basic reflections

Samuel Widmer

Dr. Samuel Widmer is a well known psychiatrist based in Switzerland with many books to his credit, centred around his experience and his knowledge of psychotherapy. Among them is his book on J.Krishnamurti ("You are Beauty") in which he attempts to show how Krishnamurti's philosophy can be applied in daily life.

Dr. Widmer is no ordinary psychotherapist. His deep interest in spirituality has led him to merge psychotherapeutic practices with those of spirituality. His workshops are a powerful combination of the two, both, helping the individual to overcome emotional blocks through therapeutic interventions and then guiding him/her further towards spiritual fulfilment which cannot be accessed without our having first dealt with our psychological imbalances.

A long time admirer of J. Krishnamurti, Dr. Widmer draws much from the talks given by the Indian philosopher, who eschewed all manner of restricting conventions and rituals, emphasising the individual’s ability to listen and to look, directly for himself without being hampered by ideas and concepts rooted in the past.

Dr. Widmer’s workshops in Europe, are conducted in German and attended by a large number of people from the German speaking countries. (Germany, Austria and Switzerland). In the last few years he has also been invited by friends in India to take part in an interactive process exploring new ways of living together – ways combining the best of the east and the west. Recently he was also invited to interact with the  people in Brazil.

The central theme of Dr. Widmer’s work has been for us human beings to develop a sense of responsibility towards the world through becoming aware of ourselves and our relationship with the each other. To learn to care for each other, to relate deeply with each other without compromising our individual, inner truth, is the core of Samuel Widmer’s message which he expresses in his own unique way, while encouraging each of us to do the same.

Other books  written by Dr. Widmer which are sure to interest  readers are: "Listening into the heart of things", in which he speaks about his experiences of using certain mind expanding substances in his work with clients, (with permission from the Swiss government)  and “Shortcuts to Enlightenment” – a charming and insightful book based on very practical suggestions on how to work on oneself, towards inner peace and happiness.

Samuel and Daniele take a break during their "desert meditation"  in north Africa.

Some clarifications

Samuel Widmer

Those of you who have  been following the basicindia weblog will probably be surprised at the facelift it has received in the last couple of days. In case of confusion I thought I would mention that this space will continue to reflect the thoughts and views of those who are a part of our group but will now serve as  a link in the main site.

This particular piece is actually for those who have read the two letters to the world written by Samuel Widmer, which you will find in the “new” basicindia site,  and who have been puzzled or disturbed by a part of it. This morning at any rate,  I got a mail from Eric (one of the members of Zaadz) to say he really appreciated the letters and found that Samuel’s point of view supported his own.  But he was perplexed by Samuel’s mention of the incest taboo and his view that it should be lifted.

Let me reproduce the mail because perhaps many readers will identify with it:

„UMA–
How are you?  Your injury has healed and you left Deutschland?

I was looking at the basicindia website again, Samuel Widmer's ideas are very profound and I think evolutionary, very in step with my own beliefs–until near the end of “Letter to the World Part 1” I came upon this:

“Should we not finally question the taboo on incest, which as basic evil lies behind all our misery, understand its effects in our life, and finally negate it?”

Am I reading this correctly?  He is advocating incest or was it mistranslated?  From what I understand, the closer the genome pool, the higher the risk for mutations(?).  They have established that second cousins–possibly first cousins–can breed with a fairly safe chance of limited mutations; but this vague statement of Widmers I found disturbing.

Am I misconstruing?

What else is happening with you?
blessings,
Eric“

Well, Eric and others, I agree that this statement needs a clarification. Let me try and explain. Samuel does not advocate incest. What he is referring to, basically, is the incestuous undertones in human relationships. Had this not been a fact, the ban on incest would not have been necessary – and indeed  almost all cultures in the world come down heavily on incest, though what is counted and not counted as incest varies. I don’t want to go into the pro’s and con’s of incest but rather, want to try and clarify what is meant by “lifting the ban”.  So let me begin with good old Freud.

Though Freud has been  discredited in recent times by many psychologists, some of his views show uncanny perception. His concept of the Oedipus complex for example, speaks of the love of the male child  for his mother and his desire for her undivided attention. Out of this desire according to Freud, develops resentment against the father and also a feeling of rivalry in relation to him. Later psychologists used the  term “Electra complex” to explain the same phenomenon in terms of the relationship between father and daughter.

From what I have understood, what this amounts to, is  that the deep fear of any forbidden relationship taking place often causes a subtle rift in close relationships  within the family.  Fathers for example, often tend  to withdraw from their daughters and to hold back on physical demonstration of affection at a time when the daughter is  growing up. In turn, the daughter, puzzled and hurt  by this sudden distance, carries her resentment over into later relationships. And as far as sons are concerned, don’t we all know the problems that arise on account of the overpowering “mother-son bond”  which so often leads men to compare their wives to their mother! 

Unfortunately  the nature of the taboo on incest makes it difficult for us to even talk about this problem or to look at it, for fear, one supposes, that our examination might indeed kindle feelings which we consider forbidden. There is precious little written on the subject which genuinely helps us to understand it.

Surfing the net a while back I came across a  cross cultural examination of 122 cultures by Yehudi Cohen (1978) who suggests that as human culture evolves and becomes socially and technologically more complex, the number of relatives included in the incest taboo will be reduced. Cohen also proposes that as the incest taboo contracts and becomes less important, violations of this taboo will be treated less severely.

Maybe a time will come when we will be able to look at the question of incest without going into a horrified frenzy about it and be able to unearth information which will really help us to understand ourselves better.

Uma

Some clarifications

Samuel Widmer

Those of you who have  been following the basicindia weblog will probably be surprised at the facelift it has received in the last couple of days. In case of confusion I thought I would mention that this space will continue to reflect the thoughts and views of those who are a part of our group but will now serve as  a link in the main site.

This particular piece is actually for those who have read the two letters to the world written by Samuel Widmer, which you will find in the “new” basicindia site,  and who have been puzzled or disturbed by a part of it. This morning at any rate,  I got a mail from Eric (one of the members of Zaadz) to say he really appreciated the letters and found that Samuel’s point of view supported his own.  But he was perplexed by Samuel’s mention of the incest taboo and his view that it should be lifted.

Let me reproduce the mail because perhaps many readers will identify with it:

„UMA–
How are you?  Your injury has healed and you left Deutschland?

I was looking at the basicindia website again, Samuel Widmer's ideas are very profound and I think evolutionary, very in step with my own beliefs–until near the end of “Letter to the World Part 1” I came upon this:

“Should we not finally question the taboo on incest, which as basic evil lies behind all our misery, understand its effects in our life, and finally negate it?”

Am I reading this correctly?  He is advocating incest or was it mistranslated?  From what I understand, the closer the genome pool, the higher the risk for mutations(?).  They have established that second cousins–possibly first cousins–can breed with a fairly safe chance of limited mutations; but this vague statement of Widmers I found disturbing.

Am I misconstruing?

What else is happening with you?
blessings,
Eric“

Well, Eric and others, I agree that this statement needs a clarification. Let me try and explain. Samuel does not advocate incest. What he is referring to, basically, is the incestuous undertones in human relationships. Had this not been a fact, the ban on incest would not have been necessary – and indeed  almost all cultures in the world come down heavily on incest, though what is counted and not counted as incest varies. I don’t want to go into the pro’s and con’s of incest but rather, want to try and clarify what is meant by “lifting the ban”.  So let me begin with good old Freud.

Though Freud has been  discredited in recent times by many psychologists, some of his views show uncanny perception. His concept of the Oedipus complex for example, speaks of the love of the male child  for his mother and his desire for her undivided attention. Out of this desire according to Freud, develops resentment against the father and also a feeling of rivalry in relation to him. Later psychologists used the  term “Electra complex” to explain the same phenomenon in terms of the relationship between father and daughter.

From what I have understood, what this amounts to, is  that the deep fear of any forbidden relationship taking place often causes a subtle rift in close relationships  within the family.  Fathers for example, often tend  to withdraw from their daughters and to hold back on physical demonstration of affection at a time when the daughter is  growing up. In turn, the daughter, puzzled and hurt  by this sudden distance, carries her resentment over into later relationships. And as far as sons are concerned, don’t we all know the problems that arise on account of the overpowering “mother-son bond”  which so often leads men to compare their wives to their mother! 

Unfortunately  the nature of the taboo on incest makes it difficult for us to even talk about this problem or to look at it, for fear, one supposes, that our examination might indeed kindle feelings which we consider forbidden. There is precious little written on the subject which genuinely helps us to understand it.

Surfing the net a while back I came across a  cross cultural examination of 122 cultures by Yehudi Cohen (1978) who suggests that as human culture evolves and becomes socially and technologically more complex, the number of relatives included in the incest taboo will be reduced. Cohen also proposes that as the incest taboo contracts and becomes less important, violations of this taboo will be treated less severely.

Maybe a time will come when we will be able to look at the question of incest without going into a horrified frenzy about it and be able to unearth information which will really help us to understand ourselves better.

Uma