Theos-Talk Archives (May 2011 Message tt00058)

Dear Morten,
I was responding to Joachim's comments, viz
The works of Jung that you mentioned just prove that he doesn't know
>>anything except the lower self. He shows an almost totally contempt for
>>oriental philosophy, and many more things.
>>
>>That is comprehensible, because Jung prefers to be attached to the
>>materialistic point of view. Besides that, Jung makes constant use of
>>deliberate ambiguity and a relativistic approach to the subjects.
>>
>>So, as a student of theosophy I cannot see any philosophical value in
>>the two works mentioned in the links you gave us.

>
>From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@UUjQ83QBhJ5wXhAEDgkmZF_FPSQttgoTcjf0vaCYJrSLDAxK7wAVyQyX214lEfbQCdCjA7yXUf3YdRW0KOxCPaFeJmk.yahoo.invalid>
>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Sat, 7 May, 2011 4:26:58 PM
>Subject: Re: theos-talk Theosophy, Carl Jung and the "Tibetan Book of the Dead"
>
>  
>Dear Cass
>
>My views are:
>
>I do not believe I stated anything about "similar aspects" in general in my 
>first comment on the issue.
>So I do not really understand your view.
>
>But, if this is the view you have I will tell you more precisely about my 
>stance.
>I will say, that there a some aspects of Jung's teachings which are similar to 
>theosophical teachings (a very loose term, which in fact needs a more precise 
>definition) and others are not similar; and some of the latter are central to 
>what in general is called theosohical teachings.
>
>Another central fact is that C. G. Jung lack some important aspects in his 
>teachings where the psychological terms Mind Control and Social Psychology are 
>not quite adequately dealt with - and his Red Book (Liber Novus) was not given 
>to the public before after his death. This is a bit telling.
>
>- - -
>The concluding remarks in the article you referred to also states:
>"The similarities are there. Differences are there as well. Blavatskyâs 
>theosophy provides a
>comprehensive philosophy reaching towards spiritual understanding,
>science, and individual experience."
>.......
>"Although there are statements of Jung that he holds to reincarnation, there are 
>others which make it unsure. As a result, âIndividuationâ seems to be more 
>related to a single life."
>.......
>"Blavatsky does strongly emphasize, however, of
>starting from universals and connecting them to the particulars of oneâs
>life. Most psychotherapy, however, is centered on problems
>(particulars) and then reaching to greater levels of understanding."
>http://theosconf.org/MAY%20ITCMAGPRINTVERSION1.pdf
>
>- - -
>
>And because of this C. G. Jung's approach has, as I see it, a tendency to become 
>more similar to the Hatha Yoga approach - which also is going from the 
>particulars towards greater levels of understanding, and not as in the 
>theosophical approach from the Universals towards the particulars.
>
>So C. G. Jungs - official - approach is scientific and gravitates more towards a 
>materialistic view than a spiritual doctrine about the Divine within each human. 
>And this is also how later generations have received him. His "Red Book" was in 
>a sense published too late.
>
>And C. G. Jung forgot to tell people that a great many parts of his teachings on 
>Archtypes and other psychological aspects - had already been covered in early 
>times - then using more spiritual words - by papers given by Ibn Arabi (known in 
>the West as Doctor Maximus - as Sufi, known as the Greatest Sheik, d. 1240) and 
>that Al Ghazali or Algazel (d. 1111) also a Sufi (although an Islamic theologist 
>in his early time) wrote papers very similar to Freuds theories on dreams and 
>psychoanalysis. Yet, Jung's papers are less spiritual in their nature, and more 
>scientific and hesitating when it comes to hypotesises like emanations of us 
>humans and Angels and present day cosmology etc. (But Blavatsky also lacked - 
>forwarding - a proper doctrine on the Key to Psychology. But she said that 
>perhaps someone would forward it at the close of the 20th century.)
>
>But, "The Seven Sermons to the Dead Septem Sermones ad Mortuos" by Carl Gustav 
>Jung, 1916
>might be an eye-opener to some...Yet it is said that it was first published 
>officially in 1952.
>(It is online here: http://www.gnosis.org/library/7Sermons.htm)
>
>So a Scientific Mystic and Gnostic, who hid his real worldview from the public 
>eyes. This might be a more correct presentation of his views. Theosophically 
>speaking, he is lacking in some respects, and in others he are explaining 
>certain psychological aspects, which was not forwarded in the early days of the 
>Theosophical Society. And no doubt one will find that C G Jung changed his 
>worldview during his life.
>
>These are my views.
>
>M. Sufilight
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: Cass Silva 
>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2011 5:48 AM
>Subject: Re: theos-talk Theosophy, Carl Jung and the "Tibetan Book of the Dead"
>
>The article from the theos conference says that Jung and Theosophy have many 
>similar aspects to their respective teachings.
>Cass
>
>>
>>From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@UUjQ83QBhJ5wXhAEDgkmZF_FPSQttgoTcjf0vaCYJrSLDAxK7wAVyQyX214lEfbQCdCjA7yXUf3YdRW0KOxCPaFeJmk.yahoo.invalid>
>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>>Sent: Sat, 7 May, 2011 12:37:49 AM
>>Subject: Re: theos-talk Theosophy, Carl Jung and the "Tibetan Book of the 
Dead"
>>
>> 
>>Disagree upon what?
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>From: Cass Silva 
>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>>Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 4:46 AM
>>Subject: Re: theos-talk Theosophy, Carl Jung and the "Tibetan Book of the 
Dead"
>>
>>Some would disagree
>>Cass
>>http://theosconf.org/MAY%20ITCMAGPRINTVERSION1.pdf
>>
>>>
>>>From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@UUjQ83QBhJ5wXhAEDgkmZF_FPSQttgoTcjf0vaCYJrSLDAxK7wAVyQyX214lEfbQCdCjA7yXUf3YdRW0KOxCPaFeJmk.yahoo.invalid>
>>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>>>Sent: Fri, 6 May, 2011 1:48:27 AM
>>>Subject: Re: theos-talk Theosophy, Carl Jung and the "Tibetan Book of the 
>Dead"
>>>
>>> 
>>>Dear Joaquim
>>>
>>>My views are:
>>>
>>>I agree very much with you.
>>>My stance is however, that C. G. Jung was not rejecting the idea of 
>>>philosophical considerations. He in fact considers the importance or 
>>>non-importance of the doctrine on reincarnation etc.
>>>His point of view was merely scientific - instead of fantatical or only 
>>>belief-based. The doctrines on the Law of karma and reincarnation aught not to 
>
>
>>>be forwarded as dogmas, but as hypothesises. Yet, I do also find that C. G. 
>>>Jung's appearnt level of hesitation and reluctancy in suggesting what to put 
>>>instead of these doctrines is a mistake on his part. So I will square it a 
>>>little, and recommend that one seek to understand Jung's scientific approach. Of 
>>>
>>>
>>>course it is not a promotion of ethics in the same manner as the promoters of 

>>>the doctrines on the Law of karma and reincarnation are doinf, - this - as you 
>
>
>>>seem to say, can be shown from his reluctance in considering these doctrine 
>>>compared to other ethics.
>>>
>>>But since Theosophy early on was defined as - the exact Science on Psychology - 
>>
>>
>>>by the magazine The Theosophist in Volume I, no 1, 1879 - I find it important to 
>>>
>>>
>>>compare the two positions - as scientifically as possible - with an eye on 
>>>psychological aspects as well as philosophical aspect.
>>>Okay?
>>>
>>>Another reason is, what is a fact to me, namely that many later theosophical or 
>>
>>
>>>esoterical off-shoot seem to do a bad job in understanding theosophical 
>>>psychology and its relation to secterian and non-secterian bahviours - among 
>>>various groups in society, AND, ESPECIALLY its relation to 
>>>theosophical/esoterical groups as well, and how they operate, when promoting 
>>>altruisme without avoiding a secterian stance.
>>>
>>>M. Sufilight
>>>
>>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>>From: jdmsoares 
>>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>>>Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 12:31 AM
>>>Subject: Re: theos-talk Theosophy, Carl Jung and the "Tibetan Book of the 
>Dead"
>>>
>>>Dear Sufilight, friends,
>>>
>>>Sufilight thanks.
>>>
>>>The works of Jung that you mentioned just prove that he doesn't know
>>>anything except the lower self. He shows an almost totally contempt for
>>>oriental philosophy, and many more things.
>>>
>>>That is comprehensible, because Jung prefers to be attached to the
>>>materialistic point of view. Besides that, Jung makes constant use of
>>>deliberate ambiguity and a relativistic approach to the subjects.
>>>
>>>So, as a student of theosophy I cannot see any philosophical value in
>>>the two works mentioned in the links you gave us.
>>>
>>>More important, as shown in the text "Freud, Jung, And Ethics",
>>>Jung's ideas are in opposition to ethics. We know that Ethics are in
>>>the center of true Psychology.
>>>
>>>We can read in the text:
>>>
>>>"While Freud, though not a professional philosopher, approaches the
>>>problem from a psychological and philosophical angle as William James,
>>>Dewey, and Macmurray have done, Jung states in the beginning of his
>>>book:
>>>
>>>`I restrict myself to the observation of phenomena and I refrain
>>>from any application of metaphysical or philosophical
>>>considerations.'
>>>
>>>He then goes on to explain how, as a psychologist, he can analyze
>>>religion without application of philosophical considerations." [1]
>>>
>>>Jung uses again the same approach in the mentioned works, supposedly
>>>about "Life after Death".
>>>
>>>One of the Mahatmas taught:
>>>
>>>"Exact experimental Science has nothing to do with morality, virtue,
>>>philanthropy, therefore can make no claim upon our help, until it blends
>>>itself with the metaphysics." [2]
>>>
>>>Best regards, Joaquim
>>>
>>>NOTES:
>>>
>>>[1] Worth reading "Freud, Jung, And Ethics" at
>>>http://www.theosophyonline.com/ler.php?id=173
>>><http://www.theosophyonline.com/ler.php?id=173> and 
>>>http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/08/freud-jung-and-ethics.html
>>><http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/08/freud-jung-and-ethics.html> 
>>>.
>>>
>>>[2] Read at http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/mahatma_letters.htm
>>><http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/mahatma_letters.htm>
>>>
>>>--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-theosophy@...>
>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well, allright...here are a few words...to contemplate in a
>>>comparative study.
>>>>
>>>> C G. Jung (d. 1961) on the Law of Karma and Reincarnation:
>>>> LIfe After Death
>>>> http://www.hermetics.org/pdf/C.G._Jung_-_On_Life_After_Death.pdf
>>>>
>>>> Carl Jung's near-death experience
>>>> "The unconscious psyche believes in life after death"
>>>> http://www.near-death.com/jung.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> M. Sufilight
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: jdmsoares
>>>> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>>>> Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 1:17 AM
>>>> Subject: theos-talk Theosophy, Carl Jung and the "Tibetan Book of
>>>the Dead"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear friends,
>>>>
>>>> There are many students of theosophy who admire the thought of Carl
>>>> Jung.
>>>>
>>>> However, maybe most of them don't see that Jung ideas are contrary
>>>> to Ethics, as Eric Fromm and others showed.
>>>>
>>>> There is a most interesting article that brings even more evidences
>>>> about the untheosophical ideais of Mr. Jung, and his relation with a
>>>> Dugpa sect.
>>>>
>>>> The text is published at our websites www.Esoteric-Philosophy.com
>>>> <http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/> and www.TheosophyOnline.com
>>>> <http://www.theosophyonline.com/> with the title:
>>>>
>>>> THEOSOPHY AND THE "BARDO THODOL"
>>>> Or Examining Some Affinities Between
>>>> Carl G. Jung And a Certain Tibetan Sect
>>>>
>>>> As it is written in the text:
>>>>
>>>> "If is perhaps a challenging fact for students of theosophy in the
>>>21st
>>>> century that a well-known thinker as Carl Jung was connected to the
>>>> Ningmapa sect literature, as well as to their methods and occult
>>>> inclinations. As we shall see, one of the main Ningma "best-selling"
>>>> books - the so-called "Bardo Thodol" or "Tibetan Book of the Dead" -
>>>had
>>>> a long- standing personal influence on Jung and received an
>>>enthusiastic
>>>> public support from him."
>>>>
>>>> Direct links to the text:
>>>> www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/08/theosophy-and-bardo-thodol.html
>>>> 
>>><http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/08/theosophy-and-bardo-thodol.h\
> > > \
>>>> tml> and http://www.theosophyonline.com/ler.php?id=89
>>>> <http://www.theosophyonline.com/ler.php?id=89> .
>>>>
>>>> Best regards, Joaquim
>>>>
>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>>
>>>
>>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>
>>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>
>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>> 
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]