Re: impressive ad about our military

January 15, 2012

Honestly, I could do without the sarcasm.

First, if you redo your reading, you will see I never

said Jung was an anti-Semite. I was referring to the

darlings in the group who had the nerve to glorify the

elite (especially in this day and age with what is going

on)

Jung glorifies the elite, if you care to put it that way.

and then also say bravo to Catholic myths

Jung did that.

and then say that Jews were more neurotic,

Jung did that.

so I spoke of the neurotic things in the Catholic

church. You have laid out the good of what you see in

the Catholic Church, but it is not a balanced view, and

let me say that in the practice I participate in there

are things that are not balanced as well and skeletons

in the closet and things swept under the carpet.

Nobody says that, in 1700 years, the RCC has not done any bad

things. You will not find any human institution of long standing

that has not done bad things.

Furthermore, there are many many myths that do many

wonderful things. Personally, I am more

interested in what the Catholic religion has

done for you personally,

Personally, it does not suit me very well. My character is probably

a bit more Calvinistic. I like martin luther's thought. That said, I

have also often thought that i should have been a Jew.

than quoting Jung who is no longer here to sort it

out.

If Jung is irrelevent because dead, then why do we have a Jung list?

As far as I'm concerned, Jung is for the ages, like Plato.

If you start talking to me about Easter,

Archetypally, the whole Easter story is about spiritual or personal

going under and rebirth. The whole story is repeated in alchemy and

various places, but is traditionally most accessible to most

Westerners thru the Easter story.

well dearest we are of totally contrary views,

starting with the fact that I do not believe that Christ

when he said " I am that I am was trying to separate

himself from all others." Even the pope has declared

the bible is not to be taken literally(after all it was

written and translated how many time and after Christ

and in how many languages).

The bible is an esoteric book. Of course it is not to be taken

literally.

I lived in Japan for ten years. There are sacred

stones in Japan written by Masters of Japanese language,

which few if any can decipher because the writing was

different and more fluid and artistic and not how it

changed in the modern world. Think of how our language,

for better or worse, changed in the last fifty years.

So I will go to the point of view of many Gnostics and

many who believe Jesus traveled to India. What Christ's

disciples, in my humble opinion saw, was the light body

rising from Christ, because they were so in harmony with

him. People have seen it in India and other places too

when religious people die. I don't want to bring in too

many airy fairy things, because one tends to be of the

bent these days that if it is not my God it could not be

and/or if you pray to God you are religious, but if you

hear God you are insane, so we lock all others as

inferior or insane. What they believe is that the idea

of one's light body rising, which each human being

should strive is the resurrection and the way and not

anything given only to Jesus or only to Christianity.

That body of Christ is a light body of many people from

many religions only Christians have their verbiage and

other religions have theirs. It has lost its mystery

and been mortified in theory for the average person.

How do the majority of Catholics practice?

The majority of Catholics practice as most people must practice -

within the confines of a concrete teaching. I don't think we can

expect all ordinary people to go to India (literally or

figuratively) and become adepts. Jung in the 1920's, when yoga was

becoming a thing in the West, said that Yoga did not belong on Fifth

Avenue, in Mayfair, or anyplace "on the telephone." Western culture

has its own myths and its own paths.

It is not okay to have an abortion, but it is okay

to kill woman and children, even pregnant women, in war.

The Church, being largely a political entity, recognizes that war is

sometimes inevitable, or else it (or any other regime) will not

survive. Hence the doctrine of the "just war." That said, if war is

bad, why is abortion OK? It kills many more human beings than does

any war.

They depend on ritual, but they do them, because

they think it will get them to heaven not because they

really have internalized the meaning of the rituals.

Do you expect the people en masse to be philosophers? What about

what I posted earlier by Jung, to the effect that, in the middle

ages, man was cared for, and his task made sense _ "to get to

heaven, or to get to hell"? Not only does Jung not teach that

everyone can or must "internalize the meaning of the rituals," he

actually says it is not necessary - hence his statement to the

effect that true Catholics have no need for an unconscious - it is

all out there, in the images of the church that they live every day.

My grandmother was such, and as far as I could see (admittedly I was

a kid), she never worried.

Metaphor is powerful very powerful and it can become

stonified beyond repair.

The "stonification" is part of the deal. Death and rebirth.

There are many beautiful myths all over the world.

How many have been killed off by so called

Christianity. What would Jesus say seeing that? What

would he have said of the crusades?

People try and make religion into a cup to hold their

pain and suffering, so that they can live. But, in

Buddhism, when you can feel the pain and suffering of

the world you are close to enlightenment, but now one

wants to allow anyone these days to feel the pain and

suffering of the world and let that take them to another

level. We give them drugs instead. But, if you really

look at that suffering of the world you can no longer

defend war and history and elitism. We defend those

things because it is too much for us to see and feel the

suffering of the world and take that first step towards

humanism and spiritual maturity. This is what I

believe, and I believe it about many people who meditate

and think they are following a path of detachment, but

are following a path of denial (not all), and I see it

in the practice I belong to and all over. It is a big

step to decide to be part of the no, thank you, I don't

want to be part of the suffering in the world and to

admit to one's own part in it. I am not good at this.

I have not become enlightened, but I am taking steps.

If they succeed inside myself, before I expire, who

knows. I am not about, if I pray to the right God, what

I do does not matter.

Your view, then, is that compassion leads to enlightenment. I think,

in Jungian terms, that this by itself dangerously denigrates the

thinking and sensate functions, and overdoes feeling and

introversion.

regards,

Dan Watkins

January 15, 2012

Â

The symbols of the Catholic liturgy

offer the unconscious is such a wealth of

possibilities for expression that they act as an

incomparable diet for the psyche" (CGJ, "Three

Versions of a Press Conference," 1928.) In 1957,

in "the Houston Films,"Â Jung said that "Again,

in the teachings of the Catholic Church there

are several thousand saints. They show us what

to do, they serve as models.

Â

But the ancient Africans from whom Jung took

many of his concepts also had thousands of

"saints"Â called orishas.

What is the textual evidence that Jung took these concepts from

ancient Africans (I'm not denying it, I just don't know)?

Or energies.Â The difference is that modern

man has been "taught" to "pray to the noun" and

ask "the noun" to cure all ills including the

psychic ills while ancient man knew to "engage the

verb" to cure himself. Jung simply did not stay in

Africa long enough. Or was merely delusional with

regard to the "truth" as confined within the

framework of Christian philosophical and

theological tradition. Tradition does not a truth

make.Â The slaves who came to North America and

Europe assimilated into that tradition. The slaves

who went to South America and the Caribbean hid

their religion within that tradition. Many of the

orishas of "macumba" particularly in Umbanda were

interestingly "assigned" to saints of the

CatholicÂ Church - the noun was different. The verb

was the same.Â People really don't get the "noun

versus verb" of archetypes.

Jung is "delusional"? When a great man says X and I think Y, I take

another look at X. Maybe I'm missing something.

Â

In the case of Catholicism in

particular, however, it is also a deliberately

managed, very ancient political regime which has

a great institutional knowledge ofÂ human

nature. This is, of course, not to say that the

Church never does anything wrong.

All religions are political regimes. They serve

to oppress. And to suppress.

And to contain, organize and give meaning, as Jung argues. Somebody

said of Plato and Aristotle that they wrote about politics as though

trying to "bring order to a madhouse." Just so.

Â God is not dead to the enlightened mind.

The gods don't die.

But religion, organized religon in

particular,Â simply no longer serves a purpose.

Insofar as it is a reflection of the permanent needs of human

nature, it always serves a purpose. We do not as a species "outgrow"

it. The archetypes are real, and will have their say. I think that

this was part of jung's point about religion.

The enlightened mind no longer needs religion.

The enlightened mind has moved beyond the noun and

discovered the verb.Â

Â

As for the "truth" of Christianity, I have to

wonder if our society might have done better had

we had neon signs on our street corners

proclaiming "Buddha Saves" instead of "Jesus

Saves."Â Although honestly Buddhists are very good

"warriors" in wars just like everyone else.Â It's

part of their collective unconscious. Many of the

"principles of war" still utliized today were

developed by the ancient Chinese. We hear a lot of

"waterboarding" these days. A variation of a

technique of torture developed by the Chinese.

Â

The noun does not individuate. The noun does

not heal the soul. The noun does send the soul to

hell in order to be healed. Only the verb does.

When the student is ready, the student goes "deep

sea diving." The vast majority of people who claim

to be enlightened merely put on a snorkel and

splashed around a little in some very shallow

water.Â And many of them have deluded themslves

into thinking that dark is light, evil is good,

the vices are virtues. Not my definition of

enllightenment. But it is the definition of many

Jungians who have not really studied Jung and

instead just applied the basis of Jung to the

principles of Ayn Rand and so many others before

her and after her.Â Â

Â

As for HilterÂ the Catholic Church also claimed

that Pope Pius was not anti-Semitic and in fact

the Church saved many Jews. The Church, however,

did not rise up and speak out against Hitler. And

neither, really, did Jung.

He spoke out repeatedly against Hitler, esp. in the 1930's. During

the war, he worked (and could do so because he actually had some

prestige and influence) to help German Jewish psychiatrists within

Germany. He did not get on the radio and denounce the Germans - that

would have killed any influence he had, while harming the Germans

not a whit. it would have been stupid, and Jung was a prudent man.

Â The greatest evil is silence. Jung moved

beyond it. The Catholic Church appears not to

have.

Â

As for the elitism of Jung, I believe it is

more a matter of the elitism of Jungians. And

would remind everyone of Jung's own comment about

Jungians. That he was glad he was Jung and not a

Jungian. .

He said what he said, and he said it repeatedly and consistently

throughout a long life. He did not "recant," as St. is

supposed to have. His social writings or poltical writings are of a

piece with his therapeutic or "spiritual" writings. The pieces all

fit.

"Nature is aristocratic"- CGJ.

regards,

Dan

Â

-- On Fri, 1/13/12, Dan Watkins

wrote:

Subject: Re: Re: impressive ad about

our military

To: JUNG-FIRE

Date: Friday, January 13, 2012, 8:40 AM

Â

On 1/13/2012 10:00 AM, Roseroberta

ing wrote:

Â

Well, in this case, it seems

gentlemen who bare a lot of racism

are in this group, so there is a

background Catholic cult going on

here, and darlings I am one of

those Jews that grew up one the

East Coast......know very well the

neuroticim of nuns, priests,

Catholics and the like and the

church holdings of major slum

properties......wrap your mind

around that dearie.....let alone

the centuries of wars in the name

of the Catholic church......right

are we talking about the Jews who

got destroyed by Hitler, perhaps

he was justified in your mind or

the centuries of pursecution they

went through forced to live in

hovels in the name of Christianity

or some or other so called

gentlemen. Or how about the

millions of people all over the

world starving, because no

gentlemen wants to start a shift

to create a society where there is

a chance for them to get out of

their poverty and become

educated......I think I am about

out of this group.Â You are

wrapped around theory and seem to

have little feeling for human

life.Â God forgive you.

Â It is true that Jung praised Catholicism

as a "psychological system," but to say

that he was a devout Catholic, or that he

praised everything that was ever done by

Rome, would be ridiculous. His father was

a Protestant minister, and he described

himself as a Protestant: "In this

connection I regard religious ideas as of

the utmost importance, by which I do not,

of course, mean any particular creed. Even

so, as a Protestant, it is quite clear to

me that, in its healing effects, no creed

is as closely akin to psychoanalysis as

Catholicism. The symbols of the Catholic

liturgy offer the unconscious is such a

wealth of possibilities for expression

that they act as an incomparable diet for

the psyche" (CGJ, "Three Versions of a

Press Conference," 1928.) In 1957, in "the

Houston Films,"Â Jung said that "Again, in

the teachings of the Catholic Church there

are several thousand saints. They show us

what to do, they serve as models. They had

their legends, and that is Christian

mythology. In Greece there was Theseus,

there was Hercules, models of fine men, a

gentlemen, you know, and they teach us how

to behave. They are archetypes of

behavior." Jung praised Catholicism

because it was psychologically and

architecturally rich, providing psychic

food for the souls of the people: "The

archetypes are, so to speak, like many

little appetites in us, and if, with the

passing of time, they get nothing to eat,

they start rumbling and upset everything.

The Catholic Church takes this very

seriously. Just now it is setting about

reviving the old Easter customs. The

abstract greeting "Christ is risen!" no

longer satisfies the cravings of the

archetypes for images. So in order to set

at rest, they have had recourse to the

hair goddess, a fertility symbol" ("Jung

and the Christmas tree," 1957). For true

Catholics, the Catholic Church, according

to Jung, even "carries" the unconscious:

"For instance, a book has just appeared,

by a Catholic, called.... "The Dark

Kingdom within Us," which is about the

psychological problems; and the author

says that there is really no proof of the

existence of the unconscious -- that there

really is no unconscious -- it is merely

imagination. Of course, almost any man

nowadays in his normal senses, as we must

assume he is, is simply unable to make

such a statement; but a Catholic can

easily, because he really has no

unconscious. It is in the church

(emphasis added) (CGJ,Â Nietzsche's

Zarathustra: Notes of the seminar given

in 1934 -- 1939, lecture

given June 20, 1934, page 121.)

The above should give just a taste of

Jung's thoughts about religion in general

and Catholicism in particular. Religion

reflects the archetypes, and serves as a

projected "psychic system." In the case of

Catholicism in particular, however, it is

also a deliberately managed, very ancient

political regime which has a great

institutional knowledge ofÂ human nature.

This is, of course, not to say that the

Church never does anything wrong.

Jung's views on these matters, as on most

matters, are "shot through" his collected

works. I cannot here try to organize and

present a thoroughgoing treatise about

everything he says in these works. I have

often thought that, in a sense, to read

one of his major works is to read all of

them, if you see what I mean.

To imply, as you do, that Jung was somehow

an anti-Semite is simply wrong. During the

second world war, Jung literally risked

his life to help his Jewish colleagues.

I hope you will not choose to leave the

group, although I can certainly see why

you might do so if you find Jung's

philosophy distasteful. It might be

better, however, to hang around and learn

more about him. To paraphrase Jung, when

we find ourselves getting upset,Â irate,

or discombobulated, that is the time to

pay attention to what is going on with us

within, rather than simply to avoid the

issue. Indignation is a poor counselor.

Best regards, Dan Watkins.

January 16, 2012

http://homepages.baylor.edu/blake_burleson/publications/

" Africa gifted Jung with his â€˜myth,â€™ his raison dâ€™etre, and many of his

important psychological concepts were discovered or crystallised during the

5-month journey. "

Jung couldn't return to Europe and announce what he had learned from " the

darkies " in Africa, now could he? So he " reframed " what he learned into a

Judeo-Christian and neo-Platonic framework. And after Burleson's book was

published, many Jungians have attempted to " reframe " it back into that

framework. Shadow, Trickster, even anima/animus were concepts of the ancient

Africans. Trickster is the god Eshu or Esu. All the orishas or energies have a

male/female expression that must be balanced. The African version of " yin-yang. "

The ramifications of the expedition are furthered by the work of

Oppenheimer who used DNA " tracing " to prove that man indeed orginated out of

Africa and migrated throughout the world. That of course has ramifications in

itself. Particularly in terms of our " collective shadow " which can probably be

better understood by reading " Heart of Darkness. " We dislike " the darkies "

because we are them.

Plato may have been contemplating it all in a cave in Greece. But he was

contemplating the same things someone was contemplating in a cave in Africa long

before man had even arrived in Greece.

Your position that Jung never changed his positions is interesting simply

because you base it on his writings. Most of which have never been published and

are archived in Zurich. And much of what has been published was written decades

before it was published. So unless you have spent years in the archives, you

cannot really know whether he did or not. Nor can I really. But Jung never used

the word " individuated " simply because the past tense is not possible.

Individuation is the journey. Not the destination. And to individuate one must

learn, change, grow. And change positions. One moves toward the light by

dispelling the darkness. Which Jung did. There are so few left who actually knew

Jung. So those of us who learned from those who did know him must trust in their

" assessment. " For many in Houston, that was Ruth Fry who founded the Jung Center

of Houston after having studied and trained with Jung in Zurich and arranged

what you refer to as the " Houston

Films " with Murray which were probably the " definitive " interviews in

many ways. That is not to say that everyone who studied and trained with her

" got it. " In fact many did not.

As for Nature being aristocratic, some studies have shown that some species in

fact are democratic. There is this wonderful documentary called " I AM " which is

the story of the spiritual journey of Hollywood director Tom Shadyac which

everyone should see. In it there is reference to a study of red deer herds. When

searching for a " watering hole " the herd tends to " democratic decision making "

and often moves in the opposite direction " decided upon " by the " alpha male " who

often doesn't do so well with the " decision making " and in fact is found

wandering about aimlessly!

The title is interesting. It also reflects on the " I have, therefore I am "

elitism in our society. This is a man who had a lot and still did not feel that

he was. And gave it all up. And became.

www.iamthedoc.com

As for truth, there is but one truth. There are just many expressions of the

truth. And as for answers, the correct answer always produces another question.

If we knew all the answers, we would no longer be able to learn, change, and

grow. We would become a noun instead of a verb if you will.

> Â

>

> Well, in this

> case, it seems

> gentlemen who bare a

> lot of racism

> are in this group, so

> there is a

> background Catholic

> cult going on

> here, and darlings I

> am one of

> those Jews that grew

> up one the

> East Coast......know

> very well the

> neuroticim of nuns,

> priests,

> Catholics and the

> like and the

> church holdings of

> major slum

> properties......wrap

> your mind

> around that

> dearie.....let alone

> the centuries of wars

> in the name

> of the Catholic

> church......right

> are we talking about

> the Jews who

> got destroyed by

> Hitler, perhaps

> he was justified in

> your mind or

> the centuries of

> pursecution they

> went through forced

> to live in

> hovels in the name of

> Christianity

> or some or other so

> called

> gentlemen. Or how

> about the

> millions of people

> all over the

> world starving,

> because no

> gentlemen wants to

> start a shift

> to create a society

> where there is

> a chance for them to

> get out of

> their poverty and

> become

> educated......I think

> I am about

> out of this group.Â

> You are

> wrapped around theory

> and seem to

> have little feeling

> for human

> life.Â God forgive

> you.

>

> Â It is true that Jung

> praised Catholicism

> as a " psychological

> system, " but to say

> that he was a devout

> Catholic, or that he

> praised everything that was

> ever done by

> Rome, would be ridiculous.

> His father was

> a Protestant minister, and he

> described

> himself as a Protestant:

> " In this

> connection I regard religious

> ideas as of

> the utmost importance, by

> which I do not,

> of course, mean any

> particular creed. Even

> so, as a Protestant, it is

> quite clear to

> me that, in its healing

> effects, no creed

> is as closely akin to

> psychoanalysis as

> Catholicism. The symbols of

> the Catholic

> liturgy offer the unconscious

> is such a

> wealth of possibilities for

> expression

> that they act as an

> incomparable diet for

> the psyche " (CGJ,

> " Three Versions of a

> Press Conference, "

> 1928.) In 1957, in " the

> Houston Films, " Â Jung

> said that " Again, in

> the teachings of the Catholic

> Church there

> are several thousand saints.

> They show us

> what to do, they serve as

> models. They had

> their legends, and that is

> Christian

> mythology. In Greece there

> was Theseus,

> there was Hercules, models of

> fine men, a

> gentlemen, you know, and they

> teach us how

> to behave. They are

> archetypes of

> behavior. " Jung praised

> Catholicism

> because it was

> psychologically and

> architecturally rich,

> providing psychic

> food for the souls of the

> people: " The

> archetypes are, so to speak,

> like many

> little appetites in us, and

> if, with the

> passing of time, they get

> nothing to eat,

> they start rumbling and upset

> everything.

> The Catholic Church takes

> this very

> seriously. Just now it is

> setting about

> reviving the old Easter

> customs. The

> abstract greeting

> " Christ is risen! " no

> longer satisfies the cravings

> of the

> archetypes for images. So in

> order to set

> at rest, they have had

> recourse to the

> hair goddess, a fertility

> symbol " ( " Jung

> and the Christmas tree, "

> 1957). For true

> Catholics, the Catholic

> Church, according

> to Jung, even

> " carries " the unconscious:

>

> " For instance, a book

> has just appeared,

> by a Catholic, called....

> " The Dark

> Kingdom within Us, "

> which is about the

> psychological problems; and

> the author

> says that there is really no

> proof of the

> existence of the unconscious

> -- that there

> really is no unconscious --

> it is merely

> imagination. Of course,

> almost any man

> nowadays in his normal

> senses, as we must

> assume he is, is simply

> unable to make

> such a statement; but a

> Catholic can

> easily, because he really has

> no

> unconscious. It is in the

> church

> (emphasis added) (CGJ,Â

> Nietzsche's

> Zarathustra: Notes of the

> seminar given

> in 1934 -- 1939,

> lecture

> given June 20, 1934, page

> 121.)

>

> The above should give just a

> taste of

> Jung's thoughts about

> religion in general

> and Catholicism in

> particular. Religion

> reflects the archetypes, and

> serves as a

> projected " psychic

> system. " In the case of

> Catholicism in particular,

> however, it is

> also a deliberately managed,

> very ancient

> political regime which has a

> great

> institutional knowledge ofÂ

> human nature.

> This is, of course, not to

> say that the

> Church never does anything

> wrong.

>

> Jung's views on these

> matters, as on most

> matters, are " shot

> through " his collected

> works. I cannot here try to

> organize and

> present a thoroughgoing

> treatise about

> everything he says in these

> works. I have

> often thought that, in a

> sense, to read

> one of his major works is to

> read all of

> them, if you see what I

> mean.

>

> To imply, as you do, that

> Jung was somehow

> an anti-Semite is simply

> wrong. During the

> second world war, Jung

> literally risked

> his life to help his Jewish

> colleagues.

>

> I hope you will not choose to

> leave the

> group, although I can

> certainly see why

> you might do so if you find

> Jung's

> philosophy distasteful. It

> might be

> better, however, to hang

> around and learn

> more about him. To paraphrase

> Jung, when

> we find ourselves getting

> upset,Â irate,

> or discombobulated, that is

> the time to

> pay attention to what is

> going on with us

> within, rather than simply to

> avoid the

> issue. Indignation is a poor

> counselor.

>

> Best regards, Dan Watkins.

>

January 16, 2012

Please read my recent posted essay "In the Beginning was a Verb!!

love,

ao howell

love

ao

http://homepages.baylor.edu/blake_burleson/publications/"Africa gifted Jung with his â€˜myth,â€™ his raison dâ€™etre, and many of his important psychological concepts were discovered or crystallised during the 5-month journey."Jung couldn't return to Europe and announce what he had learned from "the darkies" in Africa, now could he? So he "reframed" what he learned into a Judeo-Christian and neo-Platonic framework. And after Burleson's book was published, many Jungians have attempted to "reframe" it back into that framework. Shadow, Trickster, even anima/animus were concepts of the ancient Africans. Trickster is the god Eshu or Esu. All the orishas or energies have a male/female expression that must be balanced. The African version of "yin-yang." The ramifications of the expedition are furthered by the work of Oppenheimer who used DNA "tracing" to prove that man indeed orginated out of Africa and migrated throughout the world. That of course has ramifications in itself. Particularly in terms of our "collective shadow" which can probably be better understood by reading "Heart of Darkness." We dislike "the darkies" because we are them. Plato may have been contemplating it all in a cave in Greece. But he was contemplating the same things someone was contemplating in a cave in Africa long before man had even arrived in Greece. Your position that Jung never changed his positions is interesting simply because you base it on his writings. Most of which have never been published and are archived in Zurich. And much of what has been published was written decades before it was published. So unless you have spent years in the archives, you cannot really know whether he did or not. Nor can I really. But Jung never used the word "individuated"simply because the past tense is not possible. Individuation is the journey. Not the destination. And to individuate one must learn, change, grow. And change positions. One moves toward the light by dispelling the darkness. Which Jung did. There are so few left who actually knew Jung. So those of us who learned from those who did know him must trust in their "assessment." For many in Houston, that was Ruth Fry who founded the Jung Center of Houston after having studied and trained with Jung in Zurich and arranged what you refer to as the "HoustonFilms" with Murray which were probably the "definitive" interviews in many ways. That is not to say that everyone who studied and trained with her "got it." In fact many did not. As for Nature being aristocratic, some studies have shown that some species in fact are democratic. There is this wonderful documentary called "I AM" which is the story of the spiritual journey of Hollywood director Tom Shadyac which everyone should see. In it there is reference to a study of red deer herds. When searching for a "watering hole" the herd tends to "democratic decision making" and often moves in the opposite direction "decided upon" by the "alpha male" who often doesn't do so well with the "decision making" and in fact is found wandering about aimlessly! The title is interesting. It also reflects on the "I have, therefore I am" elitism in our society. This is a man who had a lot and still did not feel that he was. And gave it all up. And became. www.iamthedoc.comAs for truth, there is but one truth. There are just many expressions of the truth. And as for answers, the correct answer always produces another question. If we knew all the answers, we would no longer be able to learn, change, and grow. We would become a noun instead of a verb if you will. > > > > Well, in this> case, it seems> gentlemen who bare a> lot of racism> are in this group, so> there is a> background Catholic> cult going on> here, and darlings I> am one of> those Jews that grew> up one the> East Coast......know> very well the> neuroticim of nuns,> priests,> Catholics and the> like and the> church holdings of> major slum> properties......wrap> your mind> around that> dearie.....let alone> the centuries of wars> in the name> of the Catholic> church......right> are we talking about> the Jews who> got destroyed by> Hitler, perhaps> he was justified in> your mind or> the centuries of> pursecution they> went through forced> to live in> hovels in the name of> Christianity> or some or other so> called> gentlemen. Or how> about the> millions of people> all over the> world starving,> because no> gentlemen wants to> start a shift> to create a society> where there is> a chance for them to> get out of> their poverty and> become> educated......I think> I am about> out of this group. > You are> wrapped around theory> and seem to> have little feeling> for human> life. God forgive> you.> > > > > > It is true that Jung> praised Catholicism> as a "psychological> system," but to say> that he was a devout> Catholic, or that he> praised everything that was> ever done by> Rome, would be ridiculous.> His father was> a Protestant minister, and he> described> himself as a Protestant:> "In this> connection I regard religious> ideas as of> the utmost importance, by> which I do not,> of course, mean any> particular creed. Even> so, as a Protestant, it is> quite clear to> me that, in its healing> effects, no creed> is as closely akin to> psychoanalysis as> Catholicism. The symbols of> the Catholic> liturgy offer the unconscious> is such a> wealth of possibilities for> expression> that they act as an> incomparable diet for> the psyche" (CGJ,> "Three Versions of a> Press Conference,"> 1928.) In 1957, in "the> Houston Films," Jung> said that "Again, in> the teachings of the Catholic> Church there> are several thousand saints.> They show us> what to do, they serve as> models. They had> their legends, and that is> Christian> mythology. In Greece there> was Theseus,> there was Hercules, models of> fine men, a> gentlemen, you know, and they> teach us how> to behave. They are> archetypes of> behavior." Jung praised> Catholicism> because it was> psychologically and> architecturally rich,> providing psychic> food for the souls of the> people: "The> archetypes are, so to speak,> like many> little appetites in us, and> if, with the> passing of time, they get> nothing to eat,> they start rumbling and upset> everything.> The Catholic Church takes> this very> seriously. Just now it is> setting about> reviving the old Easter> customs. The> abstract greeting> "Christ is risen!" no> longer satisfies the cravings> of the> archetypes for images. So in> order to set> at rest, they have had> recourse to the> hair goddess, a fertility> symbol" ("Jung> and the Christmas tree,"> 1957). For true> Catholics, the Catholic> Church, according> to Jung, even> "carries" the unconscious: > > > > "For instance, a book> has just appeared,> by a Catholic, called....> "The Dark> Kingdom within Us,"> which is about the> psychological problems; and> the author> says that there is really no> proof of the> existence of the unconscious> -- that there> really is no unconscious --> it is merely> imagination. Of course,> almost any man> nowadays in his normal> senses, as we must> assume he is, is simply> unable to make> such a statement; but a> Catholic can> easily, because he really has> no> unconscious. It is in the> church> (emphasis added) (CGJ, > Nietzsche's> Zarathustra: Notes of the> seminar given> in 1934 -- 1939,> lecture> given June 20, 1934, page> 121.)> > > > The above should give just a> taste of> Jung's thoughts about> religion in general> and Catholicism in> particular. Religion> reflects the archetypes, and> serves as a> projected "psychic> system." In the case of> Catholicism in particular,> however, it is> also a deliberately managed,> very ancient> political regime which has a> great> institutional knowledge of > human nature.> This is, of course, not to> say that the> Church never does anything> wrong.> > > > Jung's views on these> matters, as on most> matters, are "shot> through" his collected> works. I cannot here try to> organize and> present a thoroughgoing> treatise about> everything he says in these> works. I have> often thought that, in a> sense, to read> one of his major works is to> read all of> them, if you see what I> mean.> > > > To imply, as you do, that> Jung was somehow> an anti-Semite is simply> wrong. During the> second world war, Jung> literally risked> his life to help his Jewish> colleagues.> > > > I hope you will not choose to> leave the> group, although I can> certainly see why> you might do so if you find> Jung's> philosophy distasteful. It> might be> better, however, to hang> around and learn> more about him. To paraphrase> Jung, when> we find ourselves getting> upset, irate,> or discombobulated, that is> the time to> pay attention to what is> going on with us> within, rather than simply to> avoid the> issue. Indignation is a poor> counselor.> > > > Best regards, Dan Watkins.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

January 16, 2012

Â

http://homepages.baylor.edu/blake_burleson/publications/

"Africa gifted Jung with his â€˜myth,â€™ his raison dâ€™etre,

and many of his important psychological concepts were

discovered or crystallised during the 5-month journey."

Jung couldn't return to Europe and announce what he had

learned from "the darkies" in Africa, now could he? So he

"reframed" what he learned into a Judeo-Christian and

neo-Platonic framework.

So there is no text that you know of where Jung says, in effect, "I

learned all this from such-and-such in Africa." And your view, then,

view is that Jung was a racist and a plagiarist?

And after Burleson's book was published, many Jungians

have attempted to "reframe" it back into that framework.

Shadow, Trickster, even anima/animus were concepts of the

ancient Africans. Trickster is the god Eshu or Esu.

According to Jung, the archetypes are universal and often express

themselves as gods, esp. among "primitives" (Jung's word). So it is

to be expected that similar gods will be discovered everywhere.

All the orishas or energies have a male/female expression

that must be balanced. The African version of "yin-yang."

Did the Chinese steal that from the Africans as well? Or is it that,

these phenomena being universal, various people might discover or

learn of them independently?

The ramifications of the expedition are furthered by the

work of Oppenheimer who used DNA "tracing" to

prove that man indeed orginated out of Africa and migrated

throughout the world. That of course has ramifications in

itself. Particularly in terms of our "collective shadow"

which can probably be better understood by reading "Heart

of Darkness." We dislike "the darkies" because we are

them.

Kindly speak for yourself. That said, Jung explicates the phenomenon

of shadow projection very well.

Plato may have been contemplating it all in a cave in

Greece. But he was contemplating the same things someone

was contemplating in a cave in Africa long before man had

even arrived in Greece.

Very possibly, but he didn't write it down, or, if he did, we don't

have it. As somebody said, tell me who the Zulu Shakespeare was, and

I'll read him. In the meantime, we have Plato.

Your position that Jung never changed his positions is

interesting simply because you base it on his writings.

Most of which have never been published and are archived

in Zurich. And much of what has been published was written

decades before it was published. So unless you have spent

years in the archives, you cannot really know whether he

did or not.

I don't say that he never changed his views, but he was remarkably

consistent in his published works about many things. As you say, we

have only that which we know to go on. That is, speaking for myself,

more than enough to try to digest in one lifetime. I don't assume

that Jung was always right, but I would disagree with him only with

trepidation. Because his views have become unpopular, I am all the

more inclined to take them seriously. Astrology, for example - the

near universal inclination nowadays is to dismiss it, but if Jung

takes it seriously, then I must take it seriously.

Because Jung wrote esoterically, spoke differently to different

people, and did not necessarily explicate everything he knew, there

is much about his thought that we will not know. As with Plato,

people will be arguing about him 2500 years hence, assuming we have

not destroyed ourselves one way or another in that time.

Nor can I really. But Jung never used the word

"individuated"simply because the past tense is not

possible. Individuation is the journey. Not the

destination. And to individuate one must learn, change,

grow. And change positions. One moves toward the light by

dispelling the darkness. Which Jung did. There are so few

left who actually knew Jung. So those of us who learned

from those who did know him must trust in their

"assessment." For many in Houston, that was Ruth Fry who

founded the Jung Center of Houston after having studied

and trained with Jung in Zurich and arranged what you

refer to as the "Houston

Films" with Murray which were probably the

"definitive" interviews in many ways. That is not to say

that everyone who studied and trained with her "got it."

In fact many did not.

As for Nature being aristocratic, some studies have shown

that some species in fact are democratic.

Species other than man rule in turn, or choose leaders by lot? I

doubt it. I expect that what you mean is that some species are

"egalitarian." This even is a projection, since man is the only

earthly creature free enough from pure instinct to have politics. I

never quite know what to make of arguments that say, such-and-such a

species does so-and-so (the implication being that thus man could do

so , too). The Bonobo (sp?) do thus-and such - I don't like to be

rude, but my response, whether I voice it or not, is always, so

what? Man is not a monkey or an elephant. We have our own nature.

Jung is mostly about human nature. Jung might say that such and such

tribe thinks so and so, and we can learn from that. He rarely if

ever points to non-human examples, however.

There is this wonderful documentary called "I AM" which

is the story of the spiritual journey of Hollywood

director Tom Shadyac which everyone should see. In it

there is reference to a study of red deer herds. When

searching for a "watering hole" the herd tends to

"democratic decision making" and often moves in the

opposite direction "decided upon" by the "alpha male" who

often doesn't do so well with the "decision making" and in

fact is found wandering about aimlessly!

The title is interesting. It also reflects on the "I have,

therefore I am" elitism in our society. This is a man who

had a lot and still did not feel that he was. And gave it

all up. And became.

As I expect you know, Jung's "aristocracy" has nothing to do with

acquiring possessions. He speaks somewhat critically of the American

worker who thinks himself a "poor devil" because he has only one

car, and his boss three.

regards,

Dan Watkins

www.iamthedoc.com

As for truth, there is but one truth. There are just many

expressions of the truth. And as for answers, the correct

answer always produces another question. If we knew all

the answers, we would no longer be able to learn, change,

and grow. We would become a noun instead of a verb if you

will.

> Â

>

> Well, in this

> case, it seems

> gentlemen who bare a

> lot of racism

> are in this group, so

> there is a

> background Catholic

> cult going on

> here, and darlings I

> am one of

> those Jews that grew

> up one the

> East Coast......know

> very well the

> neuroticim of nuns,

> priests,

> Catholics and the

> like and the

> church holdings of

> major slum

> properties......wrap

> your mind

> around that

> dearie.....let alone

> the centuries of wars

> in the name

> of the Catholic

> church......right

> are we talking about

> the Jews who

> got destroyed by

> Hitler, perhaps

> he was justified in

> your mind or

> the centuries of

> pursecution they

> went through forced

> to live in

> hovels in the name of

> Christianity

> or some or other so

> called

> gentlemen. Or how

> about the

> millions of people

> all over the

> world starving,

> because no

> gentlemen wants to

> start a shift

> to create a society

> where there is

> a chance for them to

> get out of

> their poverty and

> become

> educated......I think

> I am about

> out of this group.Â

> You are

> wrapped around theory

> and seem to

> have little feeling

> for human

> life.Â God forgive

> you.

>

> Â It is true that Jung

> praised Catholicism

> as a "psychological

> system," but to say

> that he was a devout

> Catholic, or that he

> praised everything that was

> ever done by

> Rome, would be ridiculous.

> His father was

> a Protestant minister, and he

> described

> himself as a Protestant:

> "In this

> connection I regard religious

> ideas as of

> the utmost importance, by

> which I do not,

> of course, mean any

> particular creed. Even

> so, as a Protestant, it is

> quite clear to

> me that, in its healing

> effects, no creed

> is as closely akin to

> psychoanalysis as

> Catholicism. The symbols of

> the Catholic

> liturgy offer the unconscious

> is such a

> wealth of possibilities for

> expression

> that they act as an

> incomparable diet for

> the psyche" (CGJ,

> "Three Versions of a

> Press Conference,"

> 1928.) In 1957, in "the

> Houston Films,"Â Jung

> said that "Again, in

> the teachings of the Catholic

> Church there

> are several thousand saints.

> They show us

> what to do, they serve as

> models. They had

> their legends, and that is

> Christian

> mythology. In Greece there

> was Theseus,

> there was Hercules, models of

> fine men, a

> gentlemen, you know, and they

> teach us how

> to behave. They are

> archetypes of

> behavior." Jung praised

> Catholicism

> because it was

> psychologically and

> architecturally rich,

> providing psychic

> food for the souls of the

> people: "The

> archetypes are, so to speak,

> like many

> little appetites in us, and

> if, with the

> passing of time, they get

> nothing to eat,

> they start rumbling and upset

> everything.

> The Catholic Church takes

> this very

> seriously. Just now it is

> setting about

> reviving the old Easter

> customs. The

> abstract greeting

> "Christ is risen!" no

> longer satisfies the cravings

> of the

> archetypes for images. So in

> order to set

> at rest, they have had

> recourse to the

> hair goddess, a fertility

> symbol" ("Jung

> and the Christmas tree,"

> 1957). For true

> Catholics, the Catholic

> Church, according

> to Jung, even

> "carries" the unconscious:

>

> "For instance, a book

> has just appeared,

> by a Catholic, called....

> "The Dark

> Kingdom within Us,"

> which is about the

> psychological problems; and

> the author

> says that there is really no

> proof of the

> existence of the unconscious

> -- that there

> really is no unconscious --

> it is merely

> imagination. Of course,

> almost any man

> nowadays in his normal

> senses, as we must

> assume he is, is simply

> unable to make

> such a statement; but a

> Catholic can

> easily, because he really has

> no

> unconscious. It is in the

> church

> (emphasis added) (CGJ,Â

> Nietzsche's

> Zarathustra: Notes of the

> seminar given

> in 1934 -- 1939,

> lecture

> given June 20, 1934, page

> 121.)

>

> The above should give just a

> taste of

> Jung's thoughts about

> religion in general

> and Catholicism in

> particular. Religion

> reflects the archetypes, and

> serves as a

> projected "psychic

> system." In the case of

> Catholicism in particular,

> however, it is

> also a deliberately managed,

> very ancient

> political regime which has a

> great

> institutional knowledge ofÂ

> human nature.

> This is, of course, not to

> say that the

> Church never does anything

> wrong.

>

> Jung's views on these

> matters, as on most

> matters, are "shot

> through" his collected

> works. I cannot here try to

> organize and

> present a thoroughgoing

> treatise about

> everything he says in these

> works. I have

> often thought that, in a

> sense, to read

> one of his major works is to

> read all of

> them, if you see what I

> mean.

>

> To imply, as you do, that

> Jung was somehow

> an anti-Semite is simply

> wrong. During the

> second world war, Jung

> literally risked

> his life to help his Jewish

> colleagues.

>

> I hope you will not choose to

> leave the

> group, although I can

> certainly see why

> you might do so if you find

> Jung's

> philosophy distasteful. It

> might be

> better, however, to hang

> around and learn

> more about him. To paraphrase

> Jung, when

> we find ourselves getting

> upset,Â irate,

> or discombobulated, that is

> the time to

> pay attention to what is

> going on with us

> within, rather than simply to

> avoid the

> issue. Indignation is a poor

> counselor.

>

> Best regards, Dan Watkins.

>

January 16, 2012

....exactly.For those of you who don't like my sarcasm and persist that Jews are more neurotic, don't like their depth-perception, ability to discuss, to see things from a myriad of angles, which is why they make good doctors and lawyers (LOL) and have always been known to be involved in humanitarian causes, along with knowing how to bargain (or do you call that cheap......sorry another bit of sarcasm), I will tell you my sarcasm is way better than what my writer's tongue could have said to you.Once again, and this time please find it, tell me where I particularly said Jung was anti-Semitic (find where I said those words please). Furthermore, again, it is easy to take things out of context, so I forgive you for doing so. Next on my hit parade here, I

don't like quotes out of context and out of date, especially when they are comments that lead to some very extreme thinking. Furthermore, one can wonder is this a Catholic/Christian Jungian group or a Jungian group. It seems for many it is the former. Do I need to start quoting Buddha hear and many others whose writings were not created by the original teachers. At least, we who come from the Jewish race have the brains to realize there are many many ways that things can be interpreted.....thank you very much....which is why Jews have many the Torah and then half a dozen other books which debate meanings....and you do have groups of Jews who have the brains to realize that not everything is appropriate for the times. Now we also know, right, that Jung was into alchemy. And where does the Tarot come from the Kabalah .....the Jewish mysticism for the tree of life. Now, I'm telling you

straight.....no sarcasm.....that I find these remarks, from someone is a humanitarian, not Jewish by chosen religion and is pretty eclectic in there religious beliefs. That the kind of comments you make about Jews, whether or not Jung made them (he was not perfect) is disgusting and if you know anything about the theories of how blacks can dance have lower intelligence etc. and don't have the capacity to realize that people who are bond in any form to areas where they are only amongst their own and can not communicate or get education to climb up the latter will develop bizarre traits of the abuse they are suffering just like any child who is abused by their father or mother or the powers that be. If you don't like hearing that too bad. Okay, is that better than sarcasm. You got it straight now. Or are you going to tell me how the Jews killed Christ, when Christ was a Jew and a percentage of Christians come from the Jewish

race and it was not Jewish traditon to murder people on crucifixes as far as I know. How long would you like to argue this. Till Easter? Yes, I got sarcastic. How about putting me in the category of sarcastic humanitarian. Maybe, I can start a new trend. Wouldn't that be nice. Then people could quote me.

January 16, 2012

Dear Alice,

I don't deny that the archetypes are dynamic (not to mention largely

independent). That is what makes them dangerous. Wotan, for example.

If the impression is that I think that they are somehow static or

reified (like Plato's ideas as those are conventionally understood,

for example), please allow me to correct that impression.

best,

Dan

Â

Please read my recent posted essay "In the

Beginning was a Verb!!

Â

love,

Â

ao howell

Â

love

Â

ao

Â

In a message dated 1/16/2012 8:34:02 A.M. Eastern

Standard Time, charlischauseil@... writes:

Â

http://homepages.baylor.edu/blake_burleson/publications/

"Africa gifted Jung with his â€˜myth,â€™ his

raison dâ€™etre, and many of his important

psychological concepts were discovered or

crystallised during the 5-month journey."

Jung couldn't return to Europe and announce

what he had learned from "the darkies" in

Africa, now could he? So he "reframed" what he

learned into a Judeo-Christian and

neo-Platonic framework. And after Burleson's

book was published, many Jungians have

attempted to "reframe" it back into that

framework. Shadow, Trickster, even

anima/animus were concepts of the ancient

Africans. Trickster is the god Eshu or Esu.

All the orishas or energies have a male/female

expression that must be balanced. The African

version of "yin-yang." The ramifications of

the expedition are furthered by the work of

Oppenheimer who used DNA "tracing" to

prove that man indeed orginated out of Africa

and migrated throughout the world. That of

course has ramifications in itself.

Particularly in terms of our "collective

shadow" which can probably be better

understood by reading "Heart of Darkness." We

dislike "the darkies" because we are them.

Plato may have been contemplating it all in a

cave in Greece. But he was contemplating the

same things someone was contemplating in a

cave in Africa long before man had even

arrived in Greece.

Your position that Jung never changed his

positions is interesting simply because you

base it on his writings. Most of which have

never been published and are archived in

Zurich. And much of what has been published

was written decades before it was published.

So unless you have spent years in the

archives, you cannot really know whether he

did or not. Nor can I really. But Jung never

used the word "individuated"simply because the

past tense is not possible. Individuation is

the journey. Not the destination. And to

individuate one must learn, change, grow. And

change positions. One moves toward the light

by dispelling the darkness. Which Jung did.

There are so few left who actually knew Jung.

So those of us who learned from those who did

know him must trust in their "assessment." For

many in Houston, that was Ruth Fry who founded

the Jung Center of Houston after having

studied and trained with Jung in Zurich and

arranged what you refer to as the "Houston

Films" with Murray which were probably

the "definitive" interviews in many ways. That

is not to say that everyone who studied and

trained with her "got it." In fact many did

not.

As for Nature being aristocratic, some studies

have shown that some species in fact are

democratic. There is this wonderful

documentary called "I AM" which is the story

of the spiritual journey of Hollywood director

Tom Shadyac which everyone should see. In it

there is reference to a study of red deer

herds. When searching for a "watering hole"

the herd tends to "democratic decision making"

and often moves in the opposite direction

"decided upon" by the "alpha male" who often

doesn't do so well with the "decision making"

and in fact is found wandering about

aimlessly!

The title is interesting. It also reflects on

the "I have, therefore I am" elitism in our

society. This is a man who had a lot and still

did not feel that he was. And gave it all up.

And became.

www.iamthedoc.com

As for truth, there is but one truth. There

are just many expressions of the truth. And as

for answers, the correct answer always

produces another question. If we knew all the

answers, we would no longer be able to learn,

change, and grow. We would become a noun

instead of a verb if you will.

> Â

>

> Well, in this

> case, it seems

> gentlemen who bare a

> lot of racism

> are in this group, so

> there is a

> background Catholic

> cult going on

> here, and darlings I

> am one of

> those Jews that grew

> up one the

> East Coast......know

> very well the

> neuroticim of nuns,

> priests,

> Catholics and the

> like and the

> church holdings of

> major slum

> properties......wrap

> your mind

> around that

> dearie.....let alone

> the centuries of wars

> in the name

> of the Catholic

> church......right

> are we talking about

> the Jews who

> got destroyed by

> Hitler, perhaps

> he was justified in

> your mind or

> the centuries of

> pursecution they

> went through forced

> to live in

> hovels in the name of

> Christianity

> or some or other so

> called

> gentlemen. Or how

> about the

> millions of people

> all over the

> world starving,

> because no

> gentlemen wants to

> start a shift

> to create a society

> where there is

> a chance for them to

> get out of

> their poverty and

> become

> educated......I think

> I am about

> out of this group.Â

> You are

> wrapped around theory

> and seem to

> have little feeling

> for human

> life.Â God forgive

> you.

>

> Â It is true that Jung

> praised Catholicism

> as a "psychological

> system," but to say

> that he was a devout

> Catholic, or that he

> praised everything that was

> ever done by

> Rome, would be ridiculous.

> His father was

> a Protestant minister, and he

> described

> himself as a Protestant:

> "In this

> connection I regard religious

> ideas as of

> the utmost importance, by

> which I do not,

> of course, mean any

> particular creed. Even

> so, as a Protestant, it is

> quite clear to

> me that, in its healing

> effects, no creed

> is as closely akin to

> psychoanalysis as

> Catholicism. The symbols of

> the Catholic

> liturgy offer the unconscious

> is such a

> wealth of possibilities for

> expression

> that they act as an

> incomparable diet for

> the psyche" (CGJ,

> "Three Versions of a

> Press Conference,"

> 1928.) In 1957, in "the

> Houston Films,"Â Jung

> said that "Again, in

> the teachings of the Catholic

> Church there

> are several thousand saints.

> They show us

> what to do, they serve as

> models. They had

> their legends, and that is

> Christian

> mythology. In Greece there

> was Theseus,

> there was Hercules, models of

> fine men, a

> gentlemen, you know, and they

> teach us how

> to behave. They are

> archetypes of

> behavior." Jung praised

> Catholicism

> because it was

> psychologically and

> architecturally rich,

> providing psychic

> food for the souls of the

> people: "The

> archetypes are, so to speak,

> like many

> little appetites in us, and

> if, with the

> passing of time, they get

> nothing to eat,

> they start rumbling and upset

> everything.

> The Catholic Church takes

> this very

> seriously. Just now it is

> setting about

> reviving the old Easter

> customs. The

> abstract greeting

> "Christ is risen!" no

> longer satisfies the cravings

> of the

> archetypes for images. So in

> order to set

> at rest, they have had

> recourse to the

> hair goddess, a fertility

> symbol" ("Jung

> and the Christmas tree,"

> 1957). For true

> Catholics, the Catholic

> Church, according

> to Jung, even

> "carries" the unconscious:

>

> "For instance, a book

> has just appeared,

> by a Catholic, called....

> "The Dark

> Kingdom within Us,"

> which is about the

> psychological problems; and

> the author

> says that there is really no

> proof of the

> existence of the unconscious

> -- that there

> really is no unconscious --

> it is merely

> imagination. Of course,

> almost any man

> nowadays in his normal

> senses, as we must

> assume he is, is simply

> unable to make

> such a statement; but a

> Catholic can

> easily, because he really has

> no

> unconscious. It is in the

> church

> (emphasis added) (CGJ,Â

> Nietzsche's

> Zarathustra: Notes of the

> seminar given

> in 1934 -- 1939,

> lecture

> given June 20, 1934, page

> 121.)

>

> The above should give just a

> taste of

> Jung's thoughts about

> religion in general

> and Catholicism in

> particular. Religion

> reflects the archetypes, and

> serves as a

> projected "psychic

> system." In the case of

> Catholicism in particular,

> however, it is

> also a deliberately managed,

> very ancient

> political regime which has a

> great

> institutional knowledge ofÂ

> human nature.

> This is, of course, not to

> say that the

> Church never does anything

> wrong.

>

> Jung's views on these

> matters, as on most

> matters, are "shot

> through" his collected

> works. I cannot here try to

> organize and

> present a thoroughgoing

> treatise about

> everything he says in these

> works. I have

> often thought that, in a

> sense, to read

> one of his major works is to

> read all of

> them, if you see what I

> mean.

>

> To imply, as you do, that

> Jung was somehow

> an anti-Semite is simply

> wrong. During the

> second world war, Jung

> literally risked

> his life to help his Jewish

> colleagues.

>

> I hope you will not choose to

> leave the

> group, although I can

> certainly see why

> you might do so if you find

> Jung's

> philosophy distasteful. It

> might be

> better, however, to hang

> around and learn

> more about him. To paraphrase

> Jung, when

> we find ourselves getting

> upset,Â irate,

> or discombobulated, that is

> the time to

> pay attention to what is

> going on with us

> within, rather than simply to

> avoid the

> issue. Indignation is a poor

> counselor.

>

> Best regards, Dan Watkins.

>

January 16, 2012

With all due respect, Dan, the hubris of your comments is, well, overwhelming.

Jung was a man of his times. Again, he also moved beyond himself. Which

apparently you have not. I have better things to do with my time than respond to

insults which are projections rather than perceptions. No one stole anything

from anyone. Although there are some who would say Jung did. I am not among

them.

To paraphrase Alice as she put it in " Jungian Symbolism in Astrology " you cannot

learn what you do not already know. Deep within. What he called the collective

unconscious that is part of the personal unconscious. Deep within all of us.

Regardless of where it originated. Let's compromise and say that Jung

" discovered " what he already knew when he went to Africa.

>

> > Â

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Well, in this

>

> > case, it seems

>

> > gentlemen who bare a

>

> > lot of racism

>

> > are in this group, so

>

> > there is a

>

> > background Catholic

>

> > cult going on

>

> > here, and darlings I

>

> > am one of

>

> > those Jews that grew

>

> > up one the

>

> > East Coast......know

>

> > very well the

>

> > neuroticim of nuns,

>

> > priests,

>

> > Catholics and the

>

> > like and the

>

> > church holdings of

>

> > major slum

>

> > properties......wrap

>

> > your mind

>

> > around that

>

> > dearie.....let alone

>

> > the centuries of wars

>

> > in the name

>

> > of the Catholic

>

> > church......right

>

> > are we talking about

>

> > the Jews who

>

> > got destroyed by

>

> > Hitler, perhaps

>

> > he was justified in

>

> > your mind or

>

> > the centuries of

>

> > pursecution they

>

> > went through forced

>

> > to live in

>

> > hovels in the name of

>

> > Christianity

>

> > or some or other so

>

> > called

>

> > gentlemen. Or how

>

> > about the

>

> > millions of people

>

> > all over the

>

> > world starving,

>

> > because no

>

> > gentlemen wants to

>

> > start a shift

>

> > to create a society

>

> > where there is

>

> > a chance for them to

>

> > get out of

>

> > their poverty and

>

> > become

>

> > educated......I think

>

> > I am about

>

> > out of this group.Â

>

> > You are

>

> > wrapped around theory

>

> > and seem to

>

> > have little feeling

>

> > for human

>

> > life.Â God forgive

>

> > you.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Â It is true that Jung

>

> > praised Catholicism

>

> > as a " psychological

>

> > system, " but to say

>

> > that he was a devout

>

> > Catholic, or that he

>

> > praised everything that was

>

> > ever done by

>

> > Rome, would be ridiculous.

>

> > His father was

>

> > a Protestant minister, and he

>

> > described

>

> > himself as a Protestant:

>

> > " In this

>

> > connection I regard religious

>

> > ideas as of

>

> > the utmost importance, by

>

> > which I do not,

>

> > of course, mean any

>

> > particular creed. Even

>

> > so, as a Protestant, it is

>

> > quite clear to

>

> > me that, in its healing

>

> > effects, no creed

>

> > is as closely akin to

>

> > psychoanalysis as

>

> > Catholicism. The symbols of

>

> > the Catholic

>

> > liturgy offer the unconscious

>

> > is such a

>

> > wealth of possibilities for

>

> > expression

>

> > that they act as an

>

> > incomparable diet for

>

> > the psyche " (CGJ,

>

> > " Three Versions of a

>

> > Press Conference, "

>

> > 1928.) In 1957, in " the

>

> > Houston Films, " Â Jung

>

> > said that " Again, in

>

> > the teachings of the Catholic

>

> > Church there

>

> > are several thousand saints.

>

> > They show us

>

> > what to do, they serve as

>

> > models. They had

>

> > their legends, and that is

>

> > Christian

>

> > mythology. In Greece there

>

> > was Theseus,

>

> > there was Hercules, models of

>

> > fine men, a

>

> > gentlemen, you know, and they

>

> > teach us how

>

> > to behave. They are

>

> > archetypes of

>

> > behavior. " Jung praised

>

> > Catholicism

>

> > because it was

>

> > psychologically and

>

> > architecturally rich,

>

> > providing psychic

>

> > food for the souls of the

>

> > people: " The

>

> > archetypes are, so to speak,

>

> > like many

>

> > little appetites in us, and

>

> > if, with the

>

> > passing of time, they get

>

> > nothing to eat,

>

> > they start rumbling and upset

>

> > everything.

>

> > The Catholic Church takes

>

> > this very

>

> > seriously. Just now it is

>

> > setting about

>

> > reviving the old Easter

>

> > customs. The

>

> > abstract greeting

>

> > " Christ is risen! " no

>

> > longer satisfies the cravings

>

> > of the

>

> > archetypes for images. So in

>

> > order to set

>

> > at rest, they have had

>

> > recourse to the

>

> > hair goddess, a fertility

>

> > symbol " ( " Jung

>

> > and the Christmas tree, "

>

> > 1957). For true

>

> > Catholics, the Catholic

>

> > Church, according

>

> > to Jung, even

>

> > " carries " the unconscious:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > " For instance, a book

>

> > has just appeared,

>

> > by a Catholic, called....

>

> > " The Dark

>

> > Kingdom within Us, "

>

> > which is about the

>

> > psychological problems; and

>

> > the author

>

> > says that there is really no

>

> > proof of the

>

> > existence of the unconscious

>

> > -- that there

>

> > really is no unconscious --

>

> > it is merely

>

> > imagination. Of course,

>

> > almost any man

>

> > nowadays in his normal

>

> > senses, as we must

>

> > assume he is, is simply

>

> > unable to make

>

> > such a statement; but a

>

> > Catholic can

>

> > easily, because he really has

>

> > no

>

> > unconscious. It is in the

>

> > church

>

> > (emphasis added) (CGJ,Â

>

> > Nietzsche's

>

> > Zarathustra: Notes of the

>

> > seminar given

>

> > in 1934 -- 1939,

>

> > lecture

>

> > given June 20, 1934, page

>

> > 121.)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > The above should give just a

>

> > taste of

>

> > Jung's thoughts about

>

> > religion in general

>

> > and Catholicism in

>

> > particular. Religion

>

> > reflects the archetypes, and

>

> > serves as a

>

> > projected " psychic

>

> > system. " In the case of

>

> > Catholicism in particular,

>

> > however, it is

>

> > also a deliberately managed,

>

> > very ancient

>

> > political regime which has a

>

> > great

>

> > institutional knowledge ofÂ

>

> > human nature.

>

> > This is, of course, not to

>

> > say that the

>

> > Church never does anything

>

> > wrong.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Jung's views on these

>

> > matters, as on most

>

> > matters, are " shot

>

> > through " his collected

>

> > works. I cannot here try to

>

> > organize and

>

> > present a thoroughgoing

>

> > treatise about

>

> > everything he says in these

>

> > works. I have

>

> > often thought that, in a

>

> > sense, to read

>

> > one of his major works is to

>

> > read all of

>

> > them, if you see what I

>

> > mean.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > To imply, as you do, that

>

> > Jung was somehow

>

> > an anti-Semite is simply

>

> > wrong. During the

>

> > second world war, Jung

>

> > literally risked

>

> > his life to help his Jewish

>

> > colleagues.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I hope you will not choose to

>

> > leave the

>

> > group, although I can

>

> > certainly see why

>

> > you might do so if you find

>

> > Jung's

>

> > philosophy distasteful. It

>

> > might be

>

> > better, however, to hang

>

> > around and learn

>

> > more about him. To paraphrase

>

> > Jung, when

>

> > we find ourselves getting

>

> > upset,Â irate,

>

> > or discombobulated, that is

>

> > the time to

>

> > pay attention to what is

>

> > going on with us

>

> > within, rather than simply to

>

> > avoid the

>

> > issue. Indignation is a poor

>

> > counselor.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Best regards, Dan Watkins.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

January 16, 2012

Roseroberta, elitists elevate themselves above many groups. Sadly,it's a major flaw as they do not have the ability to see in themselves.Though not all,the vast majority of Jungians, are well educated and from (at the very least) upper-middle class backgrounds and have no true idea what it is like to be born into anything less or anything markedly different.Women, the poor, the uneducated, Jews,pick any number of groups and there is an elitist Jungian view regarding that group. While I agree with Alice that one's reaction to circumstance is quite important, I know that circumstances for many are spirit crushing.This is where service is important,and in empathetic spirit, to truly get to know/feel the world of your fellowman.This is not to deny one's personal responsibility, but to simply realize in order for one to actually develop that personal sense of responsibility basic needs for food and shelter must be met,some parenting/protection from abuse, a few role models,and some education, all of which, many simply do not have. Think Maslowe's Hierarchy.

And yes, my observation is that the Jewish community is quite empathetic and demonstrates this empathy in a spirit of service to those in need.And what better way to connect with those in need than to provide for services such as counseling for women,children,the mentally ill,homes for poor/aged,and services for the developmentally disabled?

Best to All,

Gail

Re: impressive ad about our military

....exactly.

For those of you who don't like my sarcasm and persist that Jews are more neurotic, don't like their depth-perception, ability to discuss, to see things from a myriad of angles, which is why they make good doctors and lawyers (LOL) and have always been known to be involved in humanitarian causes, along with knowing how to bargain (or do you call that cheap......sorry another bit of sarcasm), I will tell you my sarcasm is way better than what my writer's tongue could have said to you.

Once again, and this time please find it, tell me where I particularly said Jung was anti-Semitic (find where I said those words please). Furthermore, again, it is easy to take things out of context, so I forgive you for doing so. Next on my hit parade here, I don't like quotes out of context and out of date, especially when they are comments that lead to some very extreme thinking.

Furthermore, one can wonder is this a Catholic/Christian Jungian group or a Jungian group. It seems for many it is the former. Do I need to start quoting Buddha hear and many others whose writings were not created by the original teachers. At least, we who come from the Jewish race have the brains to realize there are many many ways that things can be interpreted.....thank you very much....which is why Jews have many the Torah and then half a dozen other books which debate meanings....and you do have groups of Jews who have the brains to realize that not everything is appropriate for the times. Now we also know, right, that Jung was into alchemy. And where does the Tarot come from the Kabalah .....the Jewish mysticism for the tree of life. Now, I'm telling you straight.....no sarcasm.....that I find these remarks, from someone is a humanitarian, not Jewish by chosen religion and is pretty eclectic in there religious beliefs. That the kind of comments you make about Jews, whether or not Jung made them (he was not perfect) is disgusting and if you know anything about the theories of how blacks can dance have lower intelligence etc. and don't have the capacity to realize that people who are bond in any form to areas where they are only amongst their own and can not communicate or get education to climb up the latter will develop bizarre traits of the abuse they are suffering just like any child who is abused by their father or mother or the powers that be. If you don't like hearing that too bad. Okay, is that better than sarcasm. You got it straight now. Or are you going to tell me how the Jews killed Christ, when Christ was a Jew and a percentage of Christians come from the Jewish race and it was not Jewish traditon to murder people on crucifixes as far as I know. How long would you like to argue this. Till Easter? Yes, I got sarcastic. How about putting me in the category of sarcastic humanitarian. Maybe, I can start a new trend. Wouldn't that be nice. Then people could quote me.

January 16, 2012

Â

With all due respect, Dan, the hubris of your comments

is, well, overwhelming. Jung was a man of his times.

Does this mean that his stated views are to be summarily dismissed

without an argument whenever we feel that they are awkward?

A problem as I see it with the historicist "man of his times"

argument is that it applies to us, too - we are men and women of our

time. Does that make our views simply dismissible? After all, if

they are not out of date or out of fashion now, they presumably will

be in 50 or 100 years' time. Unless, of course, we think that the

"man of his times" argument does not, in fact, apply to us - that

everyone before us was a man of his time, but that we have reached

the end of hisotyr - the peak of the mountain, if you like - and

that our views are not historically conditioned, but simply true.

IMO, that really would be hubristic. I would rather look at any

opinion, old or new, shocking or not, on its own terms. Jung says a

kind of aristocracy is the best form of government? Is it, or is it

not? That is a question we can ask now just as well as it could be

asked 100 years ago or a thousand.

Again, he also moved beyond himself.

I don't know quite what this means - I take it it means that he

changed his mind about some things. Fair enough, but where is the

evidence? If he says the same thing in 1961 about a matter as he did

in 1928, I will think that he did not change his mind in the

meantime. In any event, the question will still be whether or to

what degree he was right. I don't know how else to approach the the

work of a natural philosopher.

Which apparently you have not. I have better things to do

with my time than respond to insults which are projections

rather than perceptions. No one stole anything from

anyone.

I'm sayin'.

Although there are some who would say Jung did. I am not

among them.

To paraphrase Alice as she put it in "Jungian Symbolism in

Astrology" you cannot learn what you do not already know.

Deep within.

This seems to be a restatement of the Platonic view that learning is

remembering. It may be so, I don't know. I certainly wouldn't deny

it. I know that Jung explicitly denied the opposite doctrine that

"nothing is in the soul that was not first in the sense."

What he called the collective unconscious that is part

of the personal unconscious.

Yes, the personal UCS rests, you could say, on the collective UCS.

We all carry the collective UCS. Just so. No disagreement there.

Deep within all of us. Regardless of where it originated.

Let's compromise

and say that Jung "discovered" what he already knew when

he went to Africa.

Â If Jung's ideas about archetypes (or anythig else, for that

matter)Â were in fact first "brought to (his own) consciousness" as

a result of his interaction with unnamed teachers in Africa, and he

did not credit those teachers, then he was indeed a liar, plagiarist

and thief. I doubt it, though - Jung was immersing himself in the

classics of Western thought before he went to Africa.

best regards,

Dan Watkins

>

> > Â

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Well, in this

>

> > case, it seems

>

> > gentlemen who bare a

>

> > lot of racism

>

> > are in this group, so

>

> > there is a

>

> > background Catholic

>

> > cult going on

>

> > here, and darlings I

>

> > am one of

>

> > those Jews that grew

>

> > up one the

>

> > East Coast......know

>

> > very well the

>

> > neuroticim of nuns,

>

> > priests,

>

> > Catholics and the

>

> > like and the

>

> > church holdings of

>

> > major slum

>

> > properties......wrap

>

> > your mind

>

> > around that

>

> > dearie.....let alone

>

> > the centuries of wars

>

> > in the name

>

> > of the Catholic

>

> > church......right

>

> > are we talking about

>

> > the Jews who

>

> > got destroyed by

>

> > Hitler, perhaps

>

> > he was justified in

>

> > your mind or

>

> > the centuries of

>

> > pursecution they

>

> > went through forced

>

> > to live in

>

> > hovels in the name of

>

> > Christianity

>

> > or some or other so

>

> > called

>

> > gentlemen. Or how

>

> > about the

>

> > millions of people

>

> > all over the

>

> > world starving,

>

> > because no

>

> > gentlemen wants to

>

> > start a shift

>

> > to create a society

>

> > where there is

>

> > a chance for them to

>

> > get out of

>

> > their poverty and

>

> > become

>

> > educated......I think

>

> > I am about

>

> > out of this group.Â

>

> > You are

>

> > wrapped around theory

>

> > and seem to

>

> > have little feeling

>

> > for human

>

> > life.Â God forgive

>

> > you.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Â It is true that Jung

>

> > praised Catholicism

>

> > as a "psychological

>

> > system," but to say

>

> > that he was a devout

>

> > Catholic, or that he

>

> > praised everything that was

>

> > ever done by

>

> > Rome, would be ridiculous.

>

> > His father was

>

> > a Protestant minister, and he

>

> > described

>

> > himself as a Protestant:

>

> > "In this

>

> > connection I regard religious

>

> > ideas as of

>

> > the utmost importance, by

>

> > which I do not,

>

> > of course, mean any

>

> > particular creed. Even

>

> > so, as a Protestant, it is

>

> > quite clear to

>

> > me that, in its healing

>

> > effects, no creed

>

> > is as closely akin to

>

> > psychoanalysis as

>

> > Catholicism. The symbols of

>

> > the Catholic

>

> > liturgy offer the unconscious

>

> > is such a

>

> > wealth of possibilities for

>

> > expression

>

> > that they act as an

>

> > incomparable diet for

>

> > the psyche" (CGJ,

>

> > "Three Versions of a

>

> > Press Conference,"

>

> > 1928.) In 1957, in "the

>

> > Houston Films,"Â Jung

>

> > said that "Again, in

>

> > the teachings of the Catholic

>

> > Church there

>

> > are several thousand saints.

>

> > They show us

>

> > what to do, they serve as

>

> > models. They had

>

> > their legends, and that is

>

> > Christian

>

> > mythology. In Greece there

>

> > was Theseus,

>

> > there was Hercules, models of

>

> > fine men, a

>

> > gentlemen, you know, and they

>

> > teach us how

>

> > to behave. They are

>

> > archetypes of

>

> > behavior." Jung praised

>

> > Catholicism

>

> > because it was

>

> > psychologically and

>

> > architecturally rich,

>

> > providing psychic

>

> > food for the souls of the

>

> > people: "The

>

> > archetypes are, so to speak,

>

> > like many

>

> > little appetites in us, and

>

> > if, with the

>

> > passing of time, they get

>

> > nothing to eat,

>

> > they start rumbling and upset

>

> > everything.

>

> > The Catholic Church takes

>

> > this very

>

> > seriously. Just now it is

>

> > setting about

>

> > reviving the old Easter

>

> > customs. The

>

> > abstract greeting

>

> > "Christ is risen!" no

>

> > longer satisfies the cravings

>

> > of the

>

> > archetypes for images. So in

>

> > order to set

>

> > at rest, they have had

>

> > recourse to the

>

> > hair goddess, a fertility

>

> > symbol" ("Jung

>

> > and the Christmas tree,"

>

> > 1957). For true

>

> > Catholics, the Catholic

>

> > Church, according

>

> > to Jung, even

>

> > "carries" the unconscious:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > "For instance, a book

>

> > has just appeared,

>

> > by a Catholic, called....

>

> > "The Dark

>

> > Kingdom within Us,"

>

> > which is about the

>

> > psychological problems; and

>

> > the author

>

> > says that there is really no

>

> > proof of the

>

> > existence of the unconscious

>

> > -- that there

>

> > really is no unconscious --

>

> > it is merely

>

> > imagination. Of course,

>

> > almost any man

>

> > nowadays in his normal

>

> > senses, as we must

>

> > assume he is, is simply

>

> > unable to make

>

> > such a statement; but a

>

> > Catholic can

>

> > easily, because he really has

>

> > no

>

> > unconscious. It is in the

>

> > church

>

> > (emphasis added) (CGJ,Â

>

> > Nietzsche's

>

> > Zarathustra: Notes of the

>

> > seminar given

>

> > in 1934 -- 1939,

>

> > lecture

>

> > given June 20, 1934, page

>

> > 121.)

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > The above should give just a

>

> > taste of

>

> > Jung's thoughts about

>

> > religion in general

>

> > and Catholicism in

>

> > particular. Religion

>

> > reflects the archetypes, and

>

> > serves as a

>

> > projected "psychic

>

> > system." In the case of

>

> > Catholicism in particular,

>

> > however, it is

>

> > also a deliberately managed,

>

> > very ancient

>

> > political regime which has a

>

> > great

>

> > institutional knowledge ofÂ

>

> > human nature.

>

> > This is, of course, not to

>

> > say that the

>

> > Church never does anything

>

> > wrong.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Jung's views on these

>

> > matters, as on most

>

> > matters, are "shot

>

> > through" his collected

>

> > works. I cannot here try to

>

> > organize and

>

> > present a thoroughgoing

>

> > treatise about

>

> > everything he says in these

>

> > works. I have

>

> > often thought that, in a

>

> > sense, to read

>

> > one of his major works is to

>

> > read all of

>

> > them, if you see what I

>

> > mean.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > To imply, as you do, that

>

> > Jung was somehow

>

> > an anti-Semite is simply

>

> > wrong. During the

>

> > second world war, Jung

>

> > literally risked

>

> > his life to help his Jewish

>

> > colleagues.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > I hope you will not choose to

>

> > leave the

>

> > group, although I can

>

> > certainly see why

>

> > you might do so if you find

>

> > Jung's

>

> > philosophy distasteful. It

>

> > might be

>

> > better, however, to hang

>

> > around and learn

>

> > more about him. To paraphrase

>

> > Jung, when

>

> > we find ourselves getting

>

> > upset,Â irate,

>

> > or discombobulated, that is

>

> > the time to

>

> > pay attention to what is

>

> > going on with us

>

> > within, rather than simply to

>

> > avoid the

>

> > issue. Indignation is a poor

>

> > counselor.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Best regards, Dan Watkins.

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

January 19, 2012

Confusion reigns!! LOL This is about the most fun I've ever had on this list. Who's on second? ROFL

Blissings,SamSearch for Soulhttps://sampatron.wordpress.comJust because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.Just because I don't believe something doesn't mean it's untrue.Don't believe everything you think.

Hello Mike,

Can you clarify!

What was meant for me?

All Best,

Steve

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

that was also actually meant to be @Steve.. -_- .--

Those who are awake live in a constant state of amazement. ~Jack Kornfieldthe world of dewis just a world of dew...and yet...~IssaPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4152 - Release Date: 01/18/12 19:34:00

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

January 19, 2012

the Firesign Theater statement that everything one knows is wrong.as a share.--

Those who are awake live in a constant state of amazement.

~Jack Kornfieldthe world of dewis just a world of dew...and yet...~IssaPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

January 19, 2012

Trickster Working Here?

Set your traps.

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

that was also actually meant to be @Steve.. -_- .--

Those who are awake live in a constant state of amazement. ~Jack Kornfieldthe world of dewis just a world of dew...and yet...~IssaPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4152 - Release Date: 01/18/12 19:34:00

January 19, 2012

Hello Mike,

>i was completely floored many many years ago by a Firesign Theater warcry, "Everything you know is wrong"...

_____________________________________________

I absolutely agree with this. All that we know about the wars is wrong.

99.% have no clue ! The 1 % do. The rest of us sleep in the dark!

The War cry is very loud today, the sabres are rattling. The masses are

at Wall Mart looking for crapy bargains.

All Best,

Steve

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

@Sami was completely floored many many years ago by a Firesign Theater warcry, "Everything you know is wrong"... satori moment for me (not least inasmuch as i have seven planets in fire and two of the others and my ascendant in air).it immediately became my absolute bottom line.

.. -_- .--

Those who are awake live in a constant state of amazement. ~Jack Kornfieldthe world of dewis just a world of dew...and yet...~IssaPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4152 - Release Date: 01/18/12 19:34:00

January 19, 2012

nonono!... what the sentence is saying is that EVERY thing - every single thing - everything without exception that you know - is wrong, skewed, mis-seen, misunderstood--

Those who are awake live in a constant state of amazement.

~Jack Kornfieldthe world of dewis just a world of dew...and yet...~IssaPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

January 19, 2012

sounds good to me Steve

January 19, 2012

I am that I am is everyone's name I think. Have you ever tried using it as a matra. Maybe, it would not work for you, but it does for me, along with other one's I do. It may or may not be just his Satory at all actually. But, your conception about conception is also your conception, including your conception of in the end. LOL To: JUNG-FIRE Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 7:57 PM Subject: Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

>nonono!... what the sentence is saying is that EVERY thing - every single thing - everything without exception that you know - is wrong

______________________________________

Well if its no no no no no, thats your no no no no no.

The Ego is still Everything! There is nothing else,

be it an expression of the shadow or light!

Its all part of the same ONE THING!

" I am that I am " , is what is His name!

And this is the one thing that can't ever be disputed.

Mercury and Sulfur are the two primal principles

of life. They are two aspects of the same thing.

I know you know this, because we have travelled

a certain way together with Manfred Junius.

Satory is OK, but its your Satory, Not mine, nor any

one else's. It shall always be so. My conception of the world

shapes my world, no one else's. And that is the beauty

of it all! And there is nothing else but our conceptions.

In the END, all is only experiencing.

Best,

Steve

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

nonono!... what the sentence is saying is that EVERY thing - every single thing - everything without exception that you know - is wrong, skewed, mis-seen, misunderstood--

Those who are awake live in a constant state of amazement. ~Jack Kornfieldthe world of dewis just a world of dew...and yet...~IssaPlease consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4152 - Release Date: 01/18/12 19:34:00

January 20, 2012

"God is a circle" was said by Joachim of Fleury several centuries ago. super voncept! Thanks Steve

love

ao

>Does this clear it up, Steve?

________________________

I never thought this would evolve into an

argument about faith in God. I simply wanted

to express what ambiguity lies in such statements.

I should have kept my mouth shut.

But speaking of God,

God is an infinite circle, whose center is everywhere,

and whose circumference is nowhere. Every human

being is this center. Nothing can be taken out of this

circle, for where would one put it. This circle is ALL

and infinite. The creator and his creation are but

ONE THING.

All Best,

Steve

January 20, 2012

Example of topic title!!

ooops!

hugs

ao

ï»¿ Absolutely my friend! You are with me! My mantra can never be yours , as yours can never be mine.

We are all individual. That is the perfect beauty of it all . Keep LOL! I respectfully mean it. LOL!

The BUDDHA did !

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest â€¢ Unsubscribe â€¢ Terms of Use

..

January 20, 2012

this got so confused and convoluted that I am now on individual emails.....when I said does this clear it up, Steve? I never was referring to anything about God. You understood it that way. I was referring to your comment to me about my ambiguous statement (for you, though it seems it was not for others). As far as what God is, it is always someone's personal view and interpretations. I don't think God is a circle. I think God is an expanding consciousness, which learns through us and we through it. Sorry. But, it is my view and my feel on the elephant. Has my view changed over the years. Yes it has.I am beingIn being there is everyoneIn everyone there is allIn all there is God--Roseroberta To: JUNG-FIRE Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 7:30 AM Subject: Re: impressive ad about our military

" God is a circle " was said by Joachim of Fleury several centuries ago. super voncept! Thanks Steve

love

ao

>Does this clear it up, Steve?

________________________

I never thought this would evolve into an

argument about faith in God. I simply wanted

to express what ambiguity lies in such statements.

I should have kept my mouth shut.

But speaking of God,

God is an infinite circle, whose center is everywhere,

and whose circumference is nowhere. Every human

being is this center. Nothing can be taken out of this

circle, for where would one put it. This circle is ALL

and infinite. The creator and his creation are but

ONE THING.

All Best,

Steve

January 24, 2012

Who was it that said "For those who believe, not proof is necessary. For those who do not, no proof is possible."? I believe in my beliefs with all my heart--but I am aware that that proves nothing but that I believe. It is quite possible that I am wrong, but I do not "believe" so. So long as my beliefs allow me to organise the world as I live in it, they are valid for me, but not necessarily universal. Some one also once said "Revelation is not sealed."

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

>(Just because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.)

____________________________________

How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?

There is something very very very wrong here!

If one is not sure, then he just says, I don't know!

Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!

What the heck?

Steve Kalec

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

AMEN!!

I've been gone a month and came back to over 160 emails; out of most of them, this has been the most insightful and perspicacious comment I've seen. There have been other good posts, of course, but this is the most concise statement of "the problem" that I've seen. Thanks!

Blissings,

Sam

Search for Soul

https://sampatron.wordpress.com

Just because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.

Just because I don't believe something doesn't mean it's untrue.

Don't believe everything you think.

What I have observed with this entire conversation is a great deal of knowledge with very little understanding. As long as we believe there are "others," we haven't begun to think straight.

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4149 - Release Date: 01/17/12 19:34:00

January 24, 2012

Thought I was the only one who remembered Firesign Theater. Loved it when I was in college.

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

the Firesign Theater statement that everything one knows is wrong.

as a share.

--

Those who are awake live in a constant state of amazement.

~Jack Kornfield

the world of dew

is just a world of dew...

and yet...

~Issa

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

January 24, 2012

THIS IS WHAT NEEDS ATTENTION! THE SUBJECT LINE HAS nothing TO DO W/THE CONTENT!!

Please let's pay attention to this.If we want to go back to a post, this gives misinformation!

"Motherator"

From: LBANANCY@...Reply-to: JUNG-FIRE To: JUNG-FIRE Sent: 1/24/2012 1:12:00 P.M. Eastern Standard TimeSubj: Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

Who was it that said "For those who believe, not proof is necessary. For those who do not, no proof is possible."? I believe in my beliefs with all my heart--but I am aware that that proves nothing but that I believe. It is quite possible that I am wrong, but I do not "believe" so. So long as my beliefs allow me to organise the world as I live in it, they are valid for me, but not necessarily universal. Some one also once said "Revelation is not sealed."

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

>(Just because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.)

____________________________________

How can anyone believe something to be true and yet say it may be not true?

There is something very very very wrong here!

If one is not sure, then he just says, I don't know!

Look, you can't believe something if you doubt it also!

What the heck?

Steve Kalec

Re: Re: impressive ad about our military

AMEN!!

I've been gone a month and came back to over 160 emails; out of most of them, this has been the most insightful and perspicacious comment I've seen. There have been other good posts, of course, but this is the most concise statement of "the problem" that I've seen. Thanks!

Blissings,SamSearch for Soulhttps://sampatron.wordpress.comJust because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.Just because I don't believe something doesn't mean it's untrue.Don't believe everything you think.

What I have observed with this entire conversation is a great deal of knowledge with very little understanding. As long as we believe there are "others," we haven't begun to think straight.

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.454 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4149 - Release Date: 01/17/12 19:34:00

Sign In

Re: impressive ad about our military

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Activity