Universal Discourse

Such dialogism, or discourse, is completed in the next level, in ‚Bhanwar Gupha'. Here Kirpal Singh's Surat Shabd Yoga seems similar to Hegel's philosophy, where ‚absolute knowledge' represents the culmination point. This, though, only means that any discourse closes absolutely free of any contradiction.

The system of discourse is subsequently perfect, yoga's goal is reached and the dialogue with god becomes routine.

The same applies to universal discourse: it comes near but cannot come into or even transcend the 'causal' level. However, it is an egoism of knowledge that recognizes the 'sounding'. Knowledge is organized as SHINES / SPEAKS at a high level, but cannot surpass it.

Freud was only able to discover the analytic discourse by understanding the neurotic person and through understanding the operation of the university. There, knowledge assumes truth's position and not only the position of constant excess knowledge (university), but also not that of simple exceeding power (master's discourse, "lord's" discourse), or of a discourse acquired by suffering (neurotic discourse).

But, wait! Still there is a mysterious higher level, namely 'Sach Kand', which confuses things again. What is this supposed to be: a level of perfect bliss? It is the blissful individual - if he is at least slightly educated, or does yoga - who is in a bind when it comes to helping others out of their suffering. It would truly be an outright perverted sadist who would be riding the waves of blissful pleasure while others around him waste away.

In the same way it would be nonsense to call such a blissful man in 'Sach Kand' God. God remains the subordinate One to the primal principles. 'Sach Kand' perhaps means a bit different: the mystery of that oneness of the Other. None can be such a unity, or 'one-ness', neither for themself nor in reality for anyone else. Each individual needs to achieve this on their own. Yoga and psychoanalysis can only serve as support and guidance.