Isabelle Surielow, Rutgers University-Camden, United States
published in the Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Love and Relationship Studies, 6-8 March, 2026
You can see the full video recording of this presentation at the YouTube channel of the International Institute of Love Studies
Introduction
In a polarized world, the command to love the stranger as yourself in Leviticus 19:33–34 may sound elusive and urgent. Although often read as an ethical directive, the clause “as yourself” implies a deeper spiritual and psychological imperative: setting love for the self as the measure for love of the stranger. When parts of the self are repressed or disowned (kept outside consciousness and unintegrated), the ego becomes fragmented, split between conscious identity and disowned shadow contents kept outside awareness. This fragmentation produces projection, which then distorts love of the other (the stranger) by routing love through one’s unintegrated shadow material (e.g., disowned shame, fear, or anger). Therefore, the command’s ethical demand also presupposes an inner condition: a self that is integrated, whole enough to love without distortion. “Self-love” refers to a continuous, integrative process of approaching self-knowledge, reconciliation, and integration.
The study reported in this paper argues that self-love is a pre-condition for fulfilling the command to love the stranger, by (1) elucidating “as yourself” as a textual measure(i.e., the self as the standardfor how one loves the stranger), not reciprocity rule (an exchange principle based on what others return), (2) articulating a psychological account of inner conditions of the lover(integration rather than splitting; reduced projection) (drawing on Jung and Fromm) and how their absence yields distortion (3) assessing, in dialogue with Buber’s I–Thou, whether mutual presence (grounded in the here and now) between self and other is sufficient to sustain undistorted love of the stranger, or whether inner integration is required.
Methodology and Methods
The analysis that I report in this study integrates the methodology of scriptural interpretation, psychological theory, and philosophical argument. The study combines (1) a close textual-hermeneutic reading of Leviticus 19:33–34, with special attention to how “as yourself” functions and its grammatical and theological force; (2) a synthesis of Jungian (shadow/projection; ego integration) and Frommian (ethical self-love) theory to specify the inner conditions of the lover that reduce distorted love (3) a philosophical comparison (placing the Levitical command in dialogue with Buber’s I–Thou) to assess whether mutual presence between the lover (self) and the stranger (other) alone suffices to sustain love for the stranger without distortion (projection + defensive/performative care). Across these steps, the analysis uses conceptual clarification, argument evaluation, and coherence testing to derive criteria for self-love to be a reliable measure of the clause “as yourself.” No empirical data were collected.
Highlights of Results
The results of this study elucidate the following psychological and philosophical points in Leviticus 19:33–34:
(1) “As yourself” functions as an inward-facing comparison between love of the stranger and love of the self, making the self a textual measure (i.e., the self as the standard for how one loves the stranger), rather than a reciprocity rule (an exchange principle based on what others return). This locates the relevant “standard” in the inner condition of the lover (integration vs. splitting; reduced projection).
(2) (split between conscious identity and disowned shadow contents), love of the other (the stranger) skews into projection(assigning disowned traits/affects to the other; disowned vulnerability yields reading the other as weak/threatening) and into defensive/performative “care” (managing the other to regulate one’s shame/fear; control-as-defense that appears generous but serves self-stabilization).
(3) Self-love adequate to the command to love the stranger “as yourself” is not a mood or a performance but a continuous integrative process of self-knowledge, reconciliation, and integration of disowned wounds and unclaimed potentials; engagement in this process suggests a reduced tendency to view another through inner fragmentation.
(4) In dialogue with Buber’s I-Thou shows that although love may arise in encounter between the lover and the stranger, mutual presence (between the lover and the stranger) alone is prone to I-It slippage (a utilitarian, objectifying stance in which the other is treated as an “It”; something to use, manage, or evaluate rather than meet as a “Thou”) unless supported by ongoing inner integration.
Discussion and Conclusions
The results of this study allow us to conclude that … Leviticus 19:33-34 calls not only for outward acts of love, but for an inward transformation of the one who loves. The commandment’s structure, “as yourself,” best reads as presupposing an ongoing condition of inner integration as the foundation for love. The psychological framework (Jungian and Frommian theory) demonstrates that a divided self (a self that is not integrated/a self that is fragmented) cannot love clearly. The comparative analysis in this study shows that presence (of the self and lover; grounded in the here and now) alone cannot sustain undistorted love (distorted love: projection + defensive/performative care; undistorted love: the capacity to meet the stranger as other, through genuine recognition rather than projection). Revealing that undistorted love for the stranger is not spontaneous but the fruit of inner work.
References
Buber, M. (2023). I and thou (W. A. Kaufmann, Trans.; paperback reissue ed.). Free Press. (Original work published 1923)
Bible Gateway. (n.d.). Leviticus 19:33-34 (New International Version). Retrieved May 4, 2025, from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2019%3A33-34&version=NIV
Fromm, E. (2006). The art of loving (50th anniversary ed.). Harper Perennial Modern Classics. (Original work published 1956)
Jung, C. G. (1979). Aion: Researches into the phenomenology of the self (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.