tariki

Thanks Paul. Excellent point about babies and bathwater. I think sometimes as old ways are felt inadequate they are totally thrown away. As you suggest, there can be a degree of natural evolution, a deepening. At the moment I am reading once again the Journals of Saichi, the Pure Land myokonin ( saint ) Truly, a very fundamentalist Baptist would empathise with virtually all of Saichi's cries, exclamations and insights. Yet after my own journey through Mahayana Buddhism, zen, Pure Land thought and practice, the Protestant Fundamentalist beliefs of eternal hell, election, damnation are just not found within my own heart, my own life, my own experience, in my own reading and contemplation of the texts. I realise that what is eternal, what is real, what is true, is the heart of faith, not the beliefs and assertions of a particular historically conditioned creed. What remains is Love, a process that holds us all. No one is excluded. It is the Journey itself. We just have to learn not to cling, not to seek for justification by "belief" no matter how venerated by any tradition.

Hi Iani, welcome. I think the faith of each of us is forever "emerging". Reality is infinite. "The culmination of knowledge is love"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O1CcwYf79I The link above is to the video released in relation to the Grenfell tower block fire. It is really astonishing the sheer range of comments being made on social media and Newspaper websites. A world in miniature. From "banal" to "moving", from "I've never heard of any of them" to..............well, it just goes on. Really, the NT text comes to mind, the one that speaks of every judgement we make being in a sense a judgement on ourselves. In the UK the Grenfell fire could become a watershed for fundamental change. Change to what? One overwhelming image I have is of the firefighters entering the building when the instinct of anyone would be to get as far away as possible. It brought back the very same image from 9/11, when, as the public was running and screaming and panicking (as I would have been) the NY Firefighters were entering the Towers and walking up the stairs. "Heroes" is not adequate.

Thanks Burl, food for thought there. Me being under "eastern" influence, I detect some sort of impasse within Jung's thought. Namely, that he often implies that the "individual few" ( elitist or what? ) must remain firmly within our Western cultural roots , while at the same time speaking of the universal human psyche. Though he often alludes to "eastern" ways he certainly appeared wary of such things as "emptiness", "suchness" and the like. The individual is very much alive and well within Pure Land symbolism, which ( to coin a phrase from the UK's own Jeremy Corbyn ) is, contrary to Jung, for the "many not the few". Again, on Facebook, among my friends and family, signs of true community emerging from the wasteland! Rather than looking towards the "individual few" maybe keep our eyes open - or we may miss the on-going lessons and revelations of Reality-as-is. This is not some dismissal of Jung or even meant as criticism. He certainly appeared, late in life, as one who chopped wood and carried water.

As this is a Christian Forum perhaps the place for a few of those quotes........ "The Christian symbol is a living being that carries the seeds of further development in itself.......although its foundations remain the same eternally Christianity must be interpreted anew in each aeon other wise it suffocates in traditionalism" "What was once called the Holy Ghost/Spirit is an impelling force, creating wider consciousness and responsibility and thus enriched cognition." "A metaphoric death and rebirth can be found by taking up our own cross of opposites and living them out as fully and individually as Jesus did his." "Religion is a defense against religious experience"

Reading the biography, at one point Jung is recorded as saying that the last thing he wanted to do was create yet another "ism". "I am C G Jung, not a Jungian". So not a Jungian, let alone a Freudian! P.S. I would recommend the biography to anyone interested in any progressive form of the Christian Faith. The chapter on "Jung and Christianity" is full of quotable quotes, drawn from Jung's published books and his letters to various theologians.

Back to Jung. Here is one of the illustrations from the biography I am reading, a painting by Paul Ranson, dated around 1890. The text of the book says that Jung recognised that all religions reveal God. "I could give none preference over the other"

I think words often can't do justice to reality. They can lead us astray, thinking there is always a "thing" that corresponds to each and every word. I remember some words of Thomas Merton, which another described as a "beautiful paradox"...... This wordless simplicity, in which the works of quiet and holy people speak humbly for themselves. How important that is in our day, when we are flooded with a tidal wave of meaningless words: and worse still when in the void of those words the sinister power of hatred and destruction is at work. The Shakers remain as witnesses to the fact that only humility keeps man in communion with truth, and first of all with his own inner truth. This one must know without knowing it, as they did. For as soon as a man becomes aware of "his truth" he lets go of it and embraces an illusion. (from a letter to E.D.Andrews, an expert on the life and beliefs of the Shakers (or the United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing). Andrews had sent Merton a copy of his book, Shaker Furniture, and Merton was responding to the gift) "responding to the gift".......I think everything truly valuable is a gift, given not earned, realised not attained. It is the very fabric of Reality-as-is. Neil Young said it another way in his song, "Love is a rose".... Love is a rose but you better not pick it It only grows when it's on the vine. A handful of thorns and you'll know you've missed it You lose your love when you say the word "mine".

Just read. Jung at 74......"I console myself with the thought that only a fool expects wisdom".

Meandering on through the biography of Jung, just a brief comment regarding an earlier post of Burl's regarding how to "read" Jung. Jung diverged from the base opinions and methods of Freud very early on, in spite of Freud ( the older man ) seeing him ( Jung ) as some sort of disciple/follower. Jung seemed to see the psychoanalytic methods and assumptions of Freud as being far too reductionist. Jung himself saw the approach of a human being to the numinous as being the fundamental catalyst of what he called "individuation". Freud seemed to see release of repression and the sexual drive as being far more primary, and most of that which Jung saw as the "numinous" as just illusion and fantasy. (Jung refused to accept the label of "mystic", which some sought to give him, insisting that his own approach was fundamentally empirical) Me, I remain wary of too much "calculation"

I'm sure there's a joke in there somewhere about dualism v non-dualism.........but my minds gone blank at the moment.

Thank you. I received a lovely key-ring ( plus the obligatory socks ) made of little silver nuggets spelling out the names of our two grandchildren, as well as "grandad". ( The socks do have "Best Dad in the World" on one pair and "No1 Grandad" on the others ) Happy Fathers Day to whoever!

"Not absolute" I see that as some sort of agreement. Buddhist non-dualism rests on "not two" rather than "all is one". To know reality is to live it, not to be able to pin it down in ideas and concepts all according to the dictates of logic or worse, a theological formula derived from a book. My old favorite..... O Saichi, will you tell us of Other Power? Yes, but there is neither self power nor Other Power What is, is the Graceful Acceptance only. For myself, any form of teleological anticipation corrupts the knowing. What "comes to be" will always be ungraspable.

No, in fact he wasn't. He broke with Freud quite early on.

So there is non-dualism and dualism. Dualism is the world of "either/or", non-dualism the world of "both/and". The first is a pretty static world where a "self" looks out in judgement of the world around it, that world itself a collection of things each with its own centre. The second is our world of "becoming", of "process", of inter-being. Also of empathy, mercy, grace. In Buddhism, the Dharmakaya. Not a deity on high, the ultimate "self", dispensing his/her understanding. Jung:- nothing worse can happen to one than to be completely understood. " The core of the individual is a mystery of life that is snuffed out when it is 'grasped' " ( a biographer of Jung )

Hi Burl, well, I said earlier in the thread that there were a lot of loose ends, things up in the air. That is how it is with me, I try not to judge as I stumble along, try more to empty myself and hear what another is saying. Difficult, but worth the effort, even if I fail. So I read on, allowing things to "become so of themselves". My "idea", as I have sought to explain umpteen times, is NOT that "all are one", but that things are "not two". Sorry if that difference is difficult for you to grasp. So really, I have no idea what you are striving to say. Sorry.

Just reading on Jung himself says that "only the wounded physician can heal" and then "only to the extent that he has healed himself". Not quite PC these days.........."he"? (But could perhaps point towards deeper areas needing to be healed) So it seems to be a process, on-going. Not sure if Jung saw an "end" to it in some sort of finished/completed "self". All might be revealed - or not. (I would stick with the journey itself being home) I was dipping into a little book on zen gardens, and it quoted from Dogen, and in a strange way this was relevant to this thread.......how's that for syncrionity? ( another Jung buzz word) Dogen said "who was it said that mind means thoughts, opinions, ideas and concepts? Mind means trees, fence posts, tiles and grasses" How is that relevant here? Not sure... Edit. PS Its "synchronicity"!

Ah ha Paul, I detect a note of cynicism...... Jung himself seems to speak of two parts to his life, the number 1 part of the persona presented to the world, the part of everyday concerns, ambitions and drives. Number 2 he knew as the "eternal" ( the collective unconscious, the archetypes - can't quite grasp these in any significant way at the moment ) ,that which just IS. I think he saw the integration of the two as the process of individuation.

Thanks Paul, really good. My mind is bit up in the air at the moment. I seem to thrive on clarity but for the moment too many loose ends. But all good, it does not bother me. Really, I know very little about Jung. But I'm enjoying the biography. Funnily enough there are a lot of quotes from Jung's autobiographical book, "Memories, Dreams, Reflections" and I actually read that in my twenties - I find some of this content quite stunning and wonder where it went on first reading! Jung seems to have investigated, and thought long and hard, about our current european mentality as opposed to more traditional cultures. One phrase that caught my mind was the "dreariness of calculated processes", the "cheerless clockwork fantasy" of our modern lives. I thought of some words from a "Book of Hours" by Thomas Merton, when he spoke of the dawn of a new day, as we awaken, our minds slowly filling with "self", with anticipations and desires, while the birds awake to a song, to just "be". I think Jung was always seeking to integrate both modes. Joseph, my first paragraph here can be taken as a response to your own post. Thanks.

My own thought is that "perfection" is an awful idea. Involved with its pursuit is judgement ( of others/of oneself ), self hate - and obstructions to appreciating what is and thus stifling gratitude. For me the heart of reality is Mercy and Grace - how can that fabric/heart know itself within "perfection"?(And trying to squeeze the idea of perfection back in by positing a "finality" towards which we "progress" for me just corrupts the time we are actually in) So, "Your not OK, I'm not OK, but that's OK"......or "Mutual forgiveness of each vice opens the gates of paradise"..... I think now that seeking the "meaning of it all" is a red herring. "Love has no why" ( Eckhart )

Maybe to stimulate a response or two..........in the title of the book i.e. "wounded" healer. It suggests some sort of reciprocation. That is, NOT the one who is already healed, the "master", the perfect one, as the one who heals - or as being able to heal. But rather the suggestion that those who know and acknowledge their "wounds" are more able to help others - and thus be helped. Any thoughts?

Amid other things I have been continuing with the biography of Jung, actually called "Carl Jung: Wounded Healer of the Soul: An Illustrated Biography" by Claire Dunne. Instinctively I find I am attracted to the thought of illustrations. Also by a feminine author. Moving on, the early chapters tell of Jung's childhood and his relationship with his father, a preacher. Jung is quoted as saying......."I heard him preaching about grace.......what he said sounded stale and hollow, like a tale told by someone who knows it only by hearsay and cannot quite believe it himself......" Later, his father insisted that "one ought not to think, but believe". Jung, as a young man, thought, "No, one must experience and know." Well, enough of that. My mind has drifted onto the art of translation, something that has long interested me. Obviously, to translate a noun, a word such as "cat", into another language,is simple. But translating thoughts, expressions, all subject to cultural influence - to do that, current expressions and, even more difficult, long past expressions, is an art, not a science. It strikes me that the very same demands are made of us when we reflect upon the simple human feeling of empathy. Here is Stephen Batchelor on the art of translation:- "It requires that one convey a peculiar configuration of sense, feeling, perception, anguish, desire, and understanding from one world and resurrect it in another......the translator is but a conduit through which a minor miracle occurs. The translation is inscribed in one's flesh; in the pulsing blood, sweat on the brow, spasms of dread or rapture that course through the nerves". That may seem a bit over the top, but for me it is "no-self" as flesh and blood. In one sense we must needs be "empty" to have a deep empathy with another - and to know our world. Then there is a profound relationship that exists in each moment. "The letter kills but the spirit gives life" The "law" that is to be written on hearts of flesh and not on tablets of stone. I find it more and more difficult to relate such Christian phrases and concepts to life as I know it, yet fundamentally I see Buddhism as another "translation" of the very same ideas, concepts and teachings. Grace not as hearsay, grace not as a belief, or grace as an "offer" of a transcendent deity, but the very fabric of reality.

Really, I'm not actually looking for a new path. The last thing I need is another set of buzz words - in this case "anima", "archetypes", "individuation", "synchronity" and a few more. All a bit of a jigsaw puzzle needing to be put together to try to sort out the mysterious "self" we appear to experience ourselves as being. But I have bumped into an old mate of mine, one of those ex schoolmates who I have also bumped into at odd moments over the years, and he - at least in the past - had a great interest in Jung. Myself, I like biographies, life stories, and actually find the actual meaning of the buzz words easier to grasp when put into the context of a life as lived and experienced. Letters to friends by the subject of the biography are often another source of insight and illumination. On the face of it, the idea of individuation (of the self) seems to fly in the face of "not-self" (anatta) but closer inspection reveals such not to be the case. Well, at least to me. "Universalism" is not a creed to be believed, more a lived openness to all things, sifted in the meeting of them and responded to, then moving on. Jung's individualised "self" seems always more a process rather than a "finished product" that justifies itself by being who it is. Anyway, thought I would just mention this as I dip into a biography of Jung's life. An early quote from Jung's letters caught my eyes so I'll copy it here..... The journey from cloud cuckoo land to reality lasted a long time. In my case Pilgrim's Progress consisted in my having to climb down a thousand ladders until I could reach out my hand to the little clod of earth that I am. If anyone has read his "Red Book" (that's Jung, not Mao) I would appreciate an opinion. Thanks Derek

Hi Bonnie