BEING REVISED 2014
The great debate over the sexualisation of modern children rumbles on, compounded now by revelations of exploitation at almost every level of society. This all takes place in our press without any regard to either the underlying meaning, or the possible cultural implications of this phenomenon. Yet, in a technological age, where sexual information and images are freely available, and social media invites strangers into our homes, no one should be surprised that the curiosity of children will be stirred and their well-being put at risk. We all know the form this sexual material takes - it ranges within a spectrum-of the very soft to the very hard, but the minds it impinges upon are not so dissimilar, and the processes not so different, to those of my own childhood.
My sexuality appeared in latent form at an age when the
phenomenon was played out in the roles of doctor and patient - seemingly the only common point of reference for nudity and bodily examination that most children shared at that time. This early but quite definite awakening was heavily censored by the surrounding adults and returned to the unconscious until some years later, when
the first semi adult responses started to take place. With them came the fractured emotional orientation to the objects of this sexual
reawakening that was consistent with my upbringing. This all took place in a very different age, where real sexual information was scant and always strongly toned. Parental advice was absent, so what guidance there was flowed from certain contemporaries who were more forward in promoting sexual currency than others. Most, if not all of this stuff was spurious. It was always mechanical, lacking any emotional attachment, and riddled with inherited prejudice. These individuals, from their own internal processes, seemed to have a monopoly on sexual information, which acted like a magnet for the more naive characters like myself. Unwittingly, and with little reflection, I swallowed this diet of filth and misinformation, blundering forward blindly into adolescence and accepting a mechanical view of the whole process of pair bonding. On reflection, this seems not so different from what is happening today, where the mechanics of pornography predominate the behaviour of most young male adults, or at least a particular section that suffers a similar emotional deprivation to my own generation. It is a giant step, and we cannot subtract the magnetic effect that sexuality imposes on most individuals, but we can make an effort to differentiate the necessity for sexual expression from the fundamental meaning that this diverse form of human activity conveys and see if it leads us to a more complete goal in life.
There will always be a generalised state of expression to do with sexuality and in this respect marriage and normal pair bonding provide the greatest reservoir. Culture though has never been so simple that there are never counterpoints and opposites. If we take an archaic view of reality, which involves the Babylonian philosophy of the precession of astrological ages, the liberation of sexuality from its Christian shackles is no coincidence. This was predicted as part of the culmination of the bi-millennial (Christian) age of the Icthys, purported to end around the year 2000. This notion gained a following among part of certain generation, who were looking forward to peace and (free) love. The revolutionary atmosphere of the time certainly fostered the idea among many that things were changing. Some of the more esoteric types felt this was being ushered in by the age of Aquarius dawning, but that would now be eschewed as fanciful. Though it is undeniable that the overthrow of the old restraints placed upon the most important part of humanity during the last two thousand years seems to have been the program for the twentieth century. Freud, Darwin, Einstein, they all played their essential part in subverting Christian values, but then there was the mystic Jung. Jung also played his part in overthrowing god - indeed he was the first to relativise the deity into the condition of 'psychical phenomenon' - an archetype, but in doing so, Jung pointed to a very different state of reality from these other giants, on whom the superstructure of our modern material reality depends.
If there is any concern to be expressed for the young, then it is here that the work needs to be done. Unfortunately, the liberal state of consciousness that springs from a materially conditioned mind will only take us part way in this process, and while most young people find their way - tortuous or otherwise, it is often the adults in the process who have the most confused attitudes towards sexuality.
It is as if they suffer from a hangover from the past. Something undefined, that is inherited in our laws and way of life that informs us of the necessity to express sexuality within boundaries, which when examined, and in the absence of an over arching religious imperative, reveals the best available explanations as banal and lacking conviction. This generation of adults owe their liberation to the overthrow of spiritual values, but they can't quite come to terms with the material philosophy that supplants them. This has coincided with a phenomenon that might be described as a spiritual re-amnesis. This is where the reservoir of our past colonial conquests of natural cultures has come back to its sponsor with an imbibed set of Christian values, but no less fervor than was formerly expressed to the god of the forest or plain. The power that these new religions bear for the devout is still capable of overwhelming sexuality and placing it into context with its natural function of pair bonding, but in doing so it excludes all expressions but heterosexuality. It does not wrap up sado-masochism in the shroud of devotion as do the adherents of Opus Dei, but any that cannot conform to a normal expression of sexuality within the blessing of marriage are left to dangle in a limbo of guilt and self despising. / it was equally so in our unenlightened past, where a material imperative had not been placed upon our lives. Jung might have seen this clash
So, the question I am posing is what exact function does this apparently diminishing period of sexual latency actual perform in forming and informing the child's developing personality. More importantly; what is the fantasy of a sacred innocent childhood that is harboured and treasured almost universally by adults really about and why is it so readily conflated with an obviously divergent reality.
Perhaps we are seeing now a manifestation of what Freud only observed as a latent phenomenon in the children of his time. Latest sociological studies certainly tend to dispel the cherished view of an innocent childhood in favour of more progressive development of sexual awareness. Ironically, this is a situation that almost certainly has arisen as a consequence of, and in coincidence with, the general assimilation of Freud's original work on sexuality. In fact it may be quite damaging to prolong childhood, since it is almost certain that the absence of a very well defined right of passage in modern Western culture has a reductive effect on many individuals. In these young people, neurotic illness is often substituted for development, obviating and drawing attention to the fact that they have not been able to develop a proper adult status or Persona.
So how is this related to Philemon (Elijah) and Salome. Jung was alone, it seems, in his ability to accept the implications of these two symbols in combination - the royal child temptress, together with the ancient of days. In Jung accepting this seemingly disparate conjunction, he opened up the doorway to a form of wisdom that surpasses all contemporary and traditional views of human and spiritual nature and takes us to a place of psychological extremes, where the opposites in human and spiritual nature may be united.
In the biblical drama of John The Baptist, we come upon a series of actions that challenge any form of intellectual participation and as such I have discarded any attempt to treat this important story as historical. It is simply irrelevant to our lives to try to establish what factual basis there is for this and the other dramas of the bible. It is the myth that is important and how the underlying psychical configuration plays out in contemporary consciousness. We have seen how the figure of Mary Magdalene and Judas have been distorted, or rather recast, in a more sinister light by the successive human interpolators of the bible and I would conjecture that this is inevitable. Deepening the shadows and emphasising the highlights, is a trick all artists and poets play with their subjects.
But first, we must look at the phenomenon of dreams and associated psychical manifestations as they appeared to Jung. Jung was the first to grant autonomy to his dreams and the integral fantasies of the Red Book. The language of his dreams and the manifest content of his fantasies, are in a sense, both culturally universal, but also personal. His mind was attendant at the fabrication of these psychical objects, and although Jung formulated the idea of The Collective Unconscious around this time, nevertheless, it was his personal mind through which these psychical objects came to enter reality. I will restate my view that Jung reached a peak of development that was unsurpassed by his followers, who, like Christians, have placed their hero beyond mortal reach. This is not to say there are not detractors, there will always be dissenting voices, until an object emerges that is completely beyond reproach and embraces all but those who would fall beyond the pale. Jung lived his own myth and as such, his psychical being now forms the cornerstone to The Marriage Quarternity, the complex that holds sway in all our mortal lives. So, if you accept, as I have, the preceding premise, then you must accept that the figure of The Ancient of Days in conjunction with the Royal temptress, (as it appeared to Jung), is relevant to all.
It is the psychical substructure that is to be understood, for while we admire only the scenery and worship the king, we will be caught in the same figurative world as our forebears and not have the wisdom of understanding that we are immersed in a sea of intelligence, which, like the fish that swim in the ocean, we have little or no comprehension.
Tuesday, 24 May 2011
Sunday, 15 May 2011
The Twenty Four Elect
Open letter to Dennis
I have had a chance to further ponder your love announcement to do with Panni.
The symbol (archetype) of my marriage to Susan - 2.4.1991 - 24 days prior to your departure on Jemima's day of birth - 26.4.91, stand as an overriding archetypal precondition and synchronicity to your departure from England and your return 20 years later.
When you arrived in the UK again, you were in a mindset that precluded acknowledgement of the importance of the above symbols. You stated you were a Dawkins adherent and as a consequence I did not stress again how closely I felt we were linked psychologically and through the Icthus archetype. The fact that you regarded your visit to me with the same importance as to Paul (displacement symbol) and your other friends, is indicative of how buried were your unintegrated masculine feelings for me, which I, on the contrary, felt very strongly when you stayed here. This omission, like all omissions in expression of the spirit, could not avoid some form of compensation in reality. The paradigm for which, is expressed by me in the matter of my marriage (in denial of my masculine spirit), 24 days prior to your departure.
This naive personal act of mine in 1991, underlines and reverses the Christian drama in a way I could not have imagined at the time. The word Hoax which was imposed on me by my unconscious in respect of the biblical epic, breaks down into 48, which is composed of two pairs of 24 HO=24 AX=24 - the symbol being the sum of the Christian apostles, their female counterparts and the Antichristian apostles and their female counterparts. So it is about a form of Christian reality that goes far beyond the simple homily of the bible and is only referred to in Revelations in a cryptic way: 'they that shall be first shall be last, (and they that shall be last, shall be first)'. I would really stress here that this analysis is not exclusively about historical figures, past or present, it is about essence and the disincarnate (non temporal) intelligence that Jung regarded as archetypes, in other words, living pneuma. Hence, I can no longer take the historical story of Jesus (or the apostles) seriously as historical fact, when I know it relates as much to the activity of the Icthus (Piscean and Capricorn*) archetypes in the present, as it does to their activity in the past. Besides which, the origins of the rituals, that form such an integral part of modern Christianity, are obviously rooted in the obscure cult practices of one, or several groups of adherents and had evolved over many hundreds of years and through past cultures. These cult rituals involved in many cases the use of mind altering natural substances that evoked a 'spiritual experience' and they have left their footprint in such modern rituals as the mortification of the sacramental host, to mention but one. In this sense, both you and Panni are following a well trodden path in human culture, by using drugs and alcohol in pursuit of mind altering states. When Jung passed his understanding of the confusion between THE SPIRIT in the form of PNEUMA and these cult practices, in the form of drink (and drugs), he used the phrase: Spiritum, Spiritus. This eventually found its way to Bill Wilson, who like many before and since, confused SPIRITUS, with CHRISTOS. The reason that humanity is universally hooked on magic, dates back to the earliest cult practices that I mentioned. In using natural mind altering drugs as part of ritual practice (now sanitised - but not expunged), the function of THE SPIRIT is SIMULATED - (in its ability to transcend time and space and seemingly give foreknowledge of impending events, for instance).
Returning to the symbol of my marriage to Susan, 24 days before you departed and 24 days before the birth of Jemima in 1991. I knew that Susan (The Lily*) related to St Stephen (The Crown) by an inculcation I got many years ago from David about the historical and alchemical interrelation of the two archetypes, which I had not, until now, related to you (and to Pandora, who was obviously held in abeyance until now). Archetypal, St Stephen, expressed as a repressed celibate - (in imitatio Christi), left the door open for a successor to conjoin with the after effects of his unconsummated female partner. Thus, two of the twenty four original Icthians were reversed by two of the twenty four contemporaries in the black archetypal brotherhood. The Father archetype, by contrast, holds everything, both the Icthus, (minor Yang) and its counterpart (minor Yin) archetypes, in a continuum of integrated wholeness.
The emancipation of your relation with Pandora is therefore no mean issue of chance, the ground having been laid well in advance, both sexually and spiritually (archetypal), which is why the relation is so fertile. In my case, the transposition of my personal love of David on to Susan conforms to an archetypal transposition of the Goat Fish on to the Icthus. This is exemplified by the notion that no one comes to the Father except through Jesus. This archetypal transposition operates in the Christian belief of millions. That the figure of Jesus is held as the highest attainable state, is a negation of The Father (archetype) and also of the statement attributed to Jesus by the author of the biblical drama, in which the figure of Jesus says, 'greater things than these will you do'. In other words, a full stop has been placed at the end of the sentence and the inherent spirit (archetype) that moved the early Christians is regarded as complete in Jesus. It was left to the Alchemists and Gnostics to be carried forward by the archetypal influences that were as yet unfulfilled by those that had gone before and had surrounded The Anointed One at the beginning of the reign of the first Icthus.
You might realise that I regard the story of Christian celibacy among the apostles and by extension, the priesthood, as part of the Hoax of Christianity. I am once again reiterating the wisdom of treating the biblical drama, which has been interpolated over and over again, as a point of reference to the disincarnate intelligence of the archetypes, the fulfilment of which is in the present, not the past and hence the continued transposition of the figure of Jesus on to The Father.
.....................................................................................
For me, the relation with Susan led into the world, the founding of Imago and to the material fatherhood of Jemima. It also led to an abandonment of my celibacy and masculine love and a death of the creative masculine spirit. Your relation with Pandora seems to be a reflection and compensation in the same vein as mine with Susan, but reversed in effect - confronting your existing masculine values and in the process of a love relation, creating a necessary transformation.
The stolen oversize black bike that was secured to my fence and which was stolen before you arrived, might well have given me a clue to the outcome of your visit.
The demise of this promising relation is very unfortunate. It carried the spirit, but the human individuals could not sustain it - something with which, I am all too familiar.
The relation I had with Jill showed the promise of producing a child, but this was carried over to Susan.
I have had a chance to further ponder your love announcement to do with Panni.
The symbol (archetype) of my marriage to Susan - 2.4.1991 - 24 days prior to your departure on Jemima's day of birth - 26.4.91, stand as an overriding archetypal precondition and synchronicity to your departure from England and your return 20 years later.
When you arrived in the UK again, you were in a mindset that precluded acknowledgement of the importance of the above symbols. You stated you were a Dawkins adherent and as a consequence I did not stress again how closely I felt we were linked psychologically and through the Icthus archetype. The fact that you regarded your visit to me with the same importance as to Paul (displacement symbol) and your other friends, is indicative of how buried were your unintegrated masculine feelings for me, which I, on the contrary, felt very strongly when you stayed here. This omission, like all omissions in expression of the spirit, could not avoid some form of compensation in reality. The paradigm for which, is expressed by me in the matter of my marriage (in denial of my masculine spirit), 24 days prior to your departure.
This naive personal act of mine in 1991, underlines and reverses the Christian drama in a way I could not have imagined at the time. The word Hoax which was imposed on me by my unconscious in respect of the biblical epic, breaks down into 48, which is composed of two pairs of 24 HO=24 AX=24 - the symbol being the sum of the Christian apostles, their female counterparts and the Antichristian apostles and their female counterparts. So it is about a form of Christian reality that goes far beyond the simple homily of the bible and is only referred to in Revelations in a cryptic way: 'they that shall be first shall be last, (and they that shall be last, shall be first)'. I would really stress here that this analysis is not exclusively about historical figures, past or present, it is about essence and the disincarnate (non temporal) intelligence that Jung regarded as archetypes, in other words, living pneuma. Hence, I can no longer take the historical story of Jesus (or the apostles) seriously as historical fact, when I know it relates as much to the activity of the Icthus (Piscean and Capricorn*) archetypes in the present, as it does to their activity in the past. Besides which, the origins of the rituals, that form such an integral part of modern Christianity, are obviously rooted in the obscure cult practices of one, or several groups of adherents and had evolved over many hundreds of years and through past cultures. These cult rituals involved in many cases the use of mind altering natural substances that evoked a 'spiritual experience' and they have left their footprint in such modern rituals as the mortification of the sacramental host, to mention but one. In this sense, both you and Panni are following a well trodden path in human culture, by using drugs and alcohol in pursuit of mind altering states. When Jung passed his understanding of the confusion between THE SPIRIT in the form of PNEUMA and these cult practices, in the form of drink (and drugs), he used the phrase: Spiritum, Spiritus. This eventually found its way to Bill Wilson, who like many before and since, confused SPIRITUS, with CHRISTOS. The reason that humanity is universally hooked on magic, dates back to the earliest cult practices that I mentioned. In using natural mind altering drugs as part of ritual practice (now sanitised - but not expunged), the function of THE SPIRIT is SIMULATED - (in its ability to transcend time and space and seemingly give foreknowledge of impending events, for instance).
Returning to the symbol of my marriage to Susan, 24 days before you departed and 24 days before the birth of Jemima in 1991. I knew that Susan (The Lily*) related to St Stephen (The Crown) by an inculcation I got many years ago from David about the historical and alchemical interrelation of the two archetypes, which I had not, until now, related to you (and to Pandora, who was obviously held in abeyance until now). Archetypal, St Stephen, expressed as a repressed celibate - (in imitatio Christi), left the door open for a successor to conjoin with the after effects of his unconsummated female partner. Thus, two of the twenty four original Icthians were reversed by two of the twenty four contemporaries in the black archetypal brotherhood. The Father archetype, by contrast, holds everything, both the Icthus, (minor Yang) and its counterpart (minor Yin) archetypes, in a continuum of integrated wholeness.
The emancipation of your relation with Pandora is therefore no mean issue of chance, the ground having been laid well in advance, both sexually and spiritually (archetypal), which is why the relation is so fertile. In my case, the transposition of my personal love of David on to Susan conforms to an archetypal transposition of the Goat Fish on to the Icthus. This is exemplified by the notion that no one comes to the Father except through Jesus. This archetypal transposition operates in the Christian belief of millions. That the figure of Jesus is held as the highest attainable state, is a negation of The Father (archetype) and also of the statement attributed to Jesus by the author of the biblical drama, in which the figure of Jesus says, 'greater things than these will you do'. In other words, a full stop has been placed at the end of the sentence and the inherent spirit (archetype) that moved the early Christians is regarded as complete in Jesus. It was left to the Alchemists and Gnostics to be carried forward by the archetypal influences that were as yet unfulfilled by those that had gone before and had surrounded The Anointed One at the beginning of the reign of the first Icthus.
You might realise that I regard the story of Christian celibacy among the apostles and by extension, the priesthood, as part of the Hoax of Christianity. I am once again reiterating the wisdom of treating the biblical drama, which has been interpolated over and over again, as a point of reference to the disincarnate intelligence of the archetypes, the fulfilment of which is in the present, not the past and hence the continued transposition of the figure of Jesus on to The Father.
.....................................................................................
For me, the relation with Susan led into the world, the founding of Imago and to the material fatherhood of Jemima. It also led to an abandonment of my celibacy and masculine love and a death of the creative masculine spirit. Your relation with Pandora seems to be a reflection and compensation in the same vein as mine with Susan, but reversed in effect - confronting your existing masculine values and in the process of a love relation, creating a necessary transformation.
The stolen oversize black bike that was secured to my fence and which was stolen before you arrived, might well have given me a clue to the outcome of your visit.
The demise of this promising relation is very unfortunate. It carried the spirit, but the human individuals could not sustain it - something with which, I am all too familiar.
The relation I had with Jill showed the promise of producing a child, but this was carried over to Susan.
Monday, 9 May 2011
Libellula Depressa - Symbol of The Central Archetype - 1 st May
Libellula Depressa (f) 2.5.2011 clearingFor outsiders, the idea that their own personality is part of an undifferentiated natural and psychical continuum, is almost always seen as foreign. It was however a quite common thing for tribes people to be in a synchronised state with the environment and wildlife around them in a very dynamic way. They had evolved to be so and it was the main imperative. Their primitive level of consciousness did not differentiate their individuality, nor time, nor even space, in the way of a modern person. To belong to a family group was to be subsumed by a group instinct for survival and continuity*. To act in harmony and to cooperate was a reflex and the idea of the survival of the fittest, far from being an individualistic trait, was an attribute developed in relation to mating, passing on of genes, the group, and its survival. For me, the idea that this brain - mind transposed magic on to its surroundings as a consequence of some leap in brain development brought about by diet or some other causal factor is preposterous and defies everything I know about the way I have interacted with nature throughout my life. Nature is a prime vehicle for symbolic expressions of the unconscious, simply because it is so unconscious of itself and it is my contention that it would have remained like that for ever, were it not for an imperative from a polar order of sentience in the continuum of the objective psyche and the objective material.
The symbol of the female imago Libellula Depressa in the clearing on the first of May and then the first of June, is a prime case of stooping low to see the face of god. The twice repeated imago, in this sense, is the symbol of the Imago Dei, the pristine central archetype. The area of the woods has become my back garden and therefore my unconscious. Reflecting on what Dr Venters propounded about my philosophy being of 'Spinosa', then I can only but associate the blackthorn (spinosa), with my shadow complex and the tunnelling that I have made among the dark and prickly mass of shrub - nothing less than the inroads I have made into my shadow.
* People may be unconscious of a family or group instinct, but it continues to exert a dramatic influence, often compelling people to undifferentiated and terrible acts of violence and callousness as well as acts of sacrifice and nurture.
The Present of Daisies
8.5.2011
I got another symbol yesterday from a lovely person called Lily. It consisted of a pot of daisies, (an experiment she said) and a beautiful sentiment.
There were eleven flowers and one lying down. It was not until after that I reflected about the gift of Jemima Daisy, from Susan, the Lilly, that I was able to put things together as a symbol.
The pure lilly and the crown of St Stephen.
I got another symbol yesterday from a lovely person called Lily. It consisted of a pot of daisies, (an experiment she said) and a beautiful sentiment.
There were eleven flowers and one lying down. It was not until after that I reflected about the gift of Jemima Daisy, from Susan, the Lilly, that I was able to put things together as a symbol.
The pure lilly and the crown of St Stephen.
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
The Mystery of The Stolen Black Oversize Bike On Easter Monday
No day of such note should pass without reference to its symbolism.
It seems, like unto like, the kid hanging around yesterday morning (Easter Monday), was not thinking of buying drugs down the road, but perhaps, was instead in the act of stealing the black bike I had just cleaned up for Joe, or maybe another tall man of dark countenance that has been stolen away from me...
The symbol of Joe relates to Joseph surrogate father to Jesus, who in this case rejected the bicycle, as the biblical figure is reported to have rejected Jesus.
The fact that I communicated with the thief as I left in the early morning to do some photography, means as a symbol I have a relation to this symbol of Mercurius (god of thieves).
16.5.2011 - The symbol of the oversize bicycle being removed on Easter Monday is the same as the removal of the body of Jesus from the tomb. The BLACK OVERSIZE bicycle however symbolises the Father Archetype in its aspect of The Greater Yin. The implications of the disappearance of the Greater Yin from the present, means that its appearance in the past (as The Father to the biblical figure of Jesus) leaves only the Greater Yang in the present, which will presumably manifest itself as a new spiritual age.
15.5.2011 Another disappearance of note to occur in an inexplicable manner - the young from the songbirds nest - no fuss or fight, no disruption, just a single much darkened infertile egg.
It seems, like unto like, the kid hanging around yesterday morning (Easter Monday), was not thinking of buying drugs down the road, but perhaps, was instead in the act of stealing the black bike I had just cleaned up for Joe, or maybe another tall man of dark countenance that has been stolen away from me...
The symbol of Joe relates to Joseph surrogate father to Jesus, who in this case rejected the bicycle, as the biblical figure is reported to have rejected Jesus.
The fact that I communicated with the thief as I left in the early morning to do some photography, means as a symbol I have a relation to this symbol of Mercurius (god of thieves).
16.5.2011 - The symbol of the oversize bicycle being removed on Easter Monday is the same as the removal of the body of Jesus from the tomb. The BLACK OVERSIZE bicycle however symbolises the Father Archetype in its aspect of The Greater Yin. The implications of the disappearance of the Greater Yin from the present, means that its appearance in the past (as The Father to the biblical figure of Jesus) leaves only the Greater Yang in the present, which will presumably manifest itself as a new spiritual age.
15.5.2011 Another disappearance of note to occur in an inexplicable manner - the young from the songbirds nest - no fuss or fight, no disruption, just a single much darkened infertile egg.
The Red Book Carl Jung
No one before Jung went into the unconscious more consciously.
Jung's work fell into a natural dichotomy. On the one hand, his clinical practice was conducted in a relatively straightforward and public manner and yielded a remarkable success rate, leading to Jung being embraced as revolutionary physician. On the other hand, there was Jung's 'mystical' being, which involved the convergence of Jung's personality, which was undoubtedly empirical, with the archetype of The Old Wise Man.
For outsiders, the idea, which Jung put forward variously in his later works - of incarnating one's own myth, is totally foreign. The Red Book, so far as can be determined, is a record of the process of 'psychical objectification' of Jung’s personality. The reason it was not written up as notes is because the processes is 'real', not intellectual, and therefore it demanded the response of the whole man. No one, who has not had a brush with this level of the unconscious, would understand what Jung expressed in the Red Book, and though Jung realised, that in many cases, any level of awakened awareness of the unconscious was dangerous, nevertheless for those who could profit, with guidance, it was process worth undertaking.
The illumination derived from Jung confronting his 'universal pre existent psychical counterpart in the unconscious' - 'The Self', changed Jung irrevocably. For the personality to mine the unconscious as Jung did, not only changes the man, but also changes reality. To usurp the unconscious and to derive it of even a fraction of its power to control events and human destiny’s an immeasurable victory for consciousness. Jung’s fame made him more discreet, but he knew the value of this unique type of consciousness in an otherwise unconsciously determined universe.
Jung's natural assumption was that others would take up the challenge of the Unconscious, but the status of a living mythological being, elevated Jung to such a high peak of reverence and human development that he was unsurpassed. His detractors, searching out the dirt of his human existence, (which he never denied), devalue his work by pointing to his human fallibility and mystical nature, not realising that perfection of the human life is a mythological precept and therefore only relatively realisable through incarnation. With Jung this has become overwhelmingly the case. Where empirical judgements are being made about the man, they are inevitably applied illegitimately and unconsciously to the complete perfection of the central Father Archetype, which stands beyond The Old Wise Man that Jung personified.
This confusion, between the empirical and the mythological, is at the root of most religious dilemmas and what applies to Jung, a relatively contemporary figure, applies just as much to the biblical figure of Jesus – who it is reported, had a unique relation with the The Father (Archetype). It is only latterly that we are getting historical glimpses behind the curtain of religious dogma at the empirical qualities of such mythological beings and events as are represented in the Christian texts. Jung was quite aware of this process and said so in his book Answer To Job. This book was a revolution in thinking about divinity and his questioning of the Old Testament God, Yahweh, in relation to the persecution of Job, is completely redolent of the way he conducted himself in relation to the psychical objects detailed in his Red Book fantasies.
Answer To Job raised an unholy storm of indignation among the faithful in the predominantly Christian culture of Jung’s era. It also fulfilled a secret and terrifying childhood vision Jung had of God defecating on his local church. Jung saw that the perfection of divinity, (as represented by the bible) was far from conclusive to a more complete mind and that it stood as a barrier to the form of integrated self-realisation represented by the process he had undertaken and was prescribing in his new world of analytical psychology as Individuation.
The Red Book is as much a work of art as it is of science. It is a one special man's headlong plunge into an interior world of numinous power and meaning, yet because Jung occupies such a central point - through his psychical objectification as The Old Wise Man, it is a journey that is ultimately valid for all.
RC - 2009 rev, 3.5.2011
Jung's work fell into a natural dichotomy. On the one hand, his clinical practice was conducted in a relatively straightforward and public manner and yielded a remarkable success rate, leading to Jung being embraced as revolutionary physician. On the other hand, there was Jung's 'mystical' being, which involved the convergence of Jung's personality, which was undoubtedly empirical, with the archetype of The Old Wise Man.
For outsiders, the idea, which Jung put forward variously in his later works - of incarnating one's own myth, is totally foreign. The Red Book, so far as can be determined, is a record of the process of 'psychical objectification' of Jung’s personality. The reason it was not written up as notes is because the processes is 'real', not intellectual, and therefore it demanded the response of the whole man. No one, who has not had a brush with this level of the unconscious, would understand what Jung expressed in the Red Book, and though Jung realised, that in many cases, any level of awakened awareness of the unconscious was dangerous, nevertheless for those who could profit, with guidance, it was process worth undertaking.
The illumination derived from Jung confronting his 'universal pre existent psychical counterpart in the unconscious' - 'The Self', changed Jung irrevocably. For the personality to mine the unconscious as Jung did, not only changes the man, but also changes reality. To usurp the unconscious and to derive it of even a fraction of its power to control events and human destiny’s an immeasurable victory for consciousness. Jung’s fame made him more discreet, but he knew the value of this unique type of consciousness in an otherwise unconsciously determined universe.
Jung's natural assumption was that others would take up the challenge of the Unconscious, but the status of a living mythological being, elevated Jung to such a high peak of reverence and human development that he was unsurpassed. His detractors, searching out the dirt of his human existence, (which he never denied), devalue his work by pointing to his human fallibility and mystical nature, not realising that perfection of the human life is a mythological precept and therefore only relatively realisable through incarnation. With Jung this has become overwhelmingly the case. Where empirical judgements are being made about the man, they are inevitably applied illegitimately and unconsciously to the complete perfection of the central Father Archetype, which stands beyond The Old Wise Man that Jung personified.
This confusion, between the empirical and the mythological, is at the root of most religious dilemmas and what applies to Jung, a relatively contemporary figure, applies just as much to the biblical figure of Jesus – who it is reported, had a unique relation with the The Father (Archetype). It is only latterly that we are getting historical glimpses behind the curtain of religious dogma at the empirical qualities of such mythological beings and events as are represented in the Christian texts. Jung was quite aware of this process and said so in his book Answer To Job. This book was a revolution in thinking about divinity and his questioning of the Old Testament God, Yahweh, in relation to the persecution of Job, is completely redolent of the way he conducted himself in relation to the psychical objects detailed in his Red Book fantasies.
Answer To Job raised an unholy storm of indignation among the faithful in the predominantly Christian culture of Jung’s era. It also fulfilled a secret and terrifying childhood vision Jung had of God defecating on his local church. Jung saw that the perfection of divinity, (as represented by the bible) was far from conclusive to a more complete mind and that it stood as a barrier to the form of integrated self-realisation represented by the process he had undertaken and was prescribing in his new world of analytical psychology as Individuation.
The Red Book is as much a work of art as it is of science. It is a one special man's headlong plunge into an interior world of numinous power and meaning, yet because Jung occupies such a central point - through his psychical objectification as The Old Wise Man, it is a journey that is ultimately valid for all.
RC - 2009 rev, 3.5.2011
Cronenberg, Freud, Jung
Jung was a highly complex man - of the opposites, he would say, and any attempt by others to simplify his experience will inevitably deliver the interpolating agency into the hands of his own opposites. We will see this film and observe the persona of a young and ambitious physician in the process of becoming world famous, but it is only half the story. There are two Jungs and it is inevitable that any contemporary exposition about the number one Jung, for the sake of completeness, will have to incorporate, albeit unconsciously in most cases, the number two Jung, the evolution of which, really did not blossom until he had withdrawn his Old Wise Man archetypal projection from Freud.
To begin to understand this second Jung, we must first look at The Red Book. It is effectively, the exposition of Jung's myth, (at least up until his embolism in 1944, when, according to his account, his soul entered the repository anew). This book is a mystical confession of the unconscious that is so obscure in its mythological origins that Jung felt compelled to suppress its publication completely, (for fear it would undermine his credibility as a physician). Jung's unprecedented confrontation with the unconscious, as is detailed by the Red Book, prescribes a completely different aspect of the man from his public persona. It details his work with the psychical objects, not only of his own personal Shadow Complex, but also with The Objective Shadow Complex and therefore The Anima and Old Wise Man archetypes.
Contemporaries talked about Jung’s charisma. Jung would have used the term: manna personality. This manna is the numinous effect of Jung's plunge into the depths of the unconscious and it would be wise for us to bear this in mind when we observe the portrayal of Jung in the film. Any relations that Jung undertook, before his assimilation of the (psychical) objects of The Red Book, would inevitably have been laden with these latent contents. Despite Jung’s professionalism, the intensity of his relations with an inspiring female patient, could easily be understood in terms of a highly dynamic Anima transference. No less, his relation with Freud, where Jung's Old Wise Man archetypal complex would have been involved in the dynamic transference that inevitably arose between these two giants of psychology. That these complexes coincided in his personal relations with both Freud (Old Wise Man) and Mrs Spielrein (Anima), in a highly charged emotional triangle, was no more than was predicted, by the symbolic figures of Philemon, Salome (and the snake). We must remember that these undoubtedly pagan figures, (in Salomes case, of highly doubtful morality), arose from Jung's unconscious and were the symbols he came to live by. The breadth these figures encompass - aged pagan wisdom and erotic sensuality, give a view of Jung's inner life that was at complete odds with the respectability of his formative persona. This persona was to be blown apart by the impending experience of a latent psychosis - The Red Book phase, which would change the landscape of Jung's life and bring him face to face with his inner Daemon. We should therefore bear in mind, when we think about Jung, that it was not only his undoubted therapeutic skill that effected so many of his cures, but it was also his shaman like, numinous capacity as a healer.
With this timely film, we must rely on the power of the unconscious to guide and control the intuition of Croneberg and his actors to deliver a viable record, despite their own complexes. The one thing that is certain, and Jung knew this more than anyone before him, is that the Mercurius Duplex archetype will have its way with any artist or film maker, just as it does with all human lives. Jung's number two personality foresaw our current disasters, just as it had anticipated the sea of blood that engulfed Europe during the 1914-18 World War. If we look at the turmoil that has surrounded human experience on our planet since 9/11 - where, war, famine and disaster strike almost every month, it is clear that Jung's latter-day invocation - Aquarius sets aflame Lucifer's harsh forces, cannot be disregarded as a program for human life, now and into the future, or at least, while mankind is in its transition to a more conscious and spiritual state, which is something, Jung wished and eternally strove for all his life.
To begin to understand this second Jung, we must first look at The Red Book. It is effectively, the exposition of Jung's myth, (at least up until his embolism in 1944, when, according to his account, his soul entered the repository anew). This book is a mystical confession of the unconscious that is so obscure in its mythological origins that Jung felt compelled to suppress its publication completely, (for fear it would undermine his credibility as a physician). Jung's unprecedented confrontation with the unconscious, as is detailed by the Red Book, prescribes a completely different aspect of the man from his public persona. It details his work with the psychical objects, not only of his own personal Shadow Complex, but also with The Objective Shadow Complex and therefore The Anima and Old Wise Man archetypes.
Contemporaries talked about Jung’s charisma. Jung would have used the term: manna personality. This manna is the numinous effect of Jung's plunge into the depths of the unconscious and it would be wise for us to bear this in mind when we observe the portrayal of Jung in the film. Any relations that Jung undertook, before his assimilation of the (psychical) objects of The Red Book, would inevitably have been laden with these latent contents. Despite Jung’s professionalism, the intensity of his relations with an inspiring female patient, could easily be understood in terms of a highly dynamic Anima transference. No less, his relation with Freud, where Jung's Old Wise Man archetypal complex would have been involved in the dynamic transference that inevitably arose between these two giants of psychology. That these complexes coincided in his personal relations with both Freud (Old Wise Man) and Mrs Spielrein (Anima), in a highly charged emotional triangle, was no more than was predicted, by the symbolic figures of Philemon, Salome (and the snake). We must remember that these undoubtedly pagan figures, (in Salomes case, of highly doubtful morality), arose from Jung's unconscious and were the symbols he came to live by. The breadth these figures encompass - aged pagan wisdom and erotic sensuality, give a view of Jung's inner life that was at complete odds with the respectability of his formative persona. This persona was to be blown apart by the impending experience of a latent psychosis - The Red Book phase, which would change the landscape of Jung's life and bring him face to face with his inner Daemon. We should therefore bear in mind, when we think about Jung, that it was not only his undoubted therapeutic skill that effected so many of his cures, but it was also his shaman like, numinous capacity as a healer.
With this timely film, we must rely on the power of the unconscious to guide and control the intuition of Croneberg and his actors to deliver a viable record, despite their own complexes. The one thing that is certain, and Jung knew this more than anyone before him, is that the Mercurius Duplex archetype will have its way with any artist or film maker, just as it does with all human lives. Jung's number two personality foresaw our current disasters, just as it had anticipated the sea of blood that engulfed Europe during the 1914-18 World War. If we look at the turmoil that has surrounded human experience on our planet since 9/11 - where, war, famine and disaster strike almost every month, it is clear that Jung's latter-day invocation - Aquarius sets aflame Lucifer's harsh forces, cannot be disregarded as a program for human life, now and into the future, or at least, while mankind is in its transition to a more conscious and spiritual state, which is something, Jung wished and eternally strove for all his life.
Stephen Hawking - The Grand Design (or failure)
Review of Hawkings Latest God Knocking Book
This latest offering by Hawking is unfortunately another example of the modern tendency of scientific writers to make money out of God. But what is it about this primitive notion of deity that is so threatening, that Hawking (and his twin Dawkins) feels compelled to stray across the boundaries of the material sciences into the area of belief to make a point. Surely it must be clear that no one with even a fraction of material insight believes that a conscious godlike entity was responsible for evolutionary creation. It is a simply preposterous notion.
By attacking the sources of belief, should one presume that the author’s hope is for wholesale change in the orientation of the masses and particularly those susceptible to religious radicalism? However complete and exclusive the scientific view of reality seems, as represented by this book and others both men have written, surely they cannot think that their sideswipes at religion and the conventional notion of God, will in any way affect more than a fraction of the six billion subjective humans on this planet. That is a simply preposterous notion.
In that case the scientists are overlooking the social sciences, that would inform of their impossible task and that social programming, as practiced by Mao and other powerful totalitarian leaders in the East has formerly demonstrated a much greater facility for non-religious change in large populations. The fact, that Western state mechanisms have now turned away from science as a mantra for control in the face of an uncertain environmental future, and instead now practice the dissemination of fear of an internal minority, merely demonstrates the panic that has set in over the prospect of social meltdown. This profound condition is unlikely to yield to anything this book has to say on God or science. It is a simply preposterous notion.
In the face of such uncertainty, it has often been the case that people will turn to faith. The fact that Christianity is now growing in China at a remarkable rate, for whatever other reasons, simply demonstrates how easily humans will change a material philosophy for a faith, based ideology. Emotionally, there is actually no contradiction between these alternatives - they both offer the prospect of an all-embracing father figure, whereas the science of Hawkins (and Dawkins), simply offers, cold hard facts.
It is therefore understandable to me that these latest offerings on the completeness of science, are delivered with a dogmatic tone. One suspects that the twin pillars, of what might be a new religion of the sciences, are in fear of being swept away by a rise in what they see as their antithesis - blind unquestioning faith in an unseen, non material phenomenon, i.e. God. The drift away from the certainty of science, towards creationism and a faith, based world-view by the masses, must particularly frustrate the scientists, because it comes just at a time when their own scientific viewpoint is reaching what they feel is near to complete clarity. The rejection of science by so many, or the indifference towards it, is directly commensurate with the intolerance shown by science to faith and belief.
If the modern resources of science, had once cared to treat belief as real, which it undoubtedly is — despite what appears to be an irrational basis, science might have begun to make progress in the right direction, which is towards a more embracing view of reality. Science veers away from religion, because it regards a religious orientation and its objects as being not testable by the scientific method. It is true, that certain researchers have worked with subjects professing belief and other more obscure subjective states, through the application of neural science, but their approach is to try to understand the process in relation to the brain. The idea that there might be a phenomenal entity of mind seems never to have crossed their minds. This ignorance is unforgivable, because it obviates the very science that was designed to deal with it, namely depth psychology.
My suspicions are, that there is a real threat to the scientific orientation of mind as represented by Hawking and Dawkins, but it does not come from conventional religion, (or any of the airy, fairy modern derivatives), but from a completely new order, or state of being. However, even in psychology a blanket of silence has descended, which I believe, partly comes from a quite natural fear of its proponents towards ridicule by the general community of science, but also, a more general fear of the numinous seduction that inevitably derives from the objects of the deep unconscious.
It is ironic, that a freak like Hawking should not have been the preoccupation of psychological analysis. It would certainly have been the case if Freud and Jung were alive —they feared no hallowed ground and political correctness. The one sided approach of science, in clinging on to a material philosophy and explanation of reality, seems to me to be more than wrapped up in the symbol of the illness and being of the poor unfortunate Hawking. One cannot, but be overwhelmed with sympathy and pity for a man, who has had his prospects for a normal life, based upon our evolution from primates, thwarted by such a terrible illness, and as a result, or as synchronicity, turned his mind outwards to wrestle with the complexities of Cosmology - it all seems too symbolic, too mythic and from a realm of symmetry that science still eschews.
This realm is not undiscovered, on the contrary it is well documented, representing itself in almost everything we see and hear, but it simply stands outside of science. It is wrapped in the materiality of our modern age, but it is a fiction that is only capable of pointing to something it is dimly aware of, but cannot clothe appropriately at this time, (though films like the matrix come very close) and the religious seem determined to pin upon Jesus. It is the conditioning that humanity needs to accept the next step in evolution. This advance in evolution will involve a similar, though perhaps not so extreme degree of deprivation to that which hawking himself suffers. This evolution is not Darwinian, or proto-mechanical, as in Hawking’s case, but is internal and derives from the very aspect of reality that science continually overlooks, namely God, or more correctly, the Pneumatic Matrix (Jung: Collective Psyche or Unconscious).
Here, it might be obvious to any psychologist that takes the unconscious seriously, that any extensive involvement with the objects of the unconscious at the collective level will take a heavy toll on the natural instincts. It is nevertheless my understanding, that the teleological function of the central component, or archetype, of the Collective Psyche, is the development of a specialised form of expanded human consciousness. This evolutionary development will necessarily involve very extensive erosion and modification to those instincts supporting subjectivity and an evolution of morphology towards a more cerebral based entity. The final object or being will look like us, but will have a much more optimised mind and body that runs on minimal resources.
This leap forward in evolution will create an entity that is as rational to the objects of science, as it is to the objects of the psyche. It will derive benefit from this unity and it will also put it in communication with the system of psychical phenomenology that is to be found in every aspect of the material world we inhabit as well as the unconscious of every one of the six billion subjective humans on this planet.
This latest offering by Hawking is unfortunately another example of the modern tendency of scientific writers to make money out of God. But what is it about this primitive notion of deity that is so threatening, that Hawking (and his twin Dawkins) feels compelled to stray across the boundaries of the material sciences into the area of belief to make a point. Surely it must be clear that no one with even a fraction of material insight believes that a conscious godlike entity was responsible for evolutionary creation. It is a simply preposterous notion.
By attacking the sources of belief, should one presume that the author’s hope is for wholesale change in the orientation of the masses and particularly those susceptible to religious radicalism? However complete and exclusive the scientific view of reality seems, as represented by this book and others both men have written, surely they cannot think that their sideswipes at religion and the conventional notion of God, will in any way affect more than a fraction of the six billion subjective humans on this planet. That is a simply preposterous notion.
In that case the scientists are overlooking the social sciences, that would inform of their impossible task and that social programming, as practiced by Mao and other powerful totalitarian leaders in the East has formerly demonstrated a much greater facility for non-religious change in large populations. The fact, that Western state mechanisms have now turned away from science as a mantra for control in the face of an uncertain environmental future, and instead now practice the dissemination of fear of an internal minority, merely demonstrates the panic that has set in over the prospect of social meltdown. This profound condition is unlikely to yield to anything this book has to say on God or science. It is a simply preposterous notion.
In the face of such uncertainty, it has often been the case that people will turn to faith. The fact that Christianity is now growing in China at a remarkable rate, for whatever other reasons, simply demonstrates how easily humans will change a material philosophy for a faith, based ideology. Emotionally, there is actually no contradiction between these alternatives - they both offer the prospect of an all-embracing father figure, whereas the science of Hawkins (and Dawkins), simply offers, cold hard facts.
It is therefore understandable to me that these latest offerings on the completeness of science, are delivered with a dogmatic tone. One suspects that the twin pillars, of what might be a new religion of the sciences, are in fear of being swept away by a rise in what they see as their antithesis - blind unquestioning faith in an unseen, non material phenomenon, i.e. God. The drift away from the certainty of science, towards creationism and a faith, based world-view by the masses, must particularly frustrate the scientists, because it comes just at a time when their own scientific viewpoint is reaching what they feel is near to complete clarity. The rejection of science by so many, or the indifference towards it, is directly commensurate with the intolerance shown by science to faith and belief.
If the modern resources of science, had once cared to treat belief as real, which it undoubtedly is — despite what appears to be an irrational basis, science might have begun to make progress in the right direction, which is towards a more embracing view of reality. Science veers away from religion, because it regards a religious orientation and its objects as being not testable by the scientific method. It is true, that certain researchers have worked with subjects professing belief and other more obscure subjective states, through the application of neural science, but their approach is to try to understand the process in relation to the brain. The idea that there might be a phenomenal entity of mind seems never to have crossed their minds. This ignorance is unforgivable, because it obviates the very science that was designed to deal with it, namely depth psychology.
My suspicions are, that there is a real threat to the scientific orientation of mind as represented by Hawking and Dawkins, but it does not come from conventional religion, (or any of the airy, fairy modern derivatives), but from a completely new order, or state of being. However, even in psychology a blanket of silence has descended, which I believe, partly comes from a quite natural fear of its proponents towards ridicule by the general community of science, but also, a more general fear of the numinous seduction that inevitably derives from the objects of the deep unconscious.
It is ironic, that a freak like Hawking should not have been the preoccupation of psychological analysis. It would certainly have been the case if Freud and Jung were alive —they feared no hallowed ground and political correctness. The one sided approach of science, in clinging on to a material philosophy and explanation of reality, seems to me to be more than wrapped up in the symbol of the illness and being of the poor unfortunate Hawking. One cannot, but be overwhelmed with sympathy and pity for a man, who has had his prospects for a normal life, based upon our evolution from primates, thwarted by such a terrible illness, and as a result, or as synchronicity, turned his mind outwards to wrestle with the complexities of Cosmology - it all seems too symbolic, too mythic and from a realm of symmetry that science still eschews.
This realm is not undiscovered, on the contrary it is well documented, representing itself in almost everything we see and hear, but it simply stands outside of science. It is wrapped in the materiality of our modern age, but it is a fiction that is only capable of pointing to something it is dimly aware of, but cannot clothe appropriately at this time, (though films like the matrix come very close) and the religious seem determined to pin upon Jesus. It is the conditioning that humanity needs to accept the next step in evolution. This advance in evolution will involve a similar, though perhaps not so extreme degree of deprivation to that which hawking himself suffers. This evolution is not Darwinian, or proto-mechanical, as in Hawking’s case, but is internal and derives from the very aspect of reality that science continually overlooks, namely God, or more correctly, the Pneumatic Matrix (Jung: Collective Psyche or Unconscious).
Here, it might be obvious to any psychologist that takes the unconscious seriously, that any extensive involvement with the objects of the unconscious at the collective level will take a heavy toll on the natural instincts. It is nevertheless my understanding, that the teleological function of the central component, or archetype, of the Collective Psyche, is the development of a specialised form of expanded human consciousness. This evolutionary development will necessarily involve very extensive erosion and modification to those instincts supporting subjectivity and an evolution of morphology towards a more cerebral based entity. The final object or being will look like us, but will have a much more optimised mind and body that runs on minimal resources.
This leap forward in evolution will create an entity that is as rational to the objects of science, as it is to the objects of the psyche. It will derive benefit from this unity and it will also put it in communication with the system of psychical phenomenology that is to be found in every aspect of the material world we inhabit as well as the unconscious of every one of the six billion subjective humans on this planet.
Sunday, 1 May 2011
On The Mind of God (And Man)...
The idea that sentience is an inevitable outcome of evolution, is a tacit understanding by most scientists. The consideration that there are other populated planets in distant galaxies, where intelligent life exists, with which we might communicate, defies credulity, especially where it is linked to the notion of space travel. The whole universe is suffused with non incarnate intelligence, all of which is seeking to communicate all of the time. The universe is in our minds and our minds are in the universe, a priori, it can only be so. It is simply that the scientific method can only deal with objective material phenomenon, overlooking the non material phenomenon it uses in making these observations, but which it worships i.e. The Mind.
Communication is measured in wave, structure and form, all of which we can observe, but the universe also communicates through symbolism - a realm that art seems to have made its own and which science dare not enter, except perhaps through maths, where structure and symmetry has abundant meaning. There is nothing in the universe that is outside of symbolism, it is the basis of mind and it is the basis of creation, it is simply that it exists in an area adjacent to the focus of our modern materially conditioned mind.
When I was fifteen I put forward the idea that the only thing that could exceed the speed of light was thought. I hereby modify that statement. The only thing to exceed the universal material constant by its instantaneous communication, is transcendent thought. Think it and it shall be so, for we are only masters of our own minds, when we realise that our thoughts are not our own.
... and that our lives are an endless series of symbols.
A recent dialogue for me and a much less recent dialogue for them: when a student asked his guru, 'why can we no longer see the face of God, like our forebears did', The master replies: 'because we cannot stoop low enough'.
The inflation of the Persona is commensurate to the inflation of the Shadow. These two, more or less personal components of the human psychological personality are inextricably linked in a system of compensation (the bigger they are the harder they fall).
The Soul, or Anima/Animus archetype supplies The Shadow with its transcendent connection to the Old Wise Man archetype, which is more or less indistinguishable from the Spirit, or God. ...and it is all very unconscious... (see Jung Red Book)
Science sees (the effects of) this configuration from an empirical standpoint, using sense perception, whereas art sees it from a similar standpoint, but using intuition.
The fact that there has been a massive inflation in the human spirit in the last sixty years, impacts mankind through this archetypal configuration. This inflation arrives at the level of the Anima/Animus, where the Yang component is held in suspension - giving rise to a massive material, (Yin) compensation in the Persona. This situation cannot continue indefinitely...
The biblical statement, my cup runneth over, is something I have had to live with all my adult life.
Seems complicated!
The idea is as simple as e=mc2. it is the implications that are as yet unseen. Each element of Jungs original notion of The Marriage Quaternity: Persona, Shadow, Anima/Animus, Old Wise Man, is, under certain pre-determinants, capable of autonomous action through what we regards as our conscious personality. Thus my statement, 'our thoughts are not our own'.
Some people, the so called, 'intuitives', seem capable of 'seeing' in a way that those with locked vision, 'sense perceptionists' can't. People with a fixed, sense perception minds are more likely to fall prey to being completely overwhelmed by contents from the Shadow complex, when their Persona orientation breaks down, than those with a more intuitive mind, simply because they have no intimation that there is anything more.
However, those with an inner vision are more likely to have regular communication with elements of their unconscious. This inner vision often handicaps such people into not easily seeing through the function of sense perception, hence the division between the so called, scientific and artistic mind sets.
The active archetypal process in the breaking down of the Persona is what Jung called Individuation. Its function is to re-orientate the personality ahead of death, where subjectivity is subsumed by a more objective state of psychical reality (the repository of the collective unconscious as Jung called it).
When I meet someone who has a magnetic effect on my Anima (soul), I ask the question, who is this - not only empirically, but also and more important, spiritually. These relations can be fleeting, or long lived, the important thing is the underlying symbol. When you next think about those that cross your path, for good or ill, take yourself beyond the realm of subjectivity and consider how your personality structure has been affected, or not - in this lifetime...
Communication is measured in wave, structure and form, all of which we can observe, but the universe also communicates through symbolism - a realm that art seems to have made its own and which science dare not enter, except perhaps through maths, where structure and symmetry has abundant meaning. There is nothing in the universe that is outside of symbolism, it is the basis of mind and it is the basis of creation, it is simply that it exists in an area adjacent to the focus of our modern materially conditioned mind.
When I was fifteen I put forward the idea that the only thing that could exceed the speed of light was thought. I hereby modify that statement. The only thing to exceed the universal material constant by its instantaneous communication, is transcendent thought. Think it and it shall be so, for we are only masters of our own minds, when we realise that our thoughts are not our own.
... and that our lives are an endless series of symbols.
A recent dialogue for me and a much less recent dialogue for them: when a student asked his guru, 'why can we no longer see the face of God, like our forebears did', The master replies: 'because we cannot stoop low enough'.
The inflation of the Persona is commensurate to the inflation of the Shadow. These two, more or less personal components of the human psychological personality are inextricably linked in a system of compensation (the bigger they are the harder they fall).
The Soul, or Anima/Animus archetype supplies The Shadow with its transcendent connection to the Old Wise Man archetype, which is more or less indistinguishable from the Spirit, or God. ...and it is all very unconscious... (see Jung Red Book)
Science sees (the effects of) this configuration from an empirical standpoint, using sense perception, whereas art sees it from a similar standpoint, but using intuition.
The fact that there has been a massive inflation in the human spirit in the last sixty years, impacts mankind through this archetypal configuration. This inflation arrives at the level of the Anima/Animus, where the Yang component is held in suspension - giving rise to a massive material, (Yin) compensation in the Persona. This situation cannot continue indefinitely...
The biblical statement, my cup runneth over, is something I have had to live with all my adult life.
Seems complicated!
The idea is as simple as e=mc2. it is the implications that are as yet unseen. Each element of Jungs original notion of The Marriage Quaternity: Persona, Shadow, Anima/Animus, Old Wise Man, is, under certain pre-determinants, capable of autonomous action through what we regards as our conscious personality. Thus my statement, 'our thoughts are not our own'.
Some people, the so called, 'intuitives', seem capable of 'seeing' in a way that those with locked vision, 'sense perceptionists' can't. People with a fixed, sense perception minds are more likely to fall prey to being completely overwhelmed by contents from the Shadow complex, when their Persona orientation breaks down, than those with a more intuitive mind, simply because they have no intimation that there is anything more.
However, those with an inner vision are more likely to have regular communication with elements of their unconscious. This inner vision often handicaps such people into not easily seeing through the function of sense perception, hence the division between the so called, scientific and artistic mind sets.
The active archetypal process in the breaking down of the Persona is what Jung called Individuation. Its function is to re-orientate the personality ahead of death, where subjectivity is subsumed by a more objective state of psychical reality (the repository of the collective unconscious as Jung called it).
When I meet someone who has a magnetic effect on my Anima (soul), I ask the question, who is this - not only empirically, but also and more important, spiritually. These relations can be fleeting, or long lived, the important thing is the underlying symbol. When you next think about those that cross your path, for good or ill, take yourself beyond the realm of subjectivity and consider how your personality structure has been affected, or not - in this lifetime...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)