I'll try to keep this somewhat short, but there's a lot of detail to unpack here..

Background: In the last year or two, I have discovered Jung and his theories, and they really resonate with me. After a lot of online reading, I ordered The Red Book and began reading it. I made it about halfway through and decided one night before bed to ask my shadow to prove it exists and is there.

As I was getting ready for bed, I took a moment, quieted my mind and stated to my shadow "if you're real, please show yourself to me."

That night, I had an incredibly vivid and detailed dream that without question revealed my Shadow's existence. Normally, I do not remember much of my dreams other than their general content, and the details fade quickly as the morning passes. This dream, however, has been absolutely etched in my brain. If I had any drawing/painting ability I could easily recreate the details of this dream. And this was over 6 months ago since this occurred. I don't anticipate the memory of this dream will ever fade.

I believe it's time to face this dream, so any interpretations or grounded advice on next steps would be greatly appreciated.

The dream:

I was in home, with my wife and some guests. The guests were not identifiable, but I was showing them the ground floor level of my house as if it was their first time there. Giving them a tour. It was bright and pleasant and my house was sparkling clean. I walked them through the living area to the kitchen, commenting on the various rooms as I went. My guests complimented me, and I acknowledged that the house was "pretty nice" and felt a sense of pride.

At this point, the house was exactly as my real home is, nothing was different with the layout.

In my house, I have a stairwell in the kitchen that leads to the basement. I opened the door and led my guests to the basement... but to my confusion and bewilderment I found that the basement was completely foreign to me. It was dark at the bottom of the stairs, and as I descended them I could see that it was a dirt floor with stone walls, much like a medieval castle/dungeon. I sensed the flickering glow of a torch to my right and turned to look.

What I saw immediately repulsed me. There was a post with a flaming torch on it, and beneath the torch was what appeared from a distance to be a black, disgusting mold spreading across the floor in about a 4' radius of the post. I was aghast and embarrassed that this was in my house. However, I'm curious by nature, and I immediately went over to assess the hideous mold. To my surprise, when I got up close to the "mold" i could see that it was in fact not mold, but a dark, blood red, crystalline carpet (think of what a precipitated crystal coating looks like.. borax precipitation for example). In the darkness, the gold light of the flaming torch on the post was dancing off the blood red crystal and it was mesmerizingly beautiful. Blood and fire. I made no comment about the crystal but took it in for a moment before moving on.

At this point, I turned right again and looked down the main length of my basement. It was again foreign. First off, it was HUGE. Much larger than the upper floor of my home. All stone walls and dirt floors as before, but as I gazed down the dark passage I noticed two things: The basement had large arched openings along the right hand wall, leading outside. Through the openings, moonbeams were shining and softly illuminating the entire length of the basement. The second thing I noticed was an arched doorway in the far wall, with another torch beside of it (on the left hand side at about eye level, bolted to the wall). I could see nothing beyond the door.

I began to lead my guests through the basement toward the door. At this point I said to them "See, there's plenty of room down here. Lots of storage space" and we continued the long walk toward the door.

As we were almost to the door, I noticed two things once more: First, to the left of the door in the "corner" of the room so to speak... there was an absolutely impenetrable darkness. The blackest of blacks. Simultaneously, I began to hear a sound that I cannot exactly describe. The best I can come up with is that it was a sort of wail of a what I believed to be a woman. Part sad, part lonely, part pained, 100% creepy. It would rise and drop, repeating over and over, and always emanating from pitch blackness of the corner. I tried to locate the source of the wailing, but could see nothing at all.

At this point, I stated to my guests "see, it's not that bad down here...as long as you don't mind the noise".

I woke up at this point. We never made it through the door.

I believe that I understand the general message of this dream, in that there is much in my life I've been burying and keeping hidden in the basement of my life. Living a false, ununified life. I could go on about this at great length, as I've spent a large amount of time thinking about the implications in the days since I had this dream. What I'm hoping for is for deeper insight into any of the possible symbology in this dream and for advice on where to go next. I want to unify my house and fix the division in my psyche.. but I'm not sure where to begin.

There's a bit more to this story, too. The very next night, I had another, much shorter dream.

I was standing on the overpass of a highway. In the grassy median.. watching oncoming cars speeding up the exit ramp toward the intersection. These cars would then launch across the median and crash in a blaze of fire on the other side. Car after car. I just stood there, watching. Saying nothing, but wondering the entire time why they kept coming and weren't stopping. After 4 or 5 cars, the dream simply ended.

If anyone has advice on how to move forward, I'm all ears. Thanks for reading to the end, if you made it here.

Hello Jung section,

37 m and my 29 f girlfriend initiated a conversation with a guy that she met at a crystal meth anonymous meeting when she went to support her mother(who has a meth addiction).

She messaged him on facebook and then shortly afterwards gave the guy his number.

I saw the conversation and that she did tell him to not make any weird moves and to put boundaries out there. Yet, after she said that she apologized and said sorry if she offended him.

I just had a bad feeling about this guy..and so I looked him up and saw that he had stalking and domestic abuse charges in the past plus a laundry list of other charges for theft and possession of meth.

I do believe that my girlfriend loves me and deep down believe she wouldn't cheat on me, yet this really made me feel irritated with the entire thing. Her ex boyfriend used meth and she constantly complains about him and his behavior with her. I thought she had learned her lesson of interacting with people in those circles.

She tells me that I don't trust her and I tell her that I wish she would be more cautious of giving out her number to random guys that she met a couple of times at a recovery meeting.

I am more interested in the origins of the jealousy. What is driving me to be so obsessive about this? I know that as a high school student my girlfriend cheated on me with my best friend. I know I have some PTSD with the whole situation.

I DO NOT want to be the kind of guy who prohibits her from talking with other guys..I do want her to have male friendships. Yet, my strong response has me asking the question "Why do I get so jealous?" What is it about me?

I know the Jung section does a fantastic job of getting into the unconscious and shadow...and I'd love to hear your theories on why I might be reacting like this and also if anyone else has had similar experiences.

Thanks Jungians

Random, absurd, incomplete—

everything about human beings is absurd.

Everything—

every branch of science,

every form of knowledge, perception, or even identity—

is nothing but absurdity.

An absurdity that humans fail to grasp;

pride and arrogance, masking fear, fragility, and incompleteness.

Yet, some people look at what they currently possess—their technology and the experiments they have conducted—

and leap straight to atheism, concluding that they have no need for what is called "God."

They leap to atheism because they have arrived at an explanation—

an explanation whose "shelf life" I often question: how well can it truly withstand the test of time?

I thank God always that I am a Muslim, and that I was raised with an understanding of the term "Allah the Exalted"—or what others might simply call "God."

I learned that the concept of a Creator is not something to be mocked, insulted, or trivialized—as is often done in the random, superficial portrayals found in films and television series.

Such portrayals are merely a reflection of the limited human capacity to comprehend this world.

I was never coerced into respecting other religions; rather, I learned *why* I should respect them—such as Christianity, or indeed any path an individual chooses to follow in their life.

How so? Because of Islam.

The subject of this discussion is not religion itself, but rather the denial of God’s existence—

a stance often taken by those who have either gone astray or who refuse to acknowledge the truth and seek it out.

As for the atheist: what is the reason for your atheism, and how do you perceive the word "faith"? If that term is viewed with a sense of inferiority—or as if it were merely clinging to an illusion—

don’t you think this stems from a devaluation of religion, whether in games, films, or even in the way things are discussed and described?

Ask yourself—look deep within—what fuels that impulse?

Is your line of thought truly your own?

Whether you are an atheist or a believer, share your thoughts in the comments.

Hillman

Hey guys, recently been rewatching Naruto and reliving why I love this show so much. Any Naruto fans on this sub?

I love Jung's framework for analysis as well, and try to apply it here to Naruto.

I tend to see Naruto's waterfall scene to be extremely integral for his growth but also for the show. While in the waterfall he meets with a physical manifestation of what is definitely his shadow. It really was a scene which made me feel like Naruto is not just a kid's show. However, I also think that Kyuubi acts as a nice metaphor -- I wonder if thats written on purpose.

I find that Naruto and Kyuubi work as exxcellent metaphors for Jung's "shadow" and unconscious. (outside of the fictional part where hes sealed and Kuramas actually a personality etc etc.) but as a metaphor it works. would you agree with this framing of Jung's work?

I am experiencing some kind of existential crisis, or my ego is, if it is still there, and I wrote this poem without much conscious thought.

Now tell me the tale of love,
of total surrender to your graciousness
making in your being, holy resplendent shackle of your light
-- Florescence here, brimming
Now tell me the tale of love,
of your hand, held out to the stars --
wondering whether one may
fall onto your tender palm,
-- so you wait and wait, until dawn, when they fade into the receding distance
beyond your grasp
-- So love, tell me, what have
I lost?
-- Friendship with the stars, you have
-- So now what? but why bother?
For comes now the Sun, redolent of violet and pink
Now in full redness
From here we move, ahead with the past dead,
dreams gone, the self
obliterated, and
what now?
The stream -- clear and blue
come now rushing through --- what does it do?

It cleanses and shimmers -- brimming along
your river of Time

I don’t think I have ever read a Jungian perspective that seems to spell out so clearly our present day circumstances more than this book. He wrote it during WW2, and it was published thereafter. It explains so much about how society projects our shadow side out through the Judeo-Christian ethic, a perfect counterbalance to Jordan Peterson’s Jungian stance where he asserts practically the opposite position.

Curious if anyone has read it and what thoughts you may have.

Jung begins with the ego, that is, the “I,” and moves toward the Self.

Ep. 14–Ep. 18 are individual stories, but they all begin with Jung’s concept of the ego and explore the process of deconstructing the “I.”

Ep. 14. What am I?

→ I cannot be defined by my name, occupation, or role.

Ep. 15. Where is the boundary of the “I”?

→ The boundary becomes blurred, extending from the body and microorganisms to the Earth and the universe.

Ep. 16. How do I perceive?

→ I deconstruct the senses, thoughts, habits, and the automatic system.

Ep. 17. How do I live?

→ I deconstruct desire, suffering, automatic reactions, and choice.

Ep. 18. Do I exist, or do I change?

→ I deconstruct Descartes’ fixed notion of the “I” once again.

Ep. 19. Then, how does Jung see this “I”?

→ Jung expands the “I,” while I, a salaried worker, deconstruct the “I.”

To briefly summarize the episode roadmap: Starting with Jung → shaking the “I” → shaking its boundaries → shaking the way I perceive → shaking the way I live → shaking existence itself → returning to Jung.

Now, Ep. 18.

One last time, I will shake the existence of the “I.”

If the moderation team determines that this post is not sufficiently related to Jung, or does not meet the community’s standards for any other reason, please feel free to remove it.

I respect the moderation team’s judgment.

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

​

A Shift in Perspective: Ep. 18. I Think, Therefore I Exist. But I Change.

​

​

This time, let’s take a closer look at Descartes.

​

What is existence?

​

We have already examined the existence of ‘me’ in Ep 14 and 15, even though it was uncomfortable to do so.

Who or what am I?

What can truly be called ‘me’?

​

And in Ep 17, we also mentioned that existence comes before reason.

Let’s take a closer look at that existence.

​

Descartes says:

I think.

Therefore, I exist.

​

From my perspective, the sentence “I think” is analyzed as saying two things.

​

One is the fact that a thought is occurring,

and the other is the claim that it is ‘me’ who is thinking that thought.

This leads to the conclusion that the entity called ‘me’ exists.

​

I think the fact that a thought is occurring is an actual fact.

But whether the entity that thinks can be called ‘me’ is questionable.

Because it is unclear what the entity called ‘me’ is, or whether something called ‘me’ even exists.

​

As we already explored in Ep. 14..

I kept asking, again and again, who or what ‘I’ am—

my name, species, occupation, position, role, and so on—

and even while getting cursed at for it,

I kept looking, but still could not find ‘me.’

​

In Ep. 15, we explored once again what could be called ‘me.’

Of my body, thoughts, emotions, memories, name, role, and consciousness, my body seemed the most certain.

Yet even after taking a closer look at it, I still could not find what, among E. coli, my body, the Earth, the universe, a sack that produces poop, and a salaried worker, could be called ‘me.’

​

To accept Descartes’ argument, I think we may first need to examine what exactly the entity he calls ‘I’ is.

What, exactly, can we define this entity called ‘I’ as?

Only after defining what ‘I’ is, I think, can we find out whether the entity Descartes calls ‘I’ actually exists.

​

Let’s take another slow look.

My name, species, occupation, position, and role are clearly facts. They are real.

My body, thoughts, emotions, memories, name, role, and consciousness are also facts. They are real.

E. coli, my body, the Earth, the universe, and even a sack that produces poop and a salaried worker are also facts. They are real.

​

But I think all of these are different ways in which ‘I’ appear under different conditions or circumstances.

​

In other words,

they are clearly facts. They are real. But under different conditions or circumstances, they appear as ‘me,’ and when those conditions change, ‘I’ change as well.

​

Under the condition of species, ‘I’ am a human being.

Under the condition of family, ‘I’ am a father.

Under the condition of work, ‘I’ am a salaried worker.

I think there is no fixed ‘I.’ I am simply called a human being, a father, or a salaried worker, depending on the conditions or circumstances.

​

In other words, ‘I’ am not a fixed ‘I,’

but am a human being, a father, and a salaried worker all at the same time.

That is, when certain conditions are given, ‘I’ exist within those conditions, but when the conditions change, ‘I’ change as well.

​

This does not mean that ‘I’ do not exist.

Nor does it mean that ‘I’ do exist.

Depending on the conditions or circumstances, ‘I’ change and am called something different.

​

Put simply,

we could say that ‘I’ am neither something that exists nor something that does not exist.

​

Descartes says.

I think. Therefore, I exist.

The salaried worker says.

I think. I am neither something that exists nor something that does not exist. I merely become different.

​

This is not to say that Descartes is wrong and that I am right.

It simply means that, from my point of view, it can be seen this way as well.

​

A coin has a front, but it also has a back.

This does not mean that the front is right and the back is wrong.

We are simply looking at different sides.

.

.

.

.

From this perspective..

let’s take another look at the wisdom of balance of the four great sages discussed in the previous episode.

​

The salaried worker: I am neither something that exists nor something that does not exist.

Jesus: Neither an enemy (evil) nor someone I love (good).

Buddha: Neither following desire nor rejecting it.

Tess-hyung (Socrates): Neither knowing nor not knowing.

Confucius: Neither having too much nor having too little.

​

Let’s look at the pattern, rather than the subjects themselves.

All of them speak of a balance that does not lean to either side.

​

This does not mean that it exists.

Nor does it mean that it does not exist.

It is neither something that exists nor something that does not exist.

It merely changes and is determined by the circumstances or conditions.

​

If I were to use an analogy..

Light is both a particle and a wave.

Like an electron in quantum mechanics,

it merely appears differently depending on the conditions under which it is observed.

​

To use an analogy..

Whether one maintains the automatic system based on dichotomous thinking or classical mechanics,

or chooses the manual system based on non-dual thinking or quantum mechanics,

that is a matter of individual freedom.

​

It is not that one is right and the other is wrong.

Whichever one you choose,

either way, there will be no particular problem with living your life.

There will simply be consequences that follow from it.

.

.

.

.

I’m going to work again tomorrow.

.

.

.

.

Now, let’s move on to Ep. 19.

Ep. 19 and Carl Jung’s Sermon on the Mount have already been posted.

I’ve included the links below.

A Shift in Perspective: Ep. 19. Where Is Carl Jung Heading?

Interlude: Carl Jung’s Sermon on the Mount 🤦

.

.

.

.

[Original text]

​

융은 에고, 즉 ‘나’에서 시작하여 셀프를 향해 나아갑니다.

Ep.14 ~ Ep.18은 각각의 이야기이지만, 모두 융의 에고에서 출발하여 ‘나’라는 대상을 해체하는 과정입니다.

Ep 14. 나는 무엇인가?

→ 이름·직업·역할로는 나를 규정할 수 없다

Ep 15. 나의 경계는 어디인가?

→ 몸·미생물·지구·우주까지 경계가 흔들린다

Ep 16. 나는 어떻게 인식하는가?

→ 감각·생각·습관·자동시스템을 해체한다

Ep 17. 나는 어떻게 살아가는가?

→ 욕망·고통·자동반응·선택을 해체한다

Ep 18. 나는 존재하는가, 변하는가?

→ 데카르트의 고정된 ‘나’를 다시 해체한다

Ep 19. 그렇다면 융은 이 ‘나’를 어떻게 보는가?

→ 융은 ‘나’를 확장하는 것으로, 나(월급쟁이)는 ‘나’를 해체하는 것으로 보여집니다.

에피소드 로드맵을 간단히 정리하면:

융에서 시작해서 나를 흔든다 → 경계를 흔든다 → 인식 방식을 흔든다 → 삶의 방식을 흔든다 → 존재 자체를 흔든다 → 다시 융에게 돌아간다.

이제 Ep.18입니다.

마지막으로 ‘나’라는 존재를 흔들어봅니다.

모더레이션 팀에서 이 글이 융과 충분히 관련되어 있지 않거나, 다른 어떤 이유로든 커뮤니티의 기준에 부합하지 않는다고 판단하신다면, 삭제하셔도 괜찮습니다.

저는 모더레이션 팀의 판단을 존중합니다.

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

관점의 전환: Ep 18. 나는 생각한다. 그러므로 존재한다. 하지만 변한다.

​

​

이번에는 데카르트를 조명해 봅니다.

​

존재란 무엇일까요.

​

이미 우리는 Ep 14, 15에서 불편함을 무릎쓰고 '나'의 존재를 살펴보았습니다.

'나'는 누구 또는 무엇인가.

무엇을 '나'라고 할 것인가.

​

그리고 Ep 17에서도 존재가 이유보다 먼저라고

존재를 언급했었습니다.

그 존재에 대해 좀 더 살펴봅니다.

​

데카르트는 말합니다.

나는 생각한다.

그러므로 나는 존재한다.

​

나의 관점에서 '나는 생각한다'라는 문장은 두 가지를 말하고 있다고 분석됩니다.

​

하나는 생각이 일어나고 있다는 사실이고,

다른 하나는 그 생각을 하는 것이 ‘나’라는 주장입니다.

그 결과 ‘나’라는 실체가 존재한다는 결론으로 이어집니다.

​

생각이 일어나는 것은 실제의 사실이라고 생각합니다.

그런데 생각하는 실체를 ‘나’라고 할 수 있을지는 의문입니다.

왜냐하면 '나'라고 하는 실체가 무엇인지, '나'라는 것이 존재하는지 의문이기 때문입니다.

​

이미 Ep 14에서 살펴봤지만..

이름, 종, 작업, 지위, 역할 등

'나'는 누구 또는 무엇인가를 묻고 또 물으며

심지어 욕까지 얻어먹으면서 살펴보았지만 '나'는 찾을 수 없었습니다.

​

Ep 15에서는 무엇을 '나'라고 할 것인가를 다시 살펴보았지만,

몸, 생각, 감정, 기억, 이름, 역할, 의식 중

가장 확실해 보이는 내 몸을 살펴봤을 때 역시

대장균, 내 몸뚱이, 지구, 우주 그리고 똥자루와 월급쟁이 등 무엇을 '나'라고 할 것인지 찾을 수 없었습니다.

​

데카르트의 주장을 받아들이기 위해서는 먼저 그가 말하는 ‘나’라는 실체가 무엇인지 살펴볼 필요가 있지 않을까 생각됩니다.

도대체 ‘나’라는 실체를 무엇이라고 정의할 수 있을까요?

그래야 그가 말하는 ‘나’라는 실체가 실제로 존재하는지 확인할 수 있을 것이라 생각됩니다.

​

다시 천천히 살펴봅니다.

'나'의 이름, 종, 작업, 지위, 역할은 분명히 사실이고 실재합니다.

'나'의 몸, 생각, 감정, 기억, 이름, 역할, 의식 역시 사실이고 실재합니다.

대장균, 내 몸뚱이, 지구, 우주 그리고 똥자루와 월급쟁이 또한 사실이고 실재합니다.

​

하지만 이들 모두는 각각의 조건이나 상황 속에서 존재하는 '나'의 모습이라고 생각됩니다.

​

다시 말하면

이들은 분명 사실로서 실재하지만, 각각의 조건이나 상황 속에서 '나'로 드러나고 조건이 변하면 '나'도 변하게 됩니다.

​

'나'는 종이라는 조건에서 사람이고

'나'는 가정이라는 조건에서 아빠이고,

'나'는 직장이라는 조건에서 월급쟁이입니다.

그냥 조건이나 상황에 따라 이름이 사람, 아빠, 월급쟁이라고 다르게 불려질 뿐 고정된 나는 없다고 생각됩니다.

​

다시 말하면 '나'는 고정된 '나'가 아니라

사람이면서 아빠이면서 월급쟁이입니다.

즉 조건이 주어지면 그 범위 안에서는 존재하지만 조건이 바뀌면 나도 바뀌게 됩니다.

​

내가 없다는 말이 아닙니다.

내가 있다는 말도 아닙니다.

조건이나 상황에 따라 나는 변하고, 다르게 불려집니다.

​

이것을 간단히 말하면

'나는 있는 것도 아니고 없는 것도 아니다.'라고 말할 수 있습니다.

​

데카르트는 말합니다.

나는 생각한다. 그러므로 존재한다.

​

월급쟁이는 말합니다.

나는 생각한다. 나는 존재하는 것도 아니고 존재하지 않는 것도 아니다. 다만 변할 뿐이다.

​

데카르트가 틀리고 내가 맞다는 것이 아닙니다.

다만 내 관점에는 이렇게도 보여진다는 의미입니다.

​

동전은 앞면도 있지만 뒷면도 있습니다.

앞면이 옳고 뒷면이 틀린 것은 아닙니다.

서로 다른 면을 볼 뿐입니다.

.

.

.

.

이와 같은 관점에서..

이전 에피소드에서 설명한 4대 성인의 균형의 지혜를 다시 살펴봅니다.

​

월급쟁이: 나는 존재하는 것도 아니고 존재하지 않는 것도 아니다.

예수: 원수(악)도 아니고 사랑하는 사람(선)도 아니다.

붓다: 욕구를 따르는 것도 아니고 거부하는 것도 아니다.

테스형: 아는 것도 아니고 모르는 것도 아니다.

공자: 넘치는 것도 아니고 모자라는 것도 아니다.

​

대상이 아닌 패턴을 살펴봅니다.

모두 어느 한쪽으로 치우치지 않는 균형을 말합니다.

​

있다는 것이 아닙니다.

없다는 것도 아닙니다.

있는 것도 없는 것도 아닙니다.

상황이나 조건에 따라 변하고 결정될 뿐입니다.

​

굳이 비유하자면..

빛은 입자이면서 파동입니다.

양자역학의 전자처럼

관측 조건에 따라 그 모습이 달라질 뿐입니다.

​

비유컨대,

이분법적 또는 고전역학적 사고인 자동시스템을 유지하든

비이분법적 또는 양자역학적 사고인 수동시스템을 선택하든

그것은 각자의 자유입니다.

​

어느 것이 옳고, 어느 것이 그른 것은 아닙니다.

어느 것을 선택하든

어차피 사는데 별 지장은 없습니다.

다만, 그에 따른 결과가 있을 뿐입니다.

.

.

.

.

나는 내일 또 출근합니다.^^;

.

.

.

.

이제 Ep 19로 넘어가봅니다.

Ep 19와 융의 산상수훈은 이미 가장 먼저 게시했습니다.

아래에 링크를 남깁니다.

A Shift in Perspective: Ep. 19. Where Is Carl Jung Heading?

Interlude: Carl Jung’s Sermon on the Mount 🤦

We as humans, we have a natural capacity to do active imagination. We did it since we were born. But when we grow up, we stop it, since in our times it seems something that only lunatics do. When we were kids, we played with toys, have conversation with them, role play, we engage in imaginatiom, all of this is, active imagination. But when we start to “grow up” we stop ourself from doing this, then we find that is hard to live a life without it, and we turn to do it again.

Pardon my poor grammar. Please help me interpret the meaning of it. I am in desperate need for explanation and I dont have anyone personally to ask / discuss this with so I am resorting to this sub for some clarity. I would greatly appreciate any response. Thanks.

One day, last month, I was sleeping and I had a dream at 6:30 am when my body felt like it was shaking as if there was an earthquake, i felt my heart racing and beating fast, and as if someone just placed their palm on top of my head for a second right before waking up. I didnt know if it was sleep apnea / sleep disturbance or some positive or even negative spiritual experience.

Just before waking up, I also heard my mother's voice saying all my problems will be solved by 20th(didnt say which month or year) and when i woke up and checked the date it was sep 20th ! I didnt know it was the 20th when i slept and I was unaware of the date for most part of the week, but somehow coincidentally it was 20th of sept !!!!

last week I had another dream where I was begging god ( my personal god) to solve my problems. I was crying in my dreams. to add some background, I go to temple frequently and pray to that god to remove my problems.

more background: i have addiction and I do the 12 steps for recovery, coincidentally i started taking a medicine on oct 20th, from yesterday and I didnt realise it until i started typing it now. I am also sponsoring another addict like myself and yesterday ie 20th of oct, i realised something i was missing all along, the root cause of my major resentments - trying to play god and expecting people to behave in a certain acceptable decent way ie trying to control their actions. i also realised i was too arrogant to accept defeat and lacked acceptance in general. it was epiphanical tbh.

Idk where to post this, but it's like being able to see the whole battlefield while they are stuck on a single quarrel.

How free to act can we become when we reinforce this mode.of being?

I'm seeing a lot of potential here for individuation.

I'd like to hear the Jungian take on what's happening with the "artist-in-potentia", the person who loves the idea of being a dedicated artist but feels impotent when it comes to the process of the craft, the learning and failing and trying over and over again until success happens.

I've wanted to be an electronic music producer for so long. I technically am. But I haven't finished many projects, haven't publicly shared much, haven't dedicated serious time to it. I have hundreds of unfinished tracks, barebones ideas, etc. across 5+ years, but not much to show for it because the time I've spent has been sporadic and not super intentional. If I dedicated even 30 minutes a day consistently, watched tutorials, and actively learned, I could be so far ahead by now.

The impostor syndrome hits hard; I feel like all other artists have something I don't. I wasn't born with the artist gene. Somehow everything I do is intellectualized and forced, doesn't have that magic touch that makes art good. Even when I get in the habit of working on music, it usually only lasts a couple weeks or so before it goes back to "maybe one day I'll take it seriously". Yet when I do try, everything I make feels lacking. I can't get in the flow. The fun and enthusiasm drains as I see the gap between what's possible (by appreciating other artists work) and what I'm making.

I see the archetype of the "obsessed artist" and wonder why I can't seem to get that. Why doesn't the desire to work come naturally like it seems to for most artists? If I actually cared, would that libido flow on it's own? What if I actually don't care at all and that's why I can't seem to get momentum? Why can't it just be fun?

I'm not sure if this is some kind of puer, shadow self-sabotage or what. On one side is the pain of regret, of unfulfilled potential. On the other side is what feels like continually banging my head against a wall and getting nowhere. In the middle of these two poles, I can't seem to clear up the blockage to moving in the latter side. And when I settle for the former side, I continue to hear the whispering call to make art.

I'd be curious to hear others' artistic journeys. Is this an archetypal struggle for the artist? Was there a shift that occurred that allowed for the creative libido to flow more easily?

made this sketch years ago, like in 2018 - 2020 maybe and i really resonated with the resting wolf, and the thought of the world as the one screaming at me, but over the years ive come to realize i have adhd, had a lot of ingrained shame and so in actuality, both the wolves are me!!!

ive been also getting into jung and was just wondering what is your interpretation/ thoughts on this if i told you this is a self portrait 😛

also also i remember making this out of the blue one day when i was bored and frustrated with something else, and i did this in like 30 ish minutes or something... ivei been self taught in sketching, and rarely do it like once a year or something maybe whenever the inspiration hits me... despite that this photo has a lot of significance to me!! :)

Hi everyone!

I'm 31, and currently exploring a career shift into psychotherapy. I'm looking for one or several mentors who could help shape this journey through ongoing philosophical dialogue and guidance.

Jung's ideas about individuation, the unconscious, and synchronicities resonate deeply with me.

Reading Reddit discussions criticizing the mental health system has also been eye-opening. I'm drawn to people who question not just institutional structures and symptom-focused treatment, but our fundamental understanding of psychological suffering and transformation.

I haven't chosen a training institute yet. Rather than picking one at random, I'd love to connect with thinkers and practitioners I genuinely resonate with, then potentially study where they teach or follow their guidance.

My interests extend beyond therapy itself to human flourishing, intentional communities, the evolution of society, and what our future alongside AI might look like.

Ultimately, I hope to contribute not only through clinical work, but also to the evolution of psychotherapy and how we live as human beings.

I'm looking for intellectually independent, integrative, and creative people who aren't afraid to challenge established assumptions.

Online mentorship preferred, ideally UK-based, but open internationally.

Does anyone come to mind?

Hello, gonna be long and please discern deeply with your own intution if it can resonate what I am sharing or your soul, can share. I know everyone’s is different and would still like a perspective.

Been working in shadow work for a month now, working on being consistent but it’s been a difficult with many distractions from my family. Realizing that family is not my intution, nervous system would like to be with…. It cannot, I believe it cannot communicate or be there when with family.

when I went against my intuition to travel with family. My intuition has been supporting my nervous system. Everywhere my family park, my intution direct me to park far from them and would rather walk far alone than with them but my trauma bond, doubt and cling onto the need to be in family as danger may arrive even though it knows that I am capable of overcoming it but it keep falling for my dad’s projection of me that I am weak, can’t do anything without them and need to be with people than in solitude for “safety”. I end up parking next to my family and I realize my nervous system was on edge. I wanted to change parking but my intution knew that there’s too many people seeing you park there snd if you park again, they will find you weird and questioning why you do that or worse, showing that I hate my family by not parking next to them.

When it came to hotel, oh my gosh, it refuse to be at the same hotel building but I was already there snd was stuck with a family member. Then I notice my nervous system and intution went into shutdown mode and fawning badly like returning to old days when it’s the present. . My family wonders why I am avoiding them so much. When I share, they don’t seem to care, understand deeply and always tell me to tolerate it because they have done it or it’s better. Many times I just choose not to repeat what I said since I realize that their shadow, intution and nervous system was suppressed, avoiding and ignoring it. So I knew they can’t understand the unconscious language I was expressing because they haven’t gone that deep. Still I tried but at this point of they only care about action… When they all left, my intution came back quickly after my nervous system was calmer. It felt like friend visiting me with loveI never felt that in a long time and it wanted me to change the situation but my anxiety got in the way and I was still scared so, my nervous system snd anxiety had me go outside and walk while talking out loud that I will not do it but I made no actions and time slipped by. Soon, I fell into pressure of doing things my intuition refuses me to do and it went against my own values. Believing this will bring back healing with family and will be better but it didn’t. After the traveling, I got ghosted, avoided and they got what they needed from me so they resume their lives while I dealt with my consequences.

How can this be processed but importantly, I struggle to overcome fawning no matter what I do. Even just sensing them and knowing they’ll come at this day, my nervous system can’t relax where I can hear my intuition or even do shadow work well. Thankfully my nervous system and intution is somewhat calmer when with some siblings but parents, especially my dad, my nervous system really reject his presence and my intuition like doesn’t want it either so it at times tries to have me avoid any interactions because it is protecting me for me to focus on healing and shadow work.

It’s exhausting. Even now, my nervous system, the soul and intution becomes disassociated and shutdown living with them. Like it can’t heal from the people who broke me yet others tell me I have no better options and that just deal with it (tolerating, accepting and disassociate). It’s wrong for me to disassociate and I work hard to associate or even learn to tolerate their behavior. It’s wrong for triggers me a lot and can’t unravel when they’re around my life and environment. My trauma bond, clings onto them and gets influence by them deeply where I start to become like them. It’s extremely terrifying. What they provide, my intuition and nervous system knows it no longer works and hate to stay with them as they enjoy staying in the past and pretend everything is all good without accountability… I love them deeply and hate that my empathy for them was down to the core of knowing what their feelings, past life, struggles, etc. I hate being an empath and “forgiving” their flaws for breaking me.

Example.: It wanted me to buy hiking boots even though I was broke but I listen it and bought a hiking boot it wanted me to get despite the price being double. It was brown and black. I realize it was reminding me that the hiking boots that was double the price was the future of me and the cheaper boots (grey, neon blue) was the old me, projected by my family. I felt happy even though the price tag was double.

Then a few months later, some friends visited me but my intution was silent like it didn’t feel right to be with them despite my past experience with them. They are good people but my intution was silent and not in agreement. I thought, this is it! Use my hiking boots! I fawned by their pressure and went hiking with them. But later sleepover at their place and lead to old trauma… realizing it wasn’t wrong but that my intuition knew they were not the right friends to be with even if they are good people.

A few months later, I realize it wanted me to go solo hiking and camp.. I was scared but it knew it will break me free… when I realize it the season it wanted me to camp and the place to be in was close. I grew sad but it was forgiving me so it wanted me to do it next year, next year happened and I didn’t go. It got worse and my intuition just slammed in me. I wanted to make it up by taking this way which would make it happy but knowing it’s a rush planning.

What can be done? My intution is planning so much for me to get out, travel, and so forth but my nervous system and trauma bond including me struggle to understand it or plan it at the time it wants me to and by the time it happens, it was too late. It’s at a point of I can’t hear it and the word “TRY” , it hates that word because I can try but it only wants action to make it a reality like correct it and this time needs to show improvement. Been “trying” for the past two years and it knows that I needed to solo travel before I can’t.

Even now, I cannot sense of what it wants me to do or micro plan for the future because I kept failing and my own failing to conquer them, am being pulled to return the past version of myself where I buy, do, eat and act like my old self like second nature…. It hates it… even the food made by my family, it hates it. Sometime I eat it for comfort, survive and that thinking, “It’s better than nothing.” My intution would rather me starve than eat it… It’s terrifying. My belly burns a lot too but can’t reveal what, why unless I am at a hour where everyone is either asleep, away or I am alone. That usually mess up my sleep schedule and eating hour.

Jung begins with the ego, that is, the “I,” and moves toward the Self.

Ep. 14–Ep. 18 are individual stories, but they all begin with Jung’s concept of the ego and explore the process of deconstructing the “I.”

Ep. 14. What am I?

→ I cannot be defined by my name, occupation, or role.

Ep. 15. Where is the boundary of me?

→ The boundary becomes blurred, extending from the body and microorganisms to the Earth and the universe.

Ep. 16. How do I perceive?

→ I deconstruct the senses, thoughts, habits, and the automatic system.

Ep. 17. How do I live?

→ I deconstruct desire, suffering, automatic reactions, and choice.

Ep. 18. Do I exist, or do I change?

→ I deconstruct Descartes’ fixed notion of the “I” once again.

Ep. 19. Then, how does Jung see this “I”?

→ Jung expands the “I,” while I, a salaried worker, deconstruct the “I.”

To briefly summarize the episode roadmap:

Starting with Jung → shaking the “I” → shaking its boundaries → shaking the way I perceive → shaking the way I live → shaking existence itself → returning to Jung.

This time, in Ep. 17, I shake the way I live.

Will I be dragged along by the automatic system that reacts before thought,

or will I take the lead and guide it?

The red pill or the blue pill.

Even not choosing is a choice, and the choice is yours.

If the moderation team determines that this post is not sufficiently related to Jung, or does not meet the community’s standards for any other reason, please feel free to remove it.

I respect the moderation team’s judgment.

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

​

A Shift in Perspective: Ep. 17. When Asked Why We Live..

​

​

Just as I was about to start writing,

I suddenly remembered a poem that had been hanging in a frame in a corner of my room when I was a child.

​

Even if life deceives you, do not be sad or angry.

When the days of sorrow pass, days of joy will come.

The present is always sad,

the heart lives in the future, and what has passed becomes something to miss..

​

When I was a child, I didn’t even know who Pushkin was,

but the translated poem was short and somehow seemed cool, so I read it often and memorized it without even realizing it..

It has remained vivid in my mind to this day.

​

This time, let’s take a look at Pushkin’s poem.

​

Perhaps Pushkin’s intention was something like this.

​

The present is always painful.

Since joy and suffering come and go, joy will come in the future, and what has passed becomes a memory.

So, even when things are difficult, do not be sad.

​

But when we look at the same words from a different perspective,

I think both the happiness of the future and the happiness of the past are suffering.

Because the future is beyond my control, and the past cannot be brought back, neither can satisfy me in the way I want.

​

Perhaps it could also be seen as what is commonly called “Huimang Gomon” in Korea.

※ “Huimang Gomon” is a Korean expression referring to a situation in which hope itself becomes a source of suffering.

​

From this perspective,

if we were to summarize this poem that says the present is always sad in a matter-of-fact way, I think it would look like this.

​

① There is no need to suffer because joy and suffering repeat throughout life.

② The mind of the present suffers, the mind of the future suffers, and the mind of the past suffers.

​

When we read the original poem, it seems plausible, but when we summarize it this way, it seems quite illogical.

​

I can understand ① because joy and suffering repeat, but ② raises the question of why, amid that repetition, we fail to see joy and live seeing only suffering..

​

Since it repeats anyway, by changing our perspective,

rather than looking at the painful side of the present,

if we instead look only at the joyful side, the present will always be joyful,

and I think both the past and the future would be joyful as well.

​

But does this negative perspective really apply only to Pushkin?

I think most people are the same.

I, too, had never found this poem strange and had actually sympathized with it until I started writing this piece.

​

Anyway, let’s take another slow look, starting with ①.

Since joy and suffering repeat throughout life, there is no need to suffer.

​

I also agree with what Pushkin says here.

This is because I think there is neither eternal joy nor eternal suffering.

​

So I understand Pushkin as saying that since joy and suffering inevitably repeat throughout life, there is no need to suffer unnecessarily, because joy will come again anyway.

​

I think the widely known saying, “This too shall pass,” carries a similar meaning.

​

I would take this one step further.

If there were a scale that could measure the size or weight of suffering and joy,

I think they would be equal in size or weight as well.

​

Because if we want to obtain joy but fail to obtain it, suffering will increase by that much,

and conversely, if we obtain the joy we wanted, suffering will decrease by that much.

​

Ultimately, I think the weight is determined by how strong our desire for joy is.

​

In this context, I also think Jesus said something like this.

​

Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. [Matthew 5:3]

​

Because the less we desire, that is, the poorer in spirit we are, the less we suffer, I think Jesus also spoke of being poor in spirit as the first teaching of the Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount. [See Ep. 1. The Sermon on the Mount – The Beatitudes]

​

​

But when we look at ②, life is filled entirely with suffering.

​

Why is that?

​

I think the reason is simple.

​

Among the expressions commonly used in Korea, there is one: “A single moment can feel like Yeosamchu.”

It means that a single moment can feel as long as three autumns passing by.

Conversely, enjoyable moments pass by in the blink of an eye.

※ “Yeosamchu” literally means “three autumns,” referring to a moment that feels extremely long, as if three autumns were passing by.

​

In other words..

As I explained in the previous episode, I think our sixth faculty of perception—thought—perceives things differently depending on the conditions. [See Ep. 16. Kant, a Little Break]

​

Even if the amount of time is physically the same, we tend to feel joy as if it were only a moment, while we feel suffering as if it were eternal.

​

Ultimately, in our feelings, joy disappears in an instant, while only suffering remains as if it were eternal.

​

To give another example..

Half of the cup is filled with water.

Viewed from the opposite perspective, half of the cup is empty.

Depending on the perspective, the water is both there and not there.

​

If you want the water to be there,

it appears as, “I drank most of it, and there’s only half left.”

If you have no attachment to the water,

it appears as, “There’s still half of it left.”

​

The process of perception that makes us see only what we want to see,

in other words, the habit of thinking..

That is, I think the automatic system that operates before thought is the main reason we see only suffering.

.

.

.

.

At this point, let’s bring the title back into the discussion.

Why do we live in this world where only suffering remains?

​

Why do you live? It’s all suffering anyway..

​

In fact, I don't think there is a reason for living itself.

Because existence comes before reason.

I think the question of why we live, when we are already living, is itself a contradiction.

If there is no reason, or if the purpose has been achieved, should we die?

I think the proper question should be not “why,” but “how.”

​

How will you live? It’s painful in the end anyway..

​

Will you live seeing only the suffering that the automatic system shows you?

Or will you choose not to be led by the automatic system?

​

It is not that one is good and the other is bad.

Every choice comes with a price.

If that price had a weight, I think the prices that come with the two choices would also have the same weight.

But, like Yeosamchu, I think the weight we feel would be different.

​

Will you be led by the automatic system, or will you lead it?

There is simply the choice and the result that follows from it.

And that choice,

I think, is the same yet different, and different yet the same.

​

The choice is yours.

.

.

.

.

It seems like I’ve gotten a little too serious.

​

Is there anything special about life?

It’s fine to live knowing who Pushkin was,

and even if you don’t, it makes no difference to how you live.

​

If someone asks me,

“Why do you live?”..

I just live.

​

And if they ask again,

“How do you live?”

I go to work again tomorrow and just live. ^^;;

.

.

.

.

[Original text]

융은 에고, 즉 ‘나’에서 시작하여 셀프를 향해 나아갑니다.

Ep.14 ~ Ep.18은 각각의 이야기이지만, 모두 융의 에고에서 출발하여 ‘나’라는 대상을 해체하는 과정입니다.

Ep 14. 나는 무엇인가?

→ 이름·직업·역할로는 나를 규정할 수 없다

Ep 15. 나의 경계는 어디인가?

→ 몸·미생물·지구·우주까지 경계가 흔들린다

Ep 16. 나는 어떻게 인식하는가?

→ 감각·생각·습관·자동시스템을 해체한다

Ep 17. 나는 어떻게 살아가는가?

→ 욕망·고통·자동반응·선택을 해체한다

Ep 18. 나는 존재하는가, 변하는가?

→ 데카르트의 고정된 ‘나’를 다시 해체한다

Ep 19. 그렇다면 융은 이 ‘나’를 어떻게 보는가?

→ 융은 ‘나’를 확장하는 것으로, 나(월급쟁이)는 ‘나’를 해체하는 것으로 보여집니다.

에피소드 로드맵을 간단히 정리하면:

융에서 시작해서 나를 흔든다 → 경계를 흔든다 → 인식 방식을 흔든다 → 삶의 방식을 흔든다 → 존재 자체를 흔든다 → 다시 융에게 돌아간다.

이번에는 Ep 17.에서 내 삶의 방식을 흔들어 봅니다.

생각 이전에 반응하는 자동시스템에 끌려갈 것인가,

아니면 끌고 갈 것인가.

빨간약 또는 파란약

비선택을 포함해서 선택은 각자의 몫입니다.

모더레이션 팀에서 이 글이 융과 충분히 관련되어 있지 않거나, 다른 어떤 이유로든 커뮤니티의 기준에 부합하지 않는다고 판단하신다면, 삭제하셔도 괜찮습니다.

저는 모더레이션 팀의 판단을 존중합니다.

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

​

관점의 전환: Ep 17. 왜 사느냐고 물으면..

​

​

글을 쓰려다 보니..

갑자기 어린 시절 방 한켠에 걸려있던 액자의 시 한편이 생각납니다.

​

삶이 그대를 속일지라도 슬퍼하거나 노하지 말라.

슬픔의 날이 지나면 기쁨의 날이 오리니

현재는 언제나 슬픈 것

마음은 미래에 있고 지나간 것은 그리워지느니..

​

어린 시절 나는 푸시킨이 누구인지도 몰랐지만

번역된 시가 짧기도 하고 왠지 멋있어 보이기도 해서 자주 보다 보니 자연스럽게 외워졌는데..

현재까지 머릿속에 선명하게 남아있습니다.

​

이번엔 푸시킨의 시를 한번 살펴봅니다.

​

어쩌면 푸시킨의 의도는 이럴지도 모릅니다.

​

언제나 현재는 괴롭다.

즐거움과 괴로움은 반복되니 미래에는 기쁨이 오고 지나간 것은 추억이 된다.

그러니 힘들어도 슬퍼하지 마라.

​

하지만 같은 말을 다른 관점에서 보면

미래의 행복과 과거의 행복은 모두 괴로움이라고 생각됩니다.

왜냐하면 미래는 내 마음대로 안되고 과거는 되돌릴 수 없어 내가 원하는대로 충족이 안되기 때문입니다.

어쩌면 한국에서 흔히 말하는 ‘희망고문’처럼 볼 수도 있습니다.

​

이런 관점에서

언제나 현재가 슬프다는 이 시를 건조하게 다시 정리한다면 이렇게 된다고 생각합니다.

​

① 삶은 즐거움과 괴로움이 반복되기 때문에 마음이 괴로울 필요는 없다.

② 현재 마음도 괴롭고, 미래의 마음도 괴롭고, 과거의 마음도 괴롭다.

​

원문을 읽을 때는 그럴듯해 보이지만 이렇게 정리해보니 논리적으로 상당히 이상합니다.

​

①번은 즐거움과 괴로움이 반복되니까 이해가 되는데

②번은 그 반복 속에서 왜 즐거움은 보지 못하고 괴로움만 보고 사는가..라는 의문이 생깁니다.

​

어차피 반복되는 것이라면 관점을 바꿔서

현재 괴로운 면을 볼 것이 아니라

반대로 즐거운 면만 본다면 항상 현재가 즐거우니

과거도 미래도 즐거울 것이라고 생각됩니다.

​

그런데 이런 부정적인 관점은 과연 푸시킨만 해당될까요?

대부분의 사람도 마찬가지일 것이라고 생각됩니다.

나 역시 지금 이 글을 쓰기 전까지는 이 시에 공감하며 이상하다고 느낀 적은 없었습니다.

​

어쨌든 다시 ①번부터 천천히 살펴봅니다.

​

삶은 즐거움과 괴로움이 반복되기 때문에 마음이 괴로울 필요는 없다.

​

푸시킨의 이 말에는 나 또한 동의합니다.

영원한 즐거움과 영원한 괴로움은 없다고 생각하기 때문입니다.

​

그래서 푸시킨은 어차피 삶은 즐거움과 괴로움이 반복되기 때문에 어차피 즐거움이 오니까 굳이 괴로워할 필요가 없다고 말한 것으로 이해됩니다.

​

널리 알려진 '이 또한 지나가리라'라는 말도 같은 맥락이라고 생각됩니다.

​

나는 여기에 한 발 더 나아가서

만약, 괴로움과 즐거움의 크기나 무게를 잴 수 있는 저울이 있다면

나는 그 크기나 무게 또한 같을 것이라고 생각합니다.

​

왜냐하면 즐거움을 얻고자 하는데 즐거움을 얻지 못하면 그만큼 괴로움이 더해질 것이고,

반대로 얻고자 했던 즐거움이 충족되면 그만큼 괴로움이 사라질 것이기 때문입니다.

​

결국 그 무게를 결정하는 것은 즐거움을 바라는 마음의 크기라고 생각됩니다.

​

이와 같은 맥락에서 예수님 또한 이렇게 말했다고 생각됩니다.

​

마음이 가난한 자는 복이 있나니 천국은 그들의 것임이요. [마태복음 5장3절]

​

바라는 마음이 적을수록, 즉 마음이 가난할수록 괴로움이 적어지기 때문에

예수님 역시 산상수훈에서 팔복의 첫 번째 가르침으로 가난한 마음을 말씀하셨다고 생각됩니다. [Ep 1. 산상수훈 - 팔복 참고]

​

그런데 ②번을 살펴보면 삶이 온통 괴로움입니다.

​

왜 그럴까요?

​

이유는 간단하다고 생각됩니다.

​

한국에서 흔히 쓰는 말 중에

‘일각이 여삼추’라는 표현이 있습니다.

한순간이 세 번의 가을이 지나가는 것처럼 길게 느껴진다는 의미입니다.

반대로 즐거운 시간은 쏜살같이 지나갑니다.

​

다시 말하면..

앞의 에피소드에서 설명했다시피 우리의 여섯 번째 인식기관인 생각은 조건에 따라 다르게 인식되기 때문이라고 생각됩니다. [Ep 16. 쉬어가는 칸트 참고]

​

물리적으로 같은 시간이라고 하더라도, 우리는 즐거움은 순간처럼 느끼고 괴로움은 영원처럼 느끼는 경향이 있습니다.

​

결국 우리의 느낌 속에서는 즐거움은 순간으로 사라지고, 괴로움만 영원처럼 남게 됩니다.

​

또 다른 예를 들자면..

컵에 물이 절반이 있습니다.

반대로 보면 컵에 물이 절반이 없습니다.

관점에 따라 물은 있기도 하고 없기도 합니다.

​

컵에 물이 있는 것을 원하면

'물을 다 먹고 반밖에 안남았네'라고 보여지고

물에 대한 집착이 없으면

'물이 아직도 반씩이나 남았네'라고 보여집니다.

​

보고 싶은 것만 보게 하는 인식작용,

다시 말하면 생각의 습관..

즉 생각 이전에 작동하는 자동시스템이 괴로움만 보게 하는 주된 원인이라고 생각됩니다.

.

.

.

.

이쯤에서 제목을 소환해 봅니다.

우리는 괴로움만 남아있는 이 세상을 왜 살까요.

​

넌 왜 사니? 결국 괴로움인데..

​

사실 사는 것에 이유는 없다고 생각합니다.

이유보다 존재가 먼저이기 때문입니다.

이미 살고 있는데 왜 사느냐라는 질문 자체가 모순이라고 생각됩니다.

이유가 없거나 또는 목적이 달성되면 죽어야 할까요?

제대로 된 물음이라면 '왜'가 아니라 '어떻게'가 되어야 한다고 생각합니다.

​

너는 어떻게 살거니? 결국 괴로움인데..

​

자동시스템이 보여주는 대로 괴로움만 보고 살 것인가.

아니면 자동시스템에 끌려가지 않을 것인가.

​

어느 것이 좋고 어느 것이 나쁘다는 것은 아닙니다.

어느 선택이든 대가가 따르기 때문입니다.

만약, 그 대가에 무게가 있다면 두 가지 선택에 따른 대가 역시 그 무게는 같다고 생각됩니다.

하지만 여삼추처럼 우리가 느끼는 무게는 다를 것이라고 생각됩니다.

​

자동시스템에 끌려갈 것인가, 끌고 갈 것인가.

그냥 선택과 그에 따른 결과가 있을 뿐입니다.

​

그리고 그 선택은

같지만 다르고, 다르지만 같다고 생각됩니다.

​

선택은 자유입니다.

.

.

.

.

너무 심각한 것 같네요.

인생 뭐 있나요?

푸시킨이 누군지 알고 살아도 되고,

몰라도 사는데는 아무런 지장이 없습니다.

​

누군가 나에게

왜 사느냐고 물으면..

그냥 사는거죠.

​

또 다시

어떻게 사느냐고 물으면

내일 또 출근하고 그냥 삽니다. ^^;;

We don't have to believe we're being watched for the possibility of being watched to change our relationship with the world. Sometimes, nothing changes except our awareness of ourselves. We're laughing, talking, walking somewhere familiar. Then we become conscious of how we might appear to someone else. Nothing around us has changed, but something in the experience has. We're no longer entirely within the moment. We're also looking at ourselves from the outside.

We have always imagined how others see us. We learn to anticipate reactions, adjust our behavior, and understand ourselves through the people around us. But now, our actions can be recorded, preserved, and encountered by people who were never there. A moment can outlive its context. A version of ourselves can remain long after we've changed. The observer becomes less a person than a possibility. We don't have to believe anyone is watching. We understand that what happens can be documented, separated from the moment, and interpreted by someone whose perspective we cannot control. We can be seen without being understood.

But the strangeness goes beyond recording. We can turn the outside perspective on ourselves even when nobody else is present. We examine our reactions, question our motives, and wonder what our behavior says about us. We become both the person living the experience and the person observing it. Some of this is necessary. Self-awareness allows us to recognize our mistakes, understand our motives, and change. Without it, we would struggle to learn from experience. But there is a difference between reflecting on an experience and monitoring ourselves while we're living it.

Reflection can deepen our understanding of what we're experiencing. It can also turn our attention toward how we appear, what we're doing, and what the moment might say about us. The distinction isn't always clear. The same awareness that helps us understand ourselves can introduce distance between us and what we're living. I wonder what happens when we're accustomed to doing both at once, when we experience something while also considering how it looks, how it might be remembered, or what it reveals about the person we are. The experience becomes something we're living and something we're evaluating.

Perhaps something is lost in that distance. Not the experience itself, but the ability to let it happen without immediately turning it into a story about ourselves. There are moments when we forget to observe ourselves. We become absorbed in a conversation, laugh without considering how we look, or find ourselves somewhere beautiful without thinking about what the experience says about us. For a while, we're simply there. We can reflect on these moments afterward, try to understand why they mattered, and carry their meaning with us. But their value doesn't depend on our ability to explain them while they're happening.

Perhaps this is what interests me about the unobserved self. Not a hidden version of ourselves that nobody can see, but the possibility of experiencing life without continually turning ourselves into objects of our own attention. And yet, how would we recognize such a state without observing it? The moment we begin examining our experience, we introduce the very distance we're trying to understand. We can't simply abandon reflection. It's one of the ways we make sense of our lives. But understanding an experience and being present within it are not the same thing.

Can we understand ourselves without making ourselves into objects to be understood? I keep returning to this question because I don't know how to answer it without stepping outside the experience again. We look at ourselves to understand who we are, but neither perspective, from within or from without, seems capable of telling us everything. Perhaps we need both, though I don't know how they fit together.

The unobserved self may not be a self that nobody can see, or one that never looks inward. It may be the part of our experience that doesn't have to become an object of examination in order to matter. I don't know if we can fully escape the impulse to observe ourselves. Nor do I know whether recognizing the moments when we stop observing ourselves preserves them or changes them. Perhaps some experiences can only be understood afterward. Perhaps some lose something when we try to understand them too soon.

I know nothing about jung. I read the origins and history of consciousness and it went over my head. I made this playlist tho

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4ypi9w2P92PHXF7g9b82EDiAiabUT9pc&si=VvCoufXPu0zaaCK6

I designed it so that the last line of every song made this poem.

Titled: heart shaped tail

I lived my life so desperate to be in control

But the day waits for no one

And a cheerless pier we will set alight

Well I wish that I had

Oh, do you, do you, do you, do you?

Imma feed the birds again

In that empty hotel by the sea

Begin to mend

You’re not the saviour now

Just go until you feel different

These situations, they often arise

Am I doomed?

You can’t laugh

Appropriate emotions for two homo sapiens to feel in situations like this

‘Cause I am not going to die this way

Woo

Walking into blackness

And I could see for miles, miles, miles

And I’m frightened by those who don’t see it

Is this a jung? It feels a little collective consciousy for music to fit like this. I have like 5 other playlists where I try to do the same thing, and they’re pretty satisfying to listen to in my mind. 🤷🏽‍♂️

Question for all Jungian therapists out there: Are you using any metaphoric card decks within therapy and if so please could you recommend any? I feel that I really need one, which may include some archetypal scenes or images without texts and more abstract.

Many people want to say gender is something fundamental to reality. Something informed by biology or some religious/ spiritual design. Many people want to say it's purely conventional, a performance that has been enforced through structures of power and control.
I think locking gender into any one thing limits the freedom of such words. I believe gender is going through the same process of annihilation that the word art went through. We all have this notion that there is something called art, but we can’t localize that word because of the avant garde’s process of pushing the boundaries of definitions until words like art encompass anything and everything, and therefore loses any substantial meaning it once had. Yes, art is dead, but it is also through its nonexistence that anything can arise to be called art. 

I believe it is natural for us humans to gravitate towards understanding what is considered outside of our own subjective experience. It is afterall, what is outside of us that poses the biggest existential threat. We can fight the outer world, forcing it into submission of our will, or we can submit to our environment finding some ultimate connection through our expanding sense of self that absorbs the various signifiers and signs into our constructed identity. When a man is born he is assigned the word male. The word Female will immediately enter a world of othered existence in his psyche. The experience man first has with Womaness will likely be his mother, who carried and sustained the first stages of his life. Woman becomes associated as a life sustaining force for him, and since he cannot identify with woman as a baby, the archetype of life becomes objectified in relation to his subjecthood. Therefore, he will spend a lot of his life longing for something he believes sustains his existence. The manner in which people create relationships between self and the opposite gender varies. For some it is through a hetrosexual relationship, for others a transition of their cultural signifiers, and for some people like me it is more of an internal and spiritual process. Now, obviously women have their own subjecthood, and as subjects they possess the absolute freedom to change and fluctuate their own sense of self that they construct from outside signs and signifiers. This creates an unfortunate tension where men become patriarchal as a means of keeping a life sustaining energy fixed into a stable concept that they can reliably circle back to and extract from. This is why I believe  there is such aggression and hostility towards feminism from many men. It is the destabilizing of a platform men built that affirms their own existence.   

Outlined by the Madhyamaka Buddhist is a way of seeing in which all phenomena are empty and baseless. There is no ground floor to the concepts of Man and Woman. The chain of association and causality of thoughts is infinite and recursive. This is to say that I don’t believe anyone is a man or woman. They are ideals that have absorbed a collective meaning, and the reality is that most people have a combination of both masculine and feminine associated characteristics. The concept of man gets othered from woman which creates an othered archetype in their subconscious, the same thing happens to man. I have spent a good chunk of my adolescence, like many other men, projecting my inner feminine outward onto individuals carrying the signifiers of that inner image of womaness. Obviously this flatness the subjecthood of the other person by putting them in comparison to the ideal, and therefore limits their freedom. I believe to truly love someone, through agape and not eros, is to recognize their independence, autonomy, and freedom that allows for an endless feedback loop between imagination and understanding. This is not to say that romantic companionship or sexual exploration is not a worthy pursuit, but that it should be pursued with the awareness that it is ultimately a performance that both parties enter with the recognition that neither are wholly fixed to such roles or concepts. That being said, when the ideal has no object to fix itself to there is an unquenchable longing for it. Without a hetero-relationship I could transition by expressing myself with the signifiers of womaness, but there is the undeniable feeling that this too would fall short of closing the gap for me. It remains true that I experienced most life as a man, it remains true that I still associate biological processes such as childbirth and menstruation with the feminine archetype. I will never know what it feels like to be capable of carrying a child, so even If I don’t call that biological process woman, there would still be something othered from my sense of self that some people have access to. 

For me, there will forever be this longing for this empty word, “woman”. I am aware that Shakti has no fixed point, for she is a creative dynamic force. In Hinduism Shakti can incarnate as a motherly figure, and she can also incarnate as a fearsome warrior. She has no fixed form and therefore is everywhere and simultaneously nowhere at the same time. But it is in that longing where I realized it’s the hole in me, my shakti, that allows for me to endlessly create. I long for the divine feminine, my shakti, but come to realize time and time again that it cannot be found for I see the ultimate emptiness of it. However, it is in my process to find her through creation and a search for meaning, where I end up creating more and more works of art. They don’t fill the hole, but they do change me from the inside. I am overcome with both a dreadful and beautiful feeling. I get the sense I will never find what I'm looking for, but I also now understand that this is the very engine that allows for her to express herself through me. If i were to lock a concept or thing onto her, I would be limiting her personal freedom and potentially, so instead im always orbiting around her as a reference point. Never quite one with her, never quite free from her, never knowing where she is. I exist in that tension between, where she can manifest as anything, but is never bound to being one thing either. It is a perpetual state of  chasing and becoming that never ceases to end. A wheel that I can’t get off, because I’m in love with the ever unfolding nature of its movement.

Hi everyone!

For the past year and a half, I've been exploring archetypes through my dreams and keeping a dream journal. I took a two month break for personal reasons, but today I decided to start writing my dreams down again. This was the first dream I had after that break, and I'd really appreciate hearing your thoughts on it. I find many things from the dream interesting but can't understand it all, so I'm curious to hear how others may interpret them.

Here is the dream:

I dreamed that I was in a forest with a group of friends. At first we were filming some music video for a song, and when we finished we decided to just wander around the forest for a bit. I left my regular phone in the car and took an old one that could only make calls, just in case. The forest was beautiful. No people, pure nature. It was on some uninhabited island where people literally had no access. We were walking through the forest when we heard a very strange song from afar, as if it was being sung by a strange child, supposedly in a child’s voice but with a dark, weird undertone. Up on the hill you could see a kind of house that was more like a closed off facility. Cameras, a high barbed wire fence, armored windows etc. My friends got scared and asked whether someone was going first or if we should just skip it because they were afraid to go there. I said I wasn’t scared and started walking in that direction first. I approached the gate and there stood an older woman who was singing that song in a child’s voice. When she saw us she quickly went into a glass room made of thick bulletproof glass and said we shouldn’t be there, but nothing more. Somehow we managed to get inside, but we were in a kind of entrance hall. White walls, white light, doors with armored windows, a bit like a hospital or some government facility. They locked us in that room. There were two doors, one large double door that seemed to lead further inside, and a smaller one next to it. We tried to go through but couldn’t. At one point I lay down next to the smaller door and through a thin gap an nearly invisible hand, as if made of black gas, grabbed my arm. It pulled my arm very hard, so that I couldn’t move even a centimeter. I was paralyzed, the air became thick, and I felt that if it wanted to it could literally explode my head, yet it didn’t hurt me. I lay motionless for a while but eventually it let go. It seemed purely animalistic and emotional, as if it was being held captive there and wanted to communicate that way because it couldn’t do it otherwise. I moved away from the door and a mild panic started in the group, still wrapped in a joking tone though. We wanted to call the police or any help, but the facility was blocking everyone’s phone signal. At some point we noticed a third door. I went inside and there was a locker room. Some shoes, jackets, etc. I liked the shoes, they looked good quality, so I decided to put on a pair so that if needed I could run better and move more easily in general. I put on one shoe and laced it up very tightly, not knowing what awaited us, when suddenly a huge man with a long beard appeared inside, resembling a giant. He said nothing and his eyes radiated cold. He simply started killing us, and he was so strong that no one stood a chance even though there were about 8 or 10 of us. He killed us all. But the dream didn’t end. The next thing I saw were a kind of dinosaurs or old wild animals that had lived on this island hundreds of years ago and carried on normal conversations. One of them, like a chief who looked like a huge wolf, was first talking to another wolf about how that one had accidentally fallen on his dog. The other got up and apologized, then unknowingly handed him the dog’s corpse, thinking it was still alive. It was lying on the wolf’s back and the huge wolf forgave him, as if knowing that the other didn’t even understand what he had done, and said that he had to find a new dog anyway. The words didn’t come from indifference exactly, he just lived in a world where death was everyday. Then a dinosaur resembling a huge chicken with beautiful shiny feathers said that “there are only 97 thousand of us left, the bigger we are, the stronger we are, but then it’s hard to make equipment for us.” He meant specifically his species, though they lived in harmony with other dinosaurs, and by equipment he meant some small ornaments and armor, thin silver pendants and small armor pieces for the animals. Then I also saw my group of friends as people who in other incarnations had lived in harmony with these dinosaurs, dressed in some skins and clothes resembling Neanderthals. I understood then that this institution has been killing people and animals since the dawn of time, has existed there since the age of the dinosaurs, and already back then it had modern technology. As if it had some separate purpose of its own that I don’t understand. Then I woke up.

Id be interested in any interpretations. I know dream interpretation is highly personal, so I'm not looking for a definitive answer, just different perspectives from people with more experience that might help me understand the dream better, because there is a lot happening. Also, what could the invisible being from the facility be or represent? After waking up I felt a fascination with it and a will to build a connection with it, but it sounds like a bad idea to me. The being was very powerful with a very heavy energy. It had full power over me only by grabbing my arm and could kill me any time it wanted to. It was made out of pure emotions and intuition, more like an animal then a being that thinks and acts like a human. The only means of communication it had was grabbing my arm.

Thanks for reading!

I don’t try to lucid dream but last night I had a semi lucid moment in my dream.

In my reading of Jung, though far from complete, I never encountered him writing of lucidity in dreams.

Has anyone read of this from Jung or his students? Or have any thoughts on the subject?

Thanks

Jungian Dream....

In this essay, we discuss the myth of the Succubus and two of its three components, the castrated and castrating woman. How can this help us better understand where Jordan Peterson and the traditional psychoanalytic tradition go so wrong in regard to the “feminine” archetype? In understanding myth, we must be conscious how our own perspective is always projected onto the world no matter how hard we try otherwise.

Thanks for your time and attention :)