seen in the fear of or desire for “spirit” possession. The term “spirit” is profoundly debased in this context, but it does entail a recognition that the physical is not enough to satisfy human beings. This recognition accepts the fact that the idea of possessing or being possessed by or with bodies or things is insufficient to satisfy the mind, but precisely because “spirit” possession does not limit fear so narrowly (i.e., to bodies or things), it is more likely to produce greater fear in its own right.
Endowing the “spirit” with human possessiveness is a more inclusive error than the first or second false types of possession described, and a step somewhat further away from being in one’s right mind, i.e., having a mind free of judgment and fear. This type of fallacy can be seen in the belief in the possession of “spiritual sophistication” of some sincere seekers of Truth. “Religious fervor” in a distorted sense is also more likely to occur with this kind of error, because the idea of “spirit” often associated with religion is introduced, though incorrectly, while it is excluded from the first and second types of fear of possession or losing control. Mis-projection is also more likely to occur in this third type of erroneous possession, with vacillations between forms of grandiosity and terror.
It should be noted that while the first type of erroneous possession involves only the body, and the second type involves an attempt to associate things with human attributes, the third type is a more serious level confusion (see previous discussion of this term), because it may endow the human spirit – an aspect of the superconscious – with “evil” attributes. This accounts both for the religious zeal of its proponents, and the aversion or fear of its opponents. Both attitudes stem from the same false belief.
This third type of false possession is obviously not what is meant by the expression, “being possessed of the (Holy) Spirit.” It is interesting to note that too often even those who did understand this distinction could nevertheless express their understanding inappropriately. One example is the concept of “speaking in (many) tongues,” which was originally an injunction to communicate to everyone in their own language, or at their own level of understanding. It hardly meant to speak in a way that nobody could understand. This strange error occurs when people do understand the need for universal communication but have contaminated it with fallacies about losing control. The fears engendered by this misperception lead to a conflicted state in which communication is attempted, but the fear of being misunderstood as well as of drawing closer through being understood are allayed by making the communication incomprehensible. It could also be said that this is fear-induced selfishness, or inappropriate regression, because incomprehensible communication is hardly a worthy offering from one Child of the Divine to another. Ironically, in what has become known as speaking in tongues, the speaker does lose control of their own ability to understand what they are expressing, and they speak in a way that often appears as if they are possessed by some spirit, even if this isn’t the Holy Spirit, Whose Messages are always perfectly clear.
Knowledge itself, in the current common meaning of information or “know-how” which this term has in the world of illusions, can also be misinterpreted as a means of possession, and constitutes a fourth type of possession fallacy. Here the underlying fallacy is more likely to be the confusion of mind and brain. The attempt to unite non-physical content with physical attributes is illustrated by statements like “the thirst for knowledge.” The fallacious use of or possession by knowledge of this type can result in several errors:
- The idea that knowledge will make the individual more attractive to others, which may be connected in the mind to the first type of possession fallacy.
- The idea that knowledge will make the individual invulnerable. This is a “reaction formation” defense mechanism – avoiding an inner fear by cultivating and emphasizing outwardly its opposite expression – against the underlying fear of vulnerability.
- The idea that knowledge will make the individual worthy. This is clearly a misunderstanding of worthiness and reflects a dismal lack of self-esteem.
Each of these four forms of fear of losing control, or false possession, involves a particular error of mind:
The first type involves the fallacy that only the physical is real.
The second type involves things rather than people, and the endowment of the physical with non-physical properties.
The third type involves the belief that the non-physical can be taken over by something outside itself.
The fourth type involves making knowledge inaccessible by confusing something else as knowledge.
All of these errors have been described as possession fallacies, recalling that true Possession is giving over one’s petty attempts at control to the irresistible Love of the Divine, and being possessed of, or filled with, Its Illumination and Radiance.
It is actually intolerable to the mind to remain indefinitely in a false state of possession, because this prolongs the time that the Joy of true Possession is delayed. The mind’s unconscious mechanisms for denying false possession in an erroneous attempt to escape from this delaying tactic may be helpful to understand.
The unconscious mechanism by which the mind causes its own denial of the first type of erroneous possession, that of bodies, is through experiencing a sense of physical inability, such as impotence, or psychological inability, such as loss of attractiveness or interest in continuing to explore or engage in the sexual “game.”
The unconscious denial mechanism for the second type, that of things, may be bankruptcy or its threat. Collectors of things often drive themselves well beyond their financial means in an unconscious attempt to force discontinuance.
If this idea of cessation of the possession of or by things cannot be tolerated by the mind, a strange compromise involving both insatiable possessiveness and insatiable throwing away (such as bankruptcy) may result. An example is the compulsive gambler, for instance a horse-racing addict. Here the conflicted drive is displaced both from people and things, and is invested in animals. The implied worthlessness of people is the cause of the underlying extreme superstition of the horse-racing addict. The alcoholic is in a similar position, except that their hostility is more inwardly than outwardly directed.
Defenses aimed at protecting (i.e., retaining) error are particularly hard to undo, because they introduce second-order misperceptions that obscure the original underlying possession errors still further. These become psychological complexes.
The pseudo-corrective mechanism, or the mechanism by which the mind causes its own unconscious denial, of the third type of fallacious possession, that of “spirit” possession, is apt to be more varied because of the more inclusive nature of the error (i.e., that it includes more than just the physical), which has already been mentioned. One variation is that one or the other aspect of the “possessing versus being possessed” conflict can be raised to predominance. If this is attempted in connection with possessing “spirit,” or having the one “true religion,” it leads to a paranoid solution, that is, paranoia regarding the grandiosity one feels about possessing the “only truth,” which is the fear of spiritual pride. Even if this form of denial is unconsciously attempted, the underlying component of false possession may be retained in persecution fantasies, which generally occur alongside delusions of grandiosity. Indeed, many who believe they possess the true faith feel persecuted by those who they feel don’t possess this faith. Of course, it should be noted that this type of paranoia of spiritual pride results from an upside-down understanding of the true religious sense of reconnecting with the Divine, because of its obvious attempt to unify all diverse perspectives into a false sameness of form.
If the “being possessed” component of the “spirit” possession fallacy is brought to ascendance rather than the “possessing” component, then a state of some sort of possession by external forces results, but not with a major emphasis on attacking others for not possessing “the truth.” Attack by others becomes the more obvious component. In its more virulent forms, there is a sense of being possessed by demons, and unless there is vacillation with believing one has the true faith, a catatonic pseudo-solution is more likely than a paranoid one.
Like all possession fallacies, the fourth type contains an unconscious denial mechanism based on the nature of the loss of control feared. Because knowledge, even in the common meaning of the term as information, is understood to be limitless, the unconscious denial mechanism for possessing or being possessed by knowledge comes into operation as the fear of the possession increases, thus canceling out the error temporarily but seriously impairing efficiency. For example, one person might claim to others that they cannot read, in order to escape from conversations about books which might reveal their “knowledge” to be lacking, while another might claim that they cannot publicly speak, when in fact they speak well. Depression is a real risk when this kind of unconscious denial mechanism is present, arising from a peculiar pseudo-solution that proceeds in a false logical argument like this: “A Child of the Divine is competent. I am not competent. Therefore, I am not a Child of the Divine.” This kind of twisted logic may lead to neurotic resignation – withdrawing from activities and adhering to rigid regimes in an attempt to avoid aspects of experience that bring one’s inner conflicts into awareness – a state that merely increases the depression. This is because in one’s heart it is understood that a Child of the Divine should never reduce their sense of competence in any way.
The first, second, and fourth types of fallacious possession described here (bodies, things, and knowledge respectively) are more likely to produce neurotic (relatively mild mental or emotional disturbances and struggles) rather than psychotic (major personality disorders and disruptions) states, though this is by no means guaranteed. However, the third type of fallacious possession, “spirit” possession, is inherently more vulnerable to the psychotic correction, again because of the more fundamental level confusion between the physical and non-physical that is involved. It should be noted, however, that the greater fear that is induced by the belief in “spirit” possession can itself reach proportions clearly detached from even the shared belief in the “reality” of this world, or in those components of this world conceived to be universally reliable, thus forcing the individual closer and closer to a psychotic reaction.
It is emphasized here that these differences in error have no effect at all on the miracle, which can correct or heal any of them with equal ease. This is because of the miracle’s inherent ability to see beyond all distinctions within error. Its sole concern is to distinguish between Truth on the one hand, and any kind of error on the other. This is why some miracles may seem to be of greater magnitude than others. But remember the first miracle principle in this Course, i.e., that there are no levels or orders of magnitude of difficulty in miracles, and also the miracle principle regarding the miracle making no distinction among types or variations of misperception.
The exploration of mental illness or not-right-mindedness in this section on true and false forms of possession reflects the “undoing” aspect of the miracle. The “doing” aspect of the miracle, connected with mental health or right-mindedness, is, of course, much more important. But a true miracle cannot occur on a false basis. Sometimes the undoing of error must precede the collapse of time and acceleration of learning that the miracle facilitates. At other times, undoing and doing can both occur simultaneously, but this requires being able to hold an intensity of energy the miracle worker or recipient may not yet be prepared for.
In addition, insights into mental illness can be misused, and may lead to preoccupation with one’s own symptoms. This is why this area of focus on the aspects of the error is less constructive for most people than a focus primarily devoted to mental health or right-mindedness. However, some will find principles of understanding mental illness constructive, especially if they work with such things professionally or in some other direct way, and it can be helpful for everyone to be aware of the hidden or unconscious dynamics underlying self-destructive behavior in oneself and others.
The obvious appropriate correction for all types of the possession fallacy is to consciously redefine and understand possession correctly. In the sense of “taking over” or being taken over, the concept does not exist at all in Divine Reality, which is the only level of reality where real existence is a meaningful term. In Reality, no one can be “taken over” unless they will to be. Remember the importance of Freedom in Creation. However, if a person unconsciously places their mind under tyranny rather than consciously directing it to be held by true Authority which is superconscious control, they insert or intrude the dominance-submission dynamic themselves into their own free will. This produces the obvious contradiction inherent in any formulation that associates free will with imprisonment, a contradiction highlighted in the question: can a will that chooses to imprison itself, such as under the unconscious tyranny of addiction, be called free will?
Even in very mild forms, this kind of association of free will and imprisonment is risky for right-mindedness, and may spread quite unexpectedly into fear or wrong-mindedness, particularly under external stress. This is because such a spread into fear, by the very fact that there is a propensity for it to happen, can as yet be internally controlled by you only if external conditions are apparently stress-free. This is not a stable situation at your current level of mindfulness, because your external conditions still seem to be produced by the thoughts of many, not all of whom are yet pure in heart.
This begs the question: Why should you be at the “mercy” of the thoughts of many, not all of whom are yet pure in heart? This question is very closely related to the entire fallacious possession issue. You will insist on thinking that people or things or circumstances can possess you, or that you can possess them – which will always be in the false sense of possession – if you believe that others’ thoughts or the external environment can affect you, regardless of the actual thoughts of others or the external environmental conditions. This confusing of the Power of the mind with the apparent physical and psychic levels outside the mind is a reflection of thought and will that aren’t yet free, or, more accurately, have temporarily forgotten their Freedom. In reality, you are perfectly unaffected by all expressions of lack of Love. These can be from yourself to others, from others to you, or from you to yourself.
Peace is an attribute in you. You cannot find it outside. All mental illness is an expression of some form of external searching. Inner Peace is mental health. It enables you to remain unshaken by all lacks of Love experienced inwardly, and to be capable, through miracles, of correcting external conditions that are produced by expressions of lacks of Love.
