Here again, I'm sure I'm starting to annoy you with my incessant musings, but let's talk anyway.
I've been studying the Bible against finding parallels using Jungian thought and approach. I found some verses and unpacked them. Here's a storyline (forgive me if I made any errors):
Genesis 22:1-2: God tested Abraham and commanded him to take Isaac, his son, and offer him as a burnt offering.
Genesis 22:3: Abraham got up early to prepare to carry out the command.
Genesis 22:9-10: Abraham bound Isaac and took the knife to kill him.
Genesis 22:11-12: An angel of the Lord called out to Abraham and stopped him before he hurt Isaac.
Genesis 22:13: Abraham saw a ram caught in a thicket and sacrificed it instead.
This story places obedience, love, authority and moral responsibility in direct conflict. What if Abraham represents the ego confronting an overwhelming numinous authority-an experience perceived so absolute that an ordinary moral judgment appears secondary? But I gotta be careful here, the text itself presented a test of Abraham's faith and my psychological interpretation doesn't establish that Abraham was experiencing an unconscious complex. So chill out. But the modern psychological parallel is still chilling.
People can commit terrible acts because they believe a higher authority has absolved them of personal responsibility. The authority might be God, a political movement, a charismatic leader, a family system or even an ideology. The internal logic becomes like this: I wouldn't normally do this but I have been commanded/guided. Therefore I am no longer responsible in the ordinary way". This is how conscience can be surrendered to certainty.
The dark question is when does devotion become the abandonment of one's own moral judgment?
And the inverse-can genuine spiritual maturity require refusing to sacrifice the innocent, even when the ego believes it has received divine permission?
I feel this rings true when it comes to you-know-what (politics).
Everyone wants enlightenment until it requires them to confront the parts of themselves they’ve spent a lifetime (or lifetimes) denying. Everyone wants to be healed, but few want to discover how much of their identity was built around their wounds. They want shadow work, provided the shadow turns out to be someone else. They want wisdom without humiliation, they want growth without grief, they want a transformation without the death of the person they thought they were.
Individuation is not a glow-up. It is the slow collapse of your own illusions, with you watching in horror. You’ll lose relationships, beliefs, identities, and the comforting conviction that you were always the good guy. You’ll discover that some of your virtues were actually survival mechanisms, some of your generosity was a need to be loved (ouch I’m feeling that) and some of your righteousness was projection. That kinda confrontation leaves a mark.
The question isn’t whether you want to be whole or not, the question is can you survive the process?
Do you guys think the triabl rituals were successful in creating a virtuous man? Don't you think the physical and emotional pain that boys had gone through, had no effect in their adulthood? Can jungian psychology help in resolving the problems?
Can someone please explain this phenomenon to me? It feels incredibly performative. How can someone create art, something done with intention, and claim not to know what it means? Or am I just being autistic and people can actually create art with clear direction and still not understand what they’ve designed? I fail to see what it has to do with Jung or its relevance to this page.
Is it need for purpose? For Discipline and meaning? Community? What would Jung say about the current climate of the collective? Give your insight and opinion please.
I recently finished James Hollis’s Mythologems and have a couple of questions I’d appreciate some insight on:
Why focus on ancient mythology rather than modern literature, films, or other contemporary stories that explore similar archetypal themes?
James Hollis talks about discovering and living out your personal myth. How do you actually go about discovering it? I understand that dreams, recurring patterns, and shadow work can provide clues, but how do you interpret these clues and connect them to a larger understanding of your life?
How do you discover your purpose or the task your psyche is asking you to undertake through this process? Is it something that gradually becomes clear through introspection and experience, or is there a more specific Jungian approach to identifying it?
Finally, what books would you recommend for deepening my understanding of these ideas? I’ve read a fair amount of Jung and Jungian-adjacent literature, but I’m looking to explore the subject further, especially regarding personal mythology, individuation, archetypes, and discovering one’s purpose.
Jung says the greatest burden a child must bear is the unlived life of the parents. I have also read elsewhere that parents tend to project their shadow onto their children.
I have had some less than ideal behaviors/attitudes over the years that I feel I have somewhat understood, but not entirely. Specifically, I haven't been particularly financially responsible and have somewhat resented many of the normal adult responsibilities of life. I have been perfectly capable of getting a job, but over the years I have pursued various entrepreneurial endeavors where I ended up not making enough to be self sufficient, and somewhat shirking this. Rather than just getting a job and pursuing my entrepreneur goals on the side, I remained unemployed. I consciously tried very hard and have been very persistent with my entrepreneurial pursuits, but accepted not having money/being financially dependent as well as just shirking the basic responsibilities of a regular job.
My father had to start working around the house/become the man at 13 when his dad died, and basically support himself from 18 years old, always working. When he discusses this, there is a fair amount of anger/intensity in him about this early/continuous responsibility - "I have worked continuously non-stop since I was 15 until now at 65."
I wonder if my behaviors/attitudes are potentially inheriting his shadow. I did not have the same reality as him growing up - I did not have to start working at that young age, I had college paid for, I got to live at home with my parents on and off throughout my 20's, and my parents have periodically given me money when I needed it.
Maybe this is me again just not taking responsibility and trying to place this on my dad, but it's an interesting idea I just had. The other thing is I had a VERY ruptured relationship with my parents for a long time and I think the only way I really felt love/support from my dad specifically was financially, and so part of me believes I was unconsciously expressing these behaviors as a means of maintaining the relationship/dependency dynamic.
After a long process of self-discovery, I have come to realize that the way I express myself and the way I behave—this is not who I truly am.
I am not this empty, sad shell that I currently inhabit. Deep down, this is not who I am, and I no longer wish to be this way. I do not want to remain in environments that only breed hatred for the things I love, nor do I want to stay in places where I am made to feel insufficient.
I want to rediscover the joy in what I love; I want to confront my fear of the real world by embracing my shadow as an ally.
In a world so cruel, so mechanical, so artificial—in an environment so heavily conditioned—I feel that I am not being myself. I torture myself, I limit myself, I sabotage myself—I sabotage my own shadow, my own talents, and my own capabilities. Perhaps it is out of fear, conformity, or insecurity; perhaps it is a failure to accept reality. Regardless, I am certain that I am not where I am meant to be.
"You aren't special because you know how to draw; you aren't special for being an artist—a machine can do it better. You aren't special for being bisexual; you’re just one more person among many." And yes, they’re right—I am just one more person, but I am *me*.
My ideas have value, and so do my dreams.
My work—and who I am as a person—has value.
Even within this vast, impersonal machine, my life and everything I do hold value—value to me.
The landscape may be unfair, even cruel, but I know there are people—and there *will* be people—who will know how to value all of this: who will know how to buy, how to love, how to stay, and how to truly appreciate.
Trying to please the masses is damaging; the masses tend to be cruel, erratic, and sadistic—perhaps because they are unhappy with their own lives, or because they themselves are gripped by fear.
Over the past 13 months — and especially since turning 40 this past April — I’ve been going through a period of self‑discovery, or maybe re‑self‑discovery. I’m sharing this because I’m curious whether anyone else has walked a similar path, and how your experience helped you. I’m not looking for answers or advice, just resonance and perspective.
I got sober on 1/4/2022. My spiritual life since then has been a journey with a lot of twists.
My Background
I was raised Roman Catholic and attended parochial school until bullying and violence pushed me out. Even after switching to public school, I still felt like an outsider — especially with the pressure of being “the smart kid.” My earliest memory of God is standing in a dark church with my mother, staring at a massive crucifix of a bloodied Christ. I didn’t understand it, only that I felt fear, guilt, and the sense that stepping out of line meant punishment. That impression stayed with me for decades.
In my teens, my friends and I wandered into a metaphysical shop called Gypsy Moon. They were interested in Ouija boards; I was drawn to the owner, an older witch named Maria. She answered my questions and encouraged my curiosity. I returned almost daily, reading everything I could. My mother panicked, thinking I was “communing with the devil,” but for me it was the first time spirituality felt empowering, balanced, and connected to nature. The idea of the divine as both Goddess and God made intuitive sense. I practiced into my early twenties.
Then my father died by suicide, and we buried him the day I turned 21. My drinking escalated, and my spirituality disappeared. I drank daily for 15 years, damaging one marriage and nearly another.
Sobriety and Rediscovery
When I got sober and worked the steps with my first sponsor, I prayed to a vague “spirit of the universe.” As I stayed sober, I dove headfirst back into Catholicism — retreats, Cursillo, parish council, all of it. But over time, between my daughter coming out, financial struggles in the parish, and the darker side of church politics, I began questioning everything. The fear-based foundation of my childhood didn’t fit anymore.
I felt myself being called back to the craft after twenty years away. I studied Taoism, Buddhism, and even parts of Christianity that still resonate — the golden rule, the Sermon on the Mount — but not the dogma. Last Lughnasadh (2025), I performed a rededication ritual to the Lady and Lord, and my life shifted. The connection I felt as a teenager returned, but now with the perspective of a 40-year-old man who’s been through hell and come out sober.
I’ve also noticed something interesting: the more I drank, the more rigid and right‑leaning my worldview became. Sobriety has softened that. I see nuance now — left, right, center, upside down. I avoid political discussions because they’re so volatile here in the States.
Where I Am Now
This past year has been rewarding as I walk the path again, but I’ve struggled to find others in AA who share similar beliefs. I’m a solitary practitioner, private by nature, and community has been hard to find.
I feel like my spirituality is a synthesis of Taoism, Buddhism, and Paganism. Not a hodgepodge — more like threads that all point toward balance, compassion, nature, and personal responsibility. But I’m used to having a name for my path, and now I’m realizing it may not have one. I’m not looking for structure, and I know that defining it only limits it. Still, I wonder if anyone else has lived in this unnamed space.
What I’m Curious About
I’d love to hear from anyone who has walked a similar road — especially if you’ve blended alternative spiritual paths with AA or recovery. Specifically:
How you developed a daily relationship with the Divine
How you balanced surrender with personal agency
How you reconciled spellwork or intention-setting with “turning things over”
How you connected with traditions from other cultures while living in the U.S.
How you navigated Wicca or Paganism without falling into dogma
How you integrated your craft with the steps
How you handled being a male witch or practitioner in a culture that still stigmatizes it
Again — I’m not looking for answers or instruction. I’m just interested in hearing how your experience shaped your path, and how you came to relate to the divine (or not) without needing a label.
Thanks for reading this. If you’ve walked anything like this path, I’d love to hear your story.
I think that “love your enemies” in the Sermon on the Mount is an extreme example of Jung’s process of confronting and transcending opposites.
I think that by practicing it, one can transcend the opposition between good and evil that Jung describes, and no longer be driven by or attached to good and evil.
Perhaps, the ego within a binary worldview would have difficulty surviving.
In other words, I think that the attachment caused by distinguishing between good and evil, right and wrong, would disappear, allowing one to attain a state of equanimity.
In other words, even when faced with what one judges to be evil within a binary worldview, I think one could maintain equanimity without being carried away by emotions (arising from binary judgments), and make a free choice—in other words, a wise judgment—based on the conditions and circumstances of the situation.
And I think that this is the fulfillment of Jesus’ faith: complete obedience.
For example, consider complete obedience.
Even among those who persecuted him, Jesus calmly walked toward Golgotha, and even as he was being nailed to the cross, he prayed for them.
“Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?”
“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”
Here, I think of myself not as Jesus, but as each of those who persecuted Jesus.
In this way, Jesus prayed for them through his actions rather than through his words.
I think this is the image of a free Jesus who transcends the opposition that Jung describes—the opposition between good and evil—and follows his own path without being bound by it.
To put it simply:
Binary thinking: Enemy → judge as evil → anger/hatred → be carried away by those emotions
Transcending the opposition: Enemy → even if judged as evil → not become trapped in hatred → look at the situation (the facts) → act wisely
In this context, I will examine the life of Confucius, whose life appears to me to follow a pattern similar to that of Jesus.
☆ This is related to my earlier post, [A Shift in Perspective: Ep. 19. Where Is Carl Jung Heading].
The episodes are all part of one story, so I’m posting them in order. I think this episode will also help readers better understand the earlier post.
A Shift in Perspective: Ep 12. Why Did Confucius Wander the World?
I don’t know who first grouped them together, but the people most commonly referred to as the “Four Great Sages” are Jesus, the Buddha, Socrates, and Confucius.
This time, let’s turn our attention to Confucius.
Confucius pursued the ideal of becoming a junzi (君子), a person who embodies balance between ren (仁, benevolence) and li (禮, the proper expression of that benevolence).
I believe the central teaching that leads to this ideal is the Doctrine of the Mean (Zhongyong).
To me, it represents the wisdom of balance—neither too much nor too little.
From my perspective, Confucius’ life also follows the same pattern of mental processes revealed in the Sermon on the Mount. (See Ep. 1–4.)
Likewise, I believe the progression in the Sermon on the Mount follows the same pattern as the Buddha’s Four Stages of Awakening (Stream-enterer, Once-returner, Non-returner, and Arhat).
Although they express it in different ways, I believe they all point toward the same wisdom of balance.
Before moving on, let’s briefly revisit the progression of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and the Buddha’s Four Stages of Awakening discussed in the previous episodes.
From my perspective, the “poor in spirit” in the first half of Matthew 5 are those who have seen and accepted the principle—or the path—that leads to the Kingdom of Heaven. With the birth of their first genuine faith, they have entered the same stage as the Stream-enterer (Sotāpanna).
From my perspective, those who love their enemies in the latter half of Matthew 5 have let go of the major forms of discriminating thought born of greed and anger along this path. Yet subtler forms of discriminating thought still remain. Therefore, I believe they correspond to the stage of the Once-returner (Sakadāgāmī).
From my perspective, those who do not practice their righteousness before others in Matthew 6 have let go of the subtle discriminating thought that seeks reward for doing good. By remaining awake to the present moment, I believe they correspond to the stage of the Non-returner (Anāgāmī).
From my perspective, those who “judge not” in Matthew 7 are those who have let go of even Andabyeong (attachment to conceptualized truth)—the attachment to the belief that “I am right” or “I know the truth.” I believe they correspond to the stage of the Arhat, one who has cut off all mental afflictions.
※ Andabyeong: A Korean compound word combining anda (”to know”) and byeong (”illness”). It refers to attachment to the certainty that “I know the truth,” or, in Buddhist terms, attachment to conceptualized truth (法相).
Building on this perspective, let’s now examine the life of Confucius.
Confucius reflects on the course of his life in Chapter 4 of the “Wei Zheng” (爲政) chapter of the Analects:
Of course, I do not believe Confucius was referring to his exact historical ages. Rather, I believe he was describing the overall progression of his inner journey as he reflected on his life.
Confucius said:
At fifteen, I set my heart upon learning (志於學).
At thirty, I stood firm (而立).
At forty, I had no more doubts (不惑).
At fifty, I understood the will of Heaven (知天命).
At sixty, I could accept what I heard with ease (耳順).
At seventy, I could follow my heart’s desires without overstepping what was right (從心所欲 不踰矩).
From my perspective, the final statement could also be understood as:
“I could follow my heart freely without departing from the Way.“
Confucius began his pursuit of learning at the age of fifteen and, by thirty, had established himself.
From my perspective, reaching thirty (Erli, 而立)—having established his direction—marks the point at which he entered the path. I believe this corresponds to the stage of the Stream-enterer (Sotāpanna).
Confucius said that by the age of forty (Buhuo, 不惑), he was no longer shaken by the affairs of the world.
From my perspective, having let go of the major forms of discriminating thought, he entered the stage of the Once-returner (Sakadāgāmī), whose wisdom remains unshaken.
Confucius said that by the age of fifty (Zhī Tiān Mìng, 知天命), he had come to understand the will of Heaven.
From my perspective, this was the stage of deep conviction.
Conviction can become wisdom on the one hand, but on the other, it can also give rise to attachment and the discriminating thought that says, “I am right.“
From my perspective, it was with this deep conviction that he set out to wander the world, seeking to bring change to the troubled society of his time.
Confucius presented his vision of an ideal society to the rulers of the various states, but they judged it at a glance according to their own standards and rejected it.
Borrowing Jesus’ expression, I believe this is because each person sees the speck in another’s eye more clearly than the plank in their own.
From my perspective, respect begins with recognizing our differences and seeking to understand one another. From that respect arise compassion and love.
Instead, both Confucius and the rulers appear to have remained attached to the conviction that they were right.
Clinging to the deep conviction that he understood the will of Heaven, Confucius wandered the world for fourteen years and experienced countless setbacks.
Confucius’ failures were not necessarily a bad thing.
I believe there is no inherent good or bad in life, as illustrated by the Chinese proverb Saiongjima (새옹지마, 塞翁之馬).
※ Saiongjima (새옹지마, 塞翁之馬): A Chinese proverb meaning that fortune and misfortune continually transform into one another. It originates from the story of an old man whose horse ran away, only to return later with a fine horse.
From my perspective, good and bad are not objective realities, but merely discriminating thoughts created by the mind.
From my perspective, those failures were in fact the very process through which Confucius’ ears became gentle.
As a result, by the age of sixty (Ershun, 耳順), he was able to listen to others without prejudice.
I believe this was the result of letting go of his own truth and recognizing that people can hold different perspectives.
In the end, having let go of all attachments, Confucius returned to his hometown at the age of seventy. While teaching his disciples, he attained the freedom of the Doctrine of the Mean—the freedom to follow one’s heart without departing from the Way.
To summarize Confucius’ life in a single sentence:
From my perspective, Confucius entered the path at Erli (而立), became firmly grounded at Buhuo (不惑), developed deep conviction at Zhitiānmìng (知天命), let go of his attachments through wandering the world, became gentle at Ershun (耳順), and finally attained the freedom of the Doctrine of the Mean by letting go of all attachments.
Now, let us return to the original question.
Why did Confucius wander the world?
From my perspective, it was because attachment even to truth itself gives rise to discriminating thought.
Looking at Confucius’ life, I am reminded that nothing in this world comes without a price.
The price of attaining Ershun (耳順)—ears that have become gentle—appears to have been fourteen years of wandering the world.
In other words, letting go of attachment took forty days for Jesus, forty-nine days for the Buddha, a final rooster for Socrates, and a lifetime for Confucius.
At this point, I am reminded of Jesus’ words:
“So the last will be first, and the first will be last.“
From my perspective, this means that there is no fixed order in letting go of attachment.
This does not mean that those who come first are greater, or that those who come later are lesser.
From my perspective, they are not reality, but merely discriminating thoughts (illusion) created by the mind.
From my perspective, the Way (truth) is not something to be attained, but something to be walked.
The certainty that one has attained the Way (truth)—Andabyeong—can bring that journey to a halt.
From my perspective, Confucius spent his entire life completing his own Doctrine of the Mean.
This does not mean that my interpretation is the correct one.
It simply means that this is one possible way of seeing it.
To conclude this episode, I have summarized the key ideas in the following table for easier understanding.
.
.
.
.
[Original text]
나는 융의 대립과 초월의 과정의 극단적인 사례가 산상수훈의 원수를 사랑하라라고 생각합니다.
그것을 실천하면 융이 설명하는 선과 악의 대립을 초월함으로써 더이상 선과 악에 끌려가지 않고 그것에 집착하지 않게 된다고 생각됩니다.
아마도, 이분법적인 세계관속의 나의 에고가 살아남기 힘들 것이라고 생각됩니다.
즉 선과 악, 옳고 그름의 대립, 분별심으로 인한 집착이 사라지고 평정심을 갖게 된다고 생각됩니다.
다시말하면 이분법의 세계관속에서 판단하는 악을 보더라도 감정(이분법적인 판단)에 끌려가지않고 평정심을 유지한채 해당 사건의 조건과 상황속에서 자유로운선택, 즉 지혜로운 판단을 할 수 있을것이라고 생각됩니다.
그리고 그것이 예수의 믿음의 완성인 완전한 순종이라고 생각됩니다.
완전한 순종의 예를들면..
자신을 박해하는 자들속에서도 골고다 언덕을 평온하게 올라가고
그들을 위해 십자가에 자신을 매달면서도 그들을 위하여 기도합니다.
엘리 엘리 라마 사박다니
나의 하나님 나의 하나님 왜 나를 버리셨나이까
여기서 나는 예수가 아니라 예수를 박해하는 각각의 나라고 생각됩니다.
그렇게 예수는 말이 아닌 행동으로 그들을 위하여 기도합니다.
이것이 융의 대립, 즉 선과 악의 대립을 초월하고 그것에 구애받지 않고 자신의 길을 가는 자유로운 예수의 모습이라고 생각됩니다.
이해하기 쉽게 정리하면 이렇습니다.
이분법적 사고: 원수 → 악으로 판단 → 분노/증오 → 그 감정에 끌려감
대립을 초월한 사고: 원수 → 악으로 판단하더라도 → 증오에 사로잡히지 않음 → 상황(사실)을 봄 → 지혜롭게 행동
Some children experience pain and fear that others cannot even imagine. Those who were supposed to protect them break them and suppress them just to relieve themselves of their own pain and darkness. Many children do not experience terror only during the day, but also at night, when sleep claims its word. It is precisely then, when the surroundings fall silent, that the darkness in the mind of the person who was supposed to protect becomes so much louder.
One night I was sitting in bed. My heart was pounding. The fear that someone was breaking into my house, into my room, was with me again. Why did exactly darkness, silence, and solitude trigger that deep fear that made the blood run cold in my veins? I knew that the answer was held by that part of my psyche which protected the doors behind which this fear was locked.
„Please, let me a little bit closer. What was actually happening to me?“
I closed my eyes. I found myself in the children's room from my early childhood. It was dark. I was sitting on the bed, leaning against the wall, my knees pulled close to my body. I was staring at the door next to my bed. My eyes slowly looked around the room toward the window from which a faint light was streaming. And then, suddenly, a figure appeared there. It was unexpected, fast. In the initial moment, a startle, and then paralyzing fear. The figure, partially illuminated by the soft, faint light from the window, stood by my bed and quietly watched me. And then it began to slowly lean toward me... In that moment, I returned back to the present.
My protective part, which was identified with the aggressor, wanted to show me why I have such a huge fear of the darkness when it is silent and I am alone.
What happens behind closed doors when a parent is emotionally unstable and lacks even the slightest empathy? They create their own world there. A world where children cannot create their own identity because they must fulfill a certain role. Children who are not allowed to express emotions because they were harshly punished for them. Children who, out of fear, desperately tried to be good enough, and yet had no value to the parent. Children whose boundaries were crossed to such an extent that they cannot imagine any in adulthood. Children who disconnected from their bodies because they could not have any needs. Children who tried to be invisible, to smile, and to do exactly what the parent wanted just to prevent punishment.
Such a parent was completely unpredictable. And no matter how hard the children tried, there was always something they could be punished for. And last but not least, such a parent takes away the very last thing left to a child. Sleep.
As soon as the darkness comes and everyone is asleep, such a person cannot stand to be alone with themselves, with their own fears and their own pain. They need a vent to calm them down. A child who cannot defend themselves. A child who will not cry out because they know that no one will come to help them.
Such a child, in order to survive, disconnects from their body. They shut down to endure the horror. In that moment, they feel like it is not happening to them, but to someone else. On those nights, the child sees a person whose mask, which they wear all day long, falls away. They see the person as they truly are beneath that mask.
Early childhood is not stored as a continuous story. We might remember only short flashes, but what actually happened is stored deep within the body and the unconscious. A child does not remember what happened in life. The feelings that should speak tend to be suppressed because the child never learned to trust themselves. The fear that they occasionally experience in adulthood is then explained only superficially. And if they just touch the actual truth, a mountain of doubts is triggered. The person who raised them spent their whole life trying to cover their tracks by constantly twisting reality.
Despite all that darkness, those children survived. Those children grew up and started families. Unconsciously, they may continue to perform the roles they were given, and unconsciously, they may pass on what was instilled in them. However, if they find enough courage within themselves to look the truth in the eye, they can change it. They can be freer, they can leave the role, and build their own identity. They can stop hurting themselves and others. And they might also find out that they have value regardless of what they achieved or who they are...
I’m currently unemployed for the past 8 months I had a job landscaping for a 1 year and a half but got fired as all of the blokes turned against me as well as the boss. And was just getting bullied non stop and it just put a dent in my confidence even more
I don’t know what to do with my life I feel like I’m being called to be a chaplain but I don’t really like church dogma but love Jesus and have had a few mystical type experiences in prayer
but there is a lot of study with that and I’m a bit of a lazy person when it comes to study.
I don’t want to do landscaping anymore cause everyone who does it just smokes all day and it’s just not a good environment to be around. I honestly don’t know what to do with my life.
I struggle a lot with social Anxiety and I feel like that gets it the way with my conversations with people and I don’t know how to get past it it just feels like a burden that I have been carrying with me for years and I don’t know how to get rid of it.
What would a jung say to me in my predicament I’m 23 years old and everyone that I know is having kids or have finished uni and are working full time I feel so behind the 8 ball
Im trying to figure out how to approach the last alter within my mind and convince her/me that fusion and wholeness is best. If you have ideas or messages for her, i would be grateful. She thinks she does not trust you and you would not know.
I call her Sekhmet. She formed in the ICU at a few days old. Back then babies were not handled or held much. She was left in an oxygen tent. She desires the touch and closeness of women, as she seeks the softness of a mother, yet other humans are strange things that cant be trusted. She is strongly food and comfort driven. Food is huge. The world is a game where you isolate yourself for safety and figure out how to engage with other humans like pieces on a game board to get food. If cared for here, I would have had attachment issues.
Once out of the hospital she did not cry much, as crying fidnt work I guess there. So she was a "good baby who would lay all day long for hours and hours and not cry at all" said my neglectful BPD mom, waiting for food.
She built a mask in order to be fed-a narcissistic demanding persona as she had to artificially create self importance to drive a demand for food, so that she would actually get food. This was Anne Leah. This demanding child worked during the week. if stopped here I would have had NPD.
However on the weekend Granny Fay watched me and she felt my demanding nature was a character flaw and I needed to be humbled and shamed into being "good" so she pinched me, hit me with fly swatters and withdrew affection when I was demanding. Lamassa became a new mask, a very very very good little girl who feared pain and warily watched with obsequious placation. If only this, Id have PTSD.
The real issue is that for the first two years I was alternating continuously. During the week I had to be anne leah and on the weekend, lamassa.
Behind these sat Sekmeht, learning to be a puppet master and constantly switching masks. But the very best avtors dont realize they are in a play-so Anne leah and Lamassa both were seperate ego states, and neither understood Sekhmet was behind them.
A P-DID mind was born?
After two years horrific acute trauma repeatedly with ongoing SA, two other children masks were created. All but Sekhmet fractured into dissociation at six.
I think Sekhmet was always dissociated.
So now Ive busted fucking ass and fused five whole kids. They were not hard once you get the process systemized. dont be afraid+ Unconditional love + healing their core wound.
Sekhmet remains. Becoming a real, manifest, human, in this flawed grungy world is not her cup of tea. Upon first meeting her she was like Hannibal in the TV show in mannerisms, not a serial killer ha!. She has brilliantly tested me, tricked me, led me, toyed with me, educated me, chastised me, through bringing all the other children home. She and I are adversaries and allies, comothering those we love, as we play against each other. She is very proud of her skill in the games she plays. Meeting her has made me reflect in awe at how little I understood of my own choices and actions my whole life.
There is a chance she created my last false persona as a mother to save them. Im was like my loving grandmother when this started. Overtime, its dramatic how much Ive changed as the children fuze.
But for her to come into reality, to be seen, is to give up her power of influence through shadows, playing the long game with secrecy being how one wins. And to win is to get fed. She is trying. But its like asking a goddess to let go if all their supernatural powers and be a boring human who buys lunch meat with all the yucky (ie scary frightening) humans.
If Putmams work has merit, I was a collection of states and Im much closer to just being two. She is the last left. Ive gone from being frightened of her to cherishing her magnificent strength, welcoming her, took up gourmet cooking 😂 She has always wanted to play the violin and has been my analytical brilliance.
But any help bringing her home from the jungian perspective, helping her accept being real in the real world is appreciated.
She, like all of my inner kids, is pretty damaged psychologically, and they all were challenging-but each was this way as they had to survive awfulness. This has been their chance to feel peace, and she is my last little one to being home.
Wondering if anyone knows a book by Jung or another Jungian author's book (or lecture) that speaks about tarot, how it might be used in active imagination, individuation, shadow work etc?
Curious how this may be interpreted symbolically, and what I may be trying to tell myself. I’m curious what you’d think before and after reading my take.
I took a stimulant today to get some things done. I have severe executive dysfunction. Last time I did this I took too big of a dose and wasted the time watching porn. I was rather ashamed of this.
Today I managed to stay on track, fending off the sexual impulse. Taking breaks from chores to draw, swipe through dating apps, and breathe instead.
The owl and snake figures fall into the category of cultural archetype and personal symbolism. (Once did a breathwork retreat where the facilitator did a spirit animal workshop. While normally I veer away from this more on the woo end of things sort of exercise I suspended my disbelief as I was already there and had nothing to lose. To my surprise what came to mind, powerfully I might add, was an owl with a snake on its shoulders. They looked at me together and simultaneously said “he needs help”)
I’ve always had a bit of a high sex drive, and have in the past engaged in compulsive behaviors. I’ve also screwed up a few important friendships and relationships. This is more under control but I still spend a lot of time thinking about sex, desirability, companionship, and my self worth in regard to partnership. This is generally quite low so I seek out casual sexual encounters to satisfy baser desires and find temporary validation, while feeling that the higher minded love and partnership is out of reach to me due to my deep flaws and inability to truly take responsibility and change, whatever that means. I carry a lot of shame in regard to my sexuality, sexual health, and interpersonal capacity.
I began to interpret this drawing from this lens: sexual health is a balance of sin and virtue.
The pain in us comes from our light, and is transformed through “sin” into life.
Edit to add a thought :
While the central figure is generally perceived as possibility, vastness, something beyond, if not a self or great mother archetype, I can also look at it from the lens of what is missing. The sexual experiences I gravitate towards are empty. The partner I don’t have or feel worthy of having. This is biased, likely based in shame. I also chose to draw and work instead of indulging in mindless masturbation to escape. When shame isn’t present, I think casual encounters and relationships are healthy and sometimes even beautiful if rooted in respect and responsibility, and we need outlets for Dionysian tendencies. I think the core message I’m getting is: integrating and accepting both the light and dark of your sexuality is key to wholeness. I don’t know how this translates into things I fully dislike about my behavior at times, like compulsive porn use and dopamine chasing.
On further thought, this may be a representation of what balance looks like to me. The “sin” of desire, lust is one piece of a healthy relationship, the other being support, clarity, and protection. I am both the snake eating the sin, which is transformed in the process, and the owl, watching over and protecting my partner.
Sexuality and mutual pleasure is a process of transforming and digesting pain, giving room for life and possibility to grow.
I still could have figured out the difference between three, I have read(listen) all most of jung book and I still couldn't get it. I've been working about a few years now. Actually got a really good recommendation of book from here.
I feel like this going to be the lowest quality post here, but I really want to know, is it possible for it to not like you, I completely understand "like" could be different from different perspective. I still really want to know if this is possible, for example, if you throw your money away on something you absolutely don't need or want or have no use to you, someone could a interpreted as self-sabotage, but at the same time someone could interpret it as investment. or not going to work and staying at home could be interpreted as being lazy or in a vacation.
It has occurred to me that Jungianism has become somewhat of a dogmatic religion and this is interesting if you assume Jung was an INFJ or NiFeTiSe, those types are archetypally the mystic, guru, prophet, shaman, seer, dream interpretor and whenever they tend to make a philosophy, it tends to become a religion.
You see this trope with:
Buddha and Buddhism
Muhammad and Islam/Muhammadism
Jesus and Gnosticism/Christianity
Plato and Platonism
Jung and Jungianism
So that's a good example of recurring archetypes and tropes in real time.
Now, Jung loved his archetypes, dream symbolism and tropes as this was a reflection of his cognition. For him, life was a dream full of symbolism and all people and events were walking symbols, messages or reflections of internal psychological dynamics. To that end I would like to point out some symbols archetypes that I have noticed in the present age:
(Note: Every pair of opposites I list exists on a spectrum or gradient like hot and cold. The spectrum is endless so you can always have a more extreme version of whichever two categories and relatively speaking, the less you are of one thing, the more you are of the other. But like 80 and 60 degrees are hot compared to 30 degrees, they are cold compared to 1000 degrees. So that same idea applies to every set of apparent opposites)
Autism = Masculine, Patriarchal, Left-hemisphere mode (ref. The Master and His Emissary by Iain McGilchrist)
Psychotic/Schizophrenia = Feminine, Matriarchal, Right-hemisphere mode (ref. The Master and His Emissary by Iain McGilchrist)
Autism and Schizophrenia supposedly exist on a spectrum/continuum as per ABC theory:
"the ABC theory—named after its co-formulators Ahmad Abu-Akel, Christopher Badcock, and Bernard Crespi—conceptualizes autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD) as diametrically opposite conditions of the human social brain."
More autistic civilizations tend to be more compartmentalized, object oriented, mechanistic, physicalist-materialist and inanimate in their thinking. They will focus on matter, chemistry and the external manipulation.
More schizophrenic civilizations tend to be more holistic, process oriented, relational, organic, dynamic, idealist and animate in their thinking. They will focus on the mind, "energy" and internal reconfiguration.
You can see how you can get animism and ecocentrism from a schizophrenic civilization which would be more inclined to ascribe agency to all things. (e.g., animal and planet spirits/people, nature gods, voices of the ancestors)
Autistic civilizations tend to be technocratic and tend to be ruled by autistic priests and priestesses (technocrats)
Schizophrenia civilizations tend to be theocratic and tend to be ruled by schizophrenic priests and priestess.
Both can end up at a version of idealism oddly enough but:
Autistic civilization will be more simulationist and think life is a simulation, matter is a hologram, entities are A.I. or programmable robots. God is the "Grand Architect"
Schizophrenic civilization will be more dreamist and think that life is a dream, matter is a hallucination, entities are spirits, tulpas or dream characters. God is the "Great Dreamer" or Collective Unconscious
Autistic Functions: Si, Se Te, Ti
Schizophrenic Functions: Ni, Ne, Fe, Fi
Autistic pole = Divine Masculine
Schizophrenic pole = Divine Feminine
So intuitively, the feminists are correct when they criticize the patriarchy since we've moved too far to the autistic pole.
Patriarchy ≠ Men or Male
Matriarchy ≠ Women or Females
Those are modes of cognition or energetic states and the behaviors are a side effect of a given psycho-energetic state.
Has anyone here gone through a deep psychological transformation by facing their shadow (тень), as described by Carl Jung?
I'm talking about going through intense emotional pain, suffering, depression, and confronting your deepest fears, childhood wounds, insecurities, and the darkest parts of yourself.
I'm particularly interested in Carl Jung's concept of individuation — the process of confronting your unconscious, integrating your shadow, making the unconscious conscious, and gradually becoming your authentic self.
For those who have experienced something like this:
What triggered your transformation?
How painful was the process, and how long did it take?
Did you experience a period of isolation, depression, or an identity crisis?
Were you able to make the unconscious conscious? Did you become aware of hidden patterns, suppressed emotions, unconscious motivations, and parts of yourself you had never recognized before?
How did your personality, relationships, values, and perspective on life change afterward?
Do you genuinely feel like a different person today?
I'm especially interested in hearing real personal experiences, not just psychological theories.
Did the suffering ultimately lead you to a deeper understanding of yourself, greater self-awareness, and a more meaningful life?
Hello everyone! Does anyone here intentionally use lucid dreaming as a way to encounter archetypal figures, such as the Hermit, the Magician, or the Great Mother?
I'm curious whether some of you approach lucidity as a kind of active imagination within the dream, and what those encounters have been like for you.
Wall of text. I hope you can have patience with me. I came from eastern teachings like Advaita Vedanta and Taoism in search of ideas that can help me live in everyday life and help me regulate my thoughts and emotions, and somehow they help me. From having thoughts, mostly bad image, into a mind like a water with debris here and there.
But an event came that tells me that I forget to take care of my outer self. My intellect, and all of the other parts of my outer world is neglected because of my pursuit of it. And because of my ideas from eastern teachings, there's a resistance inside of me that prevent me from going in in developing my outer because of the idea that it's against the whole teaching of eastern like taoism. That instead of going with he flow, I go against it and make my will, gripping instead of touching. I hope you can understand me.
I just want to live my life with peace yet I know I must cultivate both, my inner and outer self. I want a life where I can do my duties with right detachment. One of the right type of people I aspired to be like a sage who lives in city. Who performs his duty yet still in touch with he unseen.
Especially when you consider what it is to achieve a flow state.
Research shows this is a great thing right, to be in a flow state?
Does it then mean you’re operating without instincts or in tune with them?
Also how do instincts differ from emotions? I think research agrees emotions happen outside of our complete control and have evolutionary purposes.
If Jung included creativity as an instinct, might this be related to emotions and flow?
So then, what exactly is everyone talking about when they say humans are different from animals because we operate on logic instead of instincts?
And that men are different than women because they operate more on logic while women are more emotional.
Meanwhile men use their instincts as an excuse for how they treat women all the time, like ‘oh men are just biologically different, that’s why we can’t help our selves to stop committing all this rape and war.’
I personally think it’s all a sham, they aren’t that different. Meaning women aren’t that different from men and humans aren’t that different from animals. In certain areas sure a little, but also on many levels not at all.
This is based on everything I’ve experienced and read (which is a LOT more than the average person, trust me lol).
My theory is that flow state is when all of them are operating in unison - instincts, emotions and logic. collective unconscious, ego, super ego, and most importantly the super conscious (assigioli’s psychosnythesis) all of them together with your environment practically effortlessly. All of them are important for everyone to have a max positive human experience.
At that point they kind of lose meaning because they’re all the same, they’re you, the whole self ecosystem within ecosystems, connected yet also individuated.
That’s what flow feels like to me.
One final thought related to all this - I think this is also relevant to the zen/buddhist question of whether or not it is good to be completely non-attached, because then what happens to love for your family and other positive emotions? Do we really want to get rid of all of that or is it trying to escape a painful reality? Would it ever be completely possible or desirable for someone living an ordinary life and not in a mountaintop monastery? I doubt it.
Maybe if emotions are part of that flow state too, it’s how you can hold the paradox of caring while also detaching when necessary?
No idea if that makes any sense, but it’s what’s been rolling around as questions in my head lately.
I would love to hear what other Jungians would say about all this?
