Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Jungian Hubris and Purpose versus Platonic Hierarchy

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2015

    Jungian Hubris and Purpose versus Platonic Hierarchy

    I have already gone into Gnostics and Kabbalists on their own. I have addressed Alchemy and Jungian perspectives related thereto - in many books and places. I know that many people think they care about each other and all the whales or birdies - but I also know they never look deep inside their own motivations or past their religious brainwashing. No - don't GO THERE! You do not have to go to church to be affected by the laws, nations, and memes or archetypes which bombard you from cradle to grave. So when I see Jung attacked for being an arrogant pompous ass alchemist, a ladies man, a Nazi, a nutcase, or almost anything other than a person who worked hard and strived to shed light on our human potential to be ONE with WHAT IS, I get a little passionate. He probably was arrogant when he did not want to discuss racist or brainwashed foolishness with so many semi-illiterates or jealous Freudians who set out to discredit him.

    Many other students of Freud went their own way and maybe deserve these ridiculous charges more than Jung. Wilhelm Reich and his orgone etheric energy saw sexual communes form around his theories. His work probably was used at Roswell in altering weather as those initial reports might allow. Silberer wrote about Alchemy before Jung, and on it goes. This scholar more appropriately discusses Jung's alchemy as a syncretism or merging of many ancient mystical disciplines. He is wrong about the origins of each of them - but Jung certainly would not have the kind of knowledge from history that I do today even though his confreres at Eranos certainly grasped the Hero With a Thousand Faces or 462,000 years of civilized humans that Joseph Campbell brought to that austere forum of intellectual giants. Mircae Eliade takes the origins of alchemy back past shamans and smiths learning the sciences through observing Nature (God). Eranos included the Father of modern Kabbalistic ideology and Jung worked well with him and others in those circles - his name is Gershom Scholem and the author we will soon hear from acknowledges Scholem's contributions to his apparent personal demon or obsession. More importantly this quote from Scholem should be uppermost as we go forward.

    “Sometimes one must learn how to read books against their declared intentions.”
    Is there a bigger argument in our social milieu than what our purpose is or should be, what is our best obsession?

    Those who need an outer source for direction will find it in each other and common focal points or loci and individual extrapolations from these social memes and archetypes. I know it is not just Fukayama or Machiavelli who knew as social engineers these matters profound also had profound potential applications in governing or what is correctly called a Neo-Platonic hierarchy. Jung kept two books by his bedside for twenty years - his best obsession was knowledge and wisdom. Those books were The Tibetan Book of the Dead and the Iliad by Homer which has proven useful to understanding pre-Empire history and what Hellenizing or the destruction thereof (history has been propaganda) has created. Jung's foreword to the Evans-Wentz Book of the Dead is a masterpiece of insight we should have courses on in comparative religion at schools, from an early age.

    Plato himself struggled to allow his soul to enjoin a greater collective in his studies of the Eleusinian Mysteries (Some do say - and his writings support). I am not sure that is true because the forces putting pressure on him were immense and lead to Socrates drinking Hemlock and Pythagoras having to leave his homeland to found a colony called Bruttium (Croton and Kroton in other tongues). There is not one author who has documented those forces and familial involvements as well as myself. It serves Empire and it's purposes to hide their Hellenizing destructive acts which took people for slaves and automatons or made them sword and cannon fodder (far worse for the women). So much for me prattling about history, it has it's own course to travel and all hard sciences have made me seem prescient over the last two decades, because I never assumed people like Socrates or Pythagoras were only what was said about them. I accepted they followed the Magian Law to "Keep Silent" and you will find little or nothing written by either of them under their own name.

    Plato was not so great an alchemist and had more of a Noble lineage which influenced him. I agree with a meritocratic approach such as his family deserved to hold positions of governance in high places since Solon. Solon tried to stem the rising tide of destruction of women's rights by maintaining some right to own property for them. Plato tells us a group of people having average intellect and knowledge are the worst form of government but his associate Aristotle went to Carthage and saw remnants of Brotherhood and equality that made Athens seem autocratic. So much for a debate we could engage in on government and our current Platonic top-down hierarchy or synarchy. There is no easy answer to be sure, and great minds and planners of the Enlightenment Experiment created the USA which has maintained enough of the ethos for freedom that they have some right to be proud of their Republican (Drawn from the name of a book by Plato - Republic) form of managing people.

    The bigger issue for me and Jung is or has been something spiritual and all the other verbiage you just saw only sets the stage to see Jung and his desire to help people in some wholistic perspective. The author under my scrutiny almost says Jung had Nazi leanings and of course he was pressured to conform as he lived in Germany, but Jewish scholars he was involved with have done a good job proving that trash to be what it is - trash! So I won't even go there. But we must ascertain whether the acknowledged Father of Modern Psychoanalysis and still often top dog of dogma in Psychiatry (See Niles Crane in Frasier) is, as this author says - a Kabbalist or Christian Gnostic.

    One of the things I agree with Drob about is that Jung became more open and aware of the inter-connectedness of things as he grew older. But Jung (my Jung) was always a humanist who cared deeply for his role in helping to lift the scales off the eyes of mere mortals. However, Drob pictures a destitute Gnosticism and a "dead" alchemy which is due to Drob buying the Classical History of Empire and an overall lack of appreciation for earlier wisdom. Here is a quote from his essay which is a little on point, as he throws the cape of Kabbalah ever further over all knowledge.

    "Years later, when Jung comes to take a second look at Gnosticism through the eyes of a more fully developed archetypal psychology, he reverses himself and interprets it in a manner which is far more friendly to the world and the individual, and, as I will argue, far more Kabbalistic than Gnostic."
    Last edited by R_Baird; 12-04-2015 at 11:51 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Off we go - into the wild blue yonder!!! Where scholars interpret and without personally having known the man or having studied what he did use Jung to prove "God is Dead" or Gnosticism is a "close cousin to Kabbalah". I take the Time/Life or Wikipedia application of the title Alchemist to Jung with a grain of salt. Surely there are many layers to Hermeticism but no true student would claim such a lofty moniker upon their own visage. I have not read every word of Jung and I never met him - so my insight comes more from what he studied and what I interpret he strove to achieve FOR humanity which all humanists (another name for Alchemists) do work on, it is the Great Work or assisting of Divine Providential purpose ('logos' if you grasp it's fullness).

    "Several years later, in a letter to a Ms. Edith Schroeder who had inquired regarding "the significance of Freud's Jewish descent for the origin, content and acceptance of psychoanalysis." Jung replies: would have to take a deep plunge into the history of the Jewish mind. This would carry us beyond Jewish Orthodoxy into the subterranean workings of Hasidism...and then into the intricacies of the Kabbalah, which still remains unexplored psychologically (Jung, 1973, Vol. 2, pp. 358-9).
    Jung then informs Ms. Schroeder that he himself could not perform such a task because he has no knowledge of Hebrew {Each letter is a symbol or once was a Library in Stone - see my book Neolithic Libraries. It is a sacerdotal script of great importance and while Jung was alive it's origins were not academically known - Phoenician!} and is not acquainted with all the relevant sources.

    In point of fact, Jung, in the last decades of his life, had taken a deep interest in the psychological aspects of a number of Kabbalistic symbols and ideas; ideas which he had been exposed to primarily through his reading of 16th and 17th century alchemical texts, and, especially, through the writings of the Christian Kabbalist and alchemist, Christian Knorr Von Rosenroth (1636-89). As a result, Jung's last great work, Mysterium Coniunctionis, completed in his 80th year in 1954, though ostensibly a treatise on alchemy, is filled with discussions of such Kabbalistic symbols as Adam Kadmon (Primordial Man), the Sefirot, and the union of the "Holy One" and his bride. These symbols became important pivots around which Jung constructed his final interpretations of such notions as the archetypes and the collective unconscious, and his theory of the ultimate psychological purpose of humankind.

    Yet as great as Jung's acknowledged affinity is to the Kabbalah, his unacknowledged relationship was even greater. For every reference to the Kabbalah in Jung's writings there are several to Gnosticism, and perhaps dozens to alchemy: yet the interpretations which Jung places on Gnosticism (itself a close cousin to the Kabbalah), and the very texts which Jung refers to on alchemy, were profoundly Kabbalistic, so much so that one could call the Jung of the Mysterium Coniunctionis and other later works, a Kabbalist (albeit a Christian one) in contemporary guise. {Which came first? Christianity, Gnosticism, Kabbalah or gnosis which is translated properly as 'wisdom' not what some Romanist want to inject - 'Salvation'. Thus we might occasionally return to history rather than miss-story.}

    Jung has frequently been called a "Gnostic." Interestingly, Jungıs main accuser in this regard was the Jewish philosopher, Martin Buber, who is well known for, amongst other things, his work on Hasidism. Buber held that Jung was Gnostic because he reduced God to the inner divine spark in humans and identified religious experience with a turning inward into the Self, as opposed to a participation in relations with others as the vehicle for relating to a transcendent God (Buber, 1952; see also Dourley, 1994)). Conversely, the Christian "death of God" theologian, Thomas J. J. Altizer, hailed Jungıs "Gnosticism" as part of his proof of the death of a transcendent God, which, through Christ, had become completely immanent in humankind (Altizer, 1959, see also Segal, 1992).

    For reasons which I will detail in this paper, it is my view that Jung is far more Kabbalistic than he is Gnostic, and he is "alchemical" largely to the extent that the alchemists borrowed from and relied upon Kabbalistic ideas. I will also argue that in the 1930s, when Jung was formulating a psychology based on his reading of alchemy, he had a strong motive to suppress the "Jewish" origins of many alchemical ideas. "

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    I have often quoted Mircae Eliade and I respect everything of his I ever read - so I was somewhat surprised to see Jung having to write him a letter chastising him for attributing less than scientific methods to Jung. But I also know Jung employed intuitive insights as well as scientific approaches and so I read this letter with great interest. They both traveled the same historical and alchemical pathways or the GREAT WORK of human endeavour called the Magisterium Mysterium. They both wrote extensively about their opinions born from alchemy but how far each went in research may never be fully known. After all is said and done much of the work is internal and comes from dream state or other places.

    This letter addresses Jung's effort to see how Mandalas appear to people who have never been exposed to them. Perhaps Ralph Waldo Emerson never read Transcendentalist author before writing what became the Western World's great insights to it and allowed him to be called the Father of it. Hypnagogic states 'see'-ing into the collective consciousness and unconsciousness is how I would explain Jung's difficulty. I think towards the end of his life he saw the unconscious is not always so unconnected with the conscious. His own early visions troubled him greatly because of his paradigm view of hallucinatory experience which when hypnagogic are not just imagined or hallucinatory. I consider this might have been known to Eliade and that is why he accused Jung of apishly imitating even though Jung never consciously saw his patients doing anything apish. I understand I am personally treading into some rarified esoteric territory trying to correct and connect two such eminent scholars.

    " [Oh, oh...Carl Jung chastises Mircea Eliade]

    Letter from Carl Jung to Mircea Eliade:

    It is an honor to have been sent a copy of your book on yoga. I greatly appreciate your kindness and generosity. I am now studying your work very carefully and profoundly enjoying its riches. It is certainly the best and most complete summary of yoga that I know of, and I am happy to possess such a mine of information.

    I was somewhat surprised, however, to find that you had not been able to grant me normal intelligence and scientific responsibility. As you know, I received my scientific education in the field of the natural sciences, whose principle is “There is nothing in the mind that was not previously in the senses.”

    In any case, this is the fundamental credo of the medical alienist. So you can imagine my astonishment when, I encountered associations of ideas, or rather “thought forms,” among the dreams of neurotics and normal persons, for which no models could apparently be found. Naturally this was particularly shocking to me because very recognizable models did exist, but entirely beyond the purview of my patients.

    There was not even the chance of cryptomnesia since the models did not exist in the patients’ environment. I waited and explored all the possible explanations for fourteen years before I published the facts. I went to the U.S.A. to study the dreams of Negroes in the southern states, and I found that their dreams contain the same archetypal motifs as our own. Every time that a patient spontaneously produced a mandala, I did my best to discover its origin.

    There were no models for them We do not see such things around us, and still more important, we do not know their use or their significance, nothing is taught us about them. It should even be difficult for us to find a scholar, like “Tucci,” capable of giving us information about them. In India it is entirely different. There they repeat and imitate mandalas which are to be seen just about everywhere.

    If any “apish imitations” occurs, no contrast is intended among the Tibetans and Hindus. But the unconscious reacts instinctively, and instinct never imitates, it reproduces without a conscious model, it follows it biological “behavior pattern.” This is exactly what happens with my individual mandalas: they are produced instinctively and automatically, without models or imitation.

    Even my former teacher, Professor Freud, would never have admitted that the incest complex with its typical fantasies (what I call the “incest archetype”) was but an apish reaction, the imitation of a model. For him, incest was a biological affair, that is, a perverted sex instinct.

    The child who develops that sort of fantasies is not imitating adults. His own instinct is at the base of his fantasies. Every instinct generates its own forms and fantasies which are more or less identical everywhere, without having been spread by traditions, migration, imitation or education. For example, the mandala seems originally to have been an apotropaic gesture for the purpose of concentration. {I see it as a energy organizational tool to concentrate into form that which is natural but unseen.} That is why it reproduces a form which is the most primordial of infantile patterns. The statistics which Kellogg compiled from the drawing of thousands of very young children are proof of this.

    To attribute the qualities of the conscious psyche to the unconscious is quite a serious error. I do not commit it, nor am I so stupidly ignorant that I cannot recognize the instinctive character of the unconscious. Above all, you have only to leaf through my works to assume yourself that I identify the archetype with the “pattern of behavior.”

    You have used the term “archetype” too, but without mentioning that you mean by this term only the repetition and imitation of a conscious image or idea. The real “ape” in us is consciousness; it is our consciousness that imitates and repeats. But the unconscious, being instinctive, is very conservative and difficult to influence. Nobody knows better than the psychiatrist how much the unconscious resists every effort to change it or influence it in the least.

    If it were “apish” it would be easy to make it forget its compulsions and its obstinate ideas—and, if it were imitative, it would not be creative. The lucky intuitions of the artist and the inventor are never imitations. Those gentlemen would be very much put out by such a thought.

    There is a psychological problem here which I cannot explain. On the one hand, you make the very kind and generous gesture of sending me your book; on the other, you seem to consider me so idiotic as never even to have though about the nature of the unconscious. How have I merited this ill-will? From the moment when I had the honor and pleasure of making your acquaintance personally, I have never felt anything other than admiration and esteem for your great work, and I would be distressed to have offended you without knowing it.

    I hope that you will not be angry with me for writing you this long importunate letter, but I do not like to let a hidden sore fester. Needless to say how grateful I would be to you for a few words of explanation!

    With admiration and lasting gratitude,

    Very sincerely yours, C.G. Jung. [Letter dated 19 January 1955]


    1. Mircea Eliade had sent Dr. Jung a copy of “Yoga: Immortality and Freedom.”
    2. Giuseppe Tucci had written a book entitled: “The Theory and Practice of the Mandala.”
    3. Mrs. Rhoda Kellogg, a nursery-school teacher in San Francisco, had examined over a million scribblings of two to five year olds from more than thirty countries for basic types and patterns. Her findings are published in “The Psychology of Children’s Art (1967). "

    Last edited by R_Baird; 12-04-2015 at 03:47 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Now we go back to Mr. Drob who appears to idolize Jung and tries simultaneously to make Jung his stooge or that of his own obsession - Kabbalah. He makes it clear psychoanalytical approaches developed by Jung made Kabbalah more spiritual and yet he say Jung extracted the spiritual alchemy from Kabbalah while denigrating other parts of alchemy. I will inject an N. B. into the excerpt where I question his motives which I say are almost infantile and definitely disrespectful of a man whose breadth of spirituality encompasses Yoga and such things as The Tibetan Book of the Dead beyond the pall of power-seeking despots or egotists who seek for communion with g-d rather than seek to bring out in all people what IS g-d. Yes, that is me 'projecting', or putting words in the mouth of the great man just as I accuse Drob of doing. We just saw how Jung spent at least 14 years of study regarding his patients with visions of Mandala symbolism - I have a hard time thinking that study did not include certain burgeoning insights that became part of the quantum physical research and mathematical to harmonic resonances which Tesla was developing while Jung was learning. I do not credit Tesla and his avowed 15 minute vision after getting out of danger or near death in a hospital for all of the things Tesla achieved - as many people do with Tesla's encouragement. My book on Tesla covers his sources augmenting these things - all of which I know Jung knew.

    "In this essay, I argue that Jung ultimately read Gnosticism in such a manner as to transform a radical anti-cosmic, anti-individualistic doctrine into a world-affirming basis for an individual psychology. Further, I will show that he interpreted alchemy so as to extract its Kabbalistic spiritual and psychological core {Sure Kabbalah is King and Jung a mere student which Drob can dribble about.}. Had Jung been sufficiently familiar with the Kabbalists (and Hasidim), his task could have been far easier, for their writings would have provided Jung a psychologically richer and more sympathetic symbolism than either the "other worldly" theories of the Gnostics, or the radically material practice {Which is it radically material or a metaphoric pursuit of spiritual gold from the dross?} of the alchemists. Indeed, in some instances the Gnostics, the alchemists, and the Kabbalists share the same symbols and images (e.g., the "sparks," "Primordial Man {Adam Kadmon or what Kabbalah addresses is not all important unless one gets into brain physiology and sees the Medula Oblongata or reptilean brain as something to attune with and through - see Enneagrams of Gurdjieff, and The Celestine Prophecy by James Redfield .") but in each case the Kabbalistic approach to these symbols is the closest to Jung's own. In short, by providing a "this-worldly" interpretation of Gnosticism, and a spiritual-psychological interpretation of alchemy, Jung arrived at a view which was in many ways Kabbalistic in spirit. Indeed, Jung, in his interpretation of alchemy, succeeded remarkably in extracting the Kabbalistic gold which lay buried in the alchemistsı texts and methods (to use an alchemical metaphor) {N. B. That metaphor of turning lead to gold is no where close to all alchemy deals with.}. His work can then be profitably understood as falling in the tradition of those thinkers such as Pico della Mirandola, Johannnes Reuchlin (1983), and Knorr von Rosenroth who created a distinctively Christian Kabbalah (Scholem, 1974, [pp. 196-201]).

    Jung can be interpreted as a contemporary Kabbalist, yet one who provides the basis for a radical psychological interpretation of the Kabbalistsı symbols and ideas. Such an interpretation was not altogether foreign to the Kabbalists themselves, who, on the principle of the microcosm mirroring the macrocosm, {This is the As Above, So Below Law of the Magi which Jung knew from The Secretum Secretorum written by Aristotle to his student Alexander the Great who some reports say found the Table of Destiny sometimes called the Tabula Smaragdina or Emerald Tablet of Hermes. The Magi were traced by Gurdjieff who Jung probably knew, to the Altaic Mountains 4O,000 years ago by Idres Shah a disciple of Gurdjieff. See my book Gurdjieff and the Sarmoung Brotherhood.} held that their own descriptions of cosmic events were also, and equally profoundly, descriptions of the dynamics within men's souls (Idel, 1988, 1995). Indeed, such an interpretation of the Kabbalah provided the major impetus for the doctrines of the Hasidim. Still, Jung took this psychologization process further than either the Kabbalists or Hasidim, living in a pre-psychoanalytic age, could ever hope to do themselves."

    Clearly my interjections in that one last paragraph demonstrate Kabbalism and it's history is far older than Kabbalists claim - because Kabbalism is not original Verbal Tradition or Qabala and it is in fact another Empire building battle at work.
    Last edited by R_Baird; 12-04-2015 at 09:09 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    I feel it is unfair for me to assassinate Drob in absentia so I will just stick to meaningful elucidation of Jung - but you can be sure Jung ran into far lesser Kabbalists saying far worse things than Drob.

    Here is part of a thread on the ancient Sages or Alchemists of Greece whose work is the foundation of almost everything in our culture today.


    I have often used purpose therapy (along with Gestalt or Zen) in my efforts to help those who struggle with the alienating societal effects and outcomes from bad parenting and poor educational environments. I almost always discuss the simple choices made by Frankl in his concentration camp experiences. I give more credit to the University of Wisconsin than I do to Vienna as this Wikipedia article does. Vienna has influences that psychiatrists do not talk about (Other than Rhawn Joseph) and Frankl is more humane and human than most of them. It is good enough and well worth reading. The Logos is what Tesla drew much insight from as we should know.

    I can even say that I enjoyed drilling down into the word Noetic (See thread on the Institute of Noetic Sciences) and then seeing a discussion of alchemical principles derived from Bards like Hesiod. Of course they did not explain Bards or point out Socrates, Aristotle and Plato were alchemists. They did make reference to some "eclectic" cosmogonies that affected "Medieval" people. Here is a little of what this drilling lead to.

    "In Aristotle's influential works, the term was carefully distinguished from sense perception, imagination and reason, although these terms are closely inter-related. The term was apparently already singled out by earlier philosophers such as Parmenides, whose works are largely lost. In post-Aristotelian discussions, the exact boundaries between perception, understanding of perception, and reasoning have not always agreed with the definitions of Aristotle, even though his terminology remains influential.

    In the Aristotelian scheme, nous is the basic understanding or awareness which allows human beings to think rationally. For Aristotle, this was distinct from the processing of sensory perception, including the use of imagination and memory, which other animals can do. This therefore connects discussion of nous, {Akin to Jungian collective, soul and such.} to discussion of how the human mind sets definitions in a consistent and communicable way, and whether people must be born with some innate potential to understand the same universal categories the same logical ways. Deriving from this it was also sometimes argued, especially in classical and medieval philosophy, that the individual nous must require help of a spiritual and divine type. By this type of account, it came to be argued that the human understanding (nous) somehow stems from this cosmic nous, which is however not just a recipient of order, but a creator of it. Such explanations were influential in the development of medieval accounts of God, the immortality of the soul, and even the motions of the stars, in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, amongst both eclectic philosophers and authors representing all the major faiths of their times."

    I say you will find the root of epigenetics and modern science beginning to learn metaphysics is the true REALITY in our ordered environment in this. I also say the reason Erikson was made an outcast in Psychology after having been it's top guru; is because he learned the truer meanings in The Logos or spirituality. Tesla's whole life is credit to it's Harmonic (In the beginning was the WORD) or Divine Providential Purpose. In a list of the 20th Centuries leading psychological influences you will still find Erikson at number seven as well as the thoroughly trashed Skinner at the top of that list.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Plato is related to the wise Solon and Critias who was a Pyramid priest in Egypt. He told Plato about a myth called Atlantis which they thought would aid in controlling people. We can be sure there was some De Danaan in his blood. Plato created an enduring hierarchy that seeks to set some men above others; I think Aristotle can be excused for cow-towing to the political forces of his day until such time as he had to get out of town after Alexander died suddenly (Probably poisoned by forces who enjoy keeping people at each other's throats.). He himself died the next year. As I read Aristotle I think he wrote knowing more than he let on. I know he respected Socrates who told all comers not to put true wisdom in front of Sophists or those who might abuse the knowledge. The logic of syllogism or commonly accepted principles and arguments is a powerful mind control device to this day.

    It is important for the real researcher to look past the superficial anthologies of his work and to read his Secretum Secretorum which is not even mentioned in those anthologies at my local library. I do know there are academics who say it was not his work but I will go with Roger Bacon and all middle ages philosophers. The Secretum was an explanation of alchemy for Alexander who set the alchemist family named Ptolemy in charge of Egypt. Ptolemy had Manetho do a Kings List to link himself to the De Danaan hero named Herakles. Alexander may have found the Emerald Tablet or Tabula Smaragdina in the grave of Hermes Trismegistus at Hebron. Some people think this Tablet with the Dictum of Hermes or the Magian Law known as 'As Above, SO Below' is the Holy Grail and they imagine it was at Oak Island after the Merovingians brought it there. The 'green vitreole' it was made of was indeed an immortal and vital component in the esoteric searches of those who are called De Brix.

    Here is something that still haunts the minds of people in science as the History of Psychology gives us some idea of what Aristotle sought to understand. It also addresses another whole body of work which Drob seeks to claim FOR Kabbalah.

    "The Third Period of Greek Speculation -- Objectivism.

    Aristotle and the Rise of Objectivism. -- It would seem that Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), without doubt the greatest scientific man, if not also the greatest speculative genius, that ever lived, arose to restore the empirical tradition to philosophy after the plunge into absolutism. The time was ripe for the foundation of empirical psychology, and following his scientific instinct, he founded it. But the time was not ripe for its entire philosophical justification, and he did not justify it. He had the right to found formal logic, and he took advantage of the right. His achievements in natural science, politics, aesthetics, and ethics are also those of a man of the highest constructive genius.

    These remarks follow from the one statement that Aristotle developed both the empiricism of method of Socrates and the rationalistic logic that Plato inherited in the Ionic and Pythagorean tradition. Confining ourselves to the psychological bearings of his views, we will look at his doctrine from both sides, taking the metaphysical first.

    Aristotle distinguished four sorts of "cause," as working together in things: "efficient," "formal," "final," and "material" cause. Of these, three fell together on the side of form (eidoV), manifested in reason, soul, and God. The fourth, the material cause, [p. 61] is matter ('ulh). This is Aristotle's interpretation of dualism. Aristotle declares that final cause was the relatively new conception which had been clearly distinguished before him only by Anaxagoras.

    But matter is not an independent principle: it exists only in connection with form and design. It is a limitation, a relative negation. The only independent absolute principle is God, who is, as in the Platonic teaching, both Reason and the Good.

    With such a metaphysics, there is no positive justification of science, psychological or other. Objective nature is teleological, an incorporation of reason, which gives it its form, movement, and final outcome. Life is a semi-rational teleological principle, working to an end -- a vitalistic conception. All form in nature is the product of a formative reason. Natural phenomena are not purely quantitative; formal distinctions are qualitative.

    The objective world is thus given its right to be; but it is a world in which reason is immanent. There are two great modes of reason, considered as cause, in the world: a cause is either a potency (dunamiV), or an act, called "entelechy" (enteleceia) or actuality (energeia). Reason or form, when not actual, slumbers as a potentiality in nature. Pure reason or God is pure actuality; matter is pure potentiality. As such God merely exists in eternal self-contemplation, apart from the world. The heavenly bodies are made of ether (not matter like that of the four elements) and have spirits; they are moved by love, directed toward God. In this we have a concrete rendering of the ideas and divine love of Plato.

    On this conception, "physics," which deals with phenomenal appearances, including psychology, is contrasted [p. 62] with the theory of causes, "first things," or "metaphysics."

    This philosophical conception so dominates Aristotle's mind that he practically abandons, in theory, the subjective point of view. In his view of the soul, he goes over to a biological conception, which is, however, not that of evolution. Natural species, like the types of Plato, are immutable. The soul is the "first entelechy" or formal cause of the body; in essence it is akin to ether. It embodies also the efficient and final causal principles. Man, in the masculine gender, alone realises the end of nature. Psychology, thus fused with biology, extends to plants and animals and so becomes a comparative science. The plants have nutritive and reproductive souls; they propagate their form. Animals have, besides, the sentient and moving soul, which is endowed with impulse, feeling, and the faculty of imaging. In man, finally, the thinking or rational soul is present. This is implanted in the person before birth from without; and at death it goes back to its source, the divine reason, where it continues in eternal but impersonal form. It is two-fold in its nature in man, partaking both of divine reason and of the sensitive soul; it is both active and passive (nouV poihtikos and nouV paqetikoV).

    In the theory of the relation of these souls to one another, Aristotle advances to a genetic and strictly modern point of view. They are not separate "parts," having different local seats in the body, as [p. 63] Plato taught, but functions of the one developing principle. The higher is developed from and includes the lower.

    In all this, it is evident that while the objective point of view is maintained, still the doctrine is not the result of a searching of consciousness; nor does it employ a strictly empirical method. It does not isolate the sphere of mind as one of conscious fact, distinct from that of the physical. The results are on the same level for mind, life, and physics in the narrower sense; they are deduced from the immanental conception of nature as a whole. So far Aristotle the metaphysician.

    But Aristotle the scientific observer is still to be heard from. It is clear that psychological facts may be observed, just as other facts may be, even in the absence of any clear distinction as to the presence or absence of consciousness. Aristotle set himself to investigate the functions of the soul, looking upon it as the biological principle of form in nature. In this sense, as using an objective method of observation, and as making important and lasting discoveries, he is properly to be described as the pioneer psychologist." (7)

    His insights were boundless and Pseudo-Aristotle or he, himself, also wrote about the Carthaginian ban on travel to America. His insight on the Carthaginian democratic system with a common consent king is important to getting a glimpse of how much better things were in the earlier times before Empire became all the rage. Whether he supported the stupid ban on educating women or just went along because it was politically incorrect and dangerous to do otherwise is something we may never really know. Aquinas re-worked much of Aristotle into the Catholic dogma and many Thomists in that behemoth still hold sway.
    Last edited by R_Baird; 12-04-2015 at 09:04 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    And knowing that Kabbalah is all about power and hierarchy (especially the Hasidim) I must put some of their own words 'out there' for those who think it is just Jewish mysticism and another religion touting some obsequious horn in hopes of Gabriel showing umbrage.

    Mark seems well educated in the art of Kabbalah and I hope some day he will drop in on us.

    "The following exercises are designed to assist in freeing the most potent energy known to humanity and resident in creation. They are not designed for someone with little or no esoteric experience. In general, it would be advisable to have at lest one to two years of practical, daily experience with the Middle Pillar and/or Pentagram Rituals; in addition, an equal amount of time with the Hexagram Rituals. Several workings of the 32nd through 24th Paths on the Tree of Life would also be desirable[1], and regular practice of once a week or so of “Rising on the Planes”[2]. Common sense, a willingness to “Make haste slowly”, and a balanced lifestyle may be the best protection against any unpleasant side effects of these, or other, esoteric practices[3]. It is very important that you keep a diary of your practices and experiences with the exercises given.

    The amount of time it will take to experience the Secret Fire is unknown, although preparation is the best guarantee of success. The amount of time given to each exercise should not exceed more than 15 or 20 minutes in the beginning, and then 30 or 45 minutes after the first half year or so. It is also strongly advised that anyone undertaking these exercises also maintain a regular, daily usage of spagyric tinctures for each of the planetary qualities of the day it is used. This additional, slow, and methodical cleansing of the subtle psychic channels will aid in relieving some of side-effects of esoteric work. The nightly application of “Dream Yoga” is also suggested, as this will attune the student to the qualities of the day while sleeping, aid in interior contacts, and may shed light on particular problems of the Work.[4]

    While this may seem like a lot of work, it is not. Tinctures are fairly easy to make, all that is required is their regular use. This takes no more time than swallowing a vitamin. Dream yoga is done as we are falling asleep anyhow, no additional time required for this either. What is does take is regularity, commitment, and perseverance. Qualities that assure, albeit confer, adepthood. Best of luck in your practices. In the Bonds of Esotericism,

    Ora et labora,

    Mark Stavish

    Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania"

    I should like to discuss a Kundalini origin of the secret fire Mark refers to. It can indeed engulf and eventually poison the soul through overuse and obsession.

    In this thread there are a couple of posts of relevance to cosmic energy, the Tzadik origins of Kabbalah, mandalas and a compatriot of Jung named Wilhelm Reich - who studied with Freud as we have discussed.

    Several thousands of years ago (Add a couple more zeroes for the beginnings of this knowledge) we understood and used our conscious attunement in buildings and our day to day life. The Meru Project research was forward-thinking and leading edge when Stan Tenen began his path of re-discovery or bringing back that which was known and used many millennia ago.

    His work mirrors what went on at Eranos with the likes of Jung, Eliade and Scholem.

    "Meru Foundation research has discovered an extraordinary geometric metaphor in the letter-sequence of the Hebrew text of Genesis (B'reshit). This metaphor models embryonic growth and self-organization, applies to all whole systems, and demonstrates that the relationship between consciousness and physics - mind and world - was understood and developed several thousand years ago, and is preserved in our great spiritual traditions."
    Last edited by R_Baird; 12-05-2015 at 09:40 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    You might ask what is the connection between Jung and Plato other than alchemy, and why did I title this thread using the word Hierarchy? Freud is one powerful part of Jung's life and from it he had to gain a freedom even though early on Jung saw Freud's fears of metaphysics and true oneness for what Puritanical controlling mechanisms they are. Jung got past the pure physicality Freud feared, and learned how all of us can rise beyond logic and through spirit to be more than Plato and his hierarchy of controlling pessimism teaches or foists through the efforts of others. I cannot really say it is Plato who did this to us; the paradigm of feudalism still lingering in our zeitgeist or collective ancestral ghosts, is there because we too are looking for easy answers and father figures to tell us what to do. Jung greatly admired William James in many respects and I think James was a revealing influence upon this freedom Jung came to make into his own philosophy. It affected all of the society at large as we see in these words from James.

    "“Freud’s emotionalism gave me concern for I considered him somewhat of a religious fanatic, operating outside of religion’s conventional context. In many ways he was a shaman, born in the “wrong” country, twice as jealous of his own “masculine characteristics” because he sensed within himself the “perverse” intuitive rushes and psychic leanings that he feared and believed could undermine the personal authority of the ego and the mass authority of the state.

    In many ways also Freud’s theories represented the darker aspects of Protestantism, cut free from the conventional belief in an omnipotent God, released from optimistic ascensions into heaven—a psychological hell replacing the earlier theological one, and demons turned into the primitive impulses which were stamped upon the psyche in its infancy. In such a manner, the most pessimistic elements of Protestantism were given a new scientific face and sophisticated justification—just at a time when organized Protestantism was embarked on a new venture in America, stressing the active, aggressive, hopeful aspects of personality that would test the individual’s capacities to rule his own society with a government based not upon fear, but upon freely accepted restraints adapted to the service of the highest aspirations of man.

    So Protestantism became schizophrenic; its bleaker side expressed in disguised form through Freud’s theories, its drive for salvation allied with democracy’s conventional churches. That drive toward salvation, nationally expressed was translated as salvation through triumph over poverty, over the class systems of Europe, and over the land itself’, with the help of growing technology. Nothing was to stand in the way. The democracy’s deepest feats and hesitations, and its unspoken suspicions that it’s ideals might be too high, were expressed in Freud’s hypnotic reminders that the natural self could not be trusted. Freud’s unconscious represented the individual’s past; and for Americans it also represented the new democracy’s roots in convoluted European heritage.

    Freud actually gave Puritanism a new basis, since he provided a scientific framework in which man’s nature was seen as basically untrustworthy, in need of constant scrutiny in which even the seemingly highest acts of man could have the darkest motives. Psychoanalysis replaced the Catholic confessional. The psychologist became the new priest, in a maneuver of deepest significance by which Freud returned to Protestantism the elements dismissed by Luther, and reinstated a go-between separating God and man—only this time, that go-between was the psychologist, who stood between the conscious and subconscious elements of man.

    The individual no longer needed a priest to interpret God’s words or the Bible, but instead required an interpreter to understand the unconscious (and unsavory) aspects of his own psychological identity—for there, he had lost his authority.

    Creativity became no more than enlightened insanity; and insanity a distorted creativity. Both were seen as the inevitable results of conditioning and neurotic cravings, over which the individual had little control.

    Protestantism was based upon man’s right to interpret truth for himself on an individual basis, thus directly challenging the authority of the Roman Catholic Church as the only agency capable of such discrimination; and upon an attempt to put the individual in a one-to-one relationship with God and the universe. In ways, this was a “paganistic” adventure, reviving ancient characteristics of religion that had been buried but not lost when, for example, shamanistic genius was used for the community or tribal good. Freud, however, took that Protestant right away: the individual was seen as incapable of knowing his own motives, much less able to interpret his own relationship with nature or the soul. Freudianism was, then, based upon the less fortunate of Protestantism’s concepts, while stripping it of its heroic qualities.

    Psychology and science were simply taking up where the old conventional religions left off…

    ….The general views of Freudianism and evolution merged, flowed like a dark, threatening stream through all of the sciences and arts, business and social structures; so that all other aspects of life, past, present and future, were seen in what amounted to the murky but hypnotizing light of a new dogma….

    Religion had a good case of social embarrassment and spiritual constipation. Many of it’s ancient doctrines were no longer believed — with good reason—by anyone with sense. Religion had not cleared up its own house, and science huffed and puffed and nearly blew away the whole straw structure…."
    Last edited by R_Baird; 12-04-2015 at 11:27 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Since we saw Buber had something to say about Jung and we have had so many Kabbalists talking up their glorious occult system they stole from others and yet claim is original or from g-d. Here is more to cogitate upon. And yes, I have a world of respect for the Hasidim and their energy, but that does not mean I eat it up or have need for any of it anymore.

    Is this religion or the occult? Actually religion is basically occult because it hides what it works with and accuses those who openly worship nature for being Occult. Religion is full of devils, Tannaim and demons or CONstructs whereas 'energy representations' are spoken of even when given a name by most pagans and all panentheists.

    "‘Tales of the Hasidim’ by Martin Buber 1948 Schocken Books

    ……at about this time the prayer-book of the Rabbi Isaac Luria had appeared in print. When the volume was brought to the two friends, Rabbi Moshe snatched the heavy tome from the messenger and threw it on the floor. But Rabbi Jospeh Asher picked it up and said “After all it is a prayer-book and we must not treat it disrespectfully”. When the rabbi of Lubin was told of the incident he said “Rabbit Moshe will become a hasid; Rabbi Joseph Asher will remain an opponent of the hasidic way. For he who can burn with enmity can also burn with love for God, but he who is coldly hostile will always find the way closed” And so it was.

    In the notes Rabbi Moshe Teitelbaum made on the dreams he had in his youth we find the following
    “I was looking out of the window on the eve of the New Year and there were people running to the House of Prayer, and I saw that they were driven by fear of the Day of Judgement. And I said to myself; ’God be thanked, I have been doing the right thing all through the year! I have studied right and prayed right, so I do not have to be afraid.‘ And then my dreams showed me all my good works. I looked and looked: they were torn, ragged, ruined! And at that instant I woke up. Overcome with fear I ran to the House of Prayer along with the rest.”

    In Rabbi Moshe Teitelbaum’s notes on his dreams there is an entry which reads: “I have been in the paradise of the Tannaim.” He had kept a sheet with the words: “the angels will immerse you and you shall suffer no harm.“ In his dream he stood near a mountain and wanted to get into the paradise of the Tannaim. But he was told that first he had to immerse himself in Miriam’s Well. And at that very instant he looked into the deep water and shuddered. But angels laid hold of him and immersed him and carried him up from the depths. Then he entered the paradise of the Tannaim. There he saw one of the masters sitting with a fur cap on his head and studying a tractate called “The First Gate.” There the path stopped. Rabbi Moshe was surprised. “That can‘t be paradise!” he cried. “Listen child,” said the angels, “you seem to think that the Tannaim are in paradise, but that‘s not so: paradise is in the Tannaim“,"

    The meaning of God and the potential of your soul can come to you through Qabala. The following explains the cults surrounding a later version of Qabala more accurately than any I have seen. Does that make any of it correct or true? No, it does not. I regard Qabala as knowledge that was maintained by the bards or story-tellers; it began before writing and probably before spoken language.

    "The word Qabalah (lit. receiving, also "welcoming of God") alludes to a dynamic state of direct communication and mystical union of the individual soul with the Divine. In that sense, it is synonymous with the Sanskrit word Yoga (lit. union with or absorption in the Divine). The word "Qabalah" is often seen transliterated as "Kabbalah" or "Cabala." However, the word begins with a Qof, and not a Kaf, and only has one Beyt, not two. Hence, the Work of the Chariot uses the spelling "Qabalah" in referring to the universal mystical spirituality of the Mystical Qabalah. The spelling "Kabbalah" is generally used to designate the religious-based Jewish Kabbalah of the Pharisaic Rabbinical tradition. The spelling "Cabala" is generally used to designate the Christian Cabala that evolved to portray elements of Roman Catholic dogma as the fulfillment of the Jewish Kabbalah."

    The letter "h" is a phonetic sound known as an aspirant and did not exist in most alphabets until recent times.

    "The universal mystical spirituality of the children of Abraham is a robust, precious, and little known heritage upon which the fabric of the Judaic, Christian, Islamic, and perhaps even the Tantric religions are woven. In this book, that heritage is called the Mystical Qabalah."

    Few who profess to know God will ever come close to s/h/it.
    Last edited by R_Baird; 12-06-2015 at 12:05 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    A recent interview with the great Zen author Alan Watts gets Jung absolutely right (IMHO). There is a video to watch which I will post shortly.

    "Published on 24 Aug 2015

    "This is the most important thing in Jung, that he was able to point to, that to the degree you condemn others and find evil in others, you are to that degree unconscious of the same thing in yourself, or at least of the potentiality of it. There can be Eichmanns and Hitlers and Himmlers just because there are people who are unconscious of their own dark sides, and they project that darkness outward into, say, Jews or communists or whatever the enemy may be, and say there is the darkness, it is not in me, and therefore because the darkness is not in me i am justified, in annihilating the enemy weather it be with atom bombs or gas chambers or what not. But to the degree that a person becomes conscious that the evil is as much in himself as in the other, to this same degree he is not likely to project it on to some scapegoat, and commit the most criminal acts of violence upon other people. Now this is to my mind the primary thing that Jung saw, that in order to admit and really accept and understand the evil in oneself, one had to be able to do it without being an enemy to it. As he put it, you had to accept your own dark side, and he had this preeminently in his own character.

    I had a long talk with him back in 1958 and I was enormously impressed, with a man who was obviously very great but at the same time, which whom everybody could be completely at ease. There are so many great people, great in knowledge or great in what is called holiness with whom the ordinary individual feels rather embarrassed. He feels inclined to sit on the edge of his chair, and to feel immediately judged by this persons wisdom or sanctity. Jung managed to have wisdom and I think also sanctity in such a way that when other people came into it's presence they didn't feel judged, they felt enhanced, encouraged and invited to share in a common life. And there was a sort of twinkle in Jung's eye that gave me the impression that he knew himself to be just as much a villain as everybody else. There's a nice German word 'hintergedanke' which means a thought in the very far far back of your mind. Jung had a hintergedanke in the back of his mind which showed, it showed in the twinkle in his eyes, it showed that he knew and recognized what I have sometimes called 'the element of irreducible rascality' in himself. And he knew it so strongly and so clearly, and in a way so lovingly that he would not condemn the same thing in others, and therefore would not be lead into those thoughts feeling and acts of violence towards others, which are always characteristic of the people who project the devil in themselves upon the outside, upon somebody else, upon the scapegoat." —Alan Watts"

    I can only hope I get to wash dishes or BE in the company of men who really care like these people did without "ID".

    The Ouroboros Effect - Page 1 - Google Books Result

    D. Juliano - 2010
    In 1945, Arthur C. Clarke published an idea in "Extra- Terrestrial Relays. ... Carl Jung "Space, like time, engenders forgetfulness; but it does so by setting us ...

    Jung's unfinished experiment trying to do what Deirdre discusses as a coming together of many mystical states is most appealing to me. There are other posts in this thread which may be pertinent as well as a link to his Red Book.
    Last edited by R_Baird; 12-06-2015 at 07:19 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts