A Glance into the Archives of Islam

Slavoj Zizek

To many a Western historian of religion, Islam is a problem ho! co"l# it have emerge# after $hristianity, the religion to en# all religions% Its very geographic place belies the clich& on 'rientalism( m"ch more than belonging to the 'rient, the location of Islam makes it a fatal obstacle to the tr"e "nion of the )ast an# the West the point ma#e e*emplarily by $la"#e +evi,Stra"ss( To#ay, it is behin# Islam that I contemplate In#ia- the In#ia of ."##ha, prior to /"hamma# !ho for me as a )"ropean an# beca"se I am )"ropean arises bet!een o"r reflection an# the teachings !hich are closest to it 010 the han#s of the )ast an# the West, pre#estine# to be joine#, !ere kept apart by it2 02220 The West sho"l# ret"rn to the so"rces of its torn con#ition( by !ay of interposing itself bet!een ."##hism an# $hristianity, Islam islamize# "s !hen, in the co"rse of the $r"sa#es, the West let itself be ca"ght in the opposition to it an# th"s starte# to resemble it, instea# of #elivering itself in the case of the ine*istence of Islam to the slo! osmosis !ith ."##hism !hich !o"l# christianize "s even more, in a sense !hich !o"l# have been all the more $hristian insofar as !e !ere to mo"nt beyon# $hristianity itself2 It is then that the West has lost its chance to remain !oman2 345 This passage from the last pages of Tristes tropiques artic"lates the #ream of a #irect comm"nication an# reconciliation bet!een West an# )ast, $hristianity an# ."##hism, male an# female principles2 +ike a harmonio"s se*"al relationship, this #irect contact !o"l# have been a chance for )"rope to become feminine2 Islam serve# as the screen interposing itself bet!een the t!o, preventing the rise

of a harmonio"s hermaphro#itic !orl# civilization !ith its interposition, the West lost its last chance to 6remain !oman27 8As !e shall soon see, !hat this vie! fails to note is ho! Islam itself is gro"n#e# on a #isavo!e# femininity, trying to get ri# of the "mbilical cor# that links it to the feminine29 Islam th"s f"nctions as !hat :re"# calle# Liebesstoerer( the intr"#er0obstacle of the harmonio"s se*"al relationship2 This harmonio"s relationship, of co"rse, !o"l# have been the one "n#er the pre#ominance of femininity( the male West !o"l# have rejoine# the feminine )ast an# th"s 6remain !oman,7 locate itself !ithin femininity2 :ran;ois <egna"lt #efine# =e!s as o"r objet a , b"t are here not /"slims this a,se*"al 6partial object7% We "s"ally speak of the =e!ish,$hristian civilization perhaps, the time has come, especially !ith regar# to the /i##le )ast conflict, to talk abo"t the Jewish-Muslim civilization as an a*is oppose# to $hristianity2 8<ecall a s"rprising sign of this #eeper soli#arity( after :re"# p"blishe# his Moses booklet in 4>?@ #epriving =e!s of their fo"n#ing fig"re, the most ferocio"s reactions to it came from the /"slim intellect"als in )gyptA9 Was Begel not alrea#y on the trace of it !ith his insight into the spec"lative i#entity of ="#aism an# Islam% Accor#ing to a commonplace, ="#aism 8like Islam9 is a 6p"re7 monotheism, !hile $hristianity, !ith its Trinity, is a compromise !ith polytheism- Begel even #esignates Islam as TB) 6religion of s"blimity7 at its p"rest, as the "niversalization of the =e!ish monotheism( In /ohamme#anism the limite# principle of the =e!s is e*pan#e# into "niversality an# thereby overcome2 Bere, Go# is no longer, as !ith the Asiatics, contemplate# as e*istent in imme#iately sens"o"s mo#e b"t is apprehen#e# as the one infinite s"blime Co!er beyon# all the m"ltiplicity of the !orl#2 /ohamme#anism is, therefore, in the strictest sense of the !orl#, the religion of s"blimity2 3D5

This, perhaps, e*plains !hy there is so m"ch anti,Semitism in Islam( beca"se of the e*treme proximity of the t!o religions2 In Begelese, !hat Islam enco"nters in ="#aism is ITS)+: in its 6oppositional #etermination,7 in the mo#e of partic"larity2 The #ifference bet!een ="#aism an# Islam is th"s "ltimately not s"bstantial, b"t p"rely formal( they are the SA/) religion in a #ifferent formal mo#e 8in the sense in !hich Spinoza claims that the real #og an# the i#ea of a #og are s"bstantially one an# the same thing, j"st in a #ifferent mo#e923?5 , Against this, one sho"l# arg"e that it is ="#aism !hich is an 6abstract negation7 of polytheism an#, as s"ch, still ha"nte# by it 8there is a !hole series of cl"es pointing in this #irection( 6=ehovah7 is a pl"ral s"bstantivein one of his comman#ments, Go# prohibits =e!s to celebrate other go#s 6in front of me,7 not !hen o"tsi#e of his gaze- etc29, !hile $hristianity is the only tr"e monotheism, since it incl"#es self,#ifferentiation into the 'ne its lesson is that, in or#er to have tr"ly a 'ne, yo" nee# TB<))2 So !hat is Islam, this #ist"rbing e*cess that represents )ast for the West an# West for the )ast% In his La psychanalyse a lepreuve de l slam, :ethi .enslama 3E5 provi#es a systematic search for the 6archive7 of Islam, for its obscene secret mythical s"pport !hich ne cesse pas de ne pas secrire an# as s"ch s"stains the e*plicit #ogma2 Is, for e*ample, the story of Bagar not IslamFs 6archive,7 relating to IslamFs e*plicit teaching in the same !ay the =e!ish secret tra#ition of /oses relates to e*plicit teachings of ="#aism% In his #isc"ssion of the :re"#ian fig"re of /oses, )ric Santner intro#"ces the key #istinction bet!een symbolic history 8the set of e*plicit mythical narratives an# i#eologico,ethical prescriptions that constit"te the tra#ition of a comm"nity, !hat Begel !o"l# have calle# its Gethical s"bstanceG9 an# its obscene 'ther, the "nackno!le#geable Gspectral,G fantasmatic secret history that effectively s"stains the e*plicit symbolic tra#ition, b"t has to remain foreclose# if it

is to be operative2 3H5 What :re"# en#eavors to reconstit"te in his /oses book 8the story of the m"r#er of /oses, etc29 is s"ch a spectral history that ha"nts the space of =e!ish religio"s tra#ition2 'ne becomes a f"ll member of a comm"nity not simply by i#entifying !ith its e*plicit symbolic tra#ition, b"t only !hen one also ass"mes the spectral #imension that s"stains this tra#ition, the "n#ea# ghosts that ha"nt the living, the secret history of tra"matic fantasies transmitte# Gbet!een the lines,G thro"gh the lacks an# #istortions of the e*plicit symbolic tra#ition2 ="#aismIs st"bborn attachment to the "nackno!le#ge# violent fo"n#ing gest"re that ha"nts the p"blic legal or#er as its spectral s"pplement, enable# the =e!s to persist an# s"rvive for tho"san#s of years !itho"t lan# an# common instit"tional tra#ition( they ref"se# to give "p their ghost, to c"t off the link to their secret, #isavo!e# tra#ition2 The para#o* of ="#aism is that it maintains fi#elity to the fo"n#ing violent )vent precisely by J'T confessing, symbolizing it( this Grepresse#G stat"s of the )vent is !hat gives ="#aism its "nprece#ente# vitality2 Which, then, is the represse# )vent !hich gives vitality to Islam% The key is provi#e# by the reply to another K"estion( ho! #oes Islam, the thir# <eligion of the .ook, fit into this series% ="#aism is the religion of genealogy, of s"ccession of generations- !hen, in $hristianity, the Son #ies on the $ross, this means that the :ather also #ies 8as Begel !as f"lly a!are9 the patriarchal genealogical or#er as s"ch #ies, the Boly Spirit #oes not fit the family series, it intro#"ces a post,paternal0familial comm"nity2 In contrast to both ="#aism an# $hristianity, the t!o other religions of the book, Islam e*cl"#es Go# from the #omain of the paternal logic( Allah is not a father, not even a symbolic one Go# is one, he is neither born nor #oes he give birth to creat"res2 There is no place for a !oly "amily in slam# This is !hy Islam emphasizes so m"ch the fact that /"hamme# himself !as an orphan- this is !hy, in Islam, Go# intervenes

precisely at the moments of the s"spension, !ith#ra!al, fail"re, 6black,o"t,7 of the paternal f"nction 8!hen the mother or the chil# are aban#one# or ignore# by the biological father92 What this means is that Go# remains thoro"ghly in the #omain of impossible,<eal( he is the impossible,<eal o"tsi#e father, so that there is a 6genealogical #esert bet!een man an# Go#78?DL92 This !as the problem !ith Islam for :re"#, since his entire theory of religion is base# on the parallel of Go# !ith father2 /ore importantly even, this inscribes politics into the very heart of Islam, since the 6genealogical #esert7 ren#ers impossible to gro"n# a comm"nity in the str"ct"res of parenthoo# or other bloo#,links( 6the #esert bet!een Go# an# :ather is the place !here the political instit"tes itself78?DL92 With Islam, it is no longer possible to gro"n# a comm"nity in the mo#e of Totem and Taboo, thro"gh the m"r#er of the father an# the ens"ing g"ilt as bringing brothers together thence IslamFs "ne*pecte# act"ality2 In contrast to ="#aism an# Islam, in !hich the sacrifice of the son is prevente# in the last moment 8angel intervenes to Abraham9, only $hristianity opts for the actual sacrifice %&illin'( of the son2 8DM@9 This is !hy, altho"gh Islam recognizes the .ible as a sacre# te*t, it has to #eny this fact( in Islam, =es"s #i# not really #ie on the $ross( the =e!s 6sai# 8in boast9, NWe kille# $hrist =es"s the son of /ary, the /essenger of AllahF- b"t they kille# him not, nor cr"cifie# him, b"t so it !as ma#e to appear to them78E24HO92 There is effectively in Islam a consistent anti,sacrificial logic( in the P"ran version of IsaacFs sacrifice, AbrahamFs #ecision to kill his son is rea# not as the "ltimate in#ication of his !illingness to #o the Go#Fs !ill, b"t as a conseK"ence of AbrahamFs wron' interpretation of his dream( !hen the angel prevents the act, his message is that Abraham got it !rong, that Go# #i# not really !ant him to #o it28DOH9 Insofar as, in Islam, Go# is an impossible,<eal, this !orks

both !ays !ith regar# to sacrifice( it can !ork against sacrifice 8there is no symbolic economy of e*change bet!een the believers an# Go#s, Go# is the p"re 'ne of .eyon#9, b"t also in favo"r of sacrifice, !hen the #ivine <eal t"rns into the s"perego fig"re of 6obsc"re go#s !ho #eman# contin"o"s bloo#78+acan,QI92 Islam seems to oscillate bet!een these t!o e*tremes, !ith the obscene sacrificial logic c"lminating in its re#escription of the story of Abel an# $ain here is ho! )uran reports on 6the tr"th of the story of the t!o sons of A#am2 .ehol#A they each presente# a sacrifice 8to Allah9( It !as accepte# from one, b"t not from the other2 Sai# the latter( N.e s"re I !ill slay thee2F NS"rely,F sai# the former, NAllah #oth accept of the sacrifice of those !ho are righteo"s2 If tho" #ost stretch thy han# against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my han# against thee to slay thee( for I #o fear Allah, the cherisher of the !orl#s2 :or me, I inten# to let thee #ra! on thyself my sin as !ell as thine, for tho" !ilt be among the companions of the fire, an# that is the re!ar# of those !ho #o !rong2F The 8selfish9 so"l of the other le# him to the m"r#er of his brother( he m"r#ere# him, an# became 8himself9 one of the lost ones27 8H(DO,?L9 So it is not only $ain !ho !ants the killing( Abel himself actively participates in this #esire, provoking $ain to #o it, so that he 8Abel9 !o"l# get ri# of his o!n sins also2 .enslama is right to #iscern here traces of an 6i#eal hatre#,7 #ifferent from the imaginary hatre# of the aggressivity to!ar#s oneFs #o"ble 8D@>9( the victim itself actively #esires the crime !hose victim it !ill be, so that, as a martyr, it !ill enter Cara#ise, sen#ing the perpetrator to b"rn in hell2 :rom to#ayFs perspective, one is tempte# to play !ith the anachronistic spec"lation on ho! the 6terrorist7 logic of the martyrFs !ish to #ie is alrea#y here, in )uran altho"gh, of co"rse, one has to locate the problem in the conte*t of mo#ernization2 The problem of Islamic !orl# is, as is !ell

kno!n, that, since it !as e*pose# to Western mo#ernization abr"ptly, !itho"t a proper time to 6!ork thro"gh7 the tra"ma of its impact, to constr"ct a symbolic,fictional space0screen for it, the only possible reactions to this impact !ere either a s"perficial mo#ernization, an imitate# mo#ernization #estine# to fail 8Iran Shah regime9, or, in the fail"re of the proper symbolic space of fictions, a #irect reco"rse to the violent <eal, an o"tright !ar bet!een Islam Tr"th an# Western +ie, !ith no space for symbolic me#iation2 In this 6f"n#amentalist7 sol"tion 8a mo#ern phenomenon !ith no #irect links to /"slim tra#itions9, the #ivine #imension reasserts itself in its s"perego,<eal, as a m"r#ero"s e*plosion of sacrifical violence to pay off the obscene s"perego #ivinity2 A f"rther key #istinction bet!een ="#aism 8together !ith its $hristian contin"ation9 an# Islam is that, as !e can see in the case of AbrahamFs t!o sons, ="#aism chooses Abraham as the symbolic father, i2e2, the phallic sol"tion of the paternal symbolic a"thority, of the official symbolic lineage, #iscar#ing the secon# !oman, enacting a 6phallic appropriation of the impossible784H?92 Islam, on the contrary, opts for the lineage of Bagar, for Abraham as the biological father, maintaining the #istance bet!een father an# Go#, retaining Go# in the #omain of the Impossible2 84E>9 3M5 .oth ="#aism an# Islam repress their fo"n#ing gest"res ho!% As the story of Abraham an# his t!o sons !ith t!o #ifferent !omen sho!s, in both ="#aism an# Islam, father can become father, ass"me the paternal f"nction, only thro"gh the me#iation of another !oman2 :re"#Fs hypothesis is that the repression in ="#aism concerns the fact that Abraham !as a foreigner 8an )gyptian9, not a =e! it is the fo"n#ing paternal fig"re, the one !ho brings revelation an# establishes the covenant !ith Go#, that has to come from the o"tsi#e2 With Islam, the repression concerns

a !oman 8Bagar, the )gyptian slave !ho gave to Abraham his first son9( altho"gh Abraham an# Ishmail 8the progenitor of all Arabs, accor#ing to the myth9 are mentione# #ozens of times in )uran, Bagar is "nmentione#, erase# from the official history2 As s"ch, ho!ever, she contin"es to ha"nt Islam, her traces s"rviving in rit"als, like the obligation of the pilgrims to /ecca to r"n si* times bet!een the t!o hills Safa an# /ar!ah, a kin# of ne"rotic repetition0reenactment of BagarFs #esperate search for !ater for her son in the #esert2 , Bere is, in *enesis, the story of AbrahamFs t!o sons, this key "mbilical link bet!een ="#aism an# Islam first, the .irth of Ishmael( Jo! Sarai, AbramFs !ife, ha# not given birth to any chil#ren, b"t she ha# an )gyptian servant name# Bagar2 So Sarai sai# to Abram, NSince the +or# has prevente# me from having chil#ren, have se*"al relations !ith my servant2 Cerhaps I can have a family by her2F Abram #i# !hat Sarai tol# him2 So after Abram ha# live# in $anaan for ten years, Sarai, AbramFs !ife, gave Bagar, her )gyptian servant, to her h"sban# to be his !ife2 Be ha# se*"al relations !ith Bagar, an# she became pregnant2 'nce Bagar realize# she !as pregnant, she #espise# Sarai2 Then Sarai sai# to Abram, NRo" have bro"ght this !rong on meA I allo!e# my servant to have se*"al relations !ith yo", b"t !hen she realize# that she !as pregnant, she #espise# me2 /ay the +or# j"#ge bet!een yo" an# meAF Abram sai# to Sarai, NSince yo"r servant is "n#er yo"r a"thority, #o to her !hatever yo" think best2F Then Sarai treate# Bagar harshly, so she ran a!ay from Sarai2 The +or#Fs angel fo"n# Bagar near a spring of !ater in the #esert the spring that is along the roa# to Sh"r2 Be sai#, NBagar, servant of Sarai, !here have yo" come from, an# !here are yo" going%F She replie#, NIFm r"nning a!ay from my mistress, Sarai2F Then the +or#Fs angel sai# to her, N<et"rn to yo"r mistress an# s"bmit to her a"thority2 I !ill greatly m"ltiply yo"r

#escen#ants,F the +or#Fs angel a##e#, Nso that they !ill be too n"mero"s to co"nt2F Then the +or#Fs angel sai# to her, lsK"o-Ro" are no! pregnant an# are abo"t to give birth to a son2 Ro" are to name him Ishmael, for the +or# has hear# yo"r painf"l groans2 Be !ill be a !il# #onkey of a man2 Be !ill be hostile to everyone, an# everyone !ill be hostile to him2 Be !ill live a!ay from his brothers2F So Bagar name# the +or# !ho spoke to her, NRo" are the Go# !ho sees me,F for she sai#, NBere I have seen the one !ho sees meAF That is !hy the !ell !as calle# .eer +ahai <oi2 8It is locate# bet!een Sa#esh an# .ere#29 So Bagar gave birth to AbramFs son, !hom Abram name# Ishmael2 784M(4,4M(4H9 After the mirac"lo"s birth of Isaac, !hose immac"late conception seems to point for!ar# to $hrist 8Goo# 6 visite# Sarah7 an# ma#e her pregnant9, !hen the chil# !as ol# eno"gh to be !eane#, Abraham prepare# a great feast( ."t Sarah notice# the son of Bagar the )gyptian the son !hom Bagar ha# borne to Abraham mocking2 So she sai# to Abraham, N.anish that slave !oman an# her son, for the son of that slave !oman !ill not be an heir along !ith my son IsaacAF SarahFs #eman# #isplease# Abraham greatly beca"se Ishmael !as his son2 ."t Go# sai# to Abraham, NTo not be "pset abo"t the boy or yo"r slave !ife2 To all that Sarah is telling yo" beca"se thro"gh Isaac yo"r #escen#ants !ill be co"nte#2 ."t I !ill also make the son of the slave !ife into a great nation, for he is yo"r #escen#ant too2F )arly in the morning Abraham took some foo# an# a skin of !ater an# gave them to Bagar2 Be p"t them on her sho"l#ers, gave her the chil#, an# sent her a!ay2 So she !ent !an#ering aimlessly thro"gh the !il#erness of .eer Sheba2 When the !ater in the skin !as gone, she shove# the chil# "n#er one of the shr"bs2 Then she !ent an# sat #o!n by herself across from him at K"ite a #istance, abo"t a bo!shot a!ay- for she tho"ght, NI ref"se to !atch the chil# #ie2F So she sat across from him an# !ept "ncontrollably2

."t Go# hear# the boyFs voice2 The angel of Go# calle# to Bagar from heaven an# aske# her, NWhat is the matter, Bagar% TonFt be afrai#, for Go# has hear# the boyFs voice right !here he is crying2 Get "pA Belp the boy "p an# hol# him by the han#, for I !ill make him into a great nation2F Then Go# enable# Bagar to see a !ell of !ater2 She !ent over an# fille# the skin !ith !ater, an# then gave the boy a #rink278D4(4L,D4(4>9 Tell me, yo" !ho !ant to be "n#er the la!, #o yo" not "n#erstan# the la!% :or it is !ritten that Abraham ha# t!o sons, one by the slave !oman an# the other by the free !oman2 ."t one, the son by the slave !oman, !as born by nat"ral #escent, !hile the other, the son by the free !oman, !as born thro"gh the promise2 These things may be treate# as an allegory, for these !omen represent t!o covenants2 'ne is from /o"nt Sinai bearing chil#ren for slavery- this is Bagar2 Jo! Bagar represents /o"nt Sinai in Arabia an# correspon#s to the present =er"salem, for she is in slavery !ith her chil#ren2 ."t the =er"salem above is free, an# she is o"r mother2 :or it is !ritten( N<ejoice, ' barren !oman !ho #oes not bear chil#renbreak forth an# sho"t, yo" !ho have no birth pains, beca"se the chil#ren of the #esolate !oman are more n"mero"s than those of the !oman !ho has a h"sban#2F ."t yo", brothers an# sisters, are chil#ren of the promise like Isaac2 ."t j"st as at that time the one born by nat"ral #escent persec"te# the one born accor#ing to the Spirit, so it is no!2 ."t !hat #oes the script"re say% NThro! o"t the slave !oman an# her son, for the son of the slave !oman !ill not share the inheritance !ith the sonF of the free !oman2 Therefore, brothers an# sisters, !e are not chil#ren of the slave !oman b"t of the free !oman278E(D4,E(?49 Ca"l stages here a clear symmetrical confrontation here( Isaac vers"s Ishmail eK"als the symbolic father 8Jame,of, the,:ather9 vers"s the biological 8racial9 father, 6the origin thro"gh name an# spirit vers"s origin thro"gh s"bstantial

transmission of life784EO9, chil# of the free !oman vers"s chil# of the slave, chil# of spirit vers"s chil# of flesh2 This rea#ing, ho!ever, has to simplify the biblical narrative in 8at least9 three cr"cial points( 849 Go#Fs obvio"s care for Bagar an# Ishmail, his intervention to save IshmailFs life8D9 the e*traor#inary characterization of Bagar as not simply a !oman of flesh an# l"st, a !orthless slave, b"t the one !ho S))S Go# 86So Bagar name# the +or# !ho spoke to her, NRo" are the Go# !ho sees me,F for she sai#, NBere I have seen the one !ho sees meAF792 Bagar as the e*cl"#e# secon# !oman, o"tsi#e symbolic genealogy, stan#s not only for the pagan 8)gyptian9 fertility of +ife, b"t also for a #irect access to Go# she #irectly sees Go# himself seeing, !hich !as not given even to /oses to !hom Go# ha# to appear as a b"rning b"sh2 As s"ch, Bagar anno"nces the mystical0feminine access to Go# 8#evelope# later in S"fism92 8?9 the 8not only narrative9 fact that the choice 8bet!een flesh an# spirit9 cannot ever be confronte# #irectly, as a choice bet!een the t!o sim"ltaneo"s options2 :or Sarah to get a son, Bagar has first to get hers, i2e2, there is a necessity of s"ccession, of repetition, here, as if, in or#er to chose spirit, !e first have to chose flesh only the secon# son can be the tr"e son of spirit2 This necessity is !hat symbolic castration is abo"t( 6castration7 means that the #irect access to Tr"th is impossible, as +acan p"t it, la verite sur'it de la meprise, the !ay to Spirit is only thro"gh :lesh, etc2 <ecall BegelIs analysis of phrenonolgy !hich closes the chapter on G'bserving <easonG in his +henomenolo'y of ,pirit( Begel resorts here to a metaphor !hich concerns precisely phall"s, the organ of paternal insemination, in or#er to e*plain the opposition of the t!o possible rea#ings of the proposition Gthe Spirit is a boneG 8the v"lgar materialist Gre#"ctionistG rea#ing , the shape of o"r sk"ll effectively an# #irectly

#etermines the feat"res of a manIs min# , an# the spec"lative rea#ing , the spirit is strong eno"gh to assert its i#entity !ith the "tmost inert st"ff an# to Gs"blateG it, i2e2 even the "tmost inert st"ff cannot escape the SpiritIs po!er of me#iation92 The v"lgar materialist rea#ing is like the approach !hich sees in phall"s only the organ of "rination, !hile the spec"lative rea#ing is also able to #iscern in it the m"ch higher f"nction of insemination 8i2e2 precisely GconceptionG as the biological anticipation of concept9( The #epth !hich the Spirit brings forth from !ithin , b"t only as far as its pict"re,thinking conscio"sness !here it lets it remain , an# the ignorance of this conscio"sness abo"t !hat it really is saying, are the same conj"nction of the high an# the lo! !hich, in the living being, Jat"re naively e*presses !hen it combines the organ of its highest f"lfillment, the organ of generation, !ith the organ of "rination2 The infinite j"#gment, K"a infinite, !o"l# be the f"lfillment of life that comprehen#s itself- the conscio"sness of the infinite j"#gment that remains at the level of pict"re, thinking behaves as "rination2 3O5 A close rea#ing of this passage makes it clear that BegelIs point is J'T that, in contrast to the v"lgar empiricist min# !hich sees only "rination, the proper spec"lative attit"#e has to choose insemination2 The para#o* is that the #irect choice of insemination is the infallible !ay to miss it( it is not possible to choose #irectly the Gtr"e meaningG, i2e2 one BAS to begin by making the G!rongG choice 8of "rination9 , the tr"e spec"lative meaning emerges only thro"gh the repeate# rea#ing, as the after,effect 8or by,pro#"ct9 of the first, G!rong,G rea#ing1 an#, !e may a##, Sarah can get her chil# only after Bagar gets hers2 Where, precisely, is here castration% Crior to BagarFs entry on the scene, Sarah, the phallic,patriarchal !oman, remains barren, infertile, precisely beca"se she is too po!erf"l0phallic- so the opposition is not simply the

opposition of Sarah, f"lly s"bmitte# to patriarchal0phallic or#er, an# Bagar, in#epen#ent an# s"bversive, it is inherent to Sarah herself, her t!o aspects 8phallic arrogance, maternal service92 It is Sarah herself !ho is too po!erf"l, bossy, an# ha# to be h"miliate# thro"gh Bagar in or#er to get a chil# an# thereby enter patriarchal genealogic or#er2 This castration of hers is signalle# thro"gh the change of her name, from Sarai to Sarah2 Is, ho!ever, only Sarah castrate#% Is also Abraham not castrate#% With Bagar, he is able to conceive a chil# #irectly,biologically, b"t o"tsi#e the proper genealogy of symbolic lineage- this becomes possible only thro"gh the e*ternal intervention of Go# !ho 6visits Sarah7 this gap bet!een symbolic an# biologic paternity IS castration2 The choice of Bagar, the in#epen#ent seer of Go#, over the #ocile ho"se!ife Sarah, in Islam provi#es the first hint of the ins"fficiency of the stan#ar# notion of Islam, that of an e*treme masc"line monotheism, the collective of brothers from !hich !omen are e*cl"#e# an# have to be veile#, since their 6monstration7 is as s"ch e*cessive, #ist"rbing0provoking men, #iverting them from their service to Go#2 <ecall the ri#ic"lo"s Taliban prohibition of metal heels for !omen as if, even if !omen are entirely covere# !ith cloth, the clinging so"n# of their heels !o"l# still provoke men1 There is, ho!ever, a !hole series of feat"res !hich #ist"rb this stan#ar# notion2 :irst, the nee# to keep !omen veile# implies an extremely sexualized "niverse in !hich the very enco"nter of a !oman is a provocation that any man is "nable to resist2 <epression has to be so strong beca"se se* itself is so strong , !hat a society is this in !hich the click of metal heels can make men e*plo#e !ith l"st% A ne!spaper report a co"ple of years ago, a non,relate# yo"ng !oman an# man !ere ca"ght for a co"ple of ho"rs in a !ire, gon#ola beca"se the machine broke #o!n2 Altho"gh nothing happene#, the !oman kille# herself after!ar#s( the very i#ea of being alone !ith a foreign man for ho"rs ren#ers the

i#ea that 6nothing happens7 "nthinkable1 Jo !on#er that, in the co"rse of the analysis of the famo"s 6Signorelli7 #ream in his +sychopatholo'y of -veryday Life, :re"# reports it !as an ol# /"slim from .osnia an# Berzegovina !ho imparts him the 6!is#om7 of se* as the only thing that makes life !orth living( 6'nce a man is no longer able to have se*, the only thing that remains is to #ie27 Secon#, there is the very pre,history of Islam, !ith Bagar, the primor#ial mother of all Arabs, "nmentione# in P"ranpl"s the story of /"hamme# himself, !ith Sha#ija 8his first !ife9 as the one !ho enable# him to #ra! the line of separation bet!een tr"th an# lie, bet!een the messages from angel an# those from #emon2 There are cases !here the #ivine messages /ohamme# receive# come #angero"sly close# to self,serving fabrications, the best,kno!n among them being his marriage !ith Zaynab, his a#opte# son Zay#Fs !ife2 After seeing her half,nake#, /ohamme# began to covet her passionately- after Zay# became a!are of it, he #"tif"lly 6rep"#iate#7 8#ivorce#9 her, so that his stepfather co"l# move in an# marry her2 Unfort"nately, "n#er Arab c"stomary la!, s"ch a "nion !as prohibite#, b"t s"rprise, s"rpriseA /ohamme# soon got a timely revelation in !hich Allah e*empte# /ohamme# from this la! 8)uran ??(?O, ??(HL92 There is even an element of .r-/ater in /ohamme# her, of a father fig"re possessing all !omen in his large family2 Bo!ever, a goo# arg"ment for /ohamme#Fs basic sincerity is that he himself !as the first to #o"bt ra#ically the #ivine nat"re of his visions, #ismissing them as hall"cinatory signs of ma#ness or as o"tright cases of #emonic possession2 Bis first revelation occ"rre# in #"ring his <ama#haan retreat o"tsi#e /ecca( he sa! the archangel Gabriel, calling "pon him to 6<eciteA7 8)ar0, !hence )ur0n92 /ohamme# tho"ght he !as going ma#, an# since he #i#nFt !ant to spen# the rest of his life as /eccaFs village i#iot, preferring #eath

to #isgrace, he #eci#e# to thro! himself from a high rock2 ."t then the vision repeate# itself( he hear# a voice from above saying( 6' /ohamme#A Tho" art the apostle of Go# an# I am Gabriel27 ."t even this voice #i# not reass"re him, so he slo!ly ret"rne# to his ho"se an#, in #eep #espair, aske# Sha#ija, his first !ife 8as !ell as the first believer in him9( GWrap me in a blanket, !rap me "p in a blanket2G She !rappe# him "p, an# then /"hamme# tol# her !hat ha# happene# to him( G/y life is in #anger2G Sha#ija #"tif"lly solace# him2 When, #"ring the follo!ing visions of the archangel Gabriel, /ohamma#Fs #o"bts persiste#, Sha#ija aske# him to notify her !hen his visitant ret"rne#, so that they co"l# verify !hether he really !as Gabriel or an or#inary #emon2 So, ne*t time, /ohamme# sai# to Sha#ija( 6This is Gabriel !ho has j"st come to me27 6Get "p an# sit by my left thigh27 /ohamma# #i# so, an# she sai#( 6$an yo" see him%7 6Res27 6Then t"rn ro"n# an# sit on my right thigh27 Be #i# so, an# she sai#( 6$an yo" see him%7 When he sai# that he co"l#, Sha#ija finally she aske# him to move an# sit in her lap, an#, after #isclosing her form an# casting asi#e her veil, aske# again( 6$an yo" see him%7 An# he replie#( 6Jo27 She then comforte# him( 6<ejoice an# be of goo# heart, he is an angel an# not a Satan27 8There is a f"rther version of this story in !hich, in the final test, Sha#ija not only reveale# herself, b"t ma#e /ohamma# 6come insi#e her shift7 8penetrate her se*"ally9, an# there"pon Gabriel #eparte#2 , an# she sai# to the apostle of Go#, NThis verily is an angel an# not a satan2F7 The "n#erlying ass"mption is that, !hile a l"stf"l #emon !o"l# have enjoye# the sight of cop"lation, an angel !o"l# politely !ith#ra! from the scene29 'nly after Sha#ija provi#e# /"hamme# !ith this proof of the gen"ineness of his meeting !ith Gabriel, !as /ohamme# c"re# of his #o"bts an# co"l# embark "pon his career as Go#Fs spokesman2 3@5

/"hamme# th"s first e*perience# his revelations as signs of poetic hall"cinations his imme#iate reaction to them !as( 6Jo! none of Go#Fs creat"res !as more hatef"l to me than an ecstatic poet or a man possesse#27 The one !ho save# him from this "nbearable "ncertainty, as !ell as from the role of a social o"tcast, a village i#iot, an# the first believer in his message, the first /"slim, !as Sha#ija, a woman2 In the above scene, she is the +acanian 6big 'ther,7 the g"arantee of Tr"th of the s"bjectFs en"nciation, an# it is only in the g"ise of this circ"lar s"pport, thro"gh someone !ho beliefs in /"hamme#, that he can believe in his o!n message an# th"s serve as a messenger of Tr"th to believers2 .elief is never #irect( in or#er for me to believe, somebo#y else has to believe in me, an# !hat I believe in is this othersF believe in me2 <ecall the proverbial #o"btf"l hero, lea#er, or other fig"re of a"thority, !ho, altho"gh #esperate, f"lfils his mission beca"se others 8his follo!ers9 believe in him, an# he cannot bear the prospect of #isappointing them2 Is there a stronger press"re than the one !e e*perience !hen an innocent chil# looks into o"r eyes an# says( 6."t I believe in yo"A7 Rears ago, some feminists 8/ary Ann Toanne9 acc"se# +acan of privileging male #esire( it is only men !ho can f"lly #irectly #esire, !hile !omen can only #esire to #esire, hysterically imitate as #esire2 With regar# to belief, one sho"l# t"rn things aro"n#( !omen believe, !hile men believe those !ho believe in them2 3>5 The "n#erlying topic is here that of the objet petit a( the other !ho 6believes in me7 sees in me something more than myself, something of !hich I myself am not a!are, the objet a in me2 Accor#ing to +acan, !oman is for men re#"ce# to objet a !hat if it is the other !ay ro"n#% What if a man #esires his object of #esire, "na!are of the ca"se that makes him #esire it, !hile a !oman is more #irectly foc"se# on the 8object,9 ca"se of #esire%

This feat"re sho"l# be given all its !eight( a !oman possesses a kno!le#ge abo"t the tr"th !hich prece#es even the prophetFs o!n kno!le#ge2 , What f"rther complicates the pict"re is the precise mo#e of Sha#ijaFs intervention, the !ay she !as able to #ra! the line of separation bet!een tr"th an# lie, bet!een #ivine revelation an# #emonic possession( by !ay of puttin' forward %interposin'( herself1 her disclosed body1 as the untruth embodied, the temptation to a tr"e angel2 Woman( a lie !hich, at its best, kno!s herself as lie embo#ie#2 'pposite of Spinoza, tr"th as its o!n an# lieFs in#e* here lie its o!n an# tr"thFs in#e*2 This is ho! Sha#ijaFs #emonstration of tr"th is achieve# thro"gh her provocative 6monstration7 8#isclos"re, e*pos"re92 8DLO9 'ne th"s cannot simply oppose the 6goo#7 Islam 8reverence of !omen9 an# the 6ba#7 Islam 8veile# oppresse# !omen92 So the point is not to simply ret"rn to the 6represse# feminist origins7 of Islam, to renovate Islam in its feminist aspect by !ay of this ret"rn( these oppresse# origins are sim"ltaneo"sly the very origins of the oppression of !omen2 'ppression #oes not j"st oppress the origins, it has to oppress ITS 'WJ origins2 The key element of the genealogy of Islam is this passage from the !oman as the only one !ho can verify Tr"th itself, an# the !oman !ho by her nat"re lacks reason an# faith, cheats an# lies, provokes men, interposing herself bet!een them an# Go# as a #ist"rbing stain, an# !ho therefore has to be erase#, ren#ere# invisible, controlle#, since her e*cessive enjoyment threatens to eng"lf men2 Woman as s"ch is an ontological scan#al, her p"blic e*pos"re is an affront to Go#2 She is not simply erase#, b"t re,a#mitte# in a closely controlle# "niverse !hose fantasmatic fo"n#ations are most clearly #iscernible in the myth of the eternal virgin( the 8in9famo"s houris, virgins a!aiting martyrs in Cara#ise, never lose their virginity after every penetration, their hymen is magically restore#2

The fantasy is here that of the "n#ivi#e# an# "n#ist"rbe# reign of the phallic jouissance, of a "niverse in !hich all the traces of the feminine autre jouissance are erase#2 8DHH,M9 The profo"n#est reaction of a /"slim !oman, !hen aske# !hy she !ears a veil vol"ntarily, is 6o"t of her shame in front of Go#,7 not to offen# Go#( there is, in a !omanFs e*pos"re, an erectile prot"berance, an obscenely,intr"sive K"ality, an# this combination of vis"al intr"sion an# abn enigmatic kno!le#ge is e*plosive, it #ist"rbs the very ontological balance of the "niverse2 So ho! are !e to rea#, against this backgro"n#, a#ministrative meas"res like the :rench StateFs prohibition for yo"ng /"slim !omen to !ear their veil in schools% The para#o* is #o"ble here2 :irst, this prohibition prohibits something !hich it also K"alifies as an erective e*pos"re, a too,strong,to,be,permissible sign of oneFs i#entity that pert"rbs the :rench principle of egalitarian citizenship !earing a veil is, from this :rench rep"blican perspective, also a provocative 6monstration27 The secon# para#o* is that what this ,tate prohibition prohibits is prohibition itself 8D4H9, an#, perhaps, this prohibition is the most oppressive of them all !hy% .eca"se it prohibits the very feat"re !hich constit"tes the 8socio,instit"tional9 identity of the other( it #es,instit"tionalizes this i#entity, changing it into an irrelevant personal i#iosyncrasy2 What s"ch prohibiting of prohibitions creates is a space of "niversal /an for !hom all #ifferences 8economic, politic, religio"s, c"lt"ral, se*"al19 are in#ifferent, a matter of contingent symbolic practices, etc2 Is this space really gen#er,ne"tral% Jo b"t not in the sense of secret hegemony of the male 6phallocentric7 logic( on the contrary, the space !itho"t legitimate o"tsi#e, the space not marke# by any c"t !hich #ra!s a line of incl"sion0e*cl"sion, is a 6feminine7 non,all an# as s"ch all,encompassing space, space !itho"t o"tsi#e, in !hich !e are all locate# !ithin a kin# of 6absol"te femininity, a Woman,Worl#78D4O9 embracing "s all2 In this

"niverse, !ith its prohibition of prohibition, there is no g"ilt, b"t this absence of g"ilt is pai# for by an "nbearable rise of an*iety2 The prohibition of prohibitions is a kin# of 6general eK"ivalent7 of all prohibitions, a "niversal an# thereby "niversalize# prohibition, a prohibition of all act"al otherness( to prohibit the otherFs prohibition eK"als prohibiting his0her otherness28D4M9 Therein resi#es the para#o* of the tolerant m"ltic"lt"ralist "niverse of the m"ltit"#e of life,styles an# other i#entities( the more it is tolerant, the more it is oppressively homogeneo"s2 /artin Amis recently attacke# Islam as the most boring of all religions, #eman#ing its believers to perform again an# again the same st"pi# rit"als an# learn by heart the same sacre# form"las he !as #eeply !rong( it is m"ltic"lt"ral tolerance an# permissiveness !hich stan# for real bore#om2 A !oman th"s possesses a kno!le#ge abo"t the tr"th !hich prece#es even the CrophetFs kno!le#ge2 .ack to role of !omen in the pre,history of Islam, one sho"l# a## /"hamme#Fs conception, !here !e st"mble again "pon a mysterio"s 6bet!een,the,t!o,!omen27 After !orking in the clay on his lan#, Ab#allah, his father,to,be, !ent to the ho"se of another !oman an# ma#e a#vances to her, b"t she p"t him off on acco"nt of the clay that !as on him2 Be left her, !ashe# himself, !ent to Amina an# ha# interco"rse !ith her th"s Amina conceive# /"hamme#2 Then he !ent back to the other !oman an# aske# her if she is no! still !illing- she replie#( 6Jo2 When yo" passe# by me there !as a !hite light bet!een yo"r eyes2 I calle# to yo" an# yo" rejecte# me2 Ro" !ent to Amina an# she has taken a!ay the light27 The official !ife gets the chil#, the other gets kno!s she sees in Ab#allah more than Ab#allah himself, the 6light,7 something he has !itho"t kno!ing it, something that is in him more than himself 8the sperm to beget the Crophet9, an# it is this objet a that generates her #esire2 Ab#allahFs position is like the one of the hero of a

#etective novel !ho is all of a s"##en persec"te#, even threatene# !ith #eath he kno!s something that can p"t in #anger a big criminal, b"t he himself 8or she "s"ally a !oman9 #oesnFt kno! !hat this is2 Ab#allah, in his narcissism, conf"ses this objet a in himself !ith himself 8he conf"ses the object an# the ca"se of the !omanFs #esire9, !hich is !hy he ret"rns to her after!ar#s, !rongly pres"ming that she !ill still #esire him2 This reliance on the feminine 8an# on the foreign !oman at that9 is IslamFs represse# fo"n#ation, its "n,tho"ght, that !hich it en#eavors to e*cl"#e, to erase or at least control it thro"gh its comple* i#eological e#ifice, b"t !hat persists to ha"nt it, since it is the very so"rce of its vitality2 , Why, then, is !oman in Islam s"ch a tra"matic presence, s"ch an ontological scan#al that it has to be veile#% The tr"e problem is not the horror of the shameless e*pos"re of !hat is beneath the veil, b"t, rather, the nat"re of the veil itself2 'ne sho"l# link this feminine veil !ith +acanFs rea#ing of the anec#ote abo"t the competition bet!een Ze"*is an# Carrhasios, t!o painters from the ancient Greece, abo"t !ho !ill paint a more convincing ill"sion2 34L5 :irst, Ze"*is pro#"ce# s"ch a realistic pict"re of grapes that bir#s !ere l"re# into picking at it to eat the grape2 Je*t, Carrhasios !on by painting on the !all of his room a c"rtain, so that Ze"*is, !hen Carrhasios sho!e# him his painting, aske# him( 6'S, no! please p"ll asi#e the veil an# sho! me !hat yo" painte#A7 In Ze"*isFs painting, the ill"sion !as so convincing that image !as taken for the real thing- in CarrhasiosF painting, the ill"sion resi#e# in the very notion that !hat !e see in front of "s is j"st a veil covering "p the hi##en tr"th2 This is also ho!, for +acan, feminine masK"era#e !orks( she !ears a mask to make "s react like Ze"*is in front of CarrhasiosF painting 231 put down the mas& and show us what you really are4 Things are homologo"s in ShakespeareFs 5s 6ou Li&e t, in !hich 'rlan#o is passionately in love !ith <osalin# !ho, in or#er

to test his love, #isg"ises herself as Ganyme#e an#, as a male companion, interrogates 'rlan#o abo"t his love2 She even takes on the personality of <osalin# 8in a re#o"ble# masking, she preten#s to be herself, to be Ganyme#e !ho plays to be <osalin#9 an# pers"a#es her frien# $elia 8#isg"ise# as Aliena9 to marry them in a mock ceremony2 In this ceremony, <osalin# literally feigns to feign to be !hat she is( tr"th itself, in or#er to !in, has to be sta'ed in a re#o"ble# #eception2 We can th"s imagine 'rlan#o, after the mock !e##ing ceremony, t"rning to <osalin#, Ganyme#e an# telling her( 6Ro" playe# <osalin# so !ell that yo" almost ma#e me believe to be her- yo" can no! ret"rn to !hat yo" are an# be Ganyme#e again27 It is not an acci#ent that the agents of s"ch #o"ble masK"era#e are al!ays !omen( !hile a man can only preten# to be a !oman, only a !oman can preten# to be a man !ho preten#s to be a !oman, as only a !oman can pretend to be what she is 8a !oman92 To acco"nt for this specifically feminine stat"s of preten#ing, +acan refers to a !oman !ho !ears a conceale# fake penis in or#er to evoke that she is phall"s( S"ch is !oman conceale# behin# her veil( it is the absence of the penis that makes her the phall"s, the object of #esire2 )voke this absence in a more precise !ay by having her !ear a c"te fake one "n#er a fancy #ress, an# yo", or rather she, !ill have plenty to tell "s abo"t2 3445 The logic is here more comple* than it may appear( it is not merely that the obvio"sly fake penis evokes the absence of the NrealF penis- in a strict parallel !ith CarrhasiosF painting, the manFs first reaction "pon seeing the conto"rs of the fake penis is( 6C"t this ri#ic"lo"s fake off an# sho! me !hat yo"Fve got beneathA7 The man thereby misses ho! the fake penis is the real thing( the 6phall"s7 that the !oman is is the sha#o! generate# by the fake penis, i2e2, the specter of the non,e*istent NrealF phall"s beneath the cover of the fake one2

In this precise sense, the feminine masK"era#e has the str"ct"re of mimicry, since, for +acan, in mimicry, I #o not imitate the image I !ant to fit into, b"t those feat"res of the image !hich seem to in#icate that there is some hi##en reality behin#2 As !ith Carrhasios, I #o not imitate the grapes, b"t the veil( 6/imicry reveals something in so far as it is #istinct from !hat might be calle# an itself that is behin#27 34D5 The stat"s of phall"s itself is that of a mimicry2 Chall"s is "ltimately a kin# of stain of the h"man bo#y, an e*cessive feat"re !hich #oes not fit the bo#y an# thereby generates the ill"sion of another hi##en reality behin# the image2 An# this brings "s back to the f"nction of veil in Islam( !hat if the tr"e scan#al this veil en#eavors to obf"scate is not the feminine bo#y hi##en by it, b"t the IJ)QIST)J$) of the feminine% What if, conseK"ently, the "ltimate f"nction of the veil is precisely to s"stain the ill"sion that there IS something, the s"bstantial Thing, behin# the veil% If, follo!ing JietzscheFs eK"ation of tr"th an# !oman, !e transpose the feminine veil into the veil !hich conceals the "ltimate Tr"th, the tr"e stakes of the /"slim veil become even clearer2 Woman is a treat beca"se she stan#s for the 6"n#eci#ability7 of tr"th, for a s"ccession of veils beneath !hich there is no "ltimate hi##en core- by veiling her, !e create the ill"sion that there is, beneath the veil, the feminine Tr"th , the horrible tr"th of lie an# #eception, of co"rse2 Therein resi#es the conceale# scan#al of Islam( only a !oman, the very embo#iment of the in#iscernability of tr"th an# lie, can g"arantee Tr"th2 :or this reason, she has to remain veile#2 This brings "s back to the topic !ith !hich !e began( !oman an# the 'rient2 The tr"e choice is not the one bet!een the Jear,)ast masc"line Islam an# the :ar,)ast more feminine spirit"ality, b"t bet!een the :ar,)astern elevation of a !oman into the /other,Go##ess, the

generative,an#,#estr"ctive s"bstance of the Worl#, an# the /"slim #istr"st of !oman !hich, para#o*ically, in a negative !ay ren#ers m"ch more #irectly the tra"matic, s"bversive,creative,e*plosive po!er of feminine s"bjectivity2 Jotes( 345 $la"#e +evi,Stra"ss, Tristes tropiques, Caris( Clon 4>HH, p2 EOD,EO?2 3D5 G2W2:2 Begel, +hilosophy of Mind, '*for#( $laren#on Cress 4>O4, p2 EE2 3?5 )ven BegelFs logic of tria#s seems to get st"ck into a #ea#lock here( the tria# that offers itself, b"t that Begel cannot a#mit, of co"rse, is that of ="#aism $hristianity Islam( first the imme#iate0abstract monotheism !hich, as the price to be pai# for its imme#iate character, has to be embo#ie# in a partic"lar ethnic gro"p 8!hich is !hy =e!s reno"nce all proselytism9- then $hristianity !ith its trinityfinally Islam, the tr"ly "niversal monotheism2 3E5 :ethi .enslama, La psychanalyse a lepreuve de l slam, Caris( A"bier DLLD 8the n"mbers in brackets after a K"ote refer to this book92 3H5 See )ric Santner, GTra"matic <evelations( :re"#Is /oses an# the 'rigins of Anti,Semitism,G in <enata Salecl, e#2, ,exuation, T"rham( T"ke UC DLLL2 3M5 'f co"rse, one can claim that there is an implicit "n#ermining of its o!n official i#eology at !ork alrea#y in Genesis, !here Go# nonetheless intervenes to save BagarFs son, promising him a great f"t"re Genesis #oes 8also9 take the si#e of the other !oman !ho !as re#"ce# to an instr"ment of procreation2

3O5 G2W2:2 Begel, +henomenolo'y of ,pirit, '*for#( '*for# University Cress 4>OO, p2 D4L2 3@5 The only later occasion on !hich #emonic intervention spoils his visions is the famo"s episo#e of the 6Satanic verses27 3>5 I once ha# a #ream, the "s"al #isg"stingly self,in#"lgent one abo"t getting some big prize- my reaction, IJ TB) T<)A/, !as that this cannot be tr"e, that it is only a #ream, an# the content of the #ream !as my 8s"ccessf"l9 effort to convince myself, by !ay of pointing o"t to a series of in#ications, that it is not j"st a #ream, b"t reality the interpretive task here is to #iscover !ho !as the !oman hi##en in the #ream, !ho !as my Sha#ija2 34L5 See =acK"es +acan, The "our "undamental $oncepts of +sycho-5nalysis, Barmon#s!orth( Ceng"in .ooks 4>O>, p2 4L?2 3445 =acK"es +acan, -crits# 5 ,election, translate# by .r"ce :ink, Je! Rork( W2W2JortonV$ompany DLLD, p2 ?4L2 34D5 =acK"es +acan, The "our "undamental $oncepts of +sycho-5nalysis, p2 >>2