Depersonalization disorder
Although, according to ancient religious thinking, depersonalisation is seen as a healthy activity that transforms a person from a normal to a supernormal state, I am aware that this idea is seen in modern psychiatry as a pathological condition. According to the Dictionary of Psychology by Arthur S. Reber (Penguin Books), this term “depersonalisation”
represents an emotional disorder in which there is loss of contact with one's personal reality, a derealization accompanied by feelings of strangeness and an unreality of experience. In severe cases, parts of one's body feel alien or altered in size and one may have the experience of perceiving oneself from a distance. This condition is called depersonalization disorder or depersonalization neurosis. The conscious depersonalisation of personality by the Buddhist can easily be confused with the pathological condition mentioned above, although it is quite distinct from the pathological condition in several ways.
This confusion seems to arise due to a staunch belief of the neo-Freudians, in a personal ego. It was Paul Schilder (1886-1940) and Paul Federn (1872 - 1950), both Freudians who described the ego as the "omnipresent component of consciousness." Paul Schilder identified the ego not only as the "thinker" as Decarte did, but also as the feeler, perceiver and actor. "The ego thinks, feels, perceives, has a past and present… every experience presupposes an ego." (Schlder, P. Medical Psychology, pp 290-300, 1953). Paul Federn spoke of a "sense of ego" not as something that is perceived specifically but as something that one is generally aware of continuously. Edoardo Weis writing about Federn says, "The sense of ego which is omnipresent, is not ordinarily recognized. Yet, variations in intensity of ego feeling are a matter of common experience. When tired or drowsy, we feel numb; upon waking from a refreshing sleep, or upon receiving exciting news, we feel an invigorated "sense of ego". Federn spoke of an "ego cathexis." This fluctuation of the “sense of ego” was explained by means of his theory of "libido cathexis," or emotional investment. What it means is that if the ego becomes emotionally interested in an object, there is the experience of the "sense of ego." When the ego withdraws its interest, the object appears strange. The feeling of depersonalisation, which is described as the "loss of the sense of reality of one's self," is understood to be a similar estrangement, similar to inadequate investment of libido either in the body or in the mind, and can be caused by different emotional reasons.”
We do concede that there can be pathological cases of depersonalisation resulting from what the Buddha called "the urge to get rid of existence" (vibhava tanha), which is based on a dislike for what exists. These pathological cases of depersonalisation are in fact “unconscious” processes. What we are referring to here is a “conscious” process of depersonalisation based on a full awareness of reality. This conscious depersonalisation is something practiced not only in Buddhism, but also in other religions like Hinduism and even in Christianity as mentioned before. There is, however, a difference in the degree of depersonalisation in the different religions. In Hinduism and Christianity, there is always a subtle “self” that remains, which is called "soul" or "atman." But in Buddhism, there is a radical depersonalisation where nothing remains to identify as a "self."
It is interesting to notice, however, that the pathological case of depersonalising as described by Federn involves the withdrawal of libido cathexis from the object, though unconsciously done by the patient. The Buddhist practice of conscious depersonalisation is quite similar to the above in that it could be seen as a withdrawal of libido cathexis, but this is done consciously. Further, this pathological depersonalisation is not a complete depersonalisation. It is a partial depersonalisation where the ego remains as the subject while the object alone is depersonalised. Edoardo Weiss says on this subject, "The ego may react to an external situation presenting a conflict, by withdrawing itself from the sense organs, thus causing the outer world to be unreal; it may withdraw itself similarly from a body organ, which has become the source of unpleasant sensations, or from some objectionable wish or affect. (Weir, E. The Principles of Psychodynamics. NY. Grune and Stratton, 1950).