Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Jung and Kundalini Yoga

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

>I would be

>interested in any reactions/responses to this.

 

Thanks for posting this ! :)

 

I have heard about this book before, but

having read somewhere that Jung considered

yogas of the Indian tradition to be "unfit"

for Europeans, I never checked any of his

writings about the subject.

 

I do not write as an experienced member, but

have some comments, so here goes:

>"One must even educate

>people, when they have to cross from manipura >to anahata ...

>They really

>have to learn that their feelings should be >based on facts".

>But to cross from anahata to visuddha one >should unlearn all that. One

>should even admit that all one's psychical >facts have nothing to do with

>material facts. ...

 

My thoughts about this is that this may be

general wisdom, not just confined to the

experiences of the anahata chakra.

>But in the ajna center the psyche gets wings-->here you know you are

>nothing but psyche.

 

Yes, pure mind or mind-body.

>The ego disappears completely; the psychical >is no longer a content in

>us, but we become contents of it.

>You are not even

>dreaming of doing anything other than what the >force is demanding, and

>the force is not demanding it since you are >already doing it--since you

>are the force. And the force returns to the >origin, God.

 

This is a good description of the ajna chakra,

I believe. :) Very to the point.

 

Were you thinking about other types of comments

? Comparing the words of Jung with those

of more traditional workers ?

>Question: Do you think the idea is to >experience those cakras, which

>one has gone through, simultaneously?

>In such an extended consciousness all the >cakras would be

>simultaneously experienced, because it is the >highest state of

>consciousness, and it would not be the highest >if it did not include

>all the former experiences.''

 

I agree with this.

My thoughts about this is that

it does seem the experiences of

each chakra is a continuum, that the experiential

edges between one chakra and the next is

heavily blurred,

such as one can in the ajna chakra experience

that there are two things, the psyche and

the external thing = god, and that in the

sahasrara, everything is god. The glimpses of

this knowledge, I presume based on personal

experience of the chakras, is that knowledge

characteristic of each chakra will dawn

from the edges of the last, such that the

chakras may from a psychological viewpoint

be interpreted as one, like concentric rings,

starting from a center,

the muladhar, going outwards to the most

extrenal ring, the sahasrara, where all

the other chakras are "dissolved".

 

Best regards,

 

Amanda.

 

 

 

Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amanda wrote:

>

> >"One must even educate

> >people, when they have to cross from manipura to anahata ...

> >They really

> >have to learn that their feelings should be based on facts".

>

> >But to cross from anahata to visuddha one should unlearn all that. One

> >should even admit that all one's psychical facts have nothing to do with

> >material facts. ...

>

> My thoughts about this is that this may be

> general wisdom, not just confined to the

> experiences of the anahata chakra.

 

I concur. I think the chakras and its symbolism are an excellent backdrop to

present a continuing progression of wisdom even where you "unlearn" some

things.

> Were you thinking about other types of comments? Comparing the words of

> Jung with those of more traditional workers ?

 

Wasn't looking for anything in particular, just wanted to see what this

highly knowledgible group of people thought about the subject. As I've

mentioned before, one of my interests is to better understand the connecting

points between psychology and spirituality. The more that I truly grasp

how this stuff is all connected together, the more readily that I can

realize that all of this is THAT. (Or so my theory goes).

 

-Kartik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi.

> subbarao

>

> > Were you thinking about other types of comments? Comparing the words of

> > Jung with those of more traditional workers ?

>

> Wasn't looking for anything in particular, just wanted to see what this

> highly knowledgible group of people thought about the subject. As I've

> mentioned before, one of my interests is to better understand the connecting

> points between psychology and spirituality. The more that I truly grasp

> how this stuff is all connected together, the more readily that I can

> realize that all of this is THAT. (Or so my theory goes).

>

> -Kartik

 

I too like connecting psychology with spirit cause it seems to me I became aware

I was pure psyche (spirit ranging from nothing, .. to wearing a persona) & not

bound to body anymore. More psyche than matter.

 

And so I had a glimpse, & lost my boundaries before learning how to build a

healthy ego, with healthy boundaries. I guess it is helping me to accept the

boundless with trust, through working with the psyche in ways Jung recommended,

like dream work

etc & acknowledging we are both masculine & feminine energy.

 

Col asked:

 

I also want to clarify for myself, the difference between a core amness (I Am

That) a differentiated witness, and the constructed programmed personality.

------------

Nitin wrote:

 

See how you like this (As much as any such thing can be said in words).

 

The core Amness is the basic screen of Consciousness upon which everything

appears. It is upstream of all conceptualization. The differentiated witness is

the illusory `me' which is a total illusion. The constructed programmed

personality is the

phenomenally real (anatomical-physiological) body-mind which acts and reacts in

everyday life.

 

The core Amness is the real You (and I), the differentiated witness is what one

*thinks* oneself to be, and the c.p.p. is what carries on the lila of daily life

in the phenomenal reality

 

All the three = the average person.

Remove the (illusion of) the d.w., and you have the sage.

 

Best wishes,

 

Nitin

 

So you think witness is illusion too? I wonder where soul fits into all this?

 

Bye now,

 

Love,

 

Colette

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/28/99 at 2:03 AM subbarao wrote:

 

¤[...]

¤Wasn't looking for anything in particular, just wanted to see what this

¤highly knowledgible group of people thought about the subject. As I've

¤mentioned before, one of my interests is to better understand the

connecting

¤points between psychology and spirituality. The more that I truly grasp

¤how this stuff is all connected together, the more readily that I can

¤realize that all of this is THAT. (Or so my theory goes).

¤

¤ -Kartik

 

The non-existence of a "doer" (the me - meme) was a nice one, fitting in

well with spirituality. In a recent article in New Scientist on MPD

(Multiple Personality Disorder), a differentiation is made between memory

of emotions and memory of events; this is one of the areas where Kundalini

can pose temporary problems. The potential to store (emotional) impressions

is said to be the cause to "keep the wheel going" so without emotional

memory, one is "freed" from the burden of past (emotional) impressions but

memory of events remains vivid. This too fits in nicely with spirituality.

 

Jan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi!

There is a big gulf between psychology and Spirituality.

Psychology is to create a healthy ego for successful survival in this material

world.

Spirituality is to go beyond the ego and experience the indescribable.

-- Vis

 

Colette wrote:

> Colette <colette

>

> Hi.

>

> > subbarao

> >

> > > Were you thinking about other types of comments? Comparing the words of

> > > Jung with those of more traditional workers ?

> >

> > Wasn't looking for anything in particular, just wanted to see what this

> > highly knowledgible group of people thought about the subject. As I've

> > mentioned before, one of my interests is to better understand the connecting

> > points between psychology and spirituality. The more that I truly grasp

> > how this stuff is all connected together, the more readily that I can

> > realize that all of this is THAT. (Or so my theory goes).

> >

> > -Kartik

>

> I too like connecting psychology with spirit cause it seems to me I became

aware I was pure psyche (spirit ranging from nothing, .. to wearing a persona) &

not bound to body anymore. More psyche than matter.

>

> And so I had a glimpse, & lost my boundaries before learning how to build a

healthy ego, with healthy boundaries. I guess it is helping me to accept the

boundless with trust, through working with the psyche in ways Jung recommended,

like dream work

> etc & acknowledging we are both masculine & feminine energy.

>

> Col asked:

>

> I also want to clarify for myself, the difference between a core amness (I Am

That) a differentiated witness, and the constructed programmed personality.

> ------------

> Nitin wrote:

>

> See how you like this (As much as any such thing can be said in words).

>

> The core Amness is the basic screen of Consciousness upon which everything

appears. It is upstream of all conceptualization. The differentiated witness is

the illusory `me' which is a total illusion. The constructed programmed

personality is the

> phenomenally real (anatomical-physiological) body-mind which acts and reacts

in everyday life.

>

> The core Amness is the real You (and I), the differentiated witness is what

one *thinks* oneself to be, and the c.p.p. is what carries on the lila of daily

life in the phenomenal reality

>

> All the three = the average person.

> Remove the (illusion of) the d.w., and you have the sage.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Nitin

>

> So you think witness is illusion too? I wonder where soul fits into all this?

>

> Bye now,

>

> Love,

>

> Colette

>

> > Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy

focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List Archives are

available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ Contact Email Address:

advaitins

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

R. Viswanathan wrote:

> "R. Viswanathan" <rvis

>

> Hi!

> There is a big gulf between psychology and Spirituality.

> Psychology is to create a healthy ego for successful survival in this material

world.

> Spirituality is to go beyond the ego and experience the indescribable.

> -- Vis

 

Vis hi. To me there is no seam. The human psyche expands into the infinite Self.

It's all one energy unfolding. Psyche is Spirit ~ to me.

 

Best Regards,

 

Col

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carl Gustav Jung was very interested in Indian spirituality. I believe in his

earlier works on "Analytical Psychology" he used to explain all spiritual

experiences as examples of an "archaetypal syndrome".

Example

~~~~~~

This means that each one of us is influenced to a great extent in our child hood

by wonderful unexplained things for that age group. One typical example is that

as a child we are fascinated by the brilliance of the sun and moon. However at

that age group we do not know what they are. This forms an impression in us.

This is an archaetypal complex. In later life the mind associates anything

wonderful beyond our understanding with the brilliant objects such as the sun.

This is an explanation for visions which seers have as mental reactions from

deep impressions formed during childhood.

 

However in later years Jung seems to have a high regard for Indian spirituality.

He has even written an essay on Sri Ramana Mahrashi and compared him with Sri

Ramakrishna.

 

Personally I feel that Kundalini Yoga is more an exercise in Psychology than

spirituality though I am sure that many of you are going to disagree. I

differentiate spirituality and psychology in this that psychology deals with the

conscious and sub-conscious mind. However spirituality includes the super

conscious. (The Turiya state).

 

Anand

 

 

On 28 Dec 1999 02:03:23 -000 subbarao wrote:

>subbarao

>

>Amanda wrote:

>>

>> >"One must even educate

>> >people, when they have to cross from manipura to anahata ...

>> >They really

>> >have to learn that their feelings should be based on facts".

>>

>> >But to cross from anahata to visuddha one should unlearn all that. One

>> >should even admit that all one's psychical facts have nothing to do with

>> >material facts. ...

>>

>> My thoughts about this is that this may be

>> general wisdom, not just confined to the

>> experiences of the anahata chakra.

>

>I concur. I think the chakras and its symbolism are an excellent backdrop to

>present a continuing progression of wisdom even where you "unlearn" some

>things.

>

>> Were you thinking about other types of comments? Comparing the words of

>> Jung with those of more traditional workers ?

>

>Wasn't looking for anything in particular, just wanted to see what this

>highly knowledgible group of people thought about the subject. As I've

>mentioned before, one of my interests is to better understand the connecting

>points between psychology and spirituality. The more that I truly grasp

>how this stuff is all connected together, the more readily that I can

>realize that all of this is THAT. (Or so my theory goes).

>

> -Kartik

>

>>Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy

focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List Archives are

available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ Contact Email Address:

advaitins

>

>

 

 

A FREE web-based e-mail service brought to you by the PC World Technology

Network.

Get your FREE account today at http://www.myworldmail.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Nitin wrote:

>

>The core Amness is the basic screen of Consciousness upon which everything

appears. It is upstream of all conceptualization. The differentiated witness

is the illusory `me' which is a total illusion. The constructed programmed

personality is the

>phenomenally real (anatomical-physiological) body-mind which acts and

reacts in everyday life.

>

>

>Colette <colette

>

>So you think witness is illusion too? I wonder where soul fits into all

this?

 

 

I believe Nitin was using the word "witness" differently than it's normally

used in Advaita. Rather than the true Subject (Atman), he seems to be

referring to the pseudo-subject (personal ego, or feeling of individual

doer-ship). Hence his qualified term "differentiated witness".

 

I hate to speak for somebody else - so correct me if I'm wrong, Nitin!

 

W

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...