Towards a biblical psychoanalysis: a second look at the first book

Abstract

Freud's materialistic treatment of religion has discouraged and stigmatised inquiries concerning the potential theoretical and clinical utility that biblical stories could offer to the ongoing development of psychoanalysis. As a result, the historical development of psychoanalysis has been disproportionally influenced by the Hellenic ideals that influenced the German humanistic pedagogical value of Bildung, to which Freud was an ardent disciple. However, since it has consistently been recognised that Western culture has been mutually influenced by both biblical and Hellenistic attitudes, it may be warranted to extend this dialectal interplay into the realm of individual psychology, in the process delimiting a space whereby psychoanalysis and biblical thought can constructively coexist. In this vein, prototypical myths from the Greek and biblical traditions can reliably be situated on a psycho-mythological continuum, with Greek myths representing a less integrated level of ego development and biblical narratives reflecting an unambivalent, higher level of psychological organisation. The Greek mythology of Oedipus and the biblical Binding of Isaac has been chosen to illustrate this dynamic.

Keywords:

• Bible
• mythology
• Freud
• Oedipus
• Isaac
• psychoanalysis

Notes

Notes

1. Several recently published letters from Freud reproduced by Rolnik (2007) confirm Freud's limited understanding of biblical and Hebrew thinking. A short time after the publication of The Interpretation of Dreams, the Jewish historian and folklorist Alter Druyanov (then of Odessa) wrote to Freud suggesting that many of Freud's ideas align with those of the early Hebrews. Freud coolly replied that, “As far as I’m concerned … the similarity between my ideas and those of the early Greeks strikes me as much more salient” (p. 34). In a second, equally illuminating exchange, Max Eitingon alerted Freud to the neo-Hebraic writings of the Russian philosopher Lev Shestov, even sending Freud one of Shestov's books. Freud's reply to Eitingon further displayed his allergic-like response to anything biblical: “You cannot imagine how unaffected I am by these convoluted philosophical discussions” (p. 56). Translations into English provided by Professor Danny Algom, Tel Aviv University.

2. As a test of faith, God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his most beloved son, Isaac. Abraham was willing to carry out God's wishes, but at the moment when he was to ritually slaughter and subsequently immolate his son, God interceded by sending an angel who commanded him to halt his actions. A ram was sacrificed in Isaac's stead.

3. Although the relationship between Jason towards Aeson surely demonstrated an increased measure of filial piety, Medea, impressed with Jason's overtures, rejected his plan and offered her own: she instead killed Aeson and drained his blood, subsequently reviving him with the use of a secret potion. This magical intervention not only staved off Aeson's demise, but erased 40 years of ageing, returning to him his former youthful energy and beautiful countenance. Unlike the covenantal bond that existed between Abraham and Isaac, Aeson's supernatural renewal ensured that his Corinthian monarchy was secure, thus implicitly reinforcing the intergenerational mistrust that fathers harboured against their sons.