Re: new jobs and narrow paths

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/4/2002 11:31:54 AM Central Daylight Time,

toni.toni2@... writes:

> I do not see, hard as I try ,to see another way to get at one's unconscious

> objectively, however well we think we know ourselves.( what people mean

> when

> they say they have self knowledge is of their ego consciousness which is

> all

> they can rationally perceive.)

>

> So, I guess I will out there alone, although I know a few who agree with

> me.

> Honesty is honesty. And this is how I myself feel.

>

Who was Jung's analyst?

Namasté

Sam in Texas §(ô¿ô)§

Minds are like parachutes; they only function when open. - Sir Dewar

A closed mind is a good thing to lose.

" Minds are like parachutes; most people use them only as a last resort. "

~Ben Ostrowsky

[Guest guest]

Dear Steve,

I can only speak for myself, but I would not be where I am today without

analysis.

I knew exactly what was wrong with me before I ever started. I am good at

self knowledge.(the analyst agreed ) But as my analyst said...it was all in

my head.

It was not until I was in relationship to someone and suffered through all

the changes with her support that it was possible to get from head to

heart/soul , to strength to endure.

I do agree with the idea that without analysis thoroughly done, it is almost

impossible to examine the unconscious. Anybody can have self knowledge of

their conscious....ego. All it takes is time and effort

But, in my opinion one need an other who is totally accepting to get from

here to there.

I don't say, because I do not know, if it is possible without a learned

loving, accepting dedicated other to become individuated. Anything is

possible, I am sure. But I don't think it is very likely, with all the good

intentions in the world.And withall the skill in self introspection.

And I would add, someone who has some knowledge of the unconscious and how

to get there...and how to interpreter it. Talking over dreams, for example.

I missed a lot as I discussed them, and still more that I could never have

found by myself. ( I have read the books on Jungian dream interpretation,

all I could get my hands on.) But someone who knew me " inside and out " could

make connections I never would have seen.

What is so awful about saying what one thinks is true...as in Daryl Sharp?

I think he was willing to take the heat for an unpopular statement. And he

knew how others would perceive it.

Jung said that those who were happy and content within their religions did

not need an analyst. They would progress as far as possible within the

participation mystique and I imagine that is pretty far. Others would go

some distance with honestly and some books, or a guru.

or teacher as in Zen.

What we all need is a loving, non judgmental, accepting, knowledgeable other

whom we can trust totally, and who is dedicated to our growth.

Some spiritual directors, if one can find one, might be able to stand in.

Maybe, but who has that kind of time and desire to dedicate oneself to just

a few at a time...spiritual directors are pretty busy about other things.

I can see I will be drummed out of the list as elitist, or whatever. I

waited 10 years before I could finally get to an analyst once I saw the

need.{ when the student is ready, the teacher will come} And it is

expensive, I know.Most insurance will only pay a half or two thirds of each

session. Be all that as it may, the truth of Daryl Sharps statement is not

influenced by these other facts.

Most of us can live adequately , and do " some " of the work with friend or

close someone, but I doubt we would be willing to lay it all on the line, or

find the total acceptance necessary. It is a great burden to put on a loved

one, even if it were possible.

One can lead a good life without individuation, no one denies that. And I

personally think, a fulfilled and happy life can be without Jungian

analysis. ( I go to the best cardiologist available, not just any. Someone

else, another doctor could help me, I am sure, but the best is the best, and

knows what could go wrong at any moment, and perhaps save my life again.)

I do not see, hard as I try ,to see another way to get at one's unconscious

objectively, however well we think we know ourselves.( what people mean when

they say they have self knowledge is of their ego consciousness which is all

they can rationally perceive.)

So, I guess I will out there alone, although I know a few who agree with me.

Honesty is honesty. And this is how I myself feel.

I sign this in trepidation as I duck.

Toni

new jobs and narrow paths

> fa, all,

>

snip> ***

>

> I'm reminded of Daryl Sharpe who has stated numerous times that

> 'individuation *cannot* proceed' to mature stages without a

> relationship with a competent diplomate analyst.

>

> I find such an orthodox viewpoint appalling. I would say more about

> it as a conceit in relationship to a process that is not -by

> definition- supposed to be so hermetic and elitist.

>

> But, I don't know if such a view would appropriately represent the

> ruling ethos of 'institutional' " Jungianism " .

>

> ***

>

> I feel for you. My only credential is my own experience but I don't

> put up for a second with the idea that the face value of (any) one's

> training is proof enough for the pudding of real capability...if you

> know what I mean.

>> It beats laying down with father Freud and the psychopharmacologists

> and their bereft theories of sublimated > ***

> snip

> It sounds like the narrow path of the Jung institutes where you are

> haven't integrated the resolution to the religious problem of

> training.

>

> regards, best wishes,

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Toni, all,

Trepidation? Either Daryl Sharp is stating something true or not

true. The conceit is simple enough: the system of Jungian therapy

operated by trained analysts and specified by Jung is the *only*

vehicle for substantial, mature individuation. He doesn't leave any

wiggle room.

Another conceit offered by those who would have it that advanced

individuation may proceed without any relationship other than the

relationship one has with their own psyche.

I think both miss the mark. And I have not made any case for going it

alone or completely alone.

The problem with the narrow path construed by Sharp doesn't have to

do with work accomplished with an analyst. The problem has to do

with the assumptions which underlay such an assertion. It seems

obvious to me: that the psyche is set up to individuate with the help

of diplomate analysts only, is a grand scheme defeated by the fact

that the psyche is more grand than that!

Generally one has to fit in all the work done in the relationship

between students and adepts in all the systematic procedures having

to do with self-realization. Jung is one procedure among many

possibilities. In other words, the therapy implicit in the analytic

psychology isn't even the only way to individuate.

However the question remains, does the way of individuation

-specified as a procedure to be accomplished only in the relationship

with a diplomate trained analyst- preclude all other ways? That's a

rub, really. Best accomplished? Perhaps. Only accomplished? Doubtful.

Sharp's statement is didactic and unfounded. He's never offered any

rational or irrational proof, because there is no such proof. A cynic

might qualify it as a political sentiment since one nowadays can

study Jung rigorously outside of the Jung Institutes in other

programs.

(Meanwhile we have to also encompass the odd and rare miraculous

transformations. The uwayys path in Sufism doesn't require direct

contact between teacher and students and in fact triangulates the

hidden effective procedures between the baraka of Allah, the baraka

of the Pirs and far-flung saliks who never have any contact with the

materialized formal system and a tariqa at all, and thus the

operation of their advance through the stations of the Secret is

hidden to them. Relationship is key in this example, but its nature

(non-physical and non-mental,) is very odd. This is -of course- an

extremely rarefied example but it none-the-less accepts the totality

of grandeur implicit in the path-making of self-aware consciousness

and the comprehensive cosmic 'set-up'. Farther out: anything may be

possible.)

***

You write,

>I don't say, because I do not know, if it is possible without a learned

>loving, accepting dedicated other to become individuated. Anything is

>possible, I am sure.

If anything is possible, then Sharp is wrong. But he's more wrong to

suppose that the Self organizes the Psyche along explicit operational

lines that require a very specific form of relationship circumscribed

by, not Jung, and certainly not by the facts described by the

munificence of the ways of traveling from the circumference to the

source, but rather only by the gatekeepers of the Jung Institutes

with their 'investment' and verified expertise and piece of paper.

You and I certainly agree about the likelihood some kind of

relationship with an 'expert' (etc.) will be decisive and valuable

and -with few exceptions- necessary. But, Sharp's assertion is

illogical albeit self-serving in the sense that if there are to be

keys to the Jungian kingdom, they might as well be held by those who

are 'trained' and needing to make a living.

***

I wonder what Maureen would have to say about Sharp's statement? By

the way, the professionalization of the formats for teachers working

with students on the problem of self-realization would strike some

" old school " teachers as being a laughable concept.

regards,

[Guest guest]

One might assume that at least one analyst was Freud, since Freud was

Jung's mentor for a time, correct?

-----Original Message-----

Who was Jung's analyst?

Namasté

Sam in Texas §(ô¿ô)§

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/5/2002 11:49:34 AM Central Daylight Time,

toni.toni2@... writes:

> Well my friend from Texas..In answer to your question, and 's below:

> .all those who are the same caliber of genius as

> Jung, and knew Freud enough to deal with him on the subject of the

> unconscious, ( among other things)and was married to Emma Jung, are exempt

> from my remarks, and answer your question.

Thank you.

Namasté

Sam in Texas §(ô¿ô)§

Minds are like parachutes; they only function when open. - Sir Dewar

A closed mind is a good thing to lose.

" Minds are like parachutes; most people use them only as a last resort. "

~Ben Ostrowsky

[Guest guest]

Well my friend from Texas..In answer to your question, and 's below:

..all those who are the same caliber of genius as

Jung, and knew Freud enough to deal with him on the subject of the

unconscious, ( among other things)and was married to Emma Jung, are exempt

from my remarks, and answer your question.

How many people do you think have his capacity to delve into their own

unconscious as he had at 13?

For us relatively normal mortals, we don't even come close.

Another answer would be, all those who discovered Einstein's theory before

him.

,

Pretty riled up about that Daryl, aren't you? You use " conceit " a number of

times, " implicit grandeur " and other such words. You strip what is implied,

and correct to most from the actual words used. " right? wrong? absolute?

Since there are so many ways

to interpreter all the words used " individuation " mature individuation "

advanced individuation " {How psyche is organized, " " miraculous

transformations " etc

The problem is simple. You did not read what I wrote.

It is perfectly possible to get all the training as an analyst and still

fail. As it is ,for someone who had all the qualifications but no diploma,

he could succeed.

I talked about loving. That wasn't just added on unthinkingly. I talked

about non judgmental, fully accepting also.

I donot consider analysis as purely technique. If it were you would be right

to be so incensed. The relationship between analyst and analysand is what is

important for any change to happen.

Diploma, no diploma makes no difference....but there is a lot more to

analysis than following preset guidelines, I think., To give credit where

credit is due, lets give Daryl Sharpe the benefit of implying all those

things above as an integral part of analysis. Without the

transference...counter transference nothing much will happen...that is love

at work.

All those points I thought I raised, and all that made you mad was Daryl's

words. Poor lonely words, with no hint of your emotional interpretation. (

that's OK, I get that way often, but it is not just to the other person.)

I repeat to get a handle on the unconscious and to do the work, there must

be redeeming love and acceptance. Since I personally know no other system

that depends on love for healing, I stick by what I said.( I made exception

for gifted shamans, priests or teachers).

It is not a method, a technique that heals...and Jung says that often, it is

love. Someone who trains as an analyst must be willing to go that extra mile

if they are to succeed.

I know of no other system which is more than a system.

Guess, I will stick to what I said...which was not what you heard.

Toni

Re: new jobs and narrow paths

In a message dated 9/4/2002 11:31:54 AM Central Daylight Time,

toni.toni2@... writes:

> I do not see, hard as I try ,to see another way to get at one's

unconscious

> objectively, however well we think we know ourselves.( what people mean

> when

> they say they have self knowledge is of their ego consciousness which is

> all

> they can rationally perceive.)

>

> So, I guess I will out there alone, although I know a few who agree with

> me.

> Honesty is honesty. And this is how I myself feel.

>

Who was Jung's analyst?

Namasté

Sam in Texas §(ô¿ô)§

Minds are like parachutes; they only function when open. - Sir Dewar

A closed mind is a good thing to lose.

" Minds are like parachutes; most people use them only as a last resort. "

~Ben Ostrowsky

[Guest guest]

Toni, all,

I heard you clearly. Perhaps you wished for my reply to address your

ideas differently than the way it did address them?

***

>It is not a method, a technique that heals...and Jung says that often, it is

>love.

Fine. ...makes sense to me: in such a relationship, love is essential.

Maybe Sharp would agree, although my recollection of what he wrote is

simply what I recounted. Nor does his statement anger me.

Is anything possible? I don't know.

***

Fine essay in the new Parabola on this general theme, " Guided

Self-Sufficiency " by Easton Waller.

regards,

[Guest guest]

No, ,

I just feel that the answer to individuating is all in the loving guidance,

which is the main part of Jungian thought, I believe. I know of no other

therapy that supports transference, that is all.

I was just giving Sharpe the benefit of the doubt because I happened to

agree with him. No problem in any case.

Toni

Re: new jobs and narrow paths

> Toni, all,

>

> I heard you clearly. Perhaps you wished for my reply to address your

> ideas differently than the way it did address them?

>

> ***

>

> >It is not a method, a technique that heals...and Jung says that often, it

is

> >love.

>

> Fine. ...makes sense to me: in such a relationship, love is essential.

>

> Maybe Sharp would agree, although my recollection of what he wrote is

> simply what I recounted. Nor does his statement anger me.

>

> Is anything possible? I don't know.

>

> ***

>

> Fine essay in the new Parabola on this general theme, " Guided

> Self-Sufficiency " by Easton Waller.

>

> regards,

>

>

>

>

>

> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings

may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering. "

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

You wrote:

>

>

> ***

>

> I'm reminded of Daryl Sharpe who has stated numerous times that

> 'individuation *cannot* proceed' to mature stages without a

> relationship with a competent diplomate analyst.

>

Does he really say that? This would mean that Jung's individuation did not

proceed to mature stages - not to mention Socrates and a host of others. Or

are we to assume that Jung was finally analyzed by one of his own students?

Regards,

Dan

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/11/02 2:25:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

dwatkins5@... writes:

> > I'm reminded of Daryl Sharpe who has stated numerous times that

> > 'individuation *cannot* proceed' to mature stages without a

> > relationship with a competent diplomate analyst.

> >

>

> Does he really say that

I asked DARYL n he said that this was total misrepresentation - i suggest

Steve that u contact him directly at icb@... n sort it out.

i know the man, have read his bks, n just know that he wld never imply such a

thing!

love

ao