concerning archetypes

[Guest guest]

Hi Dan Hi Antoine. Hello everybody .. where is Harsha?

 

My current definition of 'archetypes' is all experience in the dual field. I

see it all as energy flavours contrasted from the male & female poles (postive

& negative). I once had an insight which was non verbal information. It showed

me that I am formless flavourless energy - and in order TO experience - I

attach to flavours of energy (archetypes - may be emotions, personaes, roles,

whatever). This 'I' (eye) gets overshadowed in the attaching, in my opinion ..

I even lable whom is here talking to you as an archetypal flavour (myself). I

certainly am not limiting myself to dear Mr Jung's definition, though I like it

- and all his wisdom.

 

Regards,

 

Col

[Guest guest]

The concept of archetypes has quite a history to it -- including the Hebrew

Qabala, Pythagoras, Plato, the Egyptian magi, the icons of Tibet and India.

There are different ways that archetypes are understood. In the Qabala,

they are the primordial units of meaning-number that allow structure to be

imparted to reality (realities). Jung's understanding was based on a study

of medeival alchemy as well as universal symbols that appeared in dreams

and sacred texts. The archetypes, in his portrayal, underly all

meaning-making that constitutes the essential experience of being human.

Archetypes are what allow experience to be rendered into perception and

thought, they give structure to the field of perception, and the experience

of archetypal realities are "essential meanings." The universal archetypes

that Jung studied were distinguished, in his thought, from the

idiosyncratic individual meanings given to day to day experiences.

 

The archetypes formed the transpersonal field, from which the personal

arose; thus, the archetypes were depicted by Jung as providing the

necessary background from which personal meaning-making proceeded. He

believed that the individual ego could not "contain" the powerful

transpersonal energies of archetypes, and that when an archetype was

"activated" in a person's psyche, this archetype could potentially

"overwhelm" the individual's ability to maintain an ego-center for control

of day to day realities and meanings. He saw "evidence" of this in the

drawings and statements of schizophrenic patients with whom he worked, and

even with some "neurotic" patients. His interpretations of these kinds of

events has been the subject of much controversy and dispute. For me, the

concept of archetypal realities and energies serves as a guide to open

awareness to a field of awareness beyond the personal. The idea that myths

reflect reality more than the evidence of the senses is a concept from

archetypal psychology. The theme of the uniting of Shiva and Shakti, of

Yin and Yang, of the sacred marriage of male and female, of YHVH and

Israel, of father sky and mother earth is a powerful and pervasive

archetypal image guiding spiritual development in many cultures.

 

Shalom,

Dan

 

 

At 10:52 AM 7/18/99 +1000, you wrote:

>Colette T <colette

>

>

>Hi Dan Hi Antoine. Hello everybody .. where is Harsha?

>

>My current definition of 'archetypes' is all experience in the dual field. I

>see it all as energy flavours contrasted from the male & female poles

(postive

>& negative). I once had an insight which was non verbal information. It

showed

>me that I am formless flavourless energy - and in order TO experience - I

>attach to flavours of energy (archetypes - may be emotions, personaes, roles,

>whatever). This 'I' (eye) gets overshadowed in the attaching, in my

opinion ..

>I even lable whom is here talking to you as an archetypal flavour (myself). I

>certainly am not limiting myself to dear Mr Jung's definition, though I

like it

>- and all his wisdom.

>

>Regards,

>

>Col

>

>

>

>

>--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

>

>ONElist now has T-SHIRTS!

>

>Check out homepage for details.

>

>------

>