1

Ep LOUISE
=

LEC IORS
0 ve

OPE N COURT PAPERBACKS

OPEN COURT
$11.95

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2022 with funding from
Kahle/Austin Foundation

https://archive.org/details/projectionrecoll000Ofran_l5n3
 Aastinet rs.rrchetype (SAID) 9: off
. Boe 7 Symbol fF Je

Another dhinitirn obarchel/

fe pr?
Projection VineVEL a
and Re-Collection Gilly haa
in Jungian Psychology [4 4

ieihe C Aon feady

for mteqrattion
fp
un-inte {a teu. le,
archety pa l Contents 17
projec lon S, 9/3
éauTonomows peawer

| ais duper sie or auchstic Stith.

por : of possession in proected
aan (ontenX5, pa.i4

Iranste TENCE = frye e 70 1, [4 )

: : F ; ce SEY
Letin (ton a Liteql 10/4,{9 Hf
 Sa
THE REALITY -ObP THE PS YCre SERIES
Projection
and Re-Collection
in Jungian Psychology

Reflections of the Soul

Marie-Louise von Franz

Translated by William H. Kennedy

Open Court
La Salle & London
THE REALITY OF THE PSYCHE SERIES
General Editor:
Louise Carus Mahdi
Advisory Board:
Gerhard Adler, Ernest Bel, Michael Fordham, Marie-Louise
von Franz, Marco Gay, James Hall, Joseph Henderson,
Elie Humbert, Thomas Kapacinskas, William H. Kennedy,
Thomas Lavin, John Mattern, William McGuire, C. A. Meier,
Lee Roloff, Jeffrey Satinover, June Singer, Murray Stein,
Jane Wheelwright, Joseph Wheelwright, Edward Whitmont,
Harry Wilmer, Beverly Zabriskie, Philip Zabriskie
Designer:
Design Office/Peter Martin

a
Open Court and the above logo are registered in the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office.

Originally published as Spiegelungen der Seele: Projektion und

innere Sammlung. © Kreuz Verlag, Stuttgart, 1978.

First paperback printing 1985

Second printing 1986
Third printing 1987

Translation copyright © 1980 by Open Court Publishing

Company. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may
be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior
written permission of the publisher, Open Court Publishing
Company, La Salle, Illinois 61301.

Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Catalogue Number 80-52471

ISBN 0-87548-417-4
Contents

Foreword

Definition of Projection
Projection in Everyday Life
The Five Stages in the Withdrawal of Projections
Projection and Projectile
Subjective Level and Objective Level
Possession and Loss of Soul

The Withdrawal of Projections

in Religious Hermeneutics
The Approach of the Gods to Men
Allegory in the Gnosis and in Early Christianity
Typos in Origen and the Early Middle Ages
Signs of Schism in the Second Millennium

Projection and Scientific Hypotheses

The First Principle
The Infinite Sphere as God, Cosmos, and Soul
Particles, Elements, and Causality
Energy and Field of Force
Psyche and Matter
The Hypothesis of the Collective
Unconscious ees
The Model 77
The Multiple Unity of the Collective Unconscious 54
The Polar Nature of the Collective Unconscious 8&9

The Evil Demons 2S

Exorcism of Devils or Integration of Complexes? i)
The Demons of Antiquity 107
The Demons in Christianity 111
The Problem of the Relation of the Archetypes
to the Subject 116

The Great Mediating Daimons 122

Psyche and Eros in Apuleius i
The Masculine Companion in Woman’s Psyche 134

The Inner Companion 143

The Guardian Spirit 143
The Inner Companion in Hermetic Philosophy
and in Alchemy 150
§& Consciousness and Inner Wholeness
The Return
The Eye as Symbol of“Insight”
Re-Collection
Individuation and Relatedness

9 Reflection
The Original Meanings of Reflection
Fourfold Mirroring
Mirroring of Psyche and Matter (Synchronicity)

Notes

Bibliography

Index
 —=— -
om
dead erdlivek Seataciej
wu a
> past
—_ 7 = 8s ee
—s 1° = Se opclee
a whe

or
— == oes
: ;

‘
Bid elas Frat ices alas Mange : wen
- =* fn

Sa rs

-
=

=
Foreword

The part played by projection in practical psychotherapy hav-

ing interested me for a long time, I finally made up my mind
to investigate it. As I began to look into the subject more
closely, it became clear to me that the word projection does, to
be sure, describe a set of facts that in practice are easily
enough demonstrated, but at the same time this concept leads
into borderline areas where there are still unsolved problems.
For some of these problems I am unable to suggest solutions;
the purpose of this work 1s therefore limited to an attempt to
shed some light on those questions that are still open. A study
of these problems brings us up against a mysterious quality of
human consciousness, that of mirroring the world. If nothing
but epistemological considerations were involved, perhaps
we could let the matter drop; but the phenomenon of projec-
tion is also an eminently moral and practical problem, which I
have therefore tried, by circumambulation, to clarify a bit,
with special attention to the theory of demons in antiquity.
Given the demons in our present world, perhaps one or more
readers will be induced to reflect seriously on these matters,
which in my opinion we all need to do.
 e

ee “yma
a a aye = Tid ore

Sap Lae ‘hs aha

i +E ae ea
'> - a op5ae .
< ee by oot
b hoon a \ia 1S ra a> ver WW

ee — iS arens 16° omg wea: = ae

ip, Veal, Arve, pe a ae Nm a
ies WES pip Sait i ays Spee be
{ge ¢ ae niga ime zg een dian:
ae ad ee spli Bes eds ‘deanenS stair ania ’
altts
oe bogie weg tt '
=e) a ae “AR yal meg the
1? tile fj 09 Wa sh Aw aite (a alee Age
aw Jowai ext, ~
; —_ ae 2 7 “pide H1At% Tad
=— pre are
yee ir ls ina

2°
“aha pi: om woe ah aba

* tie
:
Definition of Projection

Projection in Everyday Life

Carl Gustav Jung borrowed the term projection from Sigmund
Freud;! but as a result of his different view of the uncon-
scious, Jung gave that concept a quite separate, new interpre-
tation. He used the word to describe a psychological fact that
can be observed everywhere in the everyday life of human
beings, namely, that in our ideas about other people and situa-

1
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

tions we are often liable to make misjudgments that we later

have to correct, having acquired better insight. In such cases
most people acknowledge their mistake and let the matter
drop, without bothering to ask themselves where the false
judgment or the incorrect idea came from. The psychologist,
however, cannot avoid this question, because to a quite spe-
cial degree he must concern himself with correcting such mis-
judgments, since even with his usual neurotic patients he has
to battle with these ‘“‘crazy”’ ideas that impede the patients’
adaptation. When he has to deal with pathological delusions,
or indeed with whole delusory systems, as for example para-
noia, then the question of where such mistaken ideas come
from becomes especially acute, because, as is well known,
delusory systems are by no means easily dissolved through
improved insight; on the contrary, one often has the impres-
sion that the patient will cling to them with every fiber of his
being. In such cases the question of the origin of the mor-
bid complex of ideas becomes unavoidable.
It occurred to Freud, in the first instance, that the true and
false impressions received by a child in his earliest experience
of his parents and siblings play a role in later projections. For
example, a child who has experienced his father or mother in
a specifically negative form tends to project the same father- or
mother-image onto older men or women he meets in later
life, so that an unprejudiced experience of the relevant per-
sons is no longer possible for him. Such a negative reaction
lives on, stored up in the depths of the psyche, and is “‘pro-
jected” onto outer objects at a suitable opportunity.
To be more precise, what is projected is not only a memory-
image, as one might at first conclude, but rather a‘sum of
characteristic qualities that constitutes a part of the person ob-
served.” If a son, for example, SSE hisdang
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

days there is no longer any need to look for proof of this. One
sees SUSIE: poe it 1s pee the Mo ELUnova taere way.

The ierenee between projection and common error is

that an error can be corrected, without difficulty, by better
information and then dissolve like morning fog in the sun-
light.? In the case of a projection, on the other hand, the sub-
ject doing the projecting defends himself, in most cases
strenuously, against correction, or, if he accepts correction, he
then falls into a depression. He consequently appears to be
diminished or disillusioned, because the psychic energy that
was invested in the projection has not flowed back to the sub-
ject but has been cut off.

ts onto an outer o woe’ 4 One sees in this object some-

thing that is not there, or, if there, only to a small degree.
Seldom, if ever, is nothing of what is projected present in the
object. Jung speaks therefore of a “hook” in the object on
which one hangs a projection as one hangs a coat on a coat
hook. We can take as an example the above-mentioned an-
tiauthoritarian ‘projector.’ He will scarcely be able to hang
his image of the tyrant onto a gentle, modest worm of a man.
If, however, he has to deal with someone who shows even a
relatively slight manifestation of self-assertiveness or power,
the image of the tyrant lying dormant in him will im-
mediately attach itself to the other person. The projection has
taken place; the projector is utterly convinced that he has to
deal with a tyrant. A mistaken judgment of this kind can then
be corrected only with the greatest difficulty.§
duce tors, and be pists cole a many a ta
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

It is, however, not only a person’s negative conscious qual-

ities that are projected outward in this way but in equal mea-
sure his positive ones. The projection of the latter then brings
about an excessive, delusory, inappropriate overvaluation and
admiration of the object.
To the disinterested observer it seems simple and obvious
at first that in this or that case there is a projection. But if one
considers the case more deeply, it turns out that it is not such
a simple matter. It may be that the observer’s judgment is
mistaken, that the projector ‘“‘was right.” In general, the prac-
tical criterion is common sense, the reasonable collective
judgment of the environment. If someone who suffers from
paranoid delusions® informs the police that he is being perse-
cuted by such and such a person, this report will be inves-
tigated by so-called objective methods and it will then be
decided whether the complaint has substance or not. In the
latter case the plaintiff will be turned over to a psychiatrist
and not prosecuted for slander. But we know that the matter
is this simple only in flagrant cases, that there are border-
line areas where the question of accountability arises and it
becomes difficult to determine whether the projector was in-
tentionally guilty of slander or a victim of delusions of perse-
cution. It is also possible for a person to infect others with his
paranoid idea and for a sizable group to take up the erroneous
judgment, until another group finally sets the matter straight.
Witch-hunts, as examples of negative projections, or the ven-
eration of Hitler as a savior-hero, as an example of positive
projections, bear eloquent witness to the existence of the
phenomenon of collective contagion. In such cases nothing
can lead the projecting parties to a clearer insight; éven the
soberest factual evidence will be emotionally dismissed.
Therefore the judgment of a community or of a society
cannot always prevent the projection process and the mis-
taken judgments, errors, and lies that accompany it, because
whole groups can project collectively, so that their mistaken
judgment passes officially for the acceptable description of

4
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

reality. Thus all the conceptions current in intercultural

psychiatry come into play when, for example, it is a matter of
distinguishing between a mass psychosis and a religious
movement; the latter will usually seem to the outsider to be a
mass psychosis, whereas to the insider it will be experienced
as a “redemptive movement.’’®
Under the impression that each person’s inner image of
reality represents for him, in an absolute sense, the actual state
of affairs, certain existentially oriented therapists try to deny
altogether the evidence for projection. According to their
view, each human being is hopelessly imprisoned in his image
of reality.” In his novel The Stranger, Camus graphically de-
picts the tragedy of this situation.
Several representatives of an ethnologically oriented
psychiatry have come to similar conclusions. According to
them, distinctions between the normal and the abnormal de-
pend upon the entire cultural and religious structure of a soci-
ety and are therefore inaccessible to any general judgment
whatever.®
In contrast to this view, W. M. Pfeiffer has rightly em-
phasized, in his outstanding work Transkulturelle Psychiatrie,
that clear cases of pronounced mental illness which we diag-
nose as pathological are also recognized as pathological by all
peoples known to us; their interpretation differs only with
the culture. Indeed, the “norm” for normality cannot be
pinned down statistically, because this involves the capacity
for “adapting to the greatest possible number of life situations
in an appropriate manner.” Psychically conditioned morbid
symptoms in a reaction are, above all, “‘ego-alienation”’ and
“behavior that accords only with one’s own laws.’’? Religious
ecstasy and pathological possession, according to Pfeiffer, can
be differentiated by European investigators, even in the case
of other peoples, and here the “trivial, the nonsensical, and
deviation from the traditional context” are the characteristic
features of the pathological.1°
Existentialist and sociological views that deny the explic-

5
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

itly pathological suffer from the fact that they do not take
into consideration the manifestations of the unconscious in
human beings, especially dreams. They therefore overlook a
fundamental phenomenon, namely, the fact that the same un-
conscious from which the projections emanate also strives, in
certain phases of inner development, to correct them, and
that thus, in addition to the commonsense judgment of the
collectivity, there is an inner factor in the individual himself
that tends to correct his image of reality from time to time.
The present work will concern itself more closely with this
complicated state of affairs. First, however, it should be borne
in mind that the sociological denial of the fact of projection is
correct to the extent that a projection cannot be unambigu-
ously established by the judgment of an outside observer and
cannot in any case be communicated to the presumably pro-
jecting fellowman. The one says, “It is so’’; the other, “‘It is
not so” —and with that the discussion comes to an end.
To understand this, we must take a further look at the con-
cept of projection, as Jung used this term. He writes:
Just as we tend to assume that the world is as we see it, we
naively suppose that people are as we imagine them to be. In
this latter case, unfortunately, there is no scientific test that
would prove the discrepancy between perception and reality.
Although the possibility of gross deception is infinitely
greater here than in our perception of the physical world, we
IE in J

fellow human bei Bs

tionships based essen-
tially on projection.
j j 11

In these imaginary relationships the other person becémes an

image or a carrier
ofsymbols. Although all the contents of the
unconscious are in this fashion projected onto the environ-
ment, we can recognize them as projections only when we
gain enough insight to see that they are images of peculiarities
that are part of our own makeup; otherwise we are naively
convinced that these peculiarities belong to the object.

6
 DEFINITION
Dolls
OF PROJECTION

Unless we are possessed of an unusual degree of self-

awareness, we shall never see through our projections but
must always succumb to them, because the mind in its natural
state presupposes the existence of such projections.

dissolution of this identity arises at the moment when

it becomes disturbing, that is, when the absence of the projected con-
tent substantially interferes with adaptation, so that the oe
of the Projected content into the subject is desirable,

, dominant in. children."andprimitives, Smeeie

Whenever it prevails,
(outer world.)In such a case it is not yet possible to speak of an
ego-environment relation, because an ego, as we understand
it, hardly exists. The consciousness of the child, like that of
the primitive, is more like an “immersion in a stream of events in
which the outer and the inner world are not differentiated, or very
indistinctly so.’’13 The unconscious, as we know it today, has
become perceptible only through the differentiation of con-
sciousness. With the primitive the inner is also, in infinitely
greater measure, the outer, and vice versa. This immersion in
a stream of events in which inner and outer are not clearly
distinguished is nevertheless, to a large extent, still a normal
condition with us, too, a condition that is interrupted only
from time to time to the extent that the reflecting conscious-
ness and a certain ego-continuity intervene.
The less pronounced yet definitely present discrimination
of outer from inner world in the case of the child can perhaps
best be observed in his play with dolls. On the one hand, the
child treats the outer doll as animate, in accordance with an
inner image of a mother-child relationship, but, on the other
hand, he shows just as clearly, in his behavior, that some-
where he also ‘“‘knows”’ that the doll is inanimate. By con-

VE
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

trast, many adults can no longer join unaffectedly in play of

this kind, because their conviction that the doll is inanimate
and the mother-child game is ‘only fantasy”’ (therefore only
inner) hinders them in acting out the game. We would have
to go back rather far, as far back perhaps as our animal ances-
tors, before we reached the point where inner and outer were
” completely undifferentiated. But the archaic identity of subject
melVO ee object still lives at the very bottom of our psyche, and it
i£ is only above that layer that relatively clearer, more distinct
discriminations between subject and object are, in many de-
grees, built up. This lower or more primitive layer should,
however, not be regarded as lesser in value; on the contrary, if
we must form a value judgment, it is there that the real secret
_ of all life-intensity and cultural creativity lies. It is simply the
> normal condition that produces all our affective “‘magic”’ ties
to people and objects. As Jung emphasizes:
Thus every normal person of our time, who is not reflective
beyond the average, is bound to his environment by a whole
system of projections. So long as all goes well, he is totally
unaware of the compulsive, i.e., “magical” or “mystical,”
character of these relationships. .. . So long as the libido can
use these projections as agreeable and convenient bridges to
the world, they will alleviate life in a positive way. But as soon
as the libido wants to strike out on another path, and for
this purpose begins running back along the previous bridges
of projection, they will work as the greatest hindrances it is
possible to imagine, for they effectively prevent any real de-
tachment from the former object. We then witness the charac-
teristic phenomenon of a person trying to devalue the former
object as much as possible in order to detach his libidofrom it.14
But as the previous identity is due to the projection of subjec-
tive contents, complete and final detachment can only take
place when the imago that mirrored itself in the object is
restored, together with its meaning, to the subject. This resto-
ration is achieved through conscious recognition of the pro-
jected content, that is, by acknowledging the “symbolic
value” of the object.15
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

Therefore, although the original identity of subject and

object represents a normal condition, nature has developed,
apparently as a result of certain disturbances in the adaptation
to the inner and/or outer world, a more continuous ego-
consciousness in the human being, which forces a sharper dif-
ferentiation between subject and object, and thus insight into
certain projections. Primarily this means simply that some-
thing hitherto perceived as outer is now recognized as belong-
ing to one’s own inner world. But our mentality is still today
SO primitive, as Jung emphasizes, “‘that only certain functions
and areas have outgrown the primary mystic identity with
the object. Primitive man has a minimum of self-awareness
combined with a maximum of attachment to the object;
hence the object can exercise a direct magical compulsion
upon him. . . . Self-awareness gradually developed out of this”
initial state of identity and went hand in hand with the differ-
entiation of subject and object. ... But as everyone knows,
our self-awareness is still a long way behind our actual
knowledge.”!¢ To be precise, we could in practice speak of a”
projection only “when the need to dissolve the identity with the /
object has already arisen,” or, in other words, when the identity not
begins to have a disturbing effect and exerts a negative influ-
e on the adaptation to the outer world. At this point the
entity of the inner image with the outer object becomes
erceptible and the objectof criticism, whether it be our own
Sethst of other people.?’

The Five Stages

in the Withdrawal of Projections
The process of gaining insight into a projection takes place in
several stages.1® As an example Jung refers to the case of a
Nigerian soldier who heard a voice calling to him from a tree,
whereupon he tried to break out of the barracks in order to
go to the tree. When interrogated, the soldier stated that

9
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

everyone who bore the name of this tree heard its voice from
time to time. To us this is a case of the above-mentioned ar-
chaic identity, because, for the soldier, the tree and the voice
were obviously identical.19A separation ofthe idea of the tree
from thatof the voice or of a tree-demon (as the ethnologist
might put it, in this case) is actually a-secondary phenome=-
non, corresponding to the next stage of consciousness, sincea
differentiation has now taken place, A third stage would arise
with
the need for a moral evaluation of the phenomenon of the
voice, which would be seen as the manifestation of an evil or
of agood spirit. A fourth stage would go still one step further
in the process of elucidation. At this stage the existence of
spirits would be denied altogether and the experience written
off as an illusion. At the next, or fifth stage, one would have to
reflect on how such an overpowering, extremely real, and
awesome experience could suddenly become nothing but
self-deception. Even if one must perhaps assume that trees do
not talk in human speech and that no spirit inhabits the tree
itself or even that, looked at objectively, no “‘spirit”’ at all was
heard by the soldier, this perception of a spirit must neverthe-
less have been a phenomenon pushing upward out of his un-
conscious,us,\whose psychic existence cannot be denied unless
‘one denies the reality o c
é psyche altogether. If we
- a
not
do
do this, today
we would describe the spirit in the tree as a
projection, which does not, however, imply an illusion but
rather a psychic reality of the highest order. The distinction,
too, as to whether this spirit was good or evil then becomes
relevant again and highly important. In the case of the Nige-
rian soldier, punishment hinged on whether, in our language,
he had unconsciously wished to desert or had experienced a
“spiritual call’—the same problem, therefore, that our
courts today mutatis mutandis have to deal with under the ru-
bric “Refusal to serve for reasons of conscience.”
If one recognizes the psychic reality of the voice the soldier
heard, one has to investigate where and how this unconscious
content belongs to him. If it proves impossible to locate the

10
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

utterances of this content in the subjective environment of the

experiencing subject (for example, that the soldier had heard
in this voice a wish to desert that ¢could be shown to be his _ @
own wish), then outer “suitable” objects must be considered
"as
possible causes of the voice, and the cycle starts all over
again. If, on the other hand, it could be shown that the spirit
was part of the soldier’s own psychology, then the task of
moral integration of this content arises, through which the (@
“good” or “evil” aspect could be understood as the subject’s
own unconscious tendency and could be integrated into his
life. In the present case the unconscious attempt to break out
might perhaps in the end prove to be in no way evil. If the
integration of such a content occurs successfully, then, as we
know today, the experience of a spirit calling out of a tree is
not repeated; if the content 1snot integrated, then the same or me
similar phenomena will occur in another context. eae
What is known as integration in modern psychology is
thus a remarkable and complicated process, in which a
hitherto unconscious psychic content is brought repeatedly
into the view of the conscious egogo and
and recognized
reco as belong-
ing to its own personality. ics 2
anged in its functioning and_effects. What integration S
means in practice 1s ilustrated by this Chinese ghost story:

A young man who had been called up for military service was
on the way to report for duty. One night, having found no
other shelter, he lay down to sleep in an old half-ruined tem-
ple. As it grew dark he suddenly saw a ghostly pale, eerie
woman with a rope in her hand, sneaking away. He followed
her without being noticed and observed her disappear into the
house of a poor peasant. In the house a young woman, dis-
solved in tears, was sitting at the bedside of a small child. The
ghost sat on the roof-beam above her, dangling the rope in
such a way that it kept making the movements of a hanging.
The young woman succumbed to the suggestion, climbed on
a chair, and prepared to hang herself. The soldier broke in
through the window, seized the rope, and warned the young

i
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

woman: ‘‘Take good care of your child; we have only one life
to lose!’’ On his way back to the temple the ghost appeared
and demanded her rope, but the soldier wrapped it around his
arm and tried to frighten the ghost away. A struggle followed.
Inadvertently the soldier struck his own nose with his fist and
blood flowed. “Because ghosts cannot endure the sight of
human blood,’ the ghost stopped fighting and disappeared.
The soldier then went on his way, to report for service. Later,
the rope could be seen on the soldier’s naked arm, “because it
had grown onto the arm and surrounded it in the form of a
ring of red flesh.’’?°

According to a belief prevalent in China, the spirits of

women who have hanged themselves from grief over their
unhappy lives cannot move on into the kingdom of the dead
until they have brought about the suicide of another woman;
that was why the evil female spirit had tried to move the
young mother to suicide. It is well known that suicide can be
contagious, as cases of mass suicide in schools and prisons
especially attest. They come from a kind of chain reaction, for
which the rope carried by the ghost is an appropriate symbol.
In this story it looks at first as though the soldier had become
involved with the ghost and her problem only by chance. If,
however, we take into consideration the fact that this young
man was on his way to military service, which meant giving
up for years any possibility of having a wife and children,
then from the psychological point of view it is not merely an
accident that he was confronted with the weeping young
woman. Something in him was surely also concerned with
the problem of death. Interestingly enough, it was the sol-
dier’s act of inadvertently hitting his own nose, thereby causing
blood to flow, that frightened the ghost away. Blood sym-
bolizes everywhere the emotional part of the human psyche.
His own effective participation and the blow against himself that
this involved conquered the ghost. The fateful rope then be-
came a part of the soldier himself; it literally became inte-
grated into him, not as a sign of shame but rather as a badge

12
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

of honor. What had been an objective concatenation of de-

structive tendencies became a part of his own being and was
thereby robbed of its destructive power. The evil spirit her-
self, however, was not liquidated but only disappeared from
the human field of vision.
This last-mentioned fact corresponds exactly to an experi-
ence with which we are familiar: unconscious contents can
scarcely ever be integrated into the subject in their entirety.
The process appears to be more like that of peelin nk
onion—one or more layers of an unconscious complex can,
indeed, be integrated by the conscious personality but not the
core itself. However, the core falls backunconscious”
into the —
“Ina condition oflatency and is no longer an immediate prob-
lem. A resolution ddoes not result, though, if further meaning-
ful but unconscious contents remain attachedto the bearer of
the projection. *RAAT ii = case the whole content of the pro-

allythe casewith archetypal contents, bares such contents °*

quimmnbisiniesea ayaa eenseinasncss, 2 “Consequently A
phenomenon occurs that could be described as the wanderings
rojections: the unconscious content is in part recognized as
subjective and thereby differentiated from the object in which
it hitherto appeared as a projection; its still-unrecognized as-
pect, however, appears again projected onto another object
after a period of latency in the unconscious.
Or itmay appear
in another medium, which now becomes the new bearer of
the projection.?3 If one wants to prevent such a renewal of the
projection, the content must be recognized as psychically real,
though not as a part of the subject but rather as an autonomous.
Powe: ;
Jung once compared the ego-complex to a man who sails
out in his boat (the philosophical or religious ideas behind his
conscious view of the world) onto the sea of the unconscious
to go fishing. He must take care not to haul more fish (that is,
more unconscious contents) from the sea into his boat than
the boat can carry, or it will sink. This explains why peo-

13
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

ple with weak egos often defend themselves so desperately

against any and every insight into their negative projec-
tions—they cannot bear the weight, the moral pressure,
that results from such insight. The projection of positive
qualities can, to be sure, be dissolved with less resistance in
most cases, but if a person is weak he flies away, blown up
like a balloon, from the solid ground of reality; he suffers an
inflation and thus also lapses into unconsciousness.74 The
withdrawal and integration of projections is therefore a deli-
cate problem that, in treatment, demands great sensitivity of
feeling on the part of the therapist. He must constantly keep
asking himself whether the analysand’s ego is strong enough
to hold up under the impact of insight into a projection. As
mentioned above, apparently a human being can almost
never assimilate the archetypal core of all personal complexes;
this is why there are ghost stories all over the world in which
the spirit, after the completion of certain tasks, disappears,
appeased, into the Beyond. So the spirit lives on, but his ef-
forts toward the more drastic forms of harassing human be-
ings cease. If we could see through all our projections down
to the last traces, our personality would be extended to cos-
mic dimensions. But this is a subject that will be treated later.
A Norwegian story, ““The Comrade,” illustrates the same
problem as the Chinese fairy tale.

A peasant lad who had dreamed of a beautiful princess sets

out, with what little he has inherited, to look for this beautiful
being. On his way, before the door of a church, he comes
across a corpse frozen in a block of ice that is spit at by every
passerby. He learns that the corpse is that of a wine-dealer
who had diluted his wine with water. The pastor has refused
him a Christian burial. The lad feels pity for the sinner and
gives all he has for his burial. When he goes on his way, an
unknown man joins him as a “‘traveling companion” and of-
fers to win for him the beautiful princess, who is bewitched
by a troll. After many battles and much hardship and toil, all
of which the companion undergoes as a stand-in for the hero,

14
 UALASSiante) a
NN GOLESI 7
PSEVSR.
Cyt4 1)
AVe, | Ds ees OF A eee (
“5 la
/ oD $e

IW} mJ
IVC /
the princess is won. A year later, tie aed ‘reveals that
he is the dead wine-dealer and that that was his way of render-
ing thanks, “but now he must go away forever, because the
bells of heaven are calling.’25
In a German parallel,?© the dead man is not a sinner but
simply so poor that no one will. bury him. In this story the
hero also donates all his money to have the man buried. The
latter, too, as a companion experienced in magic, helps the
hero to find and redeem the princess he desires. At the end,
he says, ““Now I am leaving you and the world. I believe that
I have paid my debt to you. May your life be a good and a
happy one.” After which he, too, disappears.
In these examples the ghost of the one who has died es-
capes into the Beyond after having expressed gratitude to the
hero for his compassionate act. What had been wrong is ex-
plated; as in the Chinese fairy tale, no further aspect of this
figure is assimilated.
The poor sinner whose debt the hero pays is, psychologi-
cally understood, that component of the human psyche
which Jung has described as the shadow, that is, the inferior,
all-too-human side of each of us that we are so especially
ready to project and then “‘spit at.” The hero feels sorry for
him and takes upon himself the price of his guilt. Through
this act he gains a helper with magic powers for every emer-
gency. It is the hero’s sympathetic response to the other’s need
that effects the bond. ~~. Wo
Jung distinguished between two kinds of projection, the
active and the passive. Our example illustrates a passive pro-
jection, that is, an act of sympathetic feeling, which serves
to bring the object (in this case, the dead man) into an inti-
mate relation with the subject (the hero). “In order to establish
wee
this relationship, the subject detaches _a content—a ae
ee pass |
for instance—from himself, lodges it in the object, thereby .
animating it, and in this
his wway draws the- object iinto the Sphere
ofthesubject.”?7 As
Asresult
a of his empathetic compassion,
the hero gains the magically gifted comrade as companion in
11:
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

his personal enterprise.

in this kind of unconscious iden er.
forms the basis of all our unconscious ‘asics and also of
all conscious social attitudes, even in their most sublime
forms, as with us it has found its highest expression in
the ideal of Christian love for one’s neighbor. When uncon-
scious identity operates negatively it causes us, naively and
hve thoughtlessly, to take for granted thatthe other is like us
? and that what is va id for us 1is also“valid for him, _so_that
ly)
_we_feel_ justified in_‘‘im roving” him, that is, in rapin
au

him psychologically is is the origin of active projection.

ae
L The negative aspect of identity is especially clear in path-
beled cases, as, for,example, in paranoid delusions of ref-
(0| erence, where it is. assumed as self-evident that one’s own
" subjective content is to be found in the other person. This as-
iW sumption is at the same time an act of judgment, whose basic
aim is a separation of subject from object.?? If this judg-
ment is taken as absolutely valid, it can lead to the total isola-
tion of the subject, because all criticism of the validity of this
judgment by other people is rejected.3°
Passive projection—that is, unconscious empathy—is part _
of the psychological principle of Eros and forms the basis of
all social relations; active projection, on theother hand, be-
longs to the realm of Logos, since it is concerned wit han act
of recognition or judgment, by means of which we make a
See between aes and the—itself unknown—
object: principles can in practice flow into and out of
each ae
The projections of our fellow beings onto ourselves are by
no means harmless affairs that disturb nothing but ‘the adap-
tation of the people from whom they issue; they also substan-
tially affect the person onto whom the projection falls. The
projections of parents onto their children are especially influ-
ential, because children and young people are very suggest-
ible, for their ego-consciousness is still weak.
As this is a common situation it is frequently pictured in

16
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

myths and fairy tales. In Grimms’ fairy tale “The Six Swans,”
the witchlike stepmother throws a garment over her step-
sons, thereby transforming them into swans. This can be
taken quite literally as projection: the mother, being nega-
tively disposed to the children, sees in them not their own
human nature but rather throws over them the projection of
something (bird-image) existing in her, namely, her own un-
conscious, neglected spiritual side. One comes across this
quite often in everyday life, when a mother, out of laziness or
for other reasons, neglects her own spiritual development. To
compensate, she expects the achievement from her son or
sons and “‘bewitches” them into something that is alien to
their nature. The sons, for instance, may have to pursue an
ambitious academic career in order to satisfy the mother’s
unconscious expectation—in the fairy tale just mentioned,
they become birds, that is, rootless, dehumanized spirit-
beings.
The release of the bewitched beings in the fairy tale occurs
when the loving sister (or sometimes the bride) sews a shirt
of starlike flowers for the bewitched and throws it over them,
whereby the birds once again assume human form. This, too,
is a projection, albeit one that fits the object, which indeed
actually makes it possible for him to appear in his true nature.
Many people are, in fact, brought back to themselves through
Da eae co a od pec ae he caches ie
therapist who gives credit, so to speak, to his pupil or patient
through the expectation ofpositive results can often nurture a
blossoming of the other’s real personality and gifts. Perhaps it
is not important that it is a projection; it operates like a bridge
across which the other can come into himself. That is why
the phenomenon of countertransference is so important in
psychotherapy, and not just as a disadvantage to be combat-
ted; it can carry the other like a magic carpet and guide him to
his goal. One day, though, this projection naturally falls away,
and then it must be proven whether the other can remain arrar
man-
Sec
such help. Thistransition can be
himself even without ETN

IVE
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

aged with the necessary wisdom, through careful attention to

the dreams of both parties.
Whenever parents fail to live their inner wholeness and fail
to realize substantial components of themselves, the weight
of these parts falls onto the children in the form of a projec-
tion and endangers them. This is recognized even in folklore
sayings, such as “‘Parson’s children and the miller’s calf sel-
dom, if ever, turn out well.’ Clergymen are often forced by
public opinion to live better or more Christian lives than they
would if they lived the reality of their own natures. In cases
where they identify with their social role, thus repressing the
shadow, the latter falls over the children like a garment of an
evil witch. The children find themselves driven by a dark
compulsion to live out everything the parents have repressed.
The miller’s calf, though, presents a slightly different prob-
lem. In the eyes of country people the miller is traditionally
seen as a man who does not work but grows rich through
a technical trick: he lets water do the work for him. He is the
first technocrat. His calf—that is, his instinctual animal
sphere—naturally suffers from this.
In past generations, as Freud was the first to recognize, the

image had been corrupted

or distorted for them
by their par-
ents’ projections.
projections. *This situation is pictured in many myths
in which a parent shuts the son or daughter into Mower ora
@elass mountain or ®glass coffin, ohrough a curse, turns
him or her into an animal. In families, projections play the
greatest and most disastrous role. But they also play an active
part in all other social groups, not least in politics, where cer-
tain shadow projections onto the opponent can be shown on
both sides in almost all emotionally loaded conflicts.

18
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

The reason it is so difficult to acquire insight into one’s

own shadow is that inferior personality traits are mostly of an.
emotional eeu
nature. Emgtions
tions and ‘ affects are to a largge extent
relatively autonomous;
D
they) possess GOnsciousness and can
only with great difficulty be controlled. Projections coupled
with emotions isolate the human being from his surround-
ings and put him into an autoerotic or autistic state.3! If it is
‘not only his own shadow that stands behind the projections
but also the contra-sexual components of the personality, or
perhaps still deeper archetypal contents, then insight into the
projections in which these are involved is accompanied by
almost insuperable difficulties. The father and mother di-
vinities of all religions, for instance, are now often found to
be lurking behind a not particularly unusual projection of a
father- or mother-imago, and these give to the parental im-
ages a wholly inappropriate power over the individual. Or
else it is a matter not of collective religious images or ideas
but rather of modern variations of these, such as materialism,
communism, socialism, fascism, liberalism, intellectualism,
and so on—1ideas by which people are completely “possessed”
and for which they can fight with murderous emotions.%?
“Sacred”
Be EEC Ca convictions
COUy eons are
ste in
wnthis sense always suspect, unless WAR
they exist together with tolerance and a due regard for purely
ee

human considerations.

Projection and Projectile

The archaic identity of subject and object, which is the basis
of the phenomen f projection, persists subliminally, as
mentioned above, even in highly cultivated men and women.
In the unconscious the inner world and the outer world are not di
entiated, Only that which has become a content of conscious-
ness is described as an inner or an outer phenomenon, that is,
either as an introspectively perceived condition, like the well-
ing up of an emotion, or as an “outer” event or object. Ev-
erything else, of which we are not conscious, remains, as

19
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

before, an undifferentiated part of the occurrences of life. This_

is
is why, aas we said at the outset, one cannot speak of ‘projection_
the
tn strict sense until a disturbance arises that necessitates
‘the revision of a merely as:
assumed ||perception « or of“4
a judgment.
‘that has been accepted without reflection. This disturbance
finds expression as doubt or uncertainty or in a tendency to
defend the previous judgment in an unrealistic way—
precisely because its credibility is already undermined from
within or without.
Since projection is a preconscious, involuntary process, in-
dependent of consciousness, it is to be expected that the pro-
cess itself will be depicted in products of the unconscious,
such as dreams, waking fantasies, and mythological tradi-
tions. This aspect will therefore be given special attention in
what follows, so that the still-open question of exactly where
projections come from may perhaps be somewhat clarified.
Whenever projection takes place, there is first of all a
“sender” and a “receiver.” Interestingly enough, the motif of the
sender (of the figure from whom magical effects emanate) 1s
central to many myths, but even more frequently the motif of
the one who is “hit” is at the core of the myth, which may
often deal with the question of defense against such effects.
These will be considered here, because this is an aspect of
projection that seldom receives much attention in therapy at
present.
One of the oldest ways of symbolizin rojection is by

Taine offerpeople-Tie oldest explosion fothe causes of

illness—to befound almost everywhere in the world—is of a
projectile that affects its target for good or ill.33 It is\generally
believed that such a projectile is shot by a god, spirit, demon,
or
mythological
some other being, or by anevil person, and
that it hits people, and perhaps animals as well, ‘causing them
to fall ill. One isreminded of the original reece between the
German Krankheit (illness) and kranken (to hurt or wound).34
Whether
a
the archer who shoots
ae a
the arrow should
ee en cece
be
ec
regarded

20
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

as inner or outer is a question better left until the material at

book Krankheitsprojektile, has supplied an abundant collection

of documentary evidence, to which we shall refer.5
In ancient Judaism there is the idea that God (also the devil,
in the New Testament) and/or evil human beings send forth
harmful arrows. In Psalm 91 there is the passage: ‘““You will
not fear the terror of the night, nor the arrow that flies by day,
nor the pestilence that stalks in darkness, nor the destruction
that wastes at noonday.” Job’s plague was also caused by
Yahweh’s arrows: “For the arrows of the Almighty are in me;
my spirit drinks their poison; the terrors of God are arrayed
against me”’ (Job 6:4).°
But the evil, harmful words of human beings are also de-
scribed as arrows. Deceitful men “bend their tongue like a
bow; falsehood and not truth has grown strong in the
land.... Their-tongue is a deadly arrow; it speaks deceit-
fully” (Jeremiah 9:3, 8). They ‘“‘aim bitter words like arrows,
shooting from ambush at the blameless’’ (Psalm 64:3—4).
That these quotations refer to affective, calumnious activi-
ties of human beings and that such activities, as we learn from
practical psychological experience, are triggered by negative
projections is clear enough. As soon as a person projects
a bit of his shadow onto another human being he is incited
to this kind of rancorous speech. The words (barbs, punches!)
that hit the other person like projectiles symbolize the neg-
ative flow of energy directed against the other by the one
who is projecting. When one becomes the target of another
person’s negative projection, one often experiences that
hatred almost physically as a projectile.
It is more difficult to understand the arrows of agod, or of
God, as representing } projections, and yet the>dispatch ¢of ar-
rows bringing sickness or death is ascribed tto divine - figures. a
with special frequency. In ancient Vedic literature the god
Rudra sends death and illness with his arrows, as we read in
the Rig-Veda.

21
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

To Rudra I bring thee songs, whose bow is firm and

strong, ... with swiftly flying shafts... armed with sharp-
pointed weapons: may he hear our call.
He through his lordship thinks on beings of the earth, on
heavenly beings. . . . heal all sickness. .. . Thou very gracious
God, hast thousand medicines: inflict no evil on our sons or
progeny.?”
Rudra’s arrows could produce fever, coughing, malignant
tumors, and stabbing pains! Whereas today all these illnesses
are considered to be physical, the word arrowhead or arrow-
point was also used in the Rig-Veda to indicate the cause of
purely psychic disturbances. The Indic word salya means “‘ar-
rowhead,” “‘thorn,” “‘splinter”’; in one text it is said of the
doctor who removes such an object from the body of a
patient that he is “‘like a judge who in a trial pulls out the
thorn of injustice.” Here the arrow is something like a bad affect
that has led to illness out of uncertainty about the justice of a
situation.
Today we know that sharp, jabbing forms in the drawings
of patients indicate evil, wounding, destructive impulses that
stand in the way of a synthesis of the personality.78 When
in mythological representations arrows of this kind are sent_
Byaods
gods (not
eel beal Th
noma) these destructive impulses,
regarded psychologically, roduced b unconscious ar-

pressions of “direction,” the directedness psychic

of energy,
as hasbeen established in countlessdrawings by patients.9
In the mythology of classic antiquity, Apollo and Artemis
were especially noted for sending death and disease via their
arrows. Thus Apollo sent a plague to the army attacking
Troy (Iliad I, 43ff), because Agamemnon had insulted one of
his priests. In Roman renderings, Apollo and Mars dispatch
arrows of disease. Arrows fromgod,a however, produce not
only sickness and death; sudden seizures of passionate love
also come from the arrows
arrows of the god Eros(Cupid, Amor).
Suddenly falling passionately |
--
inlove is also experienced as
i

os
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

a
ST
Indian mythology the love-god Kama is armed with bow and
arrow, and Buddha describes the erotic wish as an arrow:
“But if those sensual pleasures fail the person who desires
and wishes forthem, he will suffer, pierced by the arrow of
ss |
In late antiquity the suspicion had already arisen that cer-
tain gods might have something to do with the way in which
emotions work in human beings, a view thatwas especially—
“furthered byastrological speculations. Thus Saturn has some-
thing to do with a melancholy turn of mind, Mars with ag-
gression and initiative, Venus and Cupid with love and
sexuality—all states of mind or moods that strike people
suddenly and overwhelmingly |and for a time can subjugate
the conscious ego. The symbol of the arrow is a visual ex-
pression of being suddenly “hit”? by a mood or an emotion
that often strikes one like lightning out of a blue sky.
~The gods. are representations of certain natural constants of
the unconscious psyche, of the ways in which the emotional
and imaginative elements of the personality behave. As is
well known, Jung described these constants as archetypes. al
These
irrepresentable
are innate structures that alwayspaar
ar
everywhere on suitable occasions produce similar thoughts, 2d.
mythological images, feelings, and emotions in human be- “7p<s
ings, parallel to the instincts, those impulses to action that = ¢
are characteristic of the humanin.Species. ‘These archetypal etic
symbol-forms were in principleassumed to exist in a visible ie
material or invisible spiritual outer world, but the notion that
they issued from an inner psychic space unknown to man
gradually took hold in late antiquity. This led to an interest-
ing new conception of human personality that Isodor, the son
of the Gnostic Basilides, handed down to us—namely, that
the human being, or alternatively his ego, also possesses a
prosphyes psyche, a soul that has “grown onto” him and be-
longs to a species of animal souls, like those of wolves, mon-
keys, and lions. These represent affective states that seduce a

we)
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

man into evil deeds against his will.41 The Gnostic Valen-
tinus, on the other hand, suspected that such “appendages”’
(prosartemata) might also consist of invading spirits.4* These
spirits (pneumata) seduce the human being into indecent de-
sires by bewildering him or confusing him with images of
lust, as with a “fog of evil”’ While theanimal souls tend to
depict the morefinstinctual aspect pf the unconscious, those of
the spirits and the gods appear to represent the mote
the more ar
chetypal, that is,the1mor épiritual,)¢contents of the
unconscious,
although the two realms overlap a good deal as to their sig-
nificance, which is not surprising in view of the close relation-
ship of spirit and instinct (which will be discussed below).
When an archetype is immediately and intensively constel-
lated, the experience is like being hit by a projectile sent by an
overpowering being that transfixes us and brings us into its
power. At the same time we are assailed by fantasies and imag-
inary images experienced either as proceeding directly from
the inner world (for example, as an obsessive idea) or, more
often, as caused by an outer object. An attack of aggressive
patel for example, is felt
by us_ as coming not from Mars
t rather from an “evil ac versay who * ‘deserves’ to be
I aii een

Dreams can substantiate this even moreCuresie “Thus a

woman dreamed that an unknown figure said to her, “You
have romantic, dreamy blue eyes.’ The dream-figure had
such eyes, while the dreamer herself has lively grey-green
eyes. One must conclude from this that the dream-figure
projects onto the dreamer’s ego a quality that belongs to the
unknown figure and not to the ego-complex. The unknown
dream-figure, however, would be an as yet unconscious par-
tial personality (a complex) of the dreamer, of whose exis-
tence she has hitherto known nothing. Nor, apparently, does
the dream-figure know herself, and she therefore projects her

24
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

own image onto the dreamer’s ego, probably with the inten-
tion of inducing the ego to see herself as dreamily romantic
and thus to identify with the complex. Presumably this hap-
pens in the interest of integration.
When other people project positive or negative qualities
onto us, this often produces a certain ego-insecurity. We no
longer know whether we really have such splendid or such
ugly traits or not, especially since there is almost always a
“hook” on which the projection is hung. If in addition our
own unconscious complexes can cast such projections onto
our ego, as the above dream shows, this can lead to a further
source of mistaken judgments by the ego about itself. Some-
times it really seems as if bewildering imaginary images were
buzzing all around one, as Democritus once expressed it.
As he saw it, the outer world is filled not only with atoms
but also with animated images, which he called demons or
spiritual principles.44 These eidola, or dianoetikai phantasiai,
can harm us or help us; they appear with special clarity in
dreams but also float around us during the day as fantasy
images. Only a subtle spirit, says Democritus, can tell them
apart, whereas ordinary human beings confuse these fantasy
images with concretely perceived objects.*5
Small wonder, then, that one needs a long process of
maturing and a good bit of self-knowledge before coming
to a relatively constant ego-identity and a moderate, level-
headed estimate of oneself. The attribution of a psychic con-
tent in another person’s imagination to one’s own being, or
its rejection as the other’s projection, is an occasion not only
for critical thinking but also for a feeling evaluation; it can
therefore never be managed purely intellectually.

Subjective Level and Objective Level

The same problem of correct attribution of psychic elements
arises in the interpretation of dream images, because in

ro)
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

dreams, as apparently in the unconscious in general, inner and

outer are not separated. With dream figures and with objects
appearing in dreams we therefore have to decide in each case
whether to regard them as symbols of the dreamer’s uncon-
scious psychic aspects that belong to his personality (interpre-
tation on the subjective level) or as information that throws
light on outer occurrences and persons (interpretation on
the objective level).4© In general, one can use the rule of
thumb that dream figures and objects pictured in a dream in a
way that diverges sharply from the person or object as seen in
reality are more likely to lend themselves to interpretation on
the subjective level than those that appear to reflect outer ob-
jects with relative exactitude. But this rule is by no means
infallible. If, for example, a man dreams of his wife in the
guise of a witchlike monster, is this an objective insight into a
side of his wife that until now he has been unaware of, or
does it represent an ugly side of his own feeling-life that he is
projecting onto his wife? In such a situation one can hardly
avoid taking into account the judgment of others in interpret-
ing the dream. If those in the immediate environment regard
the wife as an evil witch and the dreamer as blind to her
faults, the therapist will lean strongly toward an interpreta-
tion on the objective level. If, on the other hand, the wife
passes in general as a person of integrity, the therapist is likely
to prefer an interpretation on the subjective level. If at the
same time we also keep in mind the psychological fact that
there is always a “hook” for every projection, we have to ask:
Is the image, w bjective level, an
xaggeration. or not? Exaggerat borates cates Sarna eeeas
KG interpretation on the subjective level.*’
The presence or absence “of ¢exaggeration, however, can
often be determined only through a feeling evaluation, which
in dream interpretation demands a high degree of sensitivity
to nuance and atmosphere.*§ It is, moreover, important to
differentiate, as Jung emphasizes, between a quality or prop-
erty that is really present in the object and the value or meaning

26
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

this object possesses for the dreamer, that is, for the energy
invested in the assessment.*? It can happen, too, that the other
genuinely possesses the qualities of character or the momen-
tary attitude that the projector thinks he sees in him, so that in
this way he actually attracts the projection directly to himself.
This is especially likely when the bearer is unconscious of the
quality. It will then affect the unconscious of the other, thus
attracting his projection. This explains why projections so
often attract counterprojections, a fact now well known as a
result of the much-discussed problem of transference and
countertransference in therapy.°°
If a particular quality is obviously present in another per-
son, One must remember that the outwardly perceived qual-
ity is also present in the subject, where it forms part of the
object-image.5! This is an image existing independently of
and yet based on all perception? whose relative autonomy
remains unconscious so long as it appears to coincide with the
actual behavior of the outer object. As a result, however, the
outer object or the person onto whom something is projected
has thus received an exaggerated value and is able to produce
an unmediated psychic effect upon us. This can be seen most
clearly in cases where the mental image of a long-dead father
or mother continues to exert a magical power over the chil-
dren, because the object-imago, the image of the parents, has
lived on as actively as ever. This kind of overvaluation of
an outer object can seriously damage the development of a
human life. Nothing but a step forward along the road to
self-knowledge through discrimination and individual difter-
entiation will lead one out of this situation.54 The inner men-
tal image, the object-imago, must be recognized as an inner
factor; this is the only way in which the value or the energy
invested in the image can flow back to the individual, who
has need of it for his development.5> This difficult moral task
makes it impossible for any relatively conscious person to
want to improve other people and the world.
Jung often maintained that if one had in himself only 3

Ag
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

percent of all the evil one sees in the other fellow or projects
onto him, and the other fellow possessed in fact the other 97
percent, it would still be wiser to look one’s own 3 percent in
the eye, because, as is well known, it is only in oneself that
one can change anything, almost never in others.
Nevertheless, experience has shown that dreams often
warn the dreamer in a very realistic way against outer dan-
gers, so that a persistent interpretation of all dreams on the
subjective level must definitely be avoided. Jung reported a
case of a neurotic young man whose fiancée appeared in his
dreams in a highly ambiguous light. Investigations revealed
that she lived as a prostitute. The dreamer had had no suspi-
cion of this.5¢ It would not have been advisable, for the good
of the dreamer, to interpret these dreams only on the subjec-
tive level, because they obviously were trying to warn him
against a commitment to the actual woman. Of course, he too
must have had a sort of “prostitute” in himself; it was
nevertheless obviously very important that he detach himself
from his fiancée in outer reality. This approach turned out to
have been correct, for his hysterical symptom disappeared as
soon as he broke his engagement. If his unconscious had been
pointing to realization on the subjective level, the pains
would not have abated after a separation and it would have
been necessary to ask where in his life the dreamer was pros-
tituting himself with his own feelings. Recognizing when and
which dream images point inward and which point outward
is a delicate and uncertain matter. It is perhaps worthwhile,
therefore, to turn back once again to some ethnological mate-
rial, in order to look more closely at the empirical aspects.
\;

Possession and Loss of Soul

Belief in the so-called sickness projectiles discussed above is

found, according to Lauri Honko, everywhere on the Ameri-
can mainland (except in southern Alaska) and in particular in

28
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

Boothia, Melville, Quebec, and southern Argentina,” as well

as in Australia, Melanesia, and Indonesia. It is also widespread
in Europe and is found sporadically in Africa. In Asia, how-
ever, it is almost unknown, except in northern Siberia, the
Chukotski Peninsula, and here and there in the south. In high
cultures like those of Egypt, the Near East, and India, it was
also known at one time but was gradually replaced by the
belief that disease is caused by an “invading spirit,’ a view
also dominant in Africa and China. In the cultures of the Incas
and the Aztecs, too, the “projectile explanation” of disease
appears to have been current at one time. It was later replaced
by the view that disease was the consequence of breaking a
tabu. Wherever sickness is explained as the result of the inva-
sion of the patient by a spirit, the most frequent form of
therapy consists in transferring the spirit either to the healer,
who spits it out and annihilates it, or onto an animal, which is
sacrificed as soon as it is seized by the spirit. A special case is
that of possession, in which the invading spirit can speak
through the patient’s mouth; this conception is used espe-
cially in explaining mental disease.5° It is not always a matter
of evil spirits who cause disease; divine revelations and the
utterances of spirits in shamanistic s€ances come into expres-
sion in the same way.
In the Bible, Jesus heals diseases by driving out evil spirits
(Matthew 8:16, 10:8; Mark 1:34, 39, 5:8-10; Luke 6:18), and
this procedure has been known all over Europe since the ear-
liest times. The ceremony of healing in such cases consists in
driving out the evil spirits, as the exorcist still does today in
the Catholic Church.*%?
From the psychological point of view it is clear that in all
these cases the “‘spirit” is regarded as not belonging to the
personality of the sufferer. He belongs to an “objective”
outer world that is somewhere, visibly or invisibly, present,
as is likewise the case with the “good” spirits who manifest
themselves through revelations in visions, dreams, or sha-
manistic séances.

Ze
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

Another, diametrically opposed, conception is also wide-

spread, according to which the “‘soul,” a substance necessary
to a human being’s survival and health, has gotten lost: the
phenomenon of“‘loss of soul.’’6° The soul can be lost in sleep,
by being suddenly awakened, by fright or sneezing, but espe-
cially often by being stolen by an evil spirit. Above all, there
is the fear that someone who has died may take the soul of
someone close to him along with him into the realm of the
dead. In such cases the patient sickens hopelessly and goes
along, unless someone with a knowledge of healing finds his
lost soul in time and is able to return it to its rightful owner.
This understanding of sickness is dominant in arctic and sub-
arctic shamanistic cultures but is also found sporadically in
America, Africa, Indonesia, and Oceania. There is also evi-
dence of it in Europe.®!
Both “‘loss of soul’ and an “invading spirit’’ can also be
observed today as psychological phenomena in the everyday
lives of the human beings around us. “Loss of soul” appears
in the form of a sudden onset of apathy and listlessness; the
joy has gone out of life, initiative is crippled, one feels empty,
everything seems pointless.©? Close observation, especially of
dreams, will reveal that a large part of the psychic energy has
flowed off into the unconscious and is therefore no longer at
the disposal of the ego. This quantum of energy is in most
cases attracted by an unconscious complex that is thereby
heavily charged (corresponding to the belief that the soul has
been taken by a spirit or by the ghost of a person who has
died—that is, by the complex). If one perseveres long enough
in this condition, in most cases the complex that was acti-
vated by the energy attracted to it appears in consciousness;
an intense new interest in life emerges, an interest that now
strives in a direction different from the previous one. In very
many endogenous depressions one can observe beneath the
crippling stagnation of the personality an especially intense
desire of some sort (power, love, expansion compulsion, ag-
gression, and so on), which the depressed patient, however,

30
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

does not, for a variety of reasons, dare to allow to come to the

surface; in this respect he is like the fabled fox who finds the
grapes too sour.
Seen psychologically, the “invading spirit’? presents a
rather different picture. In this case it is a question of rela-
tively sudden psychic alterations in the personality, brought
about by an autonomous complex breaking through from the
unconscious. Although such an invasion of the personality
appears to happen suddenly, one can nevertheless quite often
in process ofconstellation, well in advance, with
theaid of the patient’s dreams and fantasies,® until one dayit
iches the threshold of consciousness.
Both of these age-old ideas of “‘loss of soul” and of the
“invading spirit” are therefore, like the idea of the projectile,
closely bound up with the phenomenon of projection. To the
extent that, in projection, a piece of one’s own personality is
transferred to or relocated in an outer object, it is at the same
time a loss of soul. Lovers, for example, so often feel listless,
ailing, when they are separated from the beloved object; their
soul is where the beloved is and they feel truly alive only
when they are near him or her. It is even possible for one’s
own intelligence to be projected in this fashion. According
to a traditional report, a pupil of Socrates by the name of
Aristides could philosophize very well as long as he had a
corner of Socrates’ toga in his hand, but when he was away
from the master his gift for philosophical argument disappeared
completely.
The experience of the actively invading spirit is like being
pierced by an arrow or being struck by lightning,® and, in-
deed, sudden projections are often so described. Thus, for
example, Charles Baudelaire:

Amid the deafening traffic of the town,

Tall, slender, in deep mourning, with majesty,
A woman passed, raising, with dignity
In her poised hand, the flounces of her gown;

31
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

Graceful, noble, with a statue’s form.

And I drank, trembling as a madman thrills,
From her eyes, ashen sky where brooded storm,
The softness that fascinates, the pleasure that kills.
A flash... then night!—O lovely fugitive,
I am suddenly reborn from your swift glance;
Shall I never see you till eternity?
Somewhere, far off! too late! never, perchance!
Neither knows where the other goes or lives;
We might have loved, and you knew this might be!®

The lightning symbolizes the impact of sudden passion,

whether for good or for ill.
It is not only in connection with love that such sudden sei-
zures occur. If one is living in a group, suddenly, as if “ridden
by the devil,’ one can let loose all kinds of pernicious non-
sense at which later, in a sober mood, one can only wonder.
In such a case it may be that one’s own shadow side has acted
as a hook and attracted the negative projections of the others
or of another, and one unexpectedly becomes the “black
sheep” or the butt of all jokes, which is a sign that the
shadows so suddenly discharged by others have taken posses-
sion of one and alienated the ego by forcing it into a collective
role. As soon as one is separated from the group or from the
person exerting the negative influence, everything falls back
into place and one awakens as from a bad dream. In the case
ofa powerful love projection (that is, a projection of the inner
partner-images of animus and anima), a double process some-
times takes place and one experiences it both as being struck
by an arrow (invasion by a complex) and as loss ofsoul, as
utter dependence on the presence of the other. Inwardly one
feels as if invaded by a passionate disquiet and fantasy activ-
ity, and at the same time as if one’s own life has flowed out
to the other in the outer world. This explains a curious
mythological motif that has so far gone unexplained. For the
most part we assume that when a man falls in love with a

32
 DEFINITION OF PROJECTION

woman as a result of a sudden anima projection, he looks

upon her as the sender of love’s arrow, not the god Amor. In
antiquity, however, such a man felt that he had been shot by
the god Eros or hit by the mater saeva cupidinum, that is, by
Venus. The flare-up of or invasion by passion is separately
experienced as something inner, while the lost soul-fragment
is considered as something different, attached to the outer
figure.
When an archetypal structure remains latent in the uncon-
scious, it is recognizable. But when it is activated, it often
appears in double form: on the one hand, as an inwardly ex-
perienced flare-up of emotions and affects and, on the other,
as a fascinating image that is, however, regarded as belong-
ing to the outer object. Still, this duality is a special case and
need not always appear. Psychic powers are often also experi-
enced as a pure inner image. In this event the doubling, alter-
natively the projection of the image onto an outer object,
does not take place and the image itself is directly perceived
within. This can be shown, for example, in visions handed
down to us by historical tradition.°? Thus a Christian vi-
sionary in a trance will see an unknown man who heals him
and conclude that it was Christ. Such visions are often associ-
ated with the feeling of being struck by a ray of light and set
afire, with the sufferer caused great torment.® This recalls
the motif of the passion projectile, which we met earlier.
The visionary Marina de Escobar reports on the way her kid-
ney-stone colics came about. She saw an ugly devil who ap-
proached her, swept up the dust in her room, and forced her
to swallow it. Then he placed a pan full oflive coals under her
back. From the dust and the coals five small stones were
formed in her body and these tortured her for months until,
in agony, she was able to discharge them.®? One is reminded
of the old belief in disease projectiles.
Few genuinely believing Christians would regard such in-
wardly seen figures as endopsychic, belonging to the subject,
nor as the projection of apsychic content. Yet the phenomena

33
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

are quite unmistakably similar to those mentioned above.

One suspects that in many cases Freud is right when he
assumes that the phenomenon of projection onto outer ob-
jects is connected with the fact that our attention in general is
directed more toward the outer world and that we are there-
fore inclined to overlook inner psychic events. Introverted
and introspective people can, however, perceive events in the
inner world directly, without the detour ofa projection onto
an outer object. If such people are inclined by temperament
and general outlook to regard endopsychic phenomena as real
in their own right, this would also naturally be an important
consideration. In the cultural history of the West, at least until
the time of the Enlightenment, these experiences were held
to be actual and real, though for the most part they were
not thought of as being subjective in character but rather as
phenomena from a “Beyond,” a “spirit world” or a ““meta-
physical religious” realm of invisible, transsubjective ob-
jective reality. In modern depth psychology it was in some
quarters (but only in some!) that this field of experience
began for the first time to be understood as endopsychic, that
is, as belonging to the unconscious psyche of ahuman being.
That even today this is by no means a generally accepted view
is illustrated in the essay by Pastor Friedrich Jussel in which
he describes in detail an exorcism that he himself carried
out.7° Jussel regards it as entirely self-evident that the evil
spirits he successfully expelled from a young girl were not
part of the girl’s psyche. His essay comes immediately after a
paper by the psychologist Wulf Wunneberg in which it is
taken for granted with equal conviction that the demons are
complexes, that is, “split-off parts of (the girl’s) owt psyche
which have been repressed from consciousness.”7! In view of
the uncertainties in such a situation, it would be worthwhile
to go back and take a look at certain features of the historical
context that might shed some light on it.

34
 2

The Withdrawal
of Projections
in Religious Hermeneutics

The Approach of the Gods to Men

The five stages in the withdrawal of a projection, asdescribed __
in the preceding chapter, not only may be demonstrated in
the single, individual case but run like a red thread through-
out the history of spiritual development in our culture, Fol-
lowing this thread, one sees that many great historical conflicts
have originated because men whose religious ideas express
different stages of development fail to communicate with one
another. Today the problem is charged with affect, as, for

Oe)
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

example, in the discussion between theologians and represen-

tatives of depth psychology. The latter frequently look upon
certain religious images and ideas as projections (the Freudian
school altogether, the Jungian school in part), whereas most
theologians attribute a “metaphysical” reality to the objects
of their reverence and are reluctant to accept religious images
and ideas as ‘‘nothing but” projections. This modern prob-
lem, however, has a long history. A short sketch follows,
therefore, in which I shall limit myself to antiquity and the
Middle Ages, periods for which, it seems to me, we have a
better perspective, as we are too close to recent times.?
In the Greek world of antiquity, before the period of rela-
tively reliable records, the original mythical psychic condi-
tion of archaic identity prevailed, as it did everywhere, a
condition in which inner psychic factors were not differenti-
ated from outer natural facts. The whole world was alive with
demons and spirits, or, in other words, single components of
the human psyche were for the most part unreflected and
were seen out there in nature where the human being was
confronted with them as parts of an objective ““world.’’? En-
counter with these factors meant working magic or being
worked upon by it, whether for good or for ill.
At about the time historical records began, we can recog-
nize the emergence of the second stage, in which natural ob-
jects are partially differentiated from the mythical beings that
animate them. Poseidon and Nereus and his tribe dominate the
sea, to be sure, but they are no longer simply identical with it.
Hamadryads and nymphs live in trees and fields; the higher
gods inhabit Olympus or live in the depths of the earth. But
though their will is revealed in the humming of beés in Del-
phi or in the rustling of oaks in Dodona, they themselves
have their own existence. Even moral distinctions (third
stage) have already begun to be made. Human beings judge
the deeds of the gods and permit themselves moral criticisms.
Naturally, this is true only of a small circle of the educated;
the masses remain true to the older beliefs.

36
 THE WITHDRAWAL OF PROJECTIONS IN RELIGIOUS HERMENEUTICS

With the beginning of pre-Socratic natural philosophy, the

mythical-religious world picture of educated Hellenes was
fundamentally altered. The divine was now sought in a world
principle (arché) (later in several) that was presented either as
material (water, fire, air, and so on) or as an abstract spiritual
principle (in the form of numbers), as the infinite, as a psychic
vortex, or as “das Sein an sich”’ (existence).
The gods hitherto revered were either reinterpreted as this
new world principle or as existing alongside it (Plato), or
their existence was denied. This rationalistic attitude became
increasingly widespread with the coming of the Sophists. It
culminated in the teaching of Euhemeros, who saw in the
gods nothing but dead, deified, historical personalities.
This initial appearance of a certain rationalism in Greek
natural philosophy means psychologically, as Jung explained,
an intensive emphasis on human consciousness that sought to
assert itself against the boundlessness and dissolution of the
mythical psychic state. Scrutinized, “J interpret,” “J. con-
strue,” or “J understand” is seen to be an apotropaism. An
apotropaic character clings to all knowing in any case;
knowledge is magic power that we need in order to protect
ourselves against the strangeness of the unknown. The
human being feels more at home in an “explained” world.
The ideas and views of the first natural philosophers of
course seem to us today to be mythical projections too, but at
that time they passed for the new truth and the gods of the
previous age were strenuously criticized. Xenophanes of
Kolophon (second half of the sixth century B.C.) says angrily:
“Homer and Hesiod have attributed to the gods everything
which, among men, means disgrace and dishonor: stealing,
adultery, and mutual betrayal. Mortals imagine that the gods
were born and that their appearance and voice and form is
like to their own.’
A somewhat younger contemporary, Theagenes of Rhe-
gion, tried to rescue the ‘‘old truth” by conceiving it as “‘al-
legorical” (today we would say “symbolic’’) and tried to

a7,
 SHAGL <
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

translate the old myths into the new philosophical language.

Thus he actually became the father of hermeneutics.* Accord-
ing to him, either the gods are symbols of material objects
(Apollo, Helios, Hephaistos, for example, stand for fire, Hera
for air, and so on) or they mean psychic qualities and states in
human beings. (This is the beginning ofthe fifth stage.) Athena
symbolized insight; ate passion; Aphrodite, car-
nal r But all these states of mind
(which we today regard as endopsychic) were still under-
stood as “outer,” that is, as objectively present powers. Air,
according to Philodemos, is an all-pervading capacity for
thought, “which can also be called Zeus.’’> Plato ridiculed
these attempts at interpretation as “‘sophistical,’® while Aris-
totle tried to replace such half-mythical ideas with more pre-
cise philosophical concepts.? Democritus (circa 470-360 B.C.)
went farthest in conceiving the old gods as concrete “‘images”’
that, flowing out of the ether, the fire of the heavens, per-
vaded the whole world.’ Objects, plants, animals, he says,
can also radiate such images. These images then frequently
attract to themselves mirror-images from psychic move-
ments, thoughts, passions, and characteristic properties ee
other men, invade our dreams, and influence us in this way.?

yh
| Their effects can be benevolent or maleficent. ‘© Envious men
yy" can send out images filled wi % — sender’s envy, thereby
damaging others both physically and psychically. #* (Here the
ds disease projectiles come up Acad) Positive images are at
work in poetic inspiration. The images of gods, finally, are
‘‘symbols”’ or speaking images that issue from the living crea-
tive world substance itself.1?
Insofar as these interpretations draw no demarcation
between material and psychic world substances, they restore
(
c part the first stage of archaic identity, alongside the
emergence of the fifth stage. This seems to correspond to a
general psychological law: The statement of the new truth reveals
the previous conceptions as “‘projections”’ and tries to draw them into
the psychic inner world, and at the same time it announces a new

38
 THE WITHDRAWAL OF PROJECTIONS IN RELIGIOUS HERMENEUTICS

myth, which now passes for the finally discovered ‘absolute’ truth.
The new outlook, which is evident here and there in the
theories of pre-Socratic natural philosophy and was given its
clearest and most significant formulation by Democritus, be-
came generally dominant in the Stoic formulations. Zeno of
Citium (circa 336—264 B.C.), the founder of the Stoa, inter-
preted the Greek gods either as physical facts or as psycholog-
ical powers; thus the Dioscuri, for example, stood for right
speaking and a stimulus to the nobler feelings,!? the god Eros
for fiery “‘pathos”’ (affect, emotion, and so on).14 Cleanthes of
Assos (circa 331-233 B.C.) went so far as to sSCCUD EE whole
ney seeslike the Hercules saga, inn this way. Th s, he

: Meionaions” of a cosmic© mystery.15 ithe*Stoic

OSES interprets the god Ares? as the wrathful, aggres-
sive element in man,!7 Athena as reasoning thought, and so
on. All these gods are taken to be logoi spermatikoi, creative

Poiclemuvctsca ela Sa PR Se ee ee
Through such interpretations of the myths and of the fig-
ures of the gods, the Stoa brought about an enormously sig-
nificant cultural achievement, because it succeeded in linking
the old myths to the new religious consciousness of the time
so that they were not rationalistically devalued. In this way
the Stoics laid the cornerstone on which the edifice of the
religious syncretism oflate antiquity was erected. They pro-
duced comprehensive concepts by means of which the gods
of different peoples could be recognized, as through a tertium
comparationis, so that, for example, a figure like Aphrodite
could be equated with the Babylonian Astarte or the Egyp-
tian Isis.
The fourth stage, in which the reality that had aN)
been believed is explained as nonexistent, could be described
as the stage of apotropaic reflection. In contrast to this, ion (5)
fifth stage of reinterpretation represents an act of assimilation

a9
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

through reflection, through which the psychic energy of the

projected content flows back to man and raises the level ofhis
consciousness, as this was achieved for the first time in the
Stoic interpretation of myths.

Allegory in the Gnosis

and in Early Christianity
The same spirit of symbolic interpretation of myths con-
tinued to live on in the Gnosis. The bridge from the Stoa
to the Christian Gnosis was created by the Biblical exegesis
of Aristobulus, of Numenius, and, above all, of Philo of Alex-
andria (c. 20 B.C-c. A.D. 45), whose work exerted a de-
cisive influence on the allegorical exegesis of the Church
Fathers.!9 Philo and his forerunners not only “‘cleared up”
the whole Greco-Roman Olympus; they went further to in-
terpret the mythological motifs of the Old Testament as typo!
(prefigurations).
While the concept “allegory” seems to have first appeared
during the first century before Christ, Plato often made use of
the concept of hyponoia (deeper or underlying thought),?° an
expression also used by Plutarch, Clement of Alexandria, and
Origen. Following an exactly definable (so-called diaeretic)
procedure, certain texts of the Old Testament, starting from
the concrete statement, are related to an “‘other’”’ set of facts.
The relation between the scriptural text and this “‘other’’ was
called a symbolon.?! Philo justified a certain number of his
interpretations by saying that God had communicated them
directly to his soul,?? others by the logical consistenty result-
ing from a comparison of the images.?3 The tertium com-
parationis used is in most cases from the realm of the psyche or
from that of Platonic ideas.24 The two realms thus brought
together are body and psyche, or the physical world and the
world of ideas. Through this method ofinterpretation, a cer-
tain number of myths that hitherto had been understood as

40
 THE WITHDRAWAL OF PROJECTIONS IN RELIGIOUS HERMENEUTICS

concrete descriptions of the outer world were brought into

the realm of the psyche, although they were still by no means
thought of as belonging to the subject but rather were under-
stood as a kind of world soul or psyche, whose existence was
““nonsubjective.”’
With the coming of Christianity there occurred something
completely unprecedented that put a stop to the development
of the old hermeneutics and at the same time made a new
beginning: the doctrine of the historically real Christ-figure. It
is as if the whole mythical heaven full of gods had come
down into one human being and as if the Gnostic pleroma,
the primordial mythical world, had now been incarnated on
earth. It was concentrated in the one man, Christ, in whom it
took historical shape. Christ clothed himself, as it were, in all
the earlier images and assimilated them into his own image.
“Figuris vestitur typos portat . . . thesaurus eius absconditus et vilis
est, ubi autem aperitur mirum visu’’ (“He is clothed in figures, he
is the bearer of types. . . . His treasure 1s hidden and of small
account, but where it is laid open, it is wonderful to look
upon.”’)?5 Or: “Because the creatures were weary of bearing
the prefigurations of his [Christ’s] glory, he disburdened
them of those prefigurations, even as he had disburdened the
womb that bore him.’ The advance of rational ego-
consciousness that had taken place in the previous centuries
was thereby overcome and compensated by a new myth. But
in Christ the whole primordial mythical world took on real
form and definition, and this new myth would dominate our
spiritual world for almost two thousand years.
It was not long, however, before the problem of the in-
terpretation of myth was posed in a new form: in the con-
frontation of the Church Fathers with the Greek spirit of
pagan antiquity. The polemic of Origen against Celsus, a
neo-Platonic advocate of paganism, is an especially illuminat-
ing example. In about A.D. 178, Celsus defended the tradi-
tional philosophic culture of late antiquity against the Chris-
tians, whom he regarded as destructive and revolutionary,

41
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

and based his argument on an interesting view of the philos-

ophy of history.27 The truth (his writing was entitled Alethes
logos—The True Logos) of the old culture, which he spoke up
for, is based on traditional usage and customs (nomos), on the
one hand, and on its meaning (logos), on the other. A hidden,
divine meaning, he said, is revealed by the course ofhistory.?8
The true origin of all cultural tradition lies with the “divinely
inspired poets, wise men, and philosophers of the past”’ who,
inspired by a divine spirit, spoke the truth in enigmatic im-
ages. These images are not rationally comprehensible (that is,
with the help of the philosophic spirit), but the intellect helps
the philosopher rise to the heights from which the gods look
down and to the realm of the eternal ideas, where he can then
find the true meanings of the image-filled sayings of the wise
men of old. Even the half-animal gods of the Egyptians, the
symbolic proceedings and ideas of the mysteries, and the
myths of all peoples are expressions of such “‘eternal ideas.’’9
The quarrel between Zeus and Hera, for example, in the
course of which Zeus ties up his wife (Iliad I, 590ff), was,
according to Celsus, an indication of how God had “bound
matter together in orderly wise” at the beginning of the
world.?° All the many and varied divine figures, myths, and
initiations and other ceremonies of the mysteries could be re-
lated to the hidden oneness behind all of them through this
labor of allegorical interpretation. This method served, as
Andresen puts it, “as a lens which gathered up the many di-
verse radiations of historical tradition into a focal point.’’31 It
was through the wise men, the poets, and the philosophers of
the past that the divine Logos of history itself revealed the
rationality of its tremendous store of mythical ideas.and im-
ages.°? Celsus sought by means of allegory to reconcile his
unwavering loyalty to tradition with his need for philosophic
rationality. “‘It transforms the old into the eternally new and
makes of words and writing the bearer of the creative
spirit .. . with its help the Logos of history is revealed as the
unending metamorphosis of the spirit.’’34

42
 THE WITHDRAWAL OF PROJECTIONS IN RELIGIOUS HERMENEUTICS

Typos in Origen
and the Early Middle Ages
Although Origen made a passionate effort in Contra Celsum
(written ca. A.D. 248) to confute these views, his attitude to-
ward allegory is in fact quite similar to that of Celsus himself.
In justifying his interpretations Origen leans heavily on the
Apostle Paul (Galatians 4:21), but his method (not the con-
tent) is in every way the same as that employed by his pagan
opponent.34 He stresses the fact that in both Greek and
Judaeo-Christian tradition there are many things that cannot
be proven to be historical facts. Those who hold these tales to
be oflittle value but who do not wish on this account to risk
deception can decide which they may simply believe, which
they should interpret allegorically by examining the motives
of those who thought them up, and to which they must deny
credence as being chronicled merely for the advantage of cer-
tain people.25 Origen repeatedly distinguishes these three
kinds of text from one another: concrete historical descrip-
tion, images which make sense, and empty tales.3° As to the
first two forms, he says, the level of education of the hearer
must be taken into account; while the uneducated man
conceives everything concretistically, the educated man tries
constantly to improve his understanding of the “deeper mean-
ing.”’37 It is for this reason that there are three degrees of un-
derstanding Scripture. The highest is ‘‘the word of wisdom”
(sophia), the second “‘the word of knowledge” (theoria), the
third “‘faith”’ (pistis).38 There are many symbols in the Old
and New Testaments, for example, the opening up of heaven
(Ezekiel) or the appearance of the Holy Ghost as a dove, that
according to Origen can be interpreted only in the symbolic
manner. He refers to the fact that many people had prophetic
sight in dreams and suspects that something similar could
also happen in the waking state: “How, then, should it be
inconceivable that that same power which influences the soul
in dreams could also in the waking state communicate

43
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

through (second) sight knowledge which would be useful to

him who receives it or to people who hear of it later?’’3?
There is, he thought, a certain “‘general divine knowledge that
only the blessed know how to come by”; from this knowl-
edge issues the allegorical understanding of Scripture.*°
If we think about these interpretative efforts from our
modern psychological standpoint, it is immediately notice-
able that the source oftrue insight, with Origen as with many
of his contemporaries, is relocated in a metaphysical world
that is understood as the world of Platonic ideas or as the
godhead itselfisunderstood, in contrast to the “empty tales”
that issue from the mere subjective intention of an author.
This metaphysical reality was also understood by Origen as a
kind of subtle body permeating the whole world. Many mira-
cles recorded in Holy Scripture took place only in that sphere
of psychic reality inhabited by the subtle body, not in the
concrete here and now.*! “Jesus appeared namely in the middle
ground between created and uncreated things.’’ The special merit
of the Christian reports, in contrast with the pagan, lies not in
their different form‘? but rather in the higher moral effect
that proceeded from Christ and became visible in the way in
which Jesus and many of his followers lived their lives, as
well as in the miracles of healing, especially in the healing of
psychic illnesses.49
According to Origen, however, the sole correct interpreter
of the allegorical sections of Holy Scripture is the pneumatic
man who has been informed by the Holy Ghost, the “spirit of
truth.”’44 Origen based his view that much in Scripture might
be symbolically interpreted on the text from Psalm 78:2: “I
will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings
from of old.”
Origen, like Celsus, sees single events in the course of his-
tory as allegories, eikones of God’s transactions. The visible
world points beyond itself to the invisible principle through
which alone it can be completely understood, and this princi-
ple is revealed in the alethes logos (the truth) of Scripture.45 In

44
 THE WITHDRAWAL OF PROJECTIONS IN RELIGIOUS HERMENEUTICS

Origen’s view, however, this course of history is goal-

directed, either in linear fashion or spirally, while Celsus un-
derstands it more as cyclical. Origen interprets long passages
of Jewish law in this sense.*© Those things prescribed by the
law, when taken literally as among the Jews, are, as it were,
but the reflection and the shadow of the true law ofJesus,
which concerns “‘the things of heaven,” since the law ‘‘con-
tains many things which must be explained and expounded
after the fashion of the spirit.”47 Not only the law but long
passages throughout the Old Testament were in this way un-
derstood sub umbra, that is, as hints of, or allusions to, the
revealed truth of the New Testament (“quod lucet in Veteri
Testamento, hoc fulget in Novo’’).48 Thus Gideon’s fleece, for
example, is a symbol of the Virgin Mary, onto which the
dew, that is, the Holy Ghost, flowed down; the serpent that
Moses hung from a staffin the desert is a prefiguration of the
Crucified One. In the light of the prophecy of Christ as the
one “‘true Logos,” all Old Testament prefigurations, or typoi,
are for the first time recognizable in their genuine signifi-
cance.*? In this sense everything in the Bible refers, as allegory,
or even as mystery or sacrament, to the gradual revelation
of the Spirit.5°
As Henri de Lubac makes clear in his excellent book
Exégese médiévale: Les quatre sens de |’Ecriture,*1 four aspects of
Biblical exegesis gradually crystallized out in the Middle
Ages: (1) the historical-concrete interpretation, which treats
Scripture as a factual report; (2) the allegorical, which works
out its basic dogmatic content; (3) the tropological, or moral,
which derives rules of conduct; and (4) the anagogic, which
says in images, “Hither everything is going and what we may
hope for.”’
Again and again Holy Scripture as a whole is referred to by
the Church Fathers in images that, taken psychologically, we
would today regard as symbols of the unconscious: as spring,
labyrinth, endless sea, unfathomable heaven, impenetrable
abyss, or as a wild and untamed stream from which we can

45
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

draw new life eternally but whose final mysteries remain

forever unattainable for us.5? ‘This is that river that has its
source in the place of blessedness and divides into the four
rivers of Paradise.... Thus there are also four procedures
(regulae) or ways of interpreting the meaning (sensus) of
Scripture: historical ... allegorical ... tropological
anagogic. . . . On these four wheels moves (volvitur) the whole of
Holy Scripture.’’5? The same quaternity of interpretative pro-
cedures was also seen in the four Evangelists and in the four
Fathers of Theology: Gregory (Luke), Ambrose (lion),
Hieronymus orJerome (ox), and Augustine (eagle).54 Jerome
(Hieronymus) is the historian; Gregory, the moralist; Am-
brose, the dogmatist; and Augustine, the eagle “‘that rises up
to the height of mystical speculation.’’>5
This fourfold exegesis corresponds quite amazingly to the
theory of the four basic functions of consciousness that Jung
developed, purely empirically, through observation ofhis pa-
tients and with no knowledge of the above methods of in-
terpretation. According to his description, the functions of
consciousness, reduced to their simplest formulation, may be
divided as follows:
1. The sensation function, which ascertains facts, that is, sees,
hears, smells, and so on, what is
2. Thinking, which brings what has been perceived into logi-
cal connection
3. Feeling, which evaluates what has been perceived, in the
sense ofpleasant-unpleasant, to be admitted-to be rejected,
better-worse
4. Intuition, which represents a kind of faculty ef divining
and orients us as to whence what has been perceived came
and anticipates whither it goes>®

The historical interpretation of Scripture corresponds to

sensation insofar as it regards Scripture as a report of concrete
facts; the sensus allegoricus, which de Lubac calls “le nerf de la
construction doctrinaire,”>? is concerned with the theological-

46
 THE WITHDRAWAL OF PROJECTIONS IN RELIGIOUS HERMENEUTICS

dogmatic classification of the scriptural text; the sensus

tropologicus corresponds to feeling, to moral evaluation; and
the sensus anagogicus is equivalent to intuition, which, “like an
eagle flying heavenwards,” circles round what is hoped for,
the future, what is to be speculatively surmised.
In the Middle Ages, Holy Scripture was looked upon as a
unit, as a mysterium, which makes clear to us the reality of the
Christ. When this mystery, in itself inconceivable, rotates by
means of the four wheels of the four scriptural exegeses, it
draws nearer to our understanding. But our understanding
can never explain Scripture “exhaustively,” for “the purport
of the divine word is of infinite diversity,’ as John Scotus
Erigena puts it.58

Signs of Schism in the Second Millennium

When we examine the Christian interpretation of images,
what strikes us at once is that fact that the opposition, light-
dark, is polarized in all these images. The metaphysical split
in the god-image of Christianity, which sees God as the sum-
mum bonum and excludes evil from the image, ascribing it
either to man or to the devil, runs through the whole field
of ontology. Just as Christ represents the incarnation of
the good God, so the Antichrist represents the power of evil.
Hence all images can refer, at one and the same time, either to
Christ or to the devil. This is most conspicuous in the com-
paratively schematic work of interpreters like Rhabanus
Maurus, Vincent de Beauvais, and Honorius of Autun. Fire,
for instance, can mean either the hell of the passions or inspi-
ration through the Holy Ghost; the raven is a symbol of the
devil or of deeper thoughts directed toward God; the dove
symbolizes erotic lust (Venus!) or the Holy Ghost; the lion,
which “‘sees what he devours,” is Satan or Christ, ““who wakes
us with his roaring,’ and so on. Around the year 1000, when
the world did not come to an end—an event many had been

47
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

waiting for—a spiritual transformation began to become vis-

ible, a transformation characterized, on the one hand, by a
more widespread and more conspicuous interest in the
natural sciences and, on the other, by a new and less concrete
kind of belief in the truths revealed by the Bible; both were
associated with an increasingly rational attitude toward mat-
ters of faith. As early as the brief heyday of Charlemagne’s
reign there had been impulses here and there to combat the all
too great naive concretism of popular piety (the stage of ar-
chaic identity within the new myth),5? impulses that later,
with Bishop Claudius of Turin, almost led to the destruc-
tion of all ecclesiastical symbolism; at the same time the
transcendence of Christian teaching was more and more
emphasized.®° By the ninth century, Agobard of Lyon was
combating the uncritical search for miracles by his contem-
poraries and recommending the use of reason in religious
matters.°? John Scotus Erigena also believed that revelation
did not stand in contradiction to reason-knowledge.® For the
thinking man, in his opinion, the history of God’s action as
related in the Bible represents mysteries that must, at least in
part, be interpreted, because those parts of the story that are
sensorily perceivable are transitory and only that which is
spiritual and invisible will remain for all eternity.°* Theology
therefore is a kind of poetic art that transforms Holy Scripture
in the interest of a full comprehension of those things that
are intelligible and thus leads us out of our imperfect childish-
ness by reducing that which is outwardly perceptible in
Holy Scripture. It is in this fashion that belief must be enlight-
ened by knowledge.®* The Ascension of Christ, for example,
is for John Scotus Erigena a purely “‘parabolic” event, not a
concrete historical fact but an event in the realm of human
consciousness.®5
As a result of attacks by those who could no longer accept
certain passages in Holy Scripture literally and concretely
(fourth stage), the kind of symbolic-psychological interpreta-
tion that had been supported by John Scotus Erigena gained

45
 THE WITHDRAWAL OF PROJECTIONS IN RELIGIOUS HERMENEUTICS

ground. Thus for Abelard, the ascension ofJesus is a symbol

for the soul’s ascent to heaven, brought about byJesus, and at
the same time for the appearance of this ascent on the horizon
of human consciousness. Only the common people, in accord
with their understanding of things, must be encouraged to go
on taking such passages concretely.®
We are not concerned here with particulars of the struggle
between reason and authority or between knowledge and
faith. The psychological aspect of this conflict can be clearly
recognized in the attempt at rational criticism of concretistic
beliefin favor of“‘intelligible’’ belief, which then, in its moral
aspect, becomes psychological interpretation.
The tendency to seek the symbolic-psychological meaning
in Scripture was seen most strikingly in some of the heretical
movements of the time. The neo-Manichaean Catharists, who
had been coming increasingly to the fore since the year
1000, taught, for example, that their members, filled with the
Holy Spirit, were the first to be able to understand Holy
Scripture and to reveal its hidden spiritual meaning.®” They
denied most of the concrete assertions of the Evangelists con-
cerning the life of Christ: his birth from a virgin, the fact of
his burial, his resurrection.®®& The heretic Girard di Mon-
teforte (near Turin) even interpreted God as the primordially
existing mind, or spirit, of man (!) and the Son as the spirit
(animus) of man (!) beloved by God, but the Holy Spirit as the
understanding of Scripture.®? A certain rationalistic, en-
lightening tendency can be recognized in such views, but also
elements of the fifth stage, of the withdrawal into the
subjective-psychic realm of what has hitherto been projected
outward.” In the case of the Albigensians a moral criticism of
Christ himself even began to set in, which led to a belief in
two Christ-figures—an evil, earthly, visible son of Joseph,
and a good figure, born in the new, invisible Bethlehem and
crucified but who possessed only an apparent body and who
had appeared to the Apostle Paul as pure spirit.’ Even
among the “Brethren of the Free Spirit” one finds a with-

49
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

drawal of the divine into the inner psychic realm, which evi-
dently led to dangerous inflations among those called ‘‘Per-
fect.’72 They taught that human beings might be so closely
bound to God that they could become identical with Him.
Such people were without sin through all eternity and could
create more than God Himself;’3 indeed, they could surpass
even the merits of Christ.74 As for Holy Scripture, people
were to attend more to their own inner promptings and to the
imaginings of the heart than to the teaching of the Gospels.
One of the most significant figures in all these movements
is that of Abbot Joachim da Fiore (died ca. 1202). According
to him, time in this world is divided into three main periods
that correspond to the three persons of the Holy Trinity. The
first era is that of the Father, of those who marry, and of
obedience to the law; the second era is that of the clergy and
of the struggles with passion; and the third is that of the
Holy Ghost and of the monks who are “‘called to the freedom
of contemplation.”75
In this latter era love will prevail and—insofar as Holy
Scripture is concerned—the spiritualis intellectus; the letter
withers and the Spirit begins to work.’¢ Joachim interpreted
the stories of Job, Tobias, Judith, and Esther in this spirit,77
that is, historically, in regard to both Christ and the coming
age of the Holy Ghost.7® For Joachim this latest age of the
Holy Ghost is an age not so much ofinner psychic events as
of anew myth struggling to be realized in the world. Success
was denied to the announcement of this new myth and, his-
torically, the struggles in the direction of a rational resolution
of the Christian myth at first won the upper hand.
The few examples cited here thus produce a complex pic-
ture. First, certain rationalistic elements are unmistakable,
standing in opposition to an overly concrete understanding of
the Christian myth, elements that today are for the most part
looked upon as precursors of the Reformation. Second, there
emerge attempts to expand the Christian myth with the help
of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, without dismissing him

50
 THE WITHDRAWAL OF PROJECTIONS IN RELIGIOUS HERMENEUTICS

in a rationalistic spirit. And third, there are clear indications

of a tendency to deal, by means of symbolic interpretation,
with what is no longer concretely believable and to under-
stand it as a purely inner psychic happening in the experienc-
ing subject.
During the course of the succeeding centuries the “‘ratio-
nalistic’”’ tendency (fourth stage) became more and more
the dominant one.”? The Reformation, which sought to com-
pensate this tendency by going back to a rigorous Christian-
ity that saw the Bible as historical truth, was not in a position
to stop this process, which signalized its victory with the en-
thronement of la Déessee Raison (the Goddess Reason) during
the French Revolution and which since then has conquered
the most important fields of European thought. In a way this
rationalistic tendency reached its zenith with the Communist
view of religion as “‘the opium of the people” and, mutatis
mutandis, with the Freudian interpretation of religion as an
illusion rooted in purely subjective complexes explicable in
terms of the “family romance.” In Protestant theology Bult-
mann’s “demythologizing” of the Christian religion belongs
to the same stage, for the logical consequence of this develop-
ment is that only the reverend theologian decides, out of his
own mental processes, what is to be believed and what not.8°
In the Catholic Church the tendency either to read Holy
Scripture with rigid dogmatism or to judge it rationalistically
prevailed down to the end of the eighteenth century. Then
gradually literary textual criticism and historical criticism
were permitted.8! Today the exegetes are trying to arrive at
the meaning of Holy Scripture from every direction, from
one of which comes the occasional insistence that sym-
bolic language must be used for interpretation, so that in one
Congress report even the words of a Freudian analyst were
included. In general, however, it is the linguistic and (anti-
psychological) structuralist systems that are broadly repre-
sented; the prevalent tendency seems to be to allow different
methods simultaneously, in order to arrive at the meaning of

oy
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

Scripture®? and to unite researchers into a kind of ecclesia of

research,83 and thus overcome ‘“‘the alienation of modern man
from Biblical language.’’®4 A kind ofinstinctive or emotional
understanding, born of the faith, is the basis of this generally
rationalistic chaos of various methods within the Catholic
world, a feeling born of faith that prevents the different at-
tempts at interpretation from falling into confusion. Still, a
certain rationalistic corrosion of the myth seems to be gaining
ground, even in Catholicism.
In the face of these tendencies, almost all of which belong
to the fourth stage of projection-withdrawal, Jung can be un-
derstood as the initiator and advocate ofthe fifth stage. Going
ahead consistently from the fourth stage he put the question:
“If all these assertions concerning the faith are, taken con-
cretely, no longer credible, then where did the projection
come from?” Through the investigation of the dreams of his
patients he discovered that these contents go on appearing
and operating, producing living effects in the inner psychic
world, quite untroubled by the dreamer’s rationalistic con-
scious judgments. But, according to Jung, these symbolic re-
ligious experiences do not spring from personally acquired
complexes but rather from a much deeper, generally human
unconscious psychic matrix that, as is well known, he called
the collective unconscious, and also the “objective psyche.”
This discovery, however, raises once again the problem of the
extent to which the contents of the collective unconscious
may be described as subjective, as belonging to the subject. In
Jung’s view many elements of faith, to be sure, can no longer
be regarded as metaphysical realities, but on the other hand
they are not simply subjective contents either. Moreover,
Jung stressed that he definitely believed in the possibility of
the metaphysical reality of religious contents, although there
is no possibility of investigating such contents psychologi-
cally. What we observe in the field of unconscious psycholog-
ical experience and can investigate empirically is always
psychic.

wy
 3

Projection and
Scientific Hypotheses

The First Principle

It is perhaps clear from the preceding chapter that projection
plays an important role in the field of higher religious ideas.
Two questions, nevertheless, remain unanswered: Where can
the line be drawn between what is transsubjective and what
is not? What is psychic and what is metapsychic? Transsubjec-
tive and transpsychic are not interchangeable, although many

aD
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

authors carelessly use the two words as if they had the

same meaning. For Jung the collective unconscious is indeed
transsubjective but it is not metapsychic. The collective un-
conscious, a reality that comprehends in the widest sense
everything that is psychic, in all probability exists, but every-
thing we can say about it is of necessity psychic—received
through the filter of the psyche.
In Western cultural history the transpsychic has been
described sometimes as “‘spirit,’ sometimes as “matter.”
Theologians and philosophers are more concerned with the
former, physicists with the latter. During the course of his-
tory almost as many contradictory statements have been
made about matter as about religious ideas, and today we can
no longer avoid seeing in many of these statements the pro-
jection of psychic contents. In the development of the natural
sciences the human spirit proceeded less conservatively than
in theology. When a statement in the realm of religion was
no longer regarded as absolutely valid, theologians, as was
clearly implied in the preceding chapter, often attempted to
keep it alive and include it within the new truth by means of a
new interpretation. In the natural sciences, however, such
“outdated” statements were for the most part simply dropped;
they were rationalistically invalidated in line with the fourth
stage and it did not occur to anyone to ask, ‘““Where did
this error in which we believed for such a long time come
from?” Today, however, a few historians of science have been
struck by the fact that certain basic themes or primordial im-
ages occur and recur as dominants, that, though transformed,
never quite gala And what was once regarded as ag

ess (or ‘‘mind”) and ~— In ‘ie past chee was

yet a third term, the idea of a ““world-soul,’ which occupied
an intermediate position between mind and matter.
The split between mind—or spirit—and matter can be
traced back to pre-Socratic natural philosophy, which for the

54
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

first time tried to free mankind from a polytheistic-mythical

picture of the world. The new dominant principle was
thought of either as matter and a material primary world
element (water, fire, air, atoms) or as a mental (spiritual)
principle (numbers, Platonic ideas, spiritual vortex, and so
on). Consequently when the old images of the gods came to
be reinterpreted, they were seen in part as psychological
powers—love, aggression, reason, and the like—and in part,
too, as material powers (the heat of the sun, fire, water, and
so on); thus another dualism of mind (psyche)! and matter
resulted. The materialistic interpretation was called logos
physikos, the theological logos theologikos; the former was sci-
entific, the latter religious-metaphysical.2 The two realms,
psyche and spirit, which stand in opposition to matter, fre-
quently overlap among different authors. The world princi-
ple that was called “‘spirit’’ or “mind”’ has in general more to
do with the ordering dynamic, with the principle of thought
(ideas) and with the source of inspiration; the collective
psyche (world-soul), on the other hand, has more to do with
man’s moods and humors and affective states (pathe), such as
wrath, love, longing, and instinctuality.
The modern student of these early philosophical systems
cannot avoid noticing that they leave us in the dark on the
question of whether these mental principles or states of mind
were imagined as belonging to the individual subject or as
transsubjective general principles. As a rule, however, the lat-
ter was nearly always the case. “Big” thoughts and feelings
were “‘influences”’ of the gods on the subject, who was gripped
or possessed by them; such thoughts and feelings had little
or nothing to do with the subjective, personal being.
What we would describe today as psychic elements belong-
ing to the individual subject were projected, at least in part,
onto an object, which is where even today many biologists
are still looking for it—namely, the human body. In the
Homeric age the soul of the individual human being was ap-
parently situated in the phrenes, which in classical time was

Ja)
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

usually understood as the diaphragm but which in Homer

more likely meant the lungs. From this source sprang the
thymos (character, attitude, mind), with which a man could
carry on an inner dialogue, just as he could with his heart, the
seat of his feelings.4 Contents that today we should regard as
pure mental ideas also sometimes came from this region; such
ideas, however, were never abstract, that is, “detached,” but
still directly accompanied by an emotion and a tendency to
act. Onians therefore refers to them correctly as “‘ideo-
motor.’ All these impulses were felt in the phrenes or in the
heart, occasionally in the liver. If the phrenes were filled with
fluid, madness, drunkenness, or forgetfulness ensued.® For a
detailed account of this manner of thinking, the reader is re-
ferred to the outstanding work by R. B. Onians, The Origin of
European Thought. In other cultures still other bodily organs
were taken to be the seat of the soul. Incidentally, the bodily
seat of the soul seems to have moved slowly upward, from
the kidneys to the belly, to the chest, to the larynx, and finally
to the head, which even today many people think of as the
“seat of the soul.”
There were thus two realms in which psychic powers were
thought to be located: an immaterial or subtly material cos-
mic world-soul, from which they “flowed into” the human
being, and a specified part of the human body. The latter, to
be sure, was more personal and closer to the subject but still
not yet identical with the ego, since Odysseus could converse
with his phrenes or with his heart, as with a partner.
If we look back at the scientific-mythological world prin-
ciples that Greek natural philosophy understood as the
ground of being, we are struck by the fact that most of them
represent the intuitive-visual pre-stage of what has developed
into today’s scientific hypotheses or thought-models. Be-
cause the forms, as they became outworn, were still not
recognized as projections, these archetypal basic images
have consistently conformed to the law of the wandering of
unintegrated projections.

56
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

The Infinite Sphere

as God, Cosmos, and Soul
One primordial image in particular has survived in scientific
tradition for a greater length of time than most, one that has
appeared as a visual image of God, of existence, of the cos-
mos, of space-time, and of the particle: the image of a circle
or of the “‘sphere whose center is everywhere and whose cir-
cumference is nowhere.’ Over the centuries this image has
undergone many transformations, until finally it was under-
stood more and more as the image of an endopsychic reality
in the human being. Dieter Mahnke’s work Unendliche Sphare
und Allmittelpunkt provides a comprehensive study of the his-
tory of this symbol; in the main I rely on it here.
An early Orphic hymn had already described Zeus as a
“royal body in which everything here circulates,’ a descrip-
tion that may have influenced Plato and Plotinus.”? And al-
though Anaximander described the ground of all being as
apeiron (‘boundless’), it was for him at the same time an
encircling of separate existences, not yet, however, explicitly
spherical. Parmenides was the first to describe the One ex-
plicitly as a geometrical sphere,? and Empedocles was un-
ambiguous in his description of cosmic reality as an infinite
sphere:1° ‘‘Sphairos, the spherical, above the everywhere pre-
vailing solitude, filled with happy pride.”’!! For Plato, the
cosmos is a spherical, blessed god, a reflection of his eternal
primordial image. Plotinus took over this idea and elaborated
on it.1? The eternal primordial image is a mental sphere
(sphaira noete), the model for the visible sphere of heaven
created by God. This purely spiritual sphere is without exten-
sion in space, so that one can say of God either that he 1s the
All-embracing One or equally that he lives “down in the
depths.”’!3 With his energy, however, he flows throughout
the whole world as a kind of omnipresence.14 On the one
hand, as Mahnke has shown, this image of Plotinus was
passed on via ben-Gabirol’s Fons vitae and via an anonymous

DY.
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

Liber XXIV _philosophorum to Alain de Lille (d. 1203),*°

though not as a god-image in ben-Gabirol but rather as an
image of the first primordial spirit emanating from God, with
whom God accomplished the creation. On the other hand,
and more significantly, the same Neoplatonic cultural inheri-
tance was passed on via Dionysius Areopagitica to John
Scotus Erigena and from there to medieval theology.® For
Scotus Erigena, God is, to be sure, infinite and without di-
mension, but he can be figuratively described as the “‘place,
time, and circumference” of everything.'? Temporally, in
him, beginning, middle, and end are one, coinciding in an
indivisible, eternal point, as it were; and, spatially, periphery
and center are also one (“‘manet in se ipso universaliter et simplict-
ter’). God 1s “everywhere whole’ — whole in each individual
and at the same time whole in himself.1®
The image of the divine sphere is also to be found in the
works of the mystics, Seuse, Tauler, Ruysbroeck, and Meister
Eckhart.?? In the unio mystica of the soul with God, man, in
spite of his creaturely finitude, has his share in the infinity of
this infinite sphere. “Here sinks, here drowns the spirit in the
bottomless sea of the godhead. It can say, In me God, outside
of me God, around me and around God, everything is God, I
know nothing but God” (Tauler).?° For Meister Eckhart God
is “‘an infinite spiritual sphere, whose center and circumfer-
ence is everywhere.’’21
Johannes Kepler, drawing on the writings of Nicholas of
Cusa, later made use of the same image. The primordial
image of the world, he writes, is God himself, ‘‘to whom no
other figure is so like as the surface of a sphere.’?2 God is, so
to speak, the point of origin at the center of this sphere; the
Son is the universal revelation of the onefoldedness of this
point; the Holy Ghost, finally, is the “identity of the space
between.” The finite world is created to accord with this di-
vine primordial image, which is why geometry is a divine art.
The human spirit also possesses the same spherical form; it
stands between the divine spirit and the physical world, like

58
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

the circular line between the surface of a sphere and the plane
from which it cuts a piece.?3
For Isaac Newton, too, three-dimensional space is still
“tamquam effectus emanativus Dei.’ The omnipresence of God
thus became, so to speak, the primordial image of a physical
field.24 Newton writes: “God is eternal, infinite, omnipotent
and omniscient, that is, He exists from eternity to eternity, is
everywhere present, governs everything and knows every-
thing that happens and that can happen. Inasmuch as He
exists forever and is everywhere present, He establishes space,
eternity and infinity.”’25 Newton distinguishes, further, an
“absolute true mathematical time’ that flows constantly
into itself, from a relative, apparently ordinary time that is
the measure of duration. In the same way ‘“‘absolute space”
for him is always in itself the same, while measurable, rela-
tive space is the measure for whatever moves. Absolute time
and absolute space are the “primary loci of all things and
themselves immovable.’ In them God’s omnipresence be-
comes manifest. Physics is, therefore, a special kind of the-
Wlogy.*° Geometry, too, is a divine art, because the law of the
creation of the world is revealed, so to speak, in its axiomatic
macture.?7
In the general theory of relativity accepted today, space
and time are regarded as a four-dimensional metric field that
determines the distance between closely adjacent points.
The metric components attributed to the field have absolute
meaning, that is, one cannot speak of them without taking
into account the presence of matter.?® ““We know, therefore,”
writes Markus Fierz, ‘that in one quite essential respect space
is still what it was in the beginning, the all-embracing, in
which everything moves and acts. And when nowadays
Pascual Jordan... wants toconceive of space as ametric
manifold
Naniroiad in
1n which
Which new stellar worlds are always being spon-
taneously produced, we can see that the thought of actually
identifying it with the old Creative Spirit has not yet quite
faded away.’?? It is in our time, of course, that purely mathe-

aD,
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

matical concepts and symbols have become the most highly

respected representations of reality and have pushed aside the
more visually representable earlier ideas.
In Einstein’s theory not only does the same primordial
image turn up in moditg eens also closely joined
to the idea of matter. Ac ing to Einstein, matter would be
an excited state of a “dynamic geometry.’3® The superspace
of this dynamic geometry contains “‘wormholes” in which
the electric lines of force are, so to speak, caught in the topol-
ogy of superspace.?! This is a true manifold whose configu-
ration, which is temporally always just instantaneous, is a
3-geometry. Superspace itself, however, has no 4-geometry
(the concept space-time completely loses its validity in this
domain);3* Wheeler compares it to an undulating foam-
carpet, shot through with countless “‘wormholes”’ in which
new bubbles are constantly appearing and disappearing; this
carpet is the “dynamic geometry” itself, in which compo-
nents of the vacuum energy, compensating one another, are
to a large extent canceled out.3* The 3-sphere (S3), the
3-sphere with a handle or wormhole! (S. X S; = W;), and the
3-sphere with n wormholes are today regarded as the most
acceptable topology for such a superspace.34
These conceptual models are new variants of the old
paradoxical image of the sphere whose “circumference is
nowhere”’ (circumferentia nusquam). The dualism mentioned at
the beginning of the chapter between a physical and a
theological interpretation of the sphere-image existed in later
centuries, too. Although authors like Weigel, Baader, and
Boehme continued to attach importance to the theological
meaning of the sphere-image, the age of Newton and Kepler
saw the beginning of a process of partial secularization and
mathematicization of the image, with the loss ofits “‘mythi-
cal”Se more and more it became the basis of a purely
‘ientific use of the geometry of the space-structure
and the —
idea of time. The aspect of the symbol of the sphere as a god-
image gradually receded into the background.35

60
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

On the other hand, yet another historical process of trans-

formation in the use of the sphere-image took place: its in-
creasingly psychological interpretation. To be sure, the image
is still applied almost conventionally by Fichte to the god-
head, but at the same time it is also widely used to indi-
cate a centerpoint of the personality to be found in the human
being, a point Fichte describes as the “‘productive, creative
ego”’ or as the “‘absolute ego’’%® (in contrast to the usual, em-
pirical ego). The “‘infinite ego-substance’’is again and again
constantly taking on specific form in the accidental ego. The
latter, for its part, is always striving to extend itself asymptot-
ically toward that ideal or absolute ego. Hardenberg
(Novalis) understands this Fichtean ideal ego more as an
image of God within the individual.37 How closely these
ideas approach the Jungian concepts of Self and ego is quite
obvious.

Particles, Elements, and Causality

If we attempt to sum up Dieter Mahnke’s extensively de-
tailed, here very abridged, account of the tradition of the
image of the sphere in the West, it is at once apparent that, up
to the end of classical physics, this archetypal image formed
the basis of scientific ideas about time and about space as
three-dimensionally conceived, as well as the idea of the
atom (omnipresent point) and the idea of continuum and dis-
continuum, and that therefore all these fundamental scientific
hypotheses are, in the end, derived from a mandala-formed God-
image.38
The idea of the particle has yet another archetypal
background, which overlaps only partially with what has
been said of the sphere. The atomic theory of Leucippus
and of Democritus was based not on any observation of
some way of splitting atoms but rather, as Jung has already
emphasized, ‘“‘on a ‘mythological’ conception of smallest parti-

61
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

cles.’39 the soul-atoms, an idea that can be found, for in-

stance, among the Central Australian aborigines. A further
mythological variant of this primordial idea may be found in
certain Gnostic systems oflate antiquity, according to which
the ultimate reality consists of an abundance oflight-nuclei or
of a totality of seeds containing the potentiality of everything
that is or can be (alles Gewordenen). The same idea reappears
in later Stoic philosophy. There we learn of certain “‘fiery
sparks”’ (igniculi) in the divine world-permeating fiery ether,
and these sparks are also the basis for the notiones communes
(the collective ideas) of humanity.
Even the obviously ‘false’? theory of the four elements,
which enjoyed general recognition from the time of Aristotle
up to the end of the Middle Ages, has not died out but, as an
archetypal image, has persisted through various transforma-
tions. As early as the third century the alchemist Zosimos
emphasized that the four elements were not to be understood
concretely; they were much more like mysterious “‘centers”’
or “principles” in matter. Later they were interpreted as
aggregate states: all solid materials were taken as “earth,” all
fluid as “‘water,” all gases as “‘air,’ and everything of a burn-
ing or caustic or corrosive nature as “‘fire”’ Without entering
into details, I would merely like to remind the reader that
today one speaks of four natural constants: energy, gravita-
tion, affinity, and weak interaction; that the Minkowski-
Einstein model of the world is four-dimensional; and that an
S-matrix (mentioned below) is associated with four princi-
ples. Whenever physicists attempt to construct a comprehen-
sive model of reality or a thought-model of what they are
doing, they return to a quaternity of principles, generally
without suspecting that Jungian psychology long ago dis-
covered the quaternal structure of consciousness.
As Samburski has demonstrated, the principle of causality
also has its roots in ancient images and ideas to which we
must attach an archetypal significance. This principle goes
back to the Stoic concept of the “‘iron law of the cosmos” or

62
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

of “necessity,” according to which everything takes its preor-

dained course in conformity with immutable rules.4° With
the coming of Christianity this conception was transferred to
the God-image. God then became the One who, so to speak,
administers this cosmic law. The alleged absolute validity of
causality in the natural sciences, which was first dethroned by
the uncertainty principle of quantum physics and had to give
way to the idea of statistical probability, stems ultimately
from the theological God-image. Descartes, the father of
modern thinking about causality, based the validity of the
causality principle expressly on his conviction that God
would always and absolutely hold himself to his own rules
that he had established once and for all. God’s veracity and his
immutability guarantee the regularity of the physical laws of
motion.*? Each particle of matter, when considered in isola-
tion, never moves in crooked lines or in curves; the reason for
this, too, is “the immutability of God and the simplicity of
operation whereby He conserves motion in matter.’’4? God
cannot manifest himself in the material world either irratio-
nally or acausally.43 When Albert Einstein said emotionally
to Niels Bohr that “God does not play with dice,’ this pri-
mordial image is evoked once again, this image of a rational,
consistent God who holds himself to his own laws and
could produce nothing irrational, accidental, or even any-
thing genuinely new or meaningful. At present the so-called
S-matrix theory is a new experiment. It is based on three
(plus one) principles: first, that reaction probabilities are in-
dependent of displacements of the experimental apparatus
and of its orientation in space, as well as of the observer’s
state of motion; second, that the result ofa specific reaction is
predictable only in the form of a mathematical probability;
and, third, that an elementary particle can originate in one
reaction and disappear in another only if the latter reaction
occurs after the former. The fourth principle would be that of
the singularities or relative nonpredictability of the creation
of new particles. These singularities cannot be localized, even

63
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

though they seem to appear in the context of the principle of

causality.*4
The principle of complementarity introduced into physics
by Niels Bohr also has an archetypal background. Although
it is not known for sure whether Bohr was influenced by
William James or whether the idea came to him quite inde-
pendently, he later referred frequently to James’s assertion
that conscious and unconscious are complementary*> and
that therefore not only does a complementary relation exist
between the particle and wave theories oflight but that such a
relation can be shown to exist in many other scientific fields
as well. Bohr speaks of a “‘deep-reaching analogy with the
difficulty in the formation of human thoughts, which lies in
the differentiation of subject from object.” In the principle of
complementarity, therefore, he saw a concept of far-reaching
general significance, and it was not by chance that he chose as
the motto for his coat-of-arms the words Contraria sunt com-
plementa when he received the Danish Order of the Elephant
in 1947. For his heraldic figure he chose the intertwined Yang
and Yin in the Chinese Tai-gi-tu:

®
In exactly the same way as Jung, Bohr postulated that in
any description of life phenomena both a causal and a final
method of observation should be applied simultaneously, al-
though the two methods and their relation to each other are
complementary.*¢ Ke
In recent developments in physics there is an increasing
tendency to include the observer’s mental presuppositions in
the field under examination and to pay more attention to
what really happens psychologically when a human being at-
tempts to grasp natural processes experimentally and theoret-
ically. Physicists have of late been much preoccupied with the

64
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

epistemological foundations of their science. Wolfgang Pauli’s

way of defining scientific knowledge of the natural world is
closer to the Platonic view in that he postulates that the pur-
pose of science is to bring inner images into coincidence with
external facts. ““The process of understanding nature as well
as the happiness that man feels in understanding, that is, in
the conscious realization of new knowledge, seems thus to be
based on a correspondence, a ‘matching’ of inner images pre-
existent in the human psyche with external objects and their
behavior.’ This is possible only because “‘both the soul of the
perceiver and that which is recognized by perception are sub-
ject to an order thought to be objective.’’47
In contemporary physics it is emphasized again and again
that intuitive images have recently tended more and more to
disappear; they have been “refined” into purely mathematical
formulae. The physicist consciously refrains from visualizing
the given material in images, and most physicists today guard
against using a visual model ofouter reality as anything more
than a stopgap,*8 a makeshift, although, in the end, as Rudolf
Carnap writes, we may always have to come back to one when
we know the facts about matter.4? Meanwhile the physicist
makes use of conceptual structures, that is, of mathemati-
cal equation systems from the mathematics of physics.%°
As I see it, this process of abstraction has unobtrusively led
to the unconscious projection of a new God-image, namely,
the image of the “divine” number. This reactivation of
Pythagorean ideas in modern physics has been noticed and
emphasized, especially by Werner Heisenberg.°! Nowadays,
as is well known, the physicist regards mathematical forms, not
“things,” as the smallest building blocks of matter. Heisen-
berg writes: “If one wishes to give an exact description of the
elementary particle—and the emphasis here is on the word
exact —then the only thing that can be written down as a de-
scription is the probability function or statistical matrix. The
consequence of this, however, is the recognition that not even
the property of ‘being’ can be attributed, without modifica-

65
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

tion, to the elementary particle. It is a possibility, or a ten-

dency, to be’’52 The mathematical forms that represent the
elementary particles had to be solutions to an immutable law
for the motion of matter.5? The basic equation, however, is
at bottom a mathematical representation of a whole series
of symmetry characteristics.54 For this, it is necessary that
certain transformation groups, which are the simplest
mathematical expression for specific symmetries, be in-
variant. But it turned out that the so-called parity, which had
previously been regarded as a law of conservation, is not al-
ways conserved,>> and Lee and Yang, the scientists who dis-
covered this, have doubts about the validity of certain other
of these mirror symmetries. Thus, the hope that Heisenberg
formulates, that all the natural laws of matter could be repre-
sented as solutions to a closed mathematical schema, is today
once again far from realization.5®
Since mathematical forms appear to be the hitherto sin-
gle knowable aspect of that unknown Something that we
call matter, we have now to ask what these forms are based
on. When we do so, we discover that the whole structure of
mathematics itself and with it all the equations used by the
physicist in the investigation of matter are based on an irra-
tional just-so datum, that is, on the series of natural whole num-
bers,>7 and that they are just-so and not otherwise and cannot
be derived from anything beyond themselves. So we are
again faced with an ancient God-image, that of the Pythago-
reans! The projection has secretly wandered once again and
has been transformed into a “new myth,’ the myth of the
“divine number.”

Energy and Field of Force

In contemporary physics, energy is taken to be the basic sub-
strate of all forms and it is materialized, so to speak, in the
great variety of particles that are the basic components of

66
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

matter. Heisenberg correctly pointed out that this concept is

related to Heraclitus’s idea of world-fire, but in the latter we
have an archetypal idea with much more ancient roots. It
goes back to the primitive idea of a magic potency that was
thought to be both an objective force in the outer world
and a subjective state of intensity in the inner world of the
subject.°8 The Dakota Indians, for example, call this force
wakanda; the sun is wakanda, and so are the moon, thunder,
lightning, stars, the wind, the shaman, the fetishes, ritual ob-
jects, animals, and conspicuous or peculiar objects. The word
wakanda can mean “‘secret,’ “‘force,’ “‘greatness,’ ‘‘holy,’
99

“old,’ “‘alive,’ and ‘immortal.’ Among the Iroquois the

same force is called oki; the Algonquins call it manitu; and the
Yaos, mulungu. Churinga has the same meaning for the Aus-
tralian aborigines and mana for the Melanesians.5? Mulungu
means the soul of aman or a woman after death, the world of
the spirits, the magic power in an object, life and health in
the body, the active principle in everything magic, the mys-
terious, the incomprehensible, the unexpected, and the great
spiritual power that creates the world and all its life.©° This
primordial idea of ‘“‘power”’ is the name for “‘a diffuse sub-
stance or energy upon the possession of which all exceptional
power or ability or fecundity depends.’’®! Its personified
form, in spirits (animism), represents a further stage of de-
velopment.® As Jung suspected, this primitive idea of mana is
a pre-stage of our psychological concept ofenergy, and, in all
probability, of the concept of energy in general.®? In Greek
natural philosophy this idea crops up in a form that is further
developed conceptually in Heraclitus’s idea of world-fire; this
is the Logos—the all-directing world mind, identical with
the godhead but at the same time also with the material
primordial fire that circulates throughout the course of all
happening, since it condenses or thins out, grows more in-
tense or less intense, penetrates upward or downward in eter-
nal rhythm: ‘‘Fire brings about the death of earth; and air

67
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

survives the death of fire, water extinguishes air, and earth

extinguishes water.’®4 “God is day and night, winter and
summer, war and peace, satiation and want. He changes in
the manner of fire, which, when it is mingled with scents, is
named after the odor of one or another particular thing.’’®s
“This world, as with all things, was made neither by man nor
by God, has always been and is and will always be, an eternal
living fire, igniting in accordance with measure and extin-
guished according to measure.’ In its profoundest depths,
the human soul (according to Heraclitus) is connected with
this world-encompassing fiery Logos and participates in its
meaningfulness. Thus, Heraclitus’s image of energy is in the
end also a God-image.®” The Stoics’ conception of pneuma,
too, had much in common with this image; for them the
pneuma was identical with God. It is clear, then, that there is a
God-image in the primordial forms of the concept of energy,
as in the concept of space-time and in that of the particle.®
The Stoic concept of pneuma, however, also forms the pre-
stage of the idea of a field of force as it was developed in
nineteenth-century physics.°? Even Newton still believed
that he could explain gravitation through the action of “‘sub-
tle spirits,’ and he rejected every mechanical explanation put
forward by the Cartesians, who tried to show that gravitation
was effected by the ether.7°
Henry Moore, Newton’s friend, also believed that the
movement of things in space is caused by immaterial spiritual
essences or stems from spatially extended spirits (in contrast
to Descartes’ purely mechanistic explanation). Spiritual prin-
ciples effect the activity and the cohesion of all material parti-
cles.71 This notion is reminiscent, as Samburski points out, of
the Faraday hypothesis of fields of force, advanced two cen-
turies later.
The old way of picturing energy lived on in the alchemistic
tradition in the idea of Mercurius as a “hidden fire” or a fiery
life-breath or a kind of life-spirit inherent in all things, which
occasionally was identified with the Holy Ghost.7? This fire-

65
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

spirit imagines everything in nature; he is a creation spirit

who contains in himself “‘the images of all creatures.”’73 In the
alchemical opus he must be liberated from his imprisonment
in matter and then he begins to rotate in himself, vortex-
fashion; at the same time he reveals himself as an immortal
component of the alchemist’s psyche. By way ofthe different
stages of the so-called phlogiston theory, this archetypal im-
age gradually developed into the energy concept of modern
physics.74
There is therefore no concept fundamental to modern
physics that is not in one degree or another a differentiated
form of some primordial archetypal idea. Samburski, too,
stresses that fact.75 ‘““The study of the ancient Greek theory
of matter is particularly gratifying to anyone who believes
that he sees an inner logic in the history of natural scientific
thought, a power that again and again forces upon the re-
searcher, each time at a different stage in the growth of
knowledge, a small number of images and sequences of ideas. Our
respect is increased when we recognize that through all the
differences and beyond every transformation of the Greek
cosmos there remains the primordial image that is still the
model for our own.’’® Gerald Holton also emphasizes that
the natural sciences always circle around the same “‘themes.”
Along with the concepts of time, space, energy, and the
field of force, as well as of the particle, there remains finally
that of chemical affinity, which has its roots in the primitive
idea of sympathy (the sympathy of all things) and in the
mythological-alchemistic idea of coniunctio. Kekulé’s vision
of the pairs of dancing atoms, which suggested to him his
theory of structure, and his vision of the snake biting its own
tail, which gave him the idea of the structure of the benzene
ring, show how active and effective such images still are in
the background of the consciousness of a modern chemical
researcher.’7
It is worthwhile to read Kekule’s own description. He
writes of returning to Clapham (London) after having visited

69
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

his friend Hugo Miller in Islington and talking about

chemistry.
One fine summer day, I went once again with the last bus. . . .
I sank into reverie, and the atoms flickered before my eyes. I
had always seen them in motion but I had never succeeded in
discerning the way in which they moved. Today I saw how
many times two of the smaller ones joined together in pairs;
how larger ones embraced two small ones, still larger ones
held fast three and even four of the small ones, and how it all
rotated in a sort of swirling round-dance. ... When the con-
ductor called out “Clapham Road,’ I awoke from my rev-
eries, but I spent a part of the night in putting sketches, at
least, of those dream images down on paper. This was the
origin of the structure theory.7®
“Tt was much the same with the benzene theory.” Kekulé
describes how, one evening in Ghent, he was making no
headway with his work.
I moved my chair over to the fireplace and fell half-asleep.
Once again the atoms fluttered about before my eyes. This
time the smaller groups remained modestly in the
background. My inner eye . . . now distinguished larger for-
mations of varying shape. Long rows, much more thickly
joined together; everything in motion, winding and turning,
snake-fashion. But look, what was that? One of the snakes
caught hold of its own tail and the whole formation swirled
mockingly before my eyes. I awoke as if struck by lightning;
this time, too, I spent the rest of the night working out the
consequences of the hypothesis.79
Experiences of this kind inclined Kekulé to the view that
ideas are like “seeds of the life of the mind” that float around
in the atmosphere until they “accidentally”’ find fertile soil
in the head of a researcher and take root and grow there.®°
This somewhat primitive explanation calls to mind the Stoic
theory of “seminal ideas” that float in the world-pneuma.
As soon as an archetypal idea that has been serving as a
model no longer coincides with the observed facts of the

70
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

external world, it is dropped or its origin in the psyche is rec-

ognized. This process always coincides, as least as far as |
have been able to observe, with the upward thrust of a
new thought-model from the unconscious to the threshold
of consciousness. This is the origin of that “disturbance of
adaptation” which indicates that it is advisable to withdraw
the projection.
Whereas the smaller sort of scientific “errors” are usually
dropped without much ado as soon as they are seen through,
there are others that even in natural science are passionately
defended. This makes it clear that, seen from a psychological
standpoint, they represent the projection of an especially im-
portant unconscious psychic factor that one wishes to pre-
serve at any cost. When it is a question of projected aspects of
a God-image,®1 as in the case of the world-mandala or the
three-dimensionality of space or the concept of energy, the
passion with which these concepts are disputed and often
fought over, even today, becomes understandable.
Nevertheless we have to proceed from the assumption that
all scientific hypotheses and/or explanations will in the end
turn out to be projections but that their psychic “nuclear
energy” will survive in still another new myth.
If we compare the above brief outline of the history of
the development of a few of the concepts used in physics with
the history of religious hermeneutics, we see an apparent
difference in that the third stage in the withdrawal of
projections—the stage of moral evaluation—seems to be
missing in the natural sciences. Nowadays, a good deal is
made of the fact that the concepts of the natural sciences are
free of values. In my opinion this is an illusion, arising from
the fact that many natural scientists, being thinkers, artifi-
cially repress the feeling function in their professional ac-
tivities. This has led to that overvaluation of reason and of its
product, technology, whose destructive consequences, both
concrete and moral, we are today beginning to see in the form
of problems of pollution, disturbances of ecology, and so on.

vo
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

The battle over the construction of nuclear power plants is

also a moral problem, however much this fact is beclouded by
rational arguments. Euthanasia, abortion—again and again it
becomes plain that one cannot get at the heart of the problem
by rational means alone, and that the value function, feeling,
must participate in the discovery ofa solution. The omission
of the third stage, of the feeling evaluation of scientific mod-
els, takes a bitter revenge, since behind these thought-models
or dominant images stand the archetypes, which are never
morally neutral powers.
A second element that, up to the present, seems to be
missing in the history of natural science is the insight that
outmoded models originated in the human unconscious;
scarcely a thought is given to what they might mean,
psychologically, once they are no longer fit to serve as a model
in describing the outer world. It is only today, when we
know that the assumptions of the observer decisively precon-
dition the total results, that this question is becoming acute.
Recognition of scientific projections has also almost always
been occasioned by a disturbance, a pressing need, or an
emergency (for example, cancer research or the necessity of
finding new sources of energy). In such cases human curios-
ity is prone to discover new facts that do not fit the old model
and force us to think up new hypotheses. Or sometimes a
new, more suitable model is born spontaneously in the mind
of a researcher of genius.
Basically there is not one essential scientific idea that is not
in the end rooted in primordial archetypal structures. As Jung
pointed out and emphasized, the parallelism of theological
speculation and the thought-models of physics indicate that
they rest, in the last analysis, on the same archetypal founda-
tion, and Jungian psychology itself naturally also rests on the
same foundation.®? In its original form such an archetypal
thought, however, was not yet consciously thought; rather
it was experienced as the “appearance of a thought,’ that is,
it was a “revelation” from the unconscious. As Jung em-

(2
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

phasized, thinking preceded the formation of a consistent

ego-consciousness and the ego in primordial times was the
object of a kind of unconscious primordial thinking rather
than the subject. It is a thinking preexistent to ego conscious-
ness that has created the great themes or primordial thoughts
of Western natural sciences.

Psyche and Matter

In what are perhaps his most important works, Psychology and
Alchemy and Mysterium Coniunctionis, Jung has shown how
important were the psychic contents projected onto matter in
the earliest periods of chemistry and physics. Since matter—
the material the researcher of the time was studying—was
for all practical purposes completely unknown to him, it was
especially easy for him to project his unconscious into its
darkness.83 This was naturally a purely involuntary occur-
rence. “Strictly speaking, projection is never made; it hap-
pens, it is simply there. In the darkness of anything external
to me I find, without recognizing it as such, an interior or
psychic life that is my own.’§* During the course of his ex-
periments the researcher may have had certain psychic ex-
periences that he interpreted as the particular behavior of the
chemical process. ‘‘Since it was a question of projection, he
was naturally unconscious of the fact that the experience had
nothing to do with matter itself (that is, with matter as we
know it today). He experienced his projection as a property
of matter; but what he was in reality experiencing was his
own unconscious.’®5 However, everything unconscious, in-
sofar as it was activated, was projected into matter; that is, it
approached the experimenter from without. The alchemist in
this way “‘recapitulated the history of man’s knowledge of nature.
As we all know, science began with the stars, and mankind
discovered in them the dominants of the unconscious, the
‘gods, as well as the curious psychological qualities of the

73
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

zodiac: a complete projected theory of human character. As-

trology is a primordial experience similar to alchemy. Such
projections repeat themselves whenever man tries to explore
an empty darkness and involuntarily fills it with living
form.’’8® According to Jung, knowledge may be said to exist,
in the final analysis, when the reactions of the psychic system
that stream into consciousness (perceptions induced from
without or endogenous psychic impulses) are brought into an
order that corresponds to the behavior of metapsychic things
(inner or outer “‘realities’”). When an order thus created no
longer corresponds to the way things behave, it is then rec-
ognized as a projection, but until this occurs it appears to us
simply as “true knowledge.”
Since earliest times, alchemy has always had two faces, “‘on
the one hand the practical chemical work in the laboratory, on
the other a psychological process, in part consciously psychic,
in part unconsciously projected and seen in the various trans-
formations of matter.’87 Many alchemists themselves half
suspected a certain connection and therefore sought, through
meditation and by cultivating their own inner life by means
of imaginative work, to influence the outer chemical experi-
ment,8® since for them fantasy was not something shadowy
and substanceless but had about it something half material, half
mental that therefore could definitely influence the concrete
materials found in the external world. “‘But,’ continues Jung,

just because of this intermingling of the physical and the

psychic, it always remains an obscure point whether the ulti-
mate transformations in the alchemical process are to be
sought more in the material or more in the spiritual realm.
Actually, however, the question is wrongly put: there was no
“either-or” for that age, but there did exist an intermediate
realm between mind and matter, i.e., a psychic realm of subtle
bodies whose characteristic it is to manifest themselves in a
mental as well as a material form. This is the only view that
makes sense of alchemistic ways of thought, which must
otherwise appear nonsensical. Obviously, the existence of this

74
 PROJECTION AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

intermediate realm comes to a sudden stop the moment we

try to investigate matter in and for itself, apart from all projec-
tion; and it remains non-existent so long as we believe we
know anything conclusive about matter or the psyche. But
the moment when physics touches on the ‘‘untrodden, un-
treadable regions,’ and when psychology has at the same time
to admit that there are other forms of psychic life besides the
acquisitions of personal consciousness—in other words,
when psychology too touches on an impenetrable darkness
—then the intermediate realm of subtle bodies comes to
life again and the physical and the psychic are once more
blended in an indissoluble unity. We have come very near to
this turning-point today.®?

Since Jung wrote the above, this trend has become much
more visible, as researchers in the natural sciences, especially
in physics, have become increasingly conscious of the extent
to which the psychological circumstances in which the physi-
cist conducts an experiment influence the result.9° This has
led to a revival of interest in basic research in these fields, to
inquiry into thought-models and their origin, although in my
view inquiry into the psychological origins of mathematical
models is still to a large extent neglected, even though in-
quiry into precisely this area would be especially signifi-
cant.?! Inquiry into the preconscious creative processes in the
researcher’s unconscious 1s also still largely ignored. In con-
trast to this neglect, interest in parapsychological phenomena
has livened up considerably (even in the Soviet Union); the
object of this interest and research is once again that “‘inter-
mediate realm of subtle bodies” in which the psychological
and the physical can no longer be differentiated.
In order to prevent yet another naive projection of psychic
contents onto external phenomena, without at the same time
denying the effectiveness and importance of such contents,
Jung created the concept of the collective unconscious, which
enables an empirical psychology to investigate more closely
this intermediate realm of a single reality, or unus mundus.

iS
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

This destroys the illusion of the positivistic natural scientists

that we can acquire absolute knowledge of matter? and also
the illusion of those psychologists who want to have it that
the psyche consists of nothing more than the contents of
our subjective consciousness.?? For the concept of the collec-
tive unconscious defines that “intermediate realm of subtle
bodies” without, however, presuming to say anything defini-
tive about its substance.%4 It is a pure hypothesis. Jung says
nothing about the contents of the collective unconscious,
which are the province of experience alone.

76
 4

The Hypothesis
of the Collective Unconscious

The Model

With a circumspection characteristic of genius, Jung in his

description of the “‘collective unconscious” brought forth a
concept in which the traditions of this idea in cultural history
could be united with the empirical findings of contemporary
natural science and through which the dualism of matter and
mind/psyche may perhaps at the same time be overcome.

AL
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

From the point of view of cultural history the idea of the

collective unconscious is, as we have already indicated, a new
formulation of the archetypal conception of a “‘world-spirit,”
as it was postulated by the Stoics, or of a “world-soul” that
animates the universe and flows from the divine or demonic
“‘in-fluences”’ (in-flowings) into the human subject. The
Gnostic idea of a prosphyes psyche (an ““on-grown”’ soul) was
a precursor, in the form of an intuitive hunch, of what today
we would call the collective unconscious. The expression
‘“‘on-grown”’ is an especially good choice, inasmuch as it can
actually be demonstrated that the realization of the objective
psyche originated historically in the process, here described,
of the gradual withdrawal ofprojections. In fact, as Jung em-
phasized, nothing was “thrown out” of the psyche originally;
rather, the human psyche as we know it today developed via a
long series ofacts of introjection. It is only later, after a piece of
the psyche has been experienced and recognized as an inner
factor that one can speak, in the past tense, of a projection, of
a transfer of inner elements to things external. ““The collective
unconscious, as we understand it today, was never a matter of
‘psychology, for before the Christian Church existed there
were the antique mysteries, and these reach back into the grey
mists of neolithic prehistory. Mankind has never lacked pow-
erful images to lend magical aid against all the uncanny things
that live in the depths of the psyche. Always the figures of the
unconscious were expressed in protecting and healing images
and in this way were expelled from the psyche into space,’?
into a metaphysical ““Beyond” or into occurrences in man’s
natural environment.
In contrast to his predecessors, however, Jung set the
hypothesis of the collective unconscious on the solid ground
of reality by demonstrating how it could be investigated em-
pirically, namely, in the dreams of modern men and women.
Adolf Bastian had already opened up one possibility of em-
pirical research, that of comparative mythology. But his con-
temporaries took very little notice of his work. And yet it is

78
 THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS

precisely myths and mythical religious systems that are the first and
foremost expression of objective psychic processes.
Primitive man impresses us so strongly with his subjectivity
that we should really have guessed long ago that myths refer
to something psychic. His knowledge of nature is essentially
the language and outer dress of an unconscious psychic pro-
cess. But the very fact that this process is unconscious gives us
the reason why man has thought of everything except the
psyche in his attempts to explain myths. He simply didn’t
know that the psyche contains all the images that have ever
given rise to myths, and that our unconscious is an acting and
suffering subject with an inner drama which primitive man
rediscovers, by means of analogy, in the processes of nature
both great and small.3
For some time students of mythology sought to derive the
mythological images of primitive cultures from external fac-
tors, from the given presence of the sun, moon, vegetation,
and so on. Jung refuted this by pointing out that when one
refers an imaginary image, or elements ofit, to outer objects,
this is, after all, a response made by the psyche to something
external and never an exact, purely photographic, reproduc-
tion. Myths are created by the unconscious in very free rela-
tion to the sense perceptions.*
Thanks to Jung, we all possess today, in addition to Bas-
tian’s early attempt at a psychic explanation of myths, the
further possibility of empirical dream-research, by means of
which the effect of the archetypes, particularly in individual
human beings, can be more accurately observed.
An impression of what the collective unconscious actually
is can perhaps best be conveyed visually (see page 80).
Immediately under the field of consciousness of each indi-
vidual ego is a layer of unconscious psychic contents (E) that
have been acquired as a result of the individual’s biographical
experience: repressed and forgotten material that, when it
occurs in dreams, can be understood only by a precise inter-
rogation of the dreamer. Then underneath this layer are

79
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

A Unified layer, unus mundus D_ Group or folk unconscious

B- Collective unconscious of mankind E Unconscious in the individual
C_ Regional unconscious F Individual ego

contents (D) that can be common to an entire group (for

example, when an individual in one company of soldiers seems
to be the “company goat,” symbolic of the common shadow,
or when everybody in the whole group unconsciously sees
his own “shadow” in him). The same holds good for larger
segments of the population. Next come contents (C) that are
common to a country, or more frequently to a geographical
region, as when one sees, for example, that certain myths
or sagas occur only in certain areas,° or that contents, such as
the myths of weakening the sun, which appear to belong to
great nations or to large areas of the earth, are to be found
throughout the East but not in our part of the world.® Then

50
 THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS

B e D

A Conscious field with ego-center C Group unconscious

B Personal unconscious D_ Collective unconscious

come contents (B) that are known to be present in all human

beings, like hero myths, beliefs about paradise or about the
Beyond, belief in spirits, and so on. This layer of the psyche,
from which the most universal human myths come, contains
at the same time the basic structure of the human soul. And,
finally, there is another level, a unit (A) in which the multiple
archetypes appear to be united or integrated into one single
center. The diagram could just as well be turned inside out,
as shown above.
Obviously the transition from one layer to another is ex-
traordinarily fluid. In dreams, for example, one often finds
universal mythological symbols mixed with contents stem-
ming from personal experience.
Within the context of his work on the hypothesis of the
collective unconscious, the word symbol acquired for Jung
an entirely new meaning.” Symbolikos, in antiquity, meant

81
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

“figurative, not literal”’ The expression was almost synony-

mous in those days with metaphor or allegory and was so
used in the early days of Christianity, when the concrete
image served to point to the “real” spiritual-psychic mean-
ing. Jung uses the concepts “symbol,” “allegory,” and “sign”
in rather different ways. A sign, for him, is a mark or token of
something of a concrete or psychic nature that is generally
known; this also applies to allegory, with the difference that
half-unconscious mythical associations often surround and
cling to allegorical images. Both allegory and sign are to a
large extent consciously created or developed. (A good deal
that is allegorical, however, is still partly unconscious and is
an image whose meaning the interpreter believes he con-
sciously knows and has exhaustively described but which
nevertheless contains other aspects still unknown to him. The
border between allegory and symbol is therefore often fluid.)
A symbol is an image that expresses an essential unconscious
factor and therefore refers to something essentially uncon-
scious, unknown, indeed to something that is never quite
knowable.® It is “the sensuously perceptible expression of an
inner experience.” It is in the secondary instance made visible
through the fact that it activates and groups the material
available for representation. The archetype, in itself unknow-
able, clothes itself, so to speak, in this material, just as a prim-
itive dancer does with animal hides and masks. In this way
a symbol is created whose nucleus is a nonrepresentable,
consciousness-transcending archetypal basic structure that
emerges from the unconscious at different times and in dif-
ferent places as a structured complex of images and leads to
the formation of religious and mythological systents of ideas
and representations. ‘‘So long as a symbol is a living thing, it
is an expression for something that cannot be characterized in
any other or better way. The symbol is alive only so long as it
is pregnant with meaning. But once its meaning has been
born out of it, once that expression is found which formulates
the thing sought, expected, or divined even better than the

82
 THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS

hitherto accepted symbol, then the symbol is dead, i.e., it

possesses only an historical significance.’!° ““A symbol really
lives only when it is the best and highest expression for some-
thing divined but not yet known to the observer. It then
compels his unconscious participation and has a life-giving
and life-enhancing effect.’!
Differentiated and primitive, conscious and unconscious
are united in the symbol,!? as well as all other possible
psychic opposites. Whenever such a symbol comes spon-
taneously to light from the unconscious, it is a content that
dominates the whole personality, “forcing the energy of the
Opposites into a common channel,’ so that “‘life can flow
on... towards new goals.’’!3 Jung called that unknown activ-
ity ag the unconscious which produces the real, life-giving
symbols the transcendent function, because this process facili-
tates a transition from one attitude to another.'4 A still-living,
genuine symbol can thus never be “resolved” (that is,
analyzed, understood) by a rational interpretation, but can
only be circumscribed and amplified by conscious associa-
tions; its nucleus, which is pregnant with meaning, remains
unconscious as long as it is living and can only be divined. If
one interprets it intellectually one “kills” the symbol, thus
preventing any further unfolding of its content. Scientific
hypotheses are also always symbols to begin with, to the de-
gree to which they refer to a set of facts of which a number
are still unknown; when this set offacts has gradually become
sufficiently known, however, the symbolic aspect of the
hypothesis has merely historical significance. The more sig-
nificantly a symbol expresses an unconscious component that
is common to a large number of people, the greater its effect
on society.
When one reflects on these formulations by Jung, it is easy
enough to understand the resistance of the churches to psy-
chological interpretations of their symbols that probe too
deeply; the fear that the symbols might thereby be destroyed
was well founded. However, the insistence that they should

83
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

be believed as concrete facts was an unfortunate way out of

the dilemma, since it merely fed the rising doubts. The only
way out of this impasse, the only way that guarantees that the
living quality of religious symbols will not be prematurely
extinguished, is through the realization that religious sym-
bols do not refer to material and concrete facts but to a
collective-psychic unconscious reality.

The Multiple Unity

of the Collective Unconscious
The collective unconscious appears at first to be—to put it
simply—the sum of archetypal structures that manifest
themselves in typical mythological motifs in all human beings.
Underneath these structures, however, one finds a still deeper
layer that has the appearance of a unit. Jung remarks: “Our
Western psychology has, in fact, got as far as yoga in that it is
able to establish scientifically a deeper layer of unity in the
unconscious. The mythological motifs whose presence has
been demonstrated by the exploration of the unconscious
form in themselves a multiplicity, but this culminates in a
concentric or radial order which constitutes the true centre or
essence of the collective unconscious.’’!5 It is the same center
that becomes visible in mandala symbols, in those circular,
square, and spherical symbols we have already met in the
preceding chapters. As this central, unified area of the un-
conscious is approached, time and space are increasingly
relativized.'°.That deepest area of the unconscious that is
simply a unit or the center may therefore be understood as an
omnipresent continuum, “an omnipresence without extension.”
“When something happens here at point A which touches
upon or affects the collective unconscious, it has happened
everywhere.”’!” As this part of the “objective psyche” “‘is not
limited to the person, it is also not limited to the body.’18
This psyche ‘behaves as if it were one and not as if it were

54
 THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS

split up into many individuals.’!9 The multiplicity of the ar-

chetypes seems to be nullified or suspended in it.
It is naturally very tempting to identify the hypothesis of
the collective unconscious historically and regressively with
the ancient idea of an all-extensive world-soul, a kind of cos-
mic “subtle body.”?° The empirical findings that could serve
as a basis for this are still, in my opinion, a long way from
being adequately clarified. Even though phenomena such as
psychokinesis and psychophotography appear to indicate the
existence of apsychoid (similar to the psychic and also similar
to matter) layer of psychic phenomena, these can by no
means be identified with other aspects of the collective un-
conscious with which we are acquainted but look rather more
like mere “boundary” phenomena. On the basis of such
phenomena we cannot at present attribute to the collective
unconscious any of the qualities of the subtle body. It seems
far likelier that its omnipresence and timelessness point to
some kind of purely transcendental existence. In what fol-
lows, therefore, I prefer to remain within the context of what
is demonstrable and leave open questions about the essential
nature of the collective unconscious.
But we must return to the subject of multiple archetypal
structures. In this connection it may be well to emphasize
once again that an “‘archetype in itself’ cannot be visualized
and that any idea ofits reality can be attained only by infer-
ence. Just as we conclude that because light shows interfer-
ence phenomena when it passes through lattice structures, it
must therefore have a wavelike character,?! we are also enti-
tled to conclude that when people of all times and all cultures
possess, for example, the collective imagery ofa healer-hero,
there must be in the human psyche a structured predisposi-
tion that motivates the production of a healer-hero fantasy in
times of need (and frequently the projection ofthese fantasies
onto suitable or unsuitable concrete persons). The same holds
good for the mythologems of the “Great Mother,” the “‘trea-
sure that is hard to attain,” the ‘‘magical helpful animal,” the

85
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

tree of life, the “‘mighty”’ spirits of the dead, and so on. The
imagery that arises in any one such local product of the col-
lective imagination—religious, literary, mythological—is
naturally only rarely completely identical with that in any
other country (when it is, the origin is apt to be traditional)
but similar only in structure. The similarity is sufficient, how-
ever, to reveal clearly enough the kinship with the myth-
ologems of other cultures. Even in cases where there is a
known tradition that can be historically explained, and this
occurs frequently, the effect of the archetype must still be
taken into consideration, because there is no other explana-
tion for the fact that certain mythologems spread like wildfire
while others remain localized and are seldom or never bor-
rowed. Viewed psychologically, it is noticeable, in cases of
widespread dissemination, that an archetypal representation
(like a rumor) comes into wide acceptance only when the un-
derlying archetypal structure in the collective unconscious is
activated, that is, charged with energy.
Jung surmised that an archetype in its quiet state is not pro-
jected.?? In this state it would have no determinable form but
would be, in respect to form, completely undefinable, “‘with,
however, a potential, due to projection, of appearing in defin-
able forms.”?3 Thus, projection is an essential part of the process
by which the archetype assumes a determinable shape. This de-
pends on the activation, that is, on the energic charge of an
archetype. Just as there are “‘excited points” in an electro-
magnetic field, so it seems that in the “field” of the collective
unconscious there are also such “excited points,’ compara-
ble to single archetypes to the extent that the latter do in
fact behave like relatively isolatable nuclei. The pomts of the
electromagnetic field can be charged—to continue the com-
parison with physics—by the action of external influences,
such as the incidence of light and radiation, or by some inter-
nal shift of energy within the field itself. An analogous pro-
cess can be observed in the case of the archetypal structures in
the collective unconscious: an external emergency, such as

56
 THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS

epidemics or famine, can suddenly “‘charge’’ the fantasy ofa

healer-savior, in itself always present in a latent state, in the
collective psyche of a group or it can intensify pessimistic
fantasies of the end of the world. Internal shifts of energy
within the field itself can also occur in the collective uncon-
scious: when, for example, an active-masculine stance and a
one-sidedly extroverted attitude toward life, with their corre-
sponding values and ideals, have been dominants in a society
for quite a long time, then complementary or even coun-
tertendencies may spontaneously be activated and come up
from the unconscious, perhaps a tendency toward introver-
sion or toward a more feminine outlook on life. In both cases,
whether prompted from without or from within, the law of
compensation or complementarity seems to dominate, that is,
a tendency to establish balance or wholeness (wholeness
achieved by two logically incompatible opposites, in the strict
sense of the word complementarity, as used in physics).
These self-regulatory processes in the psyche seem to be
controlled by the archetype of the Self, the supraordinate
center of the collective unconscious, and appear to be indepen-
dent of ego-consciousness and of the will and all its exertions;
they are therefore also to a great extent unpredictable. One
usually recognizes their compensatory character only later
and marvels at the strange and curious byways and detours
by means of which the compensatory function of the uncon-
scious accomplishes its ends.?4 A ray of light, as we know,
does not take a direct Euclidean linear path through matter-
filled space; it takes the shortest way, which in the case of
resistant material does not mean a Euclidean geometrical path
but rather a ‘“‘detour.” The same can be demonstrated in the
case of a compensatory current of energy flowing from the
archetype of the Self.
And now at last we can return to the unresolved questions
from the first chapter. We saw there that when a man projects
his anima onto a woman and falls in love with her, two cur-
rents of energy are set in motion. The lover experiences an

87
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

affect directly, as if from the impact of an arrowshot, and

sees it as coming from the god Eros (Amor, Cupid), a symbol
of the Self. Another current of energy “‘activates” the anima-
imago in his unconscious and projects it (throws it forward)
onto the outer woman, who in this way becomes forthwith
fascinating to the man. The obvious assumption is that the
reasons for this detour via the outer object are analogous to
the reasons that a ray of light does not follow a direct linear
path, namely, because there is “impermeable material” be-
tween consciousness and the anima-image in the unconscious
that stands in the way of an unmediated psychic perception of
the anima-image. We know today that when the person af-
fected opens up a way, through active imagination,”> to the
inner anima-image and comes into direct contact with it, the
image that appears externally in projected form begins to
fade. The recognition of this phenomenon inclined Freud to
the assumption that only repressed material is projected. This
is not always true, however, because experience shows just as
often— indeed, even more often—that the impermeability is
due not to any kind of repression but simply to the fact that in
consciousness the means of reception necessary to the admission
of something new coming from the unconscious are missing.
This is seen most clearly in cases where a creative inspiration
or fantasy is making its way up from the unconscious.
The mathematician Henri Poincaré describes in detail in
Science et méthode how, through a revelation from the uncon-
scious, he discovered what today are called automorphic
functions. It took him a good half hour to write down in
logical sequence the vision he had seen in a flash. He declared,
rightly, that this vision would have led to nothing If he had
not been striving—in vain—for a long time to reach a solu-
tion. Through this exertion his consciousness created, as it
were, a net to catch the new conception, so that what he had
seen could be put in its proper place.
Kekule’s above-mentioned vision of a dancing pair and of a
snake biting its own tail, which facilitated the discovery of the

58
 THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS

ring shape of the benzene molecule, is a similar example. The

vision alone would not have led to anything if it had not been
preceded by intensive conscious work on chemical research.
In psychological practice one frequently meets with men
and women who see themselves as “unrecognized geniuses.”
I have noticed in such cases that the unconscious does in fact
relatively often present genuinely creative impulses and inspi-
rations in dreams. Tragically enough, however, the right con-
scious attitude is missing. It is too narrowly conventional or
the necessary education is lacking, so that what is being re-
vealed from within is falsely evaluated or distorted; it may be,
too, that the person concerned is simply lazy and prefers, in-
stead of working at a genuine assimilation of his unconscious
intuitions, to proclaim them in an inflated and vague way as
“newly discovered truth.” The products of such an attitude
generally fail to find a publisher and mercifully disappear into
the wastepaper basket. Only an inwardly open, “‘naive”’ at-
titude to the unconscious on the one hand and an honest, con-
scientious, and painstaking devotion on the part of ego-
consciousness on the other can bring the creative contents of
the unconscious matrix successfully over the threshold into
consciousness. Play, with neither plan nor purpose, is the best
precondition.

The Polar Nature

of the Collective Unconscious
As we saw in the second chapter, a dualism developed among
the religious hermeneuts of the European past. This led to
images in the writings of poets and of the Holy Scripture
being interpreted as either physikos, in reference to the mate-
rial cosmos, or theologikos, in reference to a spiritual image of
God or to a world-spirit or world-soul. Jung brought this
dual aspect to light again in his writings on the collective un-
conscious and the archetypes, but his interpretation gave it

59
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

more the meaning of a polarity. He compares the realm of the

psychic (ego-consciousness and the unconscious) to the light
spectrum. At the infrared end, the psychic functions change
into the instincts and physiological processes, which take on a
more and more compulsive character.2© At the other, ul-
traviolet end of the scale are the archetypes, psychic struc-
tures that precondition our fantasies and ideas by producing
symbolic images. (Consciousness and, with it, freedom of
choice and free will prevail only within the middle range.)
The form and the meaning of instincts are represented in the
images produced by the archetypes.?7 The archetypes, there-
fore, are collectively present, unconscious preconditions or
innate predispositions that act as regulators and stimulators of
creative fantasy activity.2® Their effect on the human ego is
numinous-magical and is felt as something spiritual, even—
on the primitive level—as a spirit or spirits.?9
Archetype and instinct are “the most polar opposites im-
aginable.’’3° This is most clearly illustrated by comparing a
man who has fallen under the domination of instinct with one
who has been seized by the spirit. Yet extremes can meet and
can even change into their former opposites.74
At the infrared end of the scale, analytical psychology can
extend a hand to students of behavior, because at this pole
typical human ways of reacting pass over into the realm of
instinctive patterns of behavior, which in their relatively
mechanical stereotypes resemble those of animals. It is also at
this pole that those psychic patterns of reaction become visi-
ble that express themselves in typical moods and actions (in-
stincts) and can be observed statistically from the outside. At
the ultraviolet pole, on the other hand, one would fook for
those phenomena where it is no longer a question of impulses
coming from without but rather of inspirations, of being
seized by archetypal spiritual insights or images that, just as
much as drives and instincts, can overcome the freedom of
the individual personality (Paul’s vision on the road to
Damascus). It is here that one could look for the alethés logos

90
 THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS

of the ancient hermeneuts, who expressly emphasized that

their interpretations come from a “‘pneumatic inspiration”
and are involuntary and impersonal.
The polarization of the psychic middle range, between the
two consciousness-transcending poles of matter and psyche,
is only a means, however, for our consciousness to describe
its psychic experiences a bit more exactly; ‘““outward-mate-
rial”’ and “‘inner-spiritual” are only characteristic labels that
tell us nothing about the real nature of what we describe as
“matter” nor about what we call “‘spirit,’ except that both
move and affect us psychologically.
=m ciesapne instinctivemane = all creativeae

E-motio of course 1s what eves Outware

as we have noted, have a “specific Pees ae is,s,they ae
velop numinous effects that manifest themselves as affects.
These affects lift one content, which occupies the forefront
of consciousness, into super-normal clarity but at the same
time darken the rest of the field of consciousness. This

that are constellated at about the same time,3? An activated

archetype behaves rather like a whole “situation,” or “like a
circumambient atmosphere to which no definite limits can be
set, either in space or in time.’
Jung conjectured therefore that the two poles of matter and
psyche at the deepest level become one, in the sense of the
existence of an unus mundus in which matter and spirit, outer
and inner are no longer separate. In actual psychological ex-
perience a distinction between the two realms is unavoidable;
in the realm of the deeper layers of the collective unconscious,

Wt
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

Latent content: Unus mundus

Emotion Projection

Infrared end: Ultraviolet end:

Archetypal
Matter
Instinct
Pole Pole
Spirit

X = The roving light-ray of ego-consciousness

however, no such distinction can be made with a high degree

of certainty.34
The observation of synchronistic phenomena leads us to
surmise that a latent unitary reality,>> which Jung called unus
mundus, exists beneath the above-described poles of instinct
and spirit, or\ MEHR And spirit. This is the unitary layer A of
the diagram on page 80. The diagram of a kind of scale of
psychic occurrences could thus be enlarged, as the above dia-
gram shows.
_Eiiie sphere a theunus mune

and as image suddenly emerging from the set ole int

consciousness and whose meaning is identical with\what is
observed externally. This dual manifestation recalls the fact,
discussed above, that a double phenomenon also becomes
evident in the process of projection: the bullet or the arrow of
[passion (instinct) [by which the one who is projecting feels
imself directly affected and the image that is thrown out-
wards and that he thinks he sees externally.

92
 THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS

A very serious difficulty with the hypothesis of the collective

unconscious arises when we are faced with the problem of
attribution: that is, to what extent one may or should attribute
archetypal manifestations to the unconscious of an individual
and to what extent not. In a court of law, as we know, a
person shown to be unable to offer conscious resistance to his
drives is regarded as not responsible for his actions. The same
is also true for compulsions that come from the archetypal
pole! If a man is so possessed by a religious idea that he is
unable to criticize it morally, he is also considered to be irre-
sponsible. I think of the case of a man who was mentally ill
and killed a child because, as he claimed, the Holy Ghost had
commanded him to do it. As we have already seen, a problem
which even today remains completely open is that of whether
evil demons in a person possessed are alien invaders or un-
conscious components which belong to the person’s own
psychology. A mistaken judgment in such a case has, how-
ever, very serious consequences. ““A wrong attribution,” as
Jung writes, “may bring about dangerous inflations which
seem unimportant to the layman only because he has no idea
of the inward and outward disasters that may result.’ ““The
effect of inflation is that one is not only ‘puffed up’ but too
‘high up.’ This may lead to attacks of giddiness, or to a ten-
dency to fall downstairs, to twist one’s ankle, to stumble over
steps and chairs, and so on,’’3” to say nothing of megalomania
or Messianic fantasies. But if one fails to attribute to an indi-
vidual a content that belongs to him, the opposite of an infla-
tion takes place—a loss of soul, as described above, that is, a
depressing decrease in the whole individual life-potential;

in the individual’s environment, as one sees in the case of Don

Juan, who chases one woman after another in his search for
the one inner image of woman (anima), only to realize, in the
moment of possession, that it is not “there.” One sees the
same process go on in people who do not realize their shadow
and therefore always find their béte noire wherever they go;

93
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

they then enter into a power struggle that takes its stereo-
typed course but never ask themselves, ‘““Why does this al-
ways happen to me?”
Such schematic repetitions of situations or exaggerated de-
pendencies belong to the kind of disturbances in adaptation,
discussed previously, that indicate the desirability of with-
drawing the projection. How much one may attribute to the
individual as personal and how much one leaves, as “‘objec-
tive psychic,” in a realm that is not personal can in many cases
be clearly seen only through a thoroughgoing interpretation
of the person’s dreams, and even then not in every case.
Moreover, one should never lose sight of the irrationality of
human fate. Jung was once consulted by a patient with a
number of different phobias, all of which gradually disap-
peared except an insuperable fear of outdoor stairs. Later this
person was killed on an outdoor flight of steps by a stray bullet
in a street battle. This fear, then, unlike his other phobias, was
not a projection; it was a genuine premonition! What may or
may not be described as projection is today still very largely a
question of judgment and/or of careful assessment, so that in
my opinion psychologists should use the greatest caution and
discretion in dealing with this concept.

94
 D)

The Evil Demons

Exorcism of Devils
or Integration of Complexes?
In psychological treatment, when the point has been reached
where the withdrawal of a projection seems due, one is struck
by the energy with which some people resist accepting the
appropriate insight. Occasionally a patient will see the situa-
tion for what it is, with a liberating “Aha!’”’ reaction, and is
freed at least momentarily from his wrong attitude; more of-

95
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

ten, however, there is a strong resistance against the healing

insight or a helpless, apathetic perseverance in the disturbed
attitude. This can be especially observed in the treatment of
paranoia and schizophrenia, which in practice present the
greatest difficulties.! Deep-seated mendacity, too, often re-
mains therapeutically completely inaccessible. In such cases
the autonomy of certain complexes is unusually strong, so
that they “‘possess”’ the ego, so to speak, like completely in-
dependent beings—a psychological fact that found expres-
sion in the belief in demons among all peoples in all ages from
time immemorial.” On the primitive level it is therefore self-
evident that ““demons,” or in our language “‘complexes,” have
to be removed from the realm of the subject; integration
—that is, a responsible acceptance into the total personality
—1is attempted only exceptionally, namely, by certain sha-
mans or medicine men who kept a few conquered ‘‘demons”’
near them as “‘spirit heipers.” If we look at the mythological
traditions to which this theme is central, we see that a particu-
larly widespread form of liberation from such a complex is
represented in the motif of the so-called magic flight, in
which a hero or heroine escapes a pursuing demon by tossing
behind certain objects that grow into major obstacles for the
pursuer and thus contribute to the rescue of the pursued. The
following fairy tale from Turkestan, “The Magic Steed,” will
serve as an example:
A king has only one daughter. When she comes of mar-
riageable age the king feeds a flea until it becomes as fat as a
camel, has its skin removed, makes slippers from the skin, and
announces: “I shall give my daughter in marriage to whoever
recognizes whose skin this is.” Nobody can find the solution
until an evil, man-eating Div (demon) learns the secret from a
slave, appears at the court as a scurvy beggar, solves the riddle,
and demands the daughter. As the king is about to drive him
away, the Div threatens the whole realm with disaster. The
daughter must therefore go off with him. When she is seeking
a horse for herself in the stable, a small magic horse speaks to

96
 THE EVIL DEMONS

her and counsels her to take him, a mirror, a comb, salt, and a
clove and ride away. The Div sets out in pursuit. She throws
the clove behind her. It becomes a thick underbrush of thorns
that delays the Div for a time. Then she throws behind her the
salt, which becomes a desert of sand and salt; then the comb,
which turns into a high mountain; and finally the mirror,
which turns into a torrential river. Thereupon she seeks shel-
ter with a poor brushwood-gatherer and his wife. A king
finds her there and marries her. She bears him male twins. But
in the meantime the Div has again set to work; he threatens
the queen and her children while the king is away hunting.
The little magic horse then decides to fight the Div. At first
they fight on land; then they fall into a river and go on
struggling underwater. The little horse wins the fight, but as
he climbs out of the river he asks to be sacrificed: ‘“Throw my
head aside, arrange my bones according to the four directions,
toss my entrails to the side, and sit with your children under
the ribs.”-As the queen obeys, golden poplars grow out of the
horse’s bones; villages, fields, and meadows from his entrails;
a golden castle from his ribs—and out of his head there
springs a silver-bright little brook. The king finds the queen
in the castle after a long search and they live “from then on
happy and contented in this beautiful kingdom,’
At the beginning of the story the old king apparently wants
to keep his daughter with him; he is unwilling to set her free.
Therefore as king he symbolizes a masculine-collective con-
scious attitude that controls the feminine, the Eros principle,
and holds it prisoner. This calls up the “demon.” In the case
of an individual, such a daughter develops a father complex
and a tendency to be dominated by destructive masculine im-
pulses (what Jung calls the negative animus). But the magic
horse, a healthy instinctive tendency to wholeness, prevents
the daughter from falling completely into the possession of
the demon. At first this cannot be accomplished in direct
combat but only through the magic flight. The objects
thrown behind may be understood as sacrificial gifts to the
unconscious: the sacrifice of worldly ornament (clove), van-

97
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

ity (mirror and comb), and esprit (salt). All these must be
given up in order to prevent possession by the Div. Only later
can there be the open battle with the demon and the trans-
formation ofthe horse into a lasting psychic center—an inner
habitation of peace.
For the moment, only the flight motif matters to us, a
motif corresponding to a state of affairs often encountered in
therapy. In the treatment of such “devilish” states of posses-
sion resulting from a negative father complex in a woman,
I have often been impressed by the fact that the woman’s ego
is for a long time not strong enough to confront such an in-
ner devil directly;* for the time being nothing but methods
of repression or avoidance are possible, literally “flight”
through evasive measures. The disturbing factor has to re-
main outside the circle of the subject’s life and can be neither
conquered nor integrated. One can only advise the patient to
stay away, as far as possible, from situations and areas of con-
cern that could touch the complex. In the event possession
has actually taken place, therefore, defensive action and care-
ful avoidance of the complex and of situations that constellate
it are indicated. At this stage it is altogether appropriate to
think of the complex as a threatening “demon.” One can in
no way hold the patient responsible for what is happening,
but can only help him to follow his healthy instinct (the
magic horse) and to avoid everything that might provide an
opening for what is destructive. In this situation I think that
exorcism can be completely effective for those who are still
firmly anchored in the Catholic faith. There are certain dark
powers in the inner world that one really can only run away
from or keep at a distance in some other way.
In the following fairy tale of the Siberian Yukagir the
magic flight takes a different course from that of the above
story (and this is a rare exception):
A lonely girl who has no parents and no husband is able to
take care of her house and to water the reindeer with magic

9S
 THE EVIL DEMONS

songs. One day half the sky darkens; it is ‘the evil spirit.” One
of his lips touches the sky; the other rests on the earth—an
open mouth threatening to swallow up everything. The girl
escapes in a “‘magic flight.” First she throws behind her a
comb, which becomes a forest; next her red handkerchief,
which turns into a giant fire. Then she transforms herself suc-
cessively into a polar bear, a wolverine, a wolf, and a bear, and
in the form of the bear runs on. She comes to a tent and falls to
earth, fainting from exhaustion. As she recovers, the evil spirit
stands before her as a handsome young man, “more beautiful
than the sun.” With him are his two brothers. The girl chooses
the handsome youth as a husband, and they all live together in
peace.>
In this version of the magic flight, not only does the
heroine succeed in escaping but the pursuer also transforms
himself on his own, after a time, into her future partner with
whom she can share her life. The trouble she goes to in order
to avoid being possessed by the negative complex is in itself
sufficient to bring out the latter’s positive side. In this version
the magic flight is followed by a.“transformation flight,” an
equally widespread mythologem.® The girl transforms her-
self successively into four animals. This is identical with the
“healthy instinct” embodied in the magic horse in the Tur-
kestan fairy tale. The will to live and to become whole con-
quers the temptation to fall, fainting, into the jaws of the evil
demon, that is, to be ‘“‘possessed.’”’ Whether the pursuer is es-
sentially good or evil is apparently not the main considera-
tion; it is the state of possession in itself that is destructive.
The spirit-world of the Yakut, for example, includes both
the lower, evil spirits and the higher spirits of light, but pos-
session by the higher spirits leads to madness, just as posses-
sion by evil spirits does, and can be cured only by a shaman.’
The shaman has this power because during his initiation he
has overcome his own states of possession. ‘““The shaman,’
writes Adolf Friedrich, “‘is the incarnation of that type of reli-
gious man who is able to master the spirits who beset him—

oD
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

that is, his psychic struggles—and who therefore can help

others whom the spirits threaten. The person possessed,
however, is not able to help himself but is delivered over to
the storm of divergent and one-sided powers; he needs the
help of an exorcist who can liberate him.’ Friedrich’s de-
scription ofthe spirits as ‘‘one-sided”’ is exactly right, for they
are the autonomous complexes that upset the total equilib-
rium of the personality by compelling one-sidedness. One
among other easily recognizable symptoms is the way in
which the thoughts and deeds of the possessed person tend to
circle, in incredible monomania, around the one complex-
theme, to the damage of the whole personality.
This peculiar one-sidedness of the autonomous complex
is vividly represented in the folklore and myths of many
peoples by demons who are often crippled or have only a
partially human form: eyes or faces in the wrong place (in the
stomach or the genital region) or in the wrong number (like
Polyphemus, who had only one eye, or the evil one-eyed or
three-eyed creatures in Grimms’ fairy tales).? Among the
polar peoples, spirits often appear who consist only of a head
or a skull. The German expression ver-ruckt (crazy, insane)
illustrates this state of affairs impressively: in cases of posses-
sion by projected complexes certain psychic components are
really ver-nickt (displaced, shifted away, moved away) to the
wrong place!
Sometimes a person who is otherwise healthy enough will
be turned into a demon through being crippled. The Warrau
in former British Guiana tell the following story:
One day two brothers who are hunting in a forest come
upon a noisy, festive drinking-party. The elder brother, car-
ried away, joins the party, but the younger one anxiously stays
on the sidelines, because he is rightly afraid that this is a party
of ghosts, ghosts of rain-frogs that have been transformed
into people. The brothers spend the night in hammocks in a
hut. The drunken elder brother lets his feet dangle over the
fire, and when the younger brother warns him his only reply

100
 THE EVIL DEMONS

is: ““Akka, akka!’”’ But he does draw back his legs. Then he
dangles them over the fire again and after a while notices that
both his feet are charred. Thereupon he takes a knife, hacks off
both feet and all the flesh, and sharpens his leg bones into a
spear. Lying in his hammock, he uses it for spearing birds as
they fly past.
He will not take his eyes off
his brother, who finally runs away.
The cripple hurries after him on the stumps ofhis legs. On the
way he spears a deer with the spear made from his leg bones,
thinking that the deer is his brother. The younger brother
hurries back to the tribe and gives the alarm to his people.
They lure the cripple from his hammock, surround him, and
kill him.1°
This story is superbly graphic in its portrayal of the way in
which a human being is possessed by “‘spirits”’ (here they are
rain-frogs, that is, nature spirits) and as a result loses his feet,
his standpoint on the earth of reality. As a consequence he
himself becomes inhuman and demonic and can only call out:
“Akka!”’ like a rain-frog. More and more, too, he wants to
““possess”’ his brother. When the latter runs away, the cripple
becomes a murderous foe and has to be eliminated by the
community.
Not only people who are bewitched but also people who
have been murdered can similarly become demons. The Kas-
chinaua Indians of South America tell the following story:
A man of the neighboring Kutana tribe treacherously mur-
ders a Marinaua and leaves his severed head on a stake in the
forest. However, the murdered man’s mouth remains open;
he blinks his eyes and begins to weep bitterly. A fellow
tribesman finds him, and the entire tribe brings the corpse
home and mourns the murdered man. They bury the body
and take the head along in a basket. The head, however, bites
one hole after another in the basket, keeps rolling out of it,
and then bites the bearer in the behind. The tribesmen begin
to fear that the murdered man perhaps wants to bewitch
them, so they leave him and run away. Weeping, the head rolls
after them, crying out again and again, “Friends, wait for me!

101
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

I want to go home with you!” The people become ever more

frightened in their flight and the cries of the pursuing head
ever more desperate. When the tribesmen run into their
huts and close all the doors, the head cries out, “Friends, you
have fear of me and have locked the house so I cannot enter
and fetch my things. I will transform myself?’ The head then
ponders for a long time, wondering whether he should trans-
form himself into fruit or into earth or water, or fish, or
firewood, etcetera, so that the others might eat him, walk
upon him, drink him, and so on. Finally he decides to make of
his blood “‘the way of enemies,” that is, the rainbow, and to
turn his eyes into stars and his head into the moon. The moon is
at once carried up into the sky, borne upward by hawks.
“Then all the women began to bleed and their men lay with
them. Then the blood ceased to flow and the woman became
pregnant. ... And that is all I remember of the story of the
Marinaua who was beheaded by the Kutanaua. There is no
more.”*4
This tale illustrates how deeply someone prematurely or
violently taken from life longs to remain with his people,
which is-why the murdered man pursues his friends and
haunts them like a demonic ghost. This is a belief we also find
in Western documents of antiquity, in which haunting spirits
are mainly of those who died prematurely—for example,
women who died in childbirth, young men killed in wars,
and suicides. These are the unquiet spirits of the underworld;
in magic papyri they are always being called upon to work all
kinds of harm through magic.!* It was believed that these
spirits were embittered because they were forced to part too
early from their lives and consequently became evil, even if as
human beings they had been good. The Marinaua’s head in
our story suddenly began to bite without any apparent con-
scious wish to turn malevolent. It is important here that the
spirit appears as a head (the body does not haunt). The head is
the seat of thoughts and aspirations, the spiritual and mental
essence of the dead person, but it is also merely a part of the
whole and therefore uncanny in a way similar to that of the

102
 THE EVIL DEMONS

man with the spear of leg bones in the previous story. De-
mons almost never have a “normal” form; they are always
images of disfigured or incomplete human beings and thus
are very suitable visual images of the distorting effects of au-
tonomous complexes.
The best analogy of the way in which a demon tends to
compel one-sidedness is the way in which the rabies virus
works. If this virus touches a peripheral nerve of a person
who has been bitten by a rabid dog, it travels, as we know, to
precisely that place in the victim’s brain from which it can
control the whole person. It causes him to reject water so that
the virus cannot be spit out of the mouth; it induces him to
wander about so that he comes into contact with as many
other creatures as possible; and finally it brings about an ac-
tual rage to bite so that the virus can be transplanted in a new
carrier. When we recall that this virus could so enslave an
outstanding man like Kant or Goethe that he could be forced
to perform mechanically only what furthered the propaga-
tion of the virus...! Autonomous complexes behave in
exactly the same way; they can warp or destroy the whole
personality. Viruses, we know, are “dead”’ matter; it is only in
a living creature that they acquire a “‘quasi-life”’ The same is
true of autonomous complexes. They take all the life out of a
person; when they have ‘‘eaten him up” they become entan-
gled with life in the surrounding environment. That is why,
when in the vicinity of people who are possessed, one often
experiences a sudden fatigue and an inexplicable feeling of
having one’s vitality sucked out.
Mythical images of demons are extremely varied; not all
demons belong in the same category, nor are they all equally
dangerous. The Siberian Yakut have made a classification of
demons that is serviceable enough for general use. They dis-
tinguish (1) Aji, the spirits of the upper world, (2) Abassy, the
spirits of the underworld, (3) Itschi, the spirits of the middle
world or the spirits who rule over animals and plants, and (4)
the spirits of the dead.

103
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

The first two classes of spirits are eternal beings and pre-
forms of the gods in the high cultures; psychologically they
illustrate in
iBem the im SOSass - the collective uncon-
scious.

n Gre be atbloity Dapline’ sflight fi

corresponds topis motif, a flight that, however, does not
lead to union in the Beyond apart
ae the fact that Daphne

The spirits chal rule over setae and plants are probably
the oldest forms in which archetypal contents were imagined;
among the Bushmen and the Australian aborigines—that is,
in cultures that have remained especially close to their
origins—they are actual gods. In contrast to the upper and
lower spirits, they are localized in the surrounding world of
nature and are not separated into “light” and “dark.”
The spirits of the dead seem to embody mainly psychic con-
tents, which are closer to the personal realm of the psyche;13
in the dreams of modern men and women they often appear
as projected images (inner imagines) of the deceased. Hence
Jung, in his early work, assumed that such spirits were noth-
ing more than the embodiment of projected images, approx-
imate representations of the father complex, the mother
complex, and so on; “‘a persistent attachment to the dead
makes life seem less worth living, and may even Le she cause
ofpsychic illnesses.’’4 Jung later revised this opinic
no longer quite sure that spirits are only such ‘p
imagines, possessing no separate reality of their Owr
s up the whole question oat
mei poder ing eas

Mane rian ae Raia ca the eee of the dead

gradually become “‘mightier” than the deceased were during

104
 THE EVIL DEMONS

their lifetime and that their images become increasingly ac-

tual images of divinities. The above story of the murdered
Marinaua whose head became the moon is an example.
Psychologically this means simply that the images of the
spirits of the dead are gradually assimilated to collective ar-
chetypal images. The psychic energy that clings to the mem-
ory image of the deceased charges an image in the collective
unconscious, which is thereby activated. If such a newly acti-
vated content can be translated into communicable language,
beneficial creative inspirations may result; it can also lead, how-

possession. sefore si
“101 Aerts Ie
t wi always Mies ally, because, it
iT pe n
thor her ground
t and tries to
vaway HAW, theaeh reflection.19 The de-
ic, therefore,
t. would be the Seah in statu nascendi, not yet
realized, or “made real,” by the ego.
One form of evil that is especially feared is black magic. It
comes from a conscious attitude that exalts destructive
psychic impulses into the only valid truth. “The means used
| purpose are primitive, fascinating or awe-inspiring
images,” which are placed in the service of some
1 personal goal.?°
The demonic rests, as Jung emphasizes, “‘on the uncon-
scious forces of negation and destruction and on the reality of
evil. The existence of the daemonic is demonstrated by the
fact that black magic is not only possible but uncannily suc-
cessful, so much so that it is tempting to assume that black

105
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

magicians are possessed by a daemon.’’?! The theory of Al-

bertus Magnus may also be mentioned: ““When anyone gives
free rein to violent emotion and in this state wishes evil, it
will have a magical effect. This is the quintessence of primi-
tive magic and of the corresponding mass phenomena like
Nazism, Communism, etc.’?? When in such mass psychoses
chaos erupts from the unconscious, it is seeking “new
4° symbolic ideas which will embrace and express not only
«the previous order but also the essential contents of the
v \\ disorder’’23—a creative achievement, therefore, has become a
At necessity. | emonism
and creativity are
“+ psycho ose to each other. Nothing in the
x human eT is more destructive than unrealized, uncon-
scious creative impulses. That is why a psychosis can, as a
rule, be cured only if the patient can begin some creative
activity, some creative ea of the |contents that are =

Many demons are not such radically distorted creatures but

rather “mixed” figures that do not occur in nature—centaurs,
mermaids, Pegasus, the bird Garuda, and the like.?4 Images
of this kind express something supernatural and hence spiri-
tual or mental. They embody essentially creative fantasies, which
are morally neutral but in general tend to be benevolently
disposed to human beings. The centaur Chiron is skilled in
the art of healing; Garuda mediates between the gods and
men; Pegasus. carries the poet up to the heights of spiritual
inspiration. \
The question that nevertheless keeps recurring is to what
extent such beings can be integrated. Perhaps this much can
be said: Whenever a demon, for example a “poltergeist,”
consistently “follows” a man or a woman in spite of a change
in place and atmosphere, this “‘spirit’’ is at least to a substan-
tial extent subjective; if he disappears with a change of place,

106
 THE EVIL DEMONS

the relation to the subject is not of great importance. (It was

especially this phenomenon of the place-bound ghost that
—_--_-- evkenk—e—_eeeeeeee

prompted Jung to correct his earlier view that Spirits 2

are sim-

Thee are demons in all times and all cultures. Here we

shall consider briefly only the specific ancient Mediterranean
development of European belief in spirits, in its analogy to
and its differences from the examples of the imaginary realm
of primitive peoples already discussed.

The Demons of Antiquity

In ancient Egypt there were good spirits and evil ones. The
dwarf Bes and the youthful Horus, for example, were posi-
tive demons; the evil demons were often referred to as a
nameless collective, the ““companions of Seth.” Similarly with
the Devas of Iran. In Mesopotamia and Asia Minor there were
also such good and evil demons; the latter, for instance, are
spirits of the dead and evil winds that bring sickness, as well
as ‘“‘spies,” and “‘secret agents,” whose aim it is to bring harm
to human beings.?°
There were Canaanite and old Judaic demons who were
thought to be closely connected with the human psyche,
“breath-spirits” that could, when they invaded human be-
ings, produce moods, enigmatic impulses, sudden reactions,
and so on, but also a moral standpoint or conviction; the Old
Testament contains many references to a spirit of lust or of
jealousy, but also to a spirit of insight or understanding. Even

107
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

bodily functions like smell, speech, sleep, and sexuality have

their ‘spirit,22
In pre-Hellenic Greece the demons, as in Egypt, were part
of a nameless collectivity. The word daimon comes from
daiomai, which means ‘divide,’ ‘‘distribute,’ ‘‘allot,” ‘“‘as-
sign,” and originally referred to a momentarily perceptible
divine activity, such as a startled horse, a failure in work,
illnesses, madness, terror in certain natural spots. There are
even skills that are in a way demons. The idea of a demon as a
person’s constant companion emerged in the fifth century
B.C. in Hesiod, and in the third century B.C. it spread very
widely. Such a demon causes the individual’s happiness or
unhappiness; as early as the fourth century B.C., sacrifices
were made to a good (agathos) daimon as house-spirit.
Plato does not use the word daimon unambiguously; usu-
ally it is synonymous with theos (god), sometimes with the
nuance of a “‘near-human’’ being.?”? In the Symposium,
Diotima says that Eros is a mighty daimon and “‘spirits, you
know, are halfway between god and man.’’?® To Socrates’
question, “What powers have they then?” she answers,
“They are the envoys and interpreters that ply between
heaven and earth, flying upward with our worship and our
prayers, and descending with the heavenly answers and com-
mandments, and since they are between the two estates they
weld both sides together and merge them into one great
whole. They form the medium of the prophetic arts, of the
priestly rites of sacrifice, initiation, and incantation, of divina-
tion and of sorcery, for the divine will not mingle directly
with the human, and it is only through the mediation of the
spirit world that man can have any intercourse, whether wak-
ing or sleeping, with the gods. ... There are many spirits,
and many kinds of spirits, and Love [Eros] is one of them.’’?9
In the Stoa and in Platonism of the middle period the
shades of difference between gods and demons were more
sharply drawn: the gods are the mighty powers of the uni-

108
 THE EVIL DEMONS

verse, remote from men, majestic, for the most part aloof
from the suffering and the passions of humanity. The de-
mons, on the other hand, inhabit the intermediate realm be-
tween Olympus and mankind, especially the regions of the
air and the sublunar world, and there they join the nature
spirits in springs and plants and animals. In presenting his late
Platonic conception, Apuleius of Madura formulates this as
follows: The poets had falsely attributed to the gods what was
valid only for the demons; “‘they exalt and favor certain
human beings and they oppress and humble others. They feel
therefore compassion, anger, joy, and fear and all the other
feelings of human nature .. . all the storms that are so far re-
moved from the tranquility of the heavenly gods. All the
gods pass their time in an unchanging spiritual state . . . since
nothing is more perfect than a god... . All these feelings are
suited, however, to the inferior nature of the demons, which
have immortality in common with the upper beings and pas-
sions with the lower beings. . . . I have therefore called them
‘passive, because they are subject to the same disorders as we
are.’’3° In a certain sense a man’s spirit, his “‘genius,” and his
“good spirit” (like Socrates’ daimonion) are themselves also
daimons like the other spirits that inhabit the air. After death
they become Lemurs or Lares (house-gods) or, if they were
evil, larvae (ordinary ghosts).34
Apuleius’ great model was Plutarch (born A.D. 50), who
worked out this world order: At the top of the cosmic order
are the visible gods, the celestial bodies that belong to the
element fire; beneath them the demons who belong to the air;
still lower the spirits of the dead heroes (in water); and finally
human beings, animals, and plants with their earth-nature.
Our souls can climb upward or downward, according to
merit.32, The demons are not immortal but can live for
thousands of years.3? When they die there are often storms or
epidemics of the plague.34 Evil demons mostly punish trans-
gressions of taboos with incurable madness.%5

109
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

The distinction made in late antiquity between gods, who

are remote from all earthly suffering, and demons, who are
subject to all the human passions and feelings, seems to me to
be very important. The demons are, so to speak, closer to
human beings, more subjective-psychological than the gods.
Cicero even describes them as mentes or animi, that is, as
“‘souls.”’36 Others call them potestates, ‘““powers.’37 The de-
scription of demons as “‘souls”” may be found in many earlier
authors but especially in later ones, in the Stoa, Poseidonius,
Philo, Plutarch, Clement of Alexandria, and others.7® From
the standpoint of Jungian psychology the distinction in an-
tiquity between gods and demons means the following: The
gods represent more the archetypal ground-structure of the
psyche, which is far removed from consciousness, while the
demons are visualizations of the same archetypes, it is true,
but in a form nearer to consciousness, which comes closer to
the subjective inner experience of humans. It is as if a partial
aspect of the archetype were beginning to move closer to the
individual, to cling to him and to become a sort of ““grown-
on soul,”
In Neoplatonism we have the following cosmic world-
order:3? The highest god in wise providence ordered all
things. A further providence is attributed to the gods who
move through the sky, the celestial bodies; they see to the
growth of mortal man for the preservation of the species.4° A
third function of providence is entrusted to the daimons,
which are the protectors and guardians of special human con-
cerns. Celsus, who was of an academic-Stoic cast of mind,
even attributes to them specific functions: they provide the
human species with vitally needed water, wine, bread, and
air; they bestow fertility in marriage and each one watches
over a specific part of the body, which is why they must be
appealed to whenever a certain part of the body is in need of
healing.*! They can grant prophecies to men, but in certain
circumstances can also bring about physical evil. Such evil
can best be healed through public tribute to such a demon.

110
 THE EVIL DEMONS

The Demons in Christianity

Regarding the question of the affiliation of the archetypes
to the subject, there was not much change as Christianity
spread; instead a much sharper moral line of demarcation was
drawn* (the third stage!). Only Christ, that is, God himself
(and certain angels), is positive; certain nature-spirits are neu-
tral though better avoided; but all other daimons are evil. The
pagan gods of the earlier age were regarded simply as evil
daimons. Furthermore, the Judaic tradition of Satan and the
fallen angels was mixed with the picture projected by the
Greeks. According to Justin Martyr, the celestial bodies and
God’s angels possessed a providence over things beneath
heaven.*3 (The angels are identical with the “gods” of
Plato.)44 But the cause of everything evil was the fall of cer-
tain angels and their intercourse with human females.
They try to usurp divine power and they pander especially to
sexual passion.*> Their sin lies not so much in hostility to-
ward God as in disobedience and in deceiving and deluding
(apoplanan) humanity.*¢
These views went back to the Book of Enoch (around 100
B.C.), in which the story, as we know, is told of certain angels
who fell in love with human women and descended from
heaven to be with them. Together they gave birth to a de-
structive race of giants who laid the whole earth to waste. As
Jung explained, if looked at psychologically this signifies a
precipitate invasion of human consciousness by contents
from the collective unconscious. The giants are images of the
resultant inflation that leads to a catastrophe for mankind.‘
The fall of the angels, in Jung’s words, “enlarged the signifi-
cance of man to ‘gigantic’ proportions, which points to an
inflation of the cultural consciousness at that period.’’48 It was
a question of an all-too-rapid growth of knowledge—exactly
as is again the case today. This story from the Book of Enoch
is once more especially timely, because it is obvious that to-
day, too, such invasions of collective contents from the un-

111
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

conscious occur frequently. This can be illustrated by the

account of a dream of an American, unknown to me, which
was sent to mejust as I was writing the chapter on demons. It
runs as follows:
Iam walking with a woman along the Palisades, where one
can have a panoramic view of New York City. A man is lead-
ing us. New York is a mass of ruins; we know that the world
has been destroyed. Fires are burning everywhere, thousands
of people are fleeing in all directions in panic, the Hudson
River has flooded large sections of the city. It is twilight; fiery
balls in the heaven are spinning towards the earth. It is the end
of the world. . . The cause is a race of giants which has come
from extraterrestrial space. In the midst of the ruins I see two
of them sitting, casually picking up people and eating them by
the handfuls, with a nonchalance as though they were eating
grapes at the table. The giants have different sizes and shapes.
My guide explains that they come from different planets,
where they live together in peace and harmony, and that they
landed in flying saucers. The fiery balls mean more such land-
ings. In fact our earth had been set up by giants in the very
beginning. The earth is, so to speak, their hothouse and now
they are coming back to harvest their fruits; there is a definite
reason for this, which I will discover later.
I am rescued because I have high blood pressure. That is
why I have been chosen to undergo this test; if Ipass it I will
become a “saver of souls,” like my guide. We walk on and
suddenly I see before me an enormously high golden throne,
on which the king and queen of the giants are sitting. They are
the “‘intelligences”’ behind the destruction of the planet. To
pass my test I have to climb up a stairway to them. It is a very
difficult ascent; I am afraid but I know I have tq do it; the
world and mankind are at stake. I awake bathed in sweat from
this dream.

The giants are here modernized to inhabitants of outer

space, but it is easy to recognize the same archetypal back-
ground. The king and queen represent the divine pair who
celebrate the hieros gamos, the uniting of the torn-asunder

112
 THE EVIL DEMONS

psychic opposites. The divine marriage is an archetypal

image intended to heal a deep psychic dissociation.49 When-
ever man’s consciousness had become too far removed
from its natural basis, such reconciliation rites were instituted
for the purpose of healing, and they generally culminated in
the motif of the divine marriage. It is the parallels to the Book
of Enoch that are of the most interest to us. We are obviously
living in a time resembling that of the beginning of the de-
cline of ancient culture and the origins of Christianity—a
time of extreme inner and outer crises, a time that presses
toward a deep-reaching change.
But let us turn back to the early Christian peoples’ theory
about demons. The Church Father Athenagoras, in the man-
ner of Euhemeros, conceives many demons as the postmortal
souls of important deceased men, like heroes and kings.*°
(This corresponds to a reactivation of the beliefs of primitive
peoples concerning the spirits of the dead, but in rationalistic
disguise!) In addition to the demons, Athenagoras recognizes
a whole crowd of angels who rule over the stars and over
everything in the cosmos.*! In his view Satan, before the fall,
was the angel who ruled over all matter, so that after the fall
the material world became part of the realm of evil.5? Satan
descended into hell because he had betrayed his office>? and
because he and his followers had been wanton and presump-
tuous and had succumbed to lust for mortal women.*4
It is clear that these early Church Fathers did not really
want to think of Satan as a force in opposition to God, as this
would have meant falling into a dualistic conception of God.
God is and remains the One and the Whole, and the evil
angels, that is, the demons, are spirits of transgression, of
compulsion (sexuality), and of pride (hubris), which disturb
the harmony of creation and, according to the teaching of
Tatian, separate man from his original fellowship with the
divine Spirit. It is the task of mankind to rediscover this fel-
lowship.5> The forces pulling man downward are on the one
hand cosmos and matter and on the other the demons. Ac-

113
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

cording to Tatian, spirits are not pure spirit but rather a

pneuma of a subtly material kind.5° However, because they are
“fleshless’” they cannot die easily.57 In Tatian’s view, the capi-
tal sin of the angels is not sexual lust but their claim to divin-
ity, that is, their power-drive. They attempt to seduce
mankind by means of phantasmata (false imaginations and
delusions) into worshipping them instead of God.°® This is
why the Pauline injunction to “test the spirits” (1 Corinthians
12:10) is so important. According to Theophilus of Antioch, it
is not the power-drive but jealousy and bloodthirstiness that
are the chief attributes of the evil spirits.5? After the fall from
paradise these spirits usurped divine names and employed
magic signs and images of terror in their efforts to seduce
mankind. The heathen gods do the same thing, according to
Justin Martyr.© This view was a continuation, modified, of a
pagan tradition. In their day Plutarch and Xenocrates had
interpreted a number of heathen cult practices as serving the
evil demons, in order to relieve the highest gods of the bur-
den. Justin Martyr expressly places the guilt for the crucifix-
ion of Christ not on the Jews but on the evil demons.®! It was
precisely for this reason that the cross became the power that
overcomes demons.® If the demons occasionally succeed in
achieving miraculous healing, this is merely, according to Ta-
tian, in order to attract public honors;® the same holds true
for mantic proceedings, when for once they speak the truth.
This demand on the part of the demons for public cultic
honors is worth a somewhat closer examination, because
until the late seventeenth century it even played a role in
exorcism. If we accept the interpretation, widely held today,
of the word religio as a “‘conscientious consideratton of the
numinous,”’ then the demons simply want, basically, to be
“religiously” taken into account by human beings. We know
from the mythically colored Greek historical writings that
plague, harvest failures, defeat in war, and so on are often sent
by a god who has been inadvertently overlooked in a cultic
ceremony. It was for this reason that Artemis sent a lull in the

114
 THE EVIL DEMONS

wind as the Greeks were about to set out for Troy, a lull that
could be ended only by the sacrifice of Iphigenia. In this re-
spect the demons behave no differently from the gods them-
selves. Seen psychologically they represent contents of the
unconscious that make an unconditional claim on the atten-
tion of people; they act like “organs” of the psyche that do
not function if not treated with respect.
The picture of the demons as sketched in by the early
Church Fathers shows some very complex features: the de-
mons are now fallen angels, now heathen gods or quasi-
material nature spirits. They act from sexual lust, the will to
power, passionate jealousy, or bloodthirstiness, or out of the
desire to be ceremonially or ritually honored. They delude
human beings by means of phantasmata—delusory images
and notions of all kinds—or, in modern terms, through pro-
jections. Only Christ and the cross have more power. They
alone can hold the demons in check.
The demons were conceived and experienced, as outlined,
throughout the Middle Ages and well into the period of En-
lightenment, and this view formed the basis for the practice
of exorcism in the Catholic Church. During the period of the
Enlightenment, however, all these diabolical or demonic
powers were declared out of hand to be mere illusion, to be
nonexistent, a view that, broadly speaking, even modern
psychiatry has retained. But here we find ourselves in the
fourth stage of the withdrawal of projections. Only with
modern depth psychology has this judgment begun to be
revised. Freud and his school assume, even today, that com-
plexes are purely subjective in character. How far this postu-
late is carried can be illustrated in the recent book by Cecile
Ernst on exorcism of the devil.6* The author states emphati-
cally that she herself does not “‘believe”’ in devils and demons.
She stresses especially the strong craving for recognition that
psychically ill persons have and interprets their statements as
hysterical confabulations they use in order to attract the inter-
est of those around them. The extravagant theatrical display

tS:
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

of exorcistic rites has a positive effect only because it panders

to this hysterical need of the patient for attention and recogni-
tion. To me this interpretation seems to oversimplify the facts
of the matter quite considerably. We have seen that demons
are often regarded as desiring ceremonial honors. When a
person who is psychically ill wishes to attract the interest of
other people to himself, this desire, in my opinion, belongs
more to the complex and not always so much to the patient’s
ego.® Dr. Ernst holds the patient categorically responsible
for his behavior. But in my opinion, the patient’s responsibil-
ity is only conditional. In this connection the explanation given
in an old text on exorcism from Stans (1729)®° seems worthy
of note. This text emphasizes that a man can be possessed by
“devils” when he has surrendered to sinful feelings such as
wrath, envy, hatred, lechery, and faintheartedness.°? This
seems to me to be a closer approximation to the true state of
affairs: The ego is responsible only to a certain extent for the
effect a person has on his environment—namely, for what
Jung called the personal shadow of the individual, but not
for archetypal psychic factors. Ignoring one’s own shadow,
though, is often very much like opening a door through
which these powers can break in. The question of moral
responsibility is therefore extremely subtle and requires dif-
ferent judgments from case to case.

The Problem of the Relation

of the Archetypes to the Subject
If we attempt to shed some psychological light onthe above
briefly outlined development of theories about demons, we
have a complex picture to deal with. On the one hand, de-
mons are unambiguously characterized as archetypal powers;
on the other hand, the distinction made in late antiquity be-
tween demonic intermediate beings and the higher gods re-
mote from men brought with it something like a shading of

116
 THE EVIL DEMONS

the archetypal image. It is at once apparent that the instinctive

and emotional component of the archetypes has moved
nearer to the human, while the spiritual component—the
“gods,” which are more like the Platonic ideas—remains
projected into a transcosmic “metaphysical” space. The suspi-
cion had arisen that the ““demons” somehow had something
to do with the psychic states of human beings. Yet the gods,
ideas, and mathematical structures were felt to be purely ex-
trahuman; they dwelt in the Beyond in eternal tranquility.
This corresponds to the psychological fact that “an archetype
in its quiescent, unprojected state has no exactly determinable
form but is in itself an indefinite structure which can assume
definite forms only in projection.’ The demons, accord-
ingly, are archetypal formations that appear in the field of
human projections.
Even during Christian times the conceptions of the
demons did not change substantially; the devils, attracted
by depravity, can cause a human being to be possessed. On
the other hand, Christ, the counterpower, is something
objective-metaphysical, except in the case of certain mystics
who had a direct experience of the reality of the “inner
Christ.” The fact that the demons at least were looked upon
as being in part “psychic”? meant that the archetypes of the
collective unconscious began to push their “tip” upward, so
to speak, into the subjectively experienced psyche of the indi-
vidual human being; underneath this tip, however, they pos-
sess a base which lies deep in the collective unconscious and
even reaches downward or onward into the realm of trans-
psychic reality.
In the diagram on page 118, the historical concepts are on
the left and their psychological equivalents on the right.
It is only in the field of ego-consciousness that a human
being is fully responsible for everything he does. The ego’s
control begins to weaken in the field of “‘personal, complex-
conditioned inferiorities”; but the Christian ethic demands
individual ethical responsibility even in this field. What lies

117,
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

Ego-consciousness Ego-consciousness

Personal, complex-conditioned
Sins inferiorities (shadow)

Neoplatonic daimons Archetypal contents

in visions and the observable in individual
dream-world and collective psyche

Daimons causing Psychosomatic impairment

physical harm, and/or injuries by a
daimons working constellated archetype.
miracles Synchronistic phenomena

Archetypes as
Cosmic gods ultimate psychoid
nature constants

behind and outside this area lies also to a large extent outside
conscious control, so that integration—that is, the assimila-
tion of these contents into the conscious personality—is as a
rule no longer possible. Jung performed an important service,
however, by showing that it is possible to relate to these con-
tents, instead of repressing them, thus neutralizing their nega-
tive effects quite considerably. This can be done through the
technique of meditation that is called active imagination. In
this method the conscious ego permits the unconscious con-
tents to come into the field of consciousness as fantasy-
images, as objectively as possible, and then enters into dia-
logue with them as with an autonomous vis-a-vis.6\Through
this conscious and voluntary attention the demons, if it be
a question of demons, receive the respect or “ritual wor-
ship” that they demand and that serves to placate them. If the
objectives of the ego are at cross-purposes with those of
the “‘daimons,” it may be that a compromise which takes the
needs of both parties into account can be found.

118
 THE EVIL DEMONS

A classification of the various modern psychotherapeutic

methods according to their affinity to exorcism or to the ef-
forts to achieve integration would make an interesting exer-
cise, but it would take us too far afield from the main line of
our considerations. Psychopharmacology and behaviorism,
at any rate, are purely “‘exorcistic’’; Freudian analysis, as well
as group therapy, is closer to the “cathartic” in respect to
“honoring” the daimons. As far as I know, the Jungian school
is the most unambiguous in its advocacy of integration
through insight.
The integration of unconscious contents through active
imagination seems to function, however, only when it is a
question of the lesser daimons, of the “‘little devils”’ that go to
make up the personal shadow, but not when it is a question of
the principle of evil (the archetype of evil). Jung makes a special
point of this: “. . . it is quite within the bounds of possibility
for a man to recognize the relative evil of his nature, but it is a
rare and shattering experience for him to gaze into the face of
absolute evil.’7° Jung’s allusion is to the archetypal aspect of
evil, the dark side of the God-image or of the Self, whose
unfathomable depths exceed by far the evil of the human
shadow.”! This inner power, like all the archetypal powers of
the unconscious, cannot be integrated by the ego. That is
why Jung took issue so sharply in Aion with the theological
doctrine of the privatio boni, the nonsubstantiality of evil. If
evil is not part of the image of God, it becomes the burden of
the human soul,”? which means a transgression of human
limits.” “‘If?’ writes Jung, “‘this paramount power of evil is
imputed to the soul, the result can only be a negative
inflation—i.e., a daemonic claim to power on the part of the
unconscious which makes it all the more formidable.”’’4 This
means a possession by absolute evil, as was foreseen by the
Christian world in, for example, the coming of the Anti-
christ, and as we know it today, day by day, in the incredible
cruelty of modern man. Behind this phenomenon stands, in
fact, an activation of the dark aspect of the God-image that, in

te
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

the case of certain weak individuals, can lead to a catastrophic

disintegration of the components of the psyche, to panic or
some other uncontrollable, hence fateful, emotion. The seat
and center of such destructive emotions, existing as a poten-
tiality in every human soul, is the Self, an inner center from
which both the greatest creative and the worst destructive
effects can issue.75 The fact that both hell and redemption are
aspects of precisely the God-image is, as Jung says, “‘shatter-
ing.’76 “But the same note is struck by Meister Eckhart when
he says that, on returning to his true self, he enters an abyss
‘deeper than hell itself’ ”’ He brings together into one the in-
nermost thoughts, God and hell. This, comments Jung, “‘is
grounded on the experience that highest and lowest both
come from the depths of the soul, and either bring the frail
vessel of consciousness to shipwreck or carry it to port, with
little or no assistance from us.”’77
According to the Jesuit Picinellus, the destructive aspect of
the inner center lies in the tongue (James 3:6: “Et lingua ignis
est, universitas iniquitatis”). As we have seen, negative projec-
tions cause mainly venomous or rancorous speech that strikes
others like arrows; the tongue is the instrument for lies and
slander—and not alone for such malicious attacks but also for
every possible idealistic, intellectualistic nonsense, dissemi-
nated as it is by means of slogans like “welfare,” ‘“‘existence,’
‘security,’ “peace among the peoples of the world,’ and all
the rest. Evil often hides behind idealism—and behind -isms
in general, which are as often as not simply labels disguising a
very unspiritual doctrinairism.7® In such cases one ‘“‘knows’’
what is right and what is good for other people and, indeed,
for mankind. That is the beginning of the end, of the decline.
The intellectual schoolmasters of the Kremlin are a classic
example of this. The dangers involved in taking this road are
very great. It starts with lying, that is, with the projection of
the shadow.’? More human beings are tortured and killed in
the name of all these -isms than die as a result ofthe forces of
nature. Behind such -isms are the projections of our own

120
 THE EVIL DEMONS

inner unrealized problem of the opposites.8° Insight into this

problem, however, seems as yet impossible for many people.
With the help of the materials cited we have seen that
demons can, for the most part, be viewed as projections of
unconscious autonomous complexes but that definite lim-
its to their integrability are set. Where they appear in arche-
typal forms it is only their contents that can (and must!) be
integrated—that is, whatever in the symbolic images can be
understood by the experiencing subject— but not the archetypal
structure itself. To this structure one can only relate, ever and
again, “‘religiously,’ by taking it carefully into account as
long as one lives and awarding it respectful attention.

121
 6

The Great
Mediating Daimons

Psyche and Eros in Apuleius %

Among primitive peoples and also in the cultures of late an-
tiquity, as we have seen, not all demons were regarded as evil;
whether they exerted a good or a malign influence on human
beings depended largely, if not entirely, on the behavior and
attitude of humans themselves. It was only during the first
stirrings of Christianity that the idea, coming by way of the

122
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

Orient, that there are purely destructive spirits began to

spread (for example in Plutarch). But the majority of daimons
are simply a part of nature, as good or as evil as human beings
themselves. In what follows, therefore, I call the good-evil
spirits ““daimons”’ and the purely evil ones “demons.”
The sharper ethical distinction that Christianity drew be-
tween good spirits and bad spirits indicates psychologically a
growing consciousness of what Jung called the shadow: all
those animal and otherwise inferior aspects of the conscious
personality that tend to condense into an image of an enemy
and that are unashamedly projected onto persons in the envi-
ronment. This personal inimical image can be recognized,
however, without too much difficulty, granted a little self-
criticism; if one takes the trouble one can catch oneself in
flagranti, in the very act of doing or saying just that thing
one most dislikes in the other person. The shadow consists
largely of laziness, greed, envy, jealousy, the desire for pres-
tige, aggressions, and similar “tormenting spirits.”
Among the daimons of antiquity, though, Plato also men-
tioned some that are the “great daimons,” like the god Eros
and the goddess Psyche. Psychologically interpreted, these
‘“‘sreat daimons”’ are those contents of the unconscious that
Jung called the anima and animus and that he described as the
real projection-creating factors of the psyche. He used the
word anima, as we know, to indicate the feminine aspect of a
man’s psyche that is first embodied in the mother-imago and
rejuvenated in the image of the beloved or the wife. She is par
excellence the fate-spinning core of the unconscious psyche
in a man, which is why in the East she is called Maya—the
world-spinner, or the dancer who creates the illusion of the
real world. Those projections woven not by the shadow but
by this factor are much more difficult to recognize; without a
close and living relationship with a countersexual partner one
almost never picks up the trail. It is actually the power that
stands behind all love entanglements and behind most marital
conflicts. The anima appears as an irrational sort of temper-

(23
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

ament, or disposition, of which the man himself is deeply

unconscious, or as a stimulus to life that drives him to this
woman and not to that one and inclines him to this life-style
and not to that one, that disposes his feelings to warmth and
joie de vivre or to a cold and lackluster outlook, that fills him
with enthusiasm or revulsion, seduces him to lust and “‘sin,”
and also finally brings him an awakening to himself.
One of the finest descriptions of the way in which a man
can be guided through the chaos and entanglements of life
produced by his anima, to awaken, finally, to the inner reali-
zation of this greatest of “‘daimons,’ is given in The
Metamorphoses, or The Golden Ass of Apuleius of Madura,
who wrote in late antiquity and whose theory of demons was
referred to above. A philosopher and teacher of rhetoric who
grew up in North Africa, Apuleius was an intellectual ori-
ented toward Neoplatonism. As a great admirer of Plutarch,
he became interested in occult phenomena. Because he tells
his tale in a light and mannered, aestheticizing style, as was
the fashion of the time, he has not always been taken seri-
ously. This is, however, an injustice.? In my opinion, Karl
Kerényi and, especially, Reinhold Merkelbach are correct in
taking the hero’s conversion at the end of the story as serious
and genuine and in pointing out the threads that lead to this
ending.? In particular they note that the tale of Amor and
Psyche, which is inserted into the novel, refers in veiled alle-
gory to the Isis cult in which, at the end of the book, the hero
finds his inner goal. So far as I know, however, no one has as
yet commented on the fact that all the parts of the novel are
interconnected in their psychological meaning and that all the
various tales scattered throughout the main narrative are related to
the latter in the same way that a person’s dreams relate to his waking
daily life.* Here we shall consider only the roles played by the
‘“daimons” Psyche and Eros (who are identical with Isis and
Osiris).
The hero of the novel, Lucius (from lux, “‘light’’), travels
on a white horse, the sun god’s animal, to Boeotia to study

124
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

occult phenomena, out of simple curiosity and apparently

without the slightest emotional involvement. He soon en-
counters two men, one of whom tells him a story about a
wretched old man called Socrates, who is overpowered by
two witches, humiliated, and finally murdered. The name
Socrates is not chosen by accident; it is an allusion to the great
philosopher who made a goal of complete apatheia —absence
of all emotion and affect. In the early stages of his legend the
talk of the populace had included a wife, Xantippe, who was
forever after Socrates, nagging and making scenes. In our
version the compensatory fantasy goes a step further. The
figures of the dark witches—the mother-imagines —kall Soc-
rates; that is, the Platonic philosopher in Lucius-Apuleius is
overcome without his quite realizing it, because whenever a
man comes close to occult phenomena rationally, these get
under his skin and touch his primitive side.
Lucius, strangely bewitched and alienated by the Boeotian
atmosphere, now finds lodging with an arch-witch, Pam-
phile (the All-loving, in the sense of the Great Whore), and at
once begins to enjoy the sexual favors of her pretty servant,
Photis (the light). This relationship, however, is one of
““cold’”’ sexual lust, since Lucius’ ulterior motive in pursuing it
is to discover Pamphile’s secret. Photis unconsciously takes
her revenge with all kinds of Freudian slips,> which harm
Lucius, finally even transforming him into an ass. At this
point calamity breaks in. Robbers storm the house, and
Lucius, in the form of an ass and loaded with the robbers’
booty, must continue on his way in their company. The rob-
bers personify a brutal, vulger shadow side of Lucius that he
obviously knows too little about and to which he will now be
subjugated for some time to come. Throughout the whole
“frame story’? the ill-fated ass falls into the hands of crimi-
nals, usurers, homosexuals, sodomites, and sadists, and the
reader accompanies him into the sordid depths of the ancient
shadow-world with all its amoral unconsciousness and its so-
cial misery. It is an underworld that also opens up today in the

126
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

psyche of every man who identifies with only the intellect

and its false ideals and who represses his development of feel-
ing. As he himself sees it, it is as if he were being inexplicably
pursued by a negative fate, as if he were constantly running
into cold and evil women, and as if the world’s evil were
intent on bringing all his ideals to nothing. In practice one
sees this in still another form: namely, that this kind of man is
always withdrawing from life into depression, into a superior
or “‘lofty sense of injury’’; in him the negative anima becomes
a resentment that is inimical to life. The vulgar shadow —the
robbers—is then neither lived nor integrated. Such a man
seems to run into bad luck all the time. But seen from the
point of view of psychic reality, he has fallen under the
dominion of the negative mother archetype—in the language
of Apuleius, into the power of the dark Isis-Nemesis, of Isis
in the form of a punitive, vengeful daimon.
In the midst of these dark turns of fate, while Lucius is still
in the company of the robbers, a beautiful young girl, Cha-
rite, is also abducted and forced to join their company. To
console her the “‘mother’’ of the band of robbers, a toothless
old woman, tells her the famous fairy tale of Amor and
Psyche. This tale comes up like a dream from a deeper ar-
chetypal layer of the psyche and is like a brief gleam of light
in the dark night of misery and suffering. Lucius misses its
meaning but he is fascinated and somehow feels consoled by
it. I shall remind the reader briefly of the salient features:
A king’s daughter by the name of Psyche is so beautiful that
she excites the envy of the goddess Venus, who sends her son
Eros to punish the girl. But Eros falls in love with her. They
are married in a strange, otherworldly, enchanted palace, but
Psyche is not permitted to see her husband, who visits her
only at night. Urged on by her envious sisters and by her own
curiosity, she takes a knife and a lamp into her room one night
in order to kill the monster she suspects her husband to be.
Instead of amonster, however, she gazes upon a most beauti-

126
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

ful divine youth. The knife falls from her hand, she trembles
with love, and a drop of oil from the lamp falls on Eros and
awakens him. He reproaches her for her curiosity and as
punishment vanishes into Olympus: as he goes, however, he
tells her how she might find him again, after wandering a
great distance in search of him and after a trip to Hades.
Psyche, after much suffering, does find Eros once more. Be-
cause she had yielded to her curiosity, she gives birth not to a
divine boy but only to a girl, Voluptas (lust). The story ends
with a jolly burlesque marriage celebration on Olympus, in
which all the gods and goddesses take part.

While Lucius is swamped in moods of lust, egotism, fear,

and stress and by ineradicable cynicism, the unconscious
presents, in the form of this story, the secret, underlying
meaning of his situation: the fate of his anima who suffers
from her proximity to and separation from the god Eros. It is
as if the unconscious were saying to him: “Behind your ap-
parently meaningless and unhappy fate a deeper drama is
being performed, a divine play of the daimons whose mean-
ing is the redemption of the anima by the spirit of love.” The
story itself was not invented by Apuleius but belongs to a
class of fairy tales that even today one finds all over the
world;® the names Psyche and Eros (as well as those of most
of the other characters), however, were invented by him. He
has obviously projected his own conception of the daimons
into these fairy-tale figures and has implied, with subtle
psychological intuition, that the tale really concerns the fate
of his own feeling-side, his daimon-anima, a spirit who
mediates the experience of the divine. According to Jung, the
anima is the projection-creating factor par excellence: she
weaves the hidden pattern of aman’s fate but she also builds a
bridge to an experience of God within his own psyche.
Reinhold Merkelbach has shown convincingly that the
princess Psyche is really an anticipation of the goddess Isis,
who appears in the great initiation ceremony at the end of the

127,
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

novel. Yet he is surprised by the duplication of Isis-Psyche

and Isis-Charite, for, as he shows, the latter—the listener to
whom the fairy tale is told—is also a parallel figure ofIsis.’
Psychologically, however, this duplication, or in fact trip-
lication, of Isis is easily understandable. In psychological
practice we see again and again that the anima appears as a
derivative or as a rejuvenated version of the mother-image in a
man. She embodies, then, a fragment of inner psychic femi-
ninity that has come closer to the human, that is, to the man’s
ego-consciousness.® Charite, a human girl overpowered by
the robbers just as Lucius is, would be, accordingly, the most
human, as it were, aspect of his anima, the aspect closest to
consciousness; Psyche, on the other hand, as a fairy-tale fig-
ure and the daughter of a king, is closer to the otherworldly
kingdom of the gods. During the Alexandrine period, as the
evidence of handicraft objects proves, Psyche was often ritu-
ally worshipped together with Eros. She was represented as a
girl with butterfly wings, that is, as a spiritual being or as a
being not of concrete reality but real enough psychologi-
cally.° In her journey to Hades she is at times identical with
the Kore of the Eleusinian mysteries.!° She represents an ar-
chetypal aspect of the feminine in Apuleius that is remote
from consciousness. On the other hand, Isis, who appears at
the end of the novel in all her cosmic majesty, personifies the
archetypal collective aspect of the anima. There is no longer
anything of Apuleius’ personal wishes nor of his desire for
her. She is the remote, lofty revelation of his deepest, trans-
personal fate.
One motif of this journey has puzzled interpreters: Psyche
must receive from Persephone a box containing a tosmetic,
which she may not open. She again succumbs to curiosity
and when she opens the box she is enveloped in a deathly
sleep, like a cloud. It seems as if everything is lost, but just
then Eros appears and calls her back by giving her a sip of the
water oflife. She is saved and at the same time she has finally
fulfilled her task. Why a cosmetic at such a decisive point, and

128
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

how is this supposed to work lethally?!1 Seen psychologi-

cally, this is connected with a familiar anima problem of men.
The anima believes often enough, even today, in the pagan
kalon k’agathon, in the idea that beauty and goodness go to-
gether; such a man cannot be convinced, for instance, that a
really beautiful woman could also be stupid or totally unsatis-
factory, and he will consequently have some unfortunate ex-
periences with love. In the case of Apuleius himself, however,
we see another destructive aspect ofthis ‘“cosmetic’”’: his liter-
ary aestheticizing, his addiction to a mannered, affected way
of expressing himself,!2 which obscures the depth of the
novel and robs it of its full emotional impact. Literary aes-
theticism and belletrism ultimately form a kind of block to
genuine religious experience, because such experience comes
from naive, primitive ground levels of the psyche. That is
“why today the rather clumsy folk art of the early Christians
moves us more than the affected, moribund ancient art of the
Pompeiian wall paintings; it expresses’simple, human, reli-
gious feeling. It is in the nature of the anima to produce aes-
theticism and vanity at a certain stage of development, and
when these are not outgrown or overcome they stand in the
way of the religious-spiritual deepening of inner experience;
hence they are represented in our fairy tale as the danger of
falling into a lethal sleep.
Although the fairy tale provides a happy ending for Psyche
and Eros, when examined a bit more closely this ending is
not as positive as one might think. The marriage takes place
not on earth but on Olympus, Psyche is carried off to the
realm of the gods, and Eros does not come down to earth.
This means that both figures vanish into the collective uncon-
scious. The motif of the holy marriage, the union of oppo-
sites, sinks once again into the unconscious; consequently
both listeners, Lucius and Charite, get into serious trouble
immediately afterward. Still another detail points to the fact
that something remains unrealized. Instead of a boy, as fore-
seen by fate, Psyche gives birth to Voluptas, a girl. In all the

129
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

great myths the “divine son” is the issue of the holy mar-
riage; he is a symbol of new life and of the inner wholeness
resulting from the union of opposites. Psyche is indeed re-
juvenated in Voluptas but, as the name informs us, the pro-
cess gets stuck in the realm of the anima, which is to say in
the entanglements of desirousness, in the unconscious life-
impulses in a man, instead of developing toward a realization
of the Self. Still, Voluptas does represent the more personal
anima of Apuleius; she is closer to consciousness than her
mother, Psyche. It is only at the end of the novel, when
Lucius-Apuleius, after his Isis ceremony, is initiated into the
Osiris mysteries, that he finally attains to the experience of
the ‘‘divine son,” the Self.
The somewhat questionable end of the Amor and Psyche
fairy tale anticipates the misfortune that follows shortly af-
terward. To be sure, Charite is saved from the robbers and
finds her betrothed again, but her good fortune does not last
long. Thrasyllos, an insolent youth who has fallen in love
with her, mischievously murders her husband. She revenges
herself on him by blinding him, then takes her own life in
order to be united once again with her husband in the Be-
yond. Her life thus ends in a tragic “‘death-marriage’’;!3 seen
from the point of view of human fate, the union of Psyche
and Eros on Olympus has the same meaning. “Immortal
mortal, mortal immortal, death is life for the one, and life is
death for the other!’’4
Lucius, the ass, escapes from the robbers and for a short
time, thanks to Charite’s solicitude, enjoys a better life. But
then he falls once more into the hands of sadistic, evil men and
his suffering begins all over again. The positive constellations
in the unconscious do not reach the surface of conscious-
ness. Cynicism, egotism, concupiscence are still uppermost
in Lucius; but these features of the conscious attitude do again
save him from death at the last minute. His soul, though,
suffers deeply, without his realizing this consciously.

130
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

At the end of his wanderings, after escaping a final humil-

iation by flight, Lucius sinks down onto a beach, exhausted.

Not long afterwards I awoke in sudden terror. A dazzling full

moon was rising from the sea. It is at this secret hour that the
Moon-goddess, sole sovereign of mankind, is possessed ofher
greatest power and majesty. She is the shining deity by whose
divine influence not only all beasts, wild and tame, but all
inanimate things as well, are invigorated. ... Of this I was
well aware and therefore resolved to address the visible image
of the goddess, imploring her help; for Fortune seemed at last
to have made up her mind I had suffered enough and to be
offering me a hope of release... .
“Blessed Queen of Heaven, whether you are pleased to be
known as Ceres, the original harvest mother who... gave
bread raised from the fertile soil of Eleusis; or whether as ce-
lestial Venus, now adored at sea-girt Paphos . . . or whether as
Artemis, the physician sister of Phoebus Apollo, reliever of the
birth pangs of women, and now adored in the ancient shrine
at Ephesus; or whether as dread Proserpine . . . whose triple
face is potent against the malice of ghosts, keeping them im-
prisoned below earth . . . Ibeseech you, by whatever name, in
whatever aspect, with whatever ceremonies you deign to be
invoked, have mercy on me in my extreme distress, restore
my shattered fortune and . . . return me to my family, give me
back to myself?’45

Having finished his prayer, Lucius falls into a deep sleep.

He has scarcely closed his eyes when the goddess appears to
him in her most majestic form, in iridescent dress shimmer-
ing with color, now red, now yellow, and a mantle of deep
black, a wreath, and a mirror-likeness of the moon over her
brow. She tells him that she, the mother of creation and mis-
tress of the elements, has been moved by his prayer and has
come to him to prophesy that on the following day he will
find redemption in the Isis procession by eating roses, the
flower of Isis. In return he must commit himself to her

131
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

forever, both in this life and in the life hereafter, and must
serve her eternally.
The fairy tale of Eros and Psyche appeared and then van-
ished, like a treasure that rises to the surface of a pool and
then, if not lifted out, sinks down again. This time, however,
its content crosses the threshold. Isis and Osiris, who in the
opinion of both Plutarch and Apuleius are the greatest of
daimons,!© represent the same primordial forms as Psyche
and Eros.17 They emerge again in this new form, and this
time the genuine religious feeling that had been repressed
breaks through in Lucius-Apuleius. His intellectualism falls
away, his preoccupation with the trivialities of a purely
materialistically oriented life-style ceases, and a deeper mean-
ing is revealed to him in an overwhelming experience of the
Egyptian numina, the gods of his ancient homeland. We can
see that his conversion is real because he preserves the silence
commanded in the mysteries; his intellect would for sure
gladly have made a spiritual game of them, but now, having
turned serious, he is committed and hence can give only a
couple of hints about their meaning. Furthermore, the result
of the development this time is not the birth of a girl but the
encounter with Osiris, the husband and son of the goddess
Isis, who is identical with Horus, Harpocrates, the divine
boy, and who also symbolizes the philosopher’s stone, the Self,
in the alchemy of that day. The goddess Psyche-Isis is no
longer the bearer and the bringer of suffering but has become
a bridge to feeling and to a loyalty to the Self.
We are presented, then, in Apuleius’ famous novel of late
antiquity, with a step in the development of the anima that
justified the greatest hopes; but this development was broken
off by the spread of the Christian message. The spirit of mas-
culine Logos prevailed one-sidedly against the feminine prin-
ciple. It is not until the time of the medieval Minnedienst that
we again find documents of anima experiences that move us
as deeply; it is no accident that motifs of the Isis procession
from The Metamorphoses appear in the literature of the Grail.

132
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

It seems to me, however, that we have only now come to the

point where the daimon Psyche with the butterfly wings
once again draws near to men and can finally be understood
as the principle of a love that has no trace of egoistic motives
and whose goal signifies the individuation of the man, with a
liberation from all rationalistic one-sidedness.
In his Amor and Psyche Erich Neumann interprets the story
as the development of awoman rather than as a description of
the fate of the anima of Apuleius.18 This can be justified in-
asmuch as the anima, as the feminine being in a man, is not of
a structurally different nature from the feminine side of a
woman; otherwise it would not be possible for men always to
project their anima onto women.
The immaturity of the approach to the problem of love
in Apuleius’ tale of Amor and Psyche is evident in the fact
that Eros behaves like a moody youngster; it is only in the
nocturnal light-scene that he appears as the great and numi-
nous god he really is. His ‘‘boyishness” (it is the equivalent
of the immaturity of the Homunculus and of Euphorion in
Goethe’s Faust) indicates that the possibility of a realization of
the Self is not yet present. The daimon is not yet integrable;
he comes and goes, and the man who encounters him cannot
understand the meaning of his appearance. But who, even
today, can really grasp the meaning of a deep experience of
love? A prayer to Eros from late antiquity comes close,
perhaps, to expressing this incomprehensible experience:

“T call to thee, the source of everything living, whose wings

are outspread over the whole world, the unnameable and im-
measurable, who breathes life-giving thoughts into every
soul, who with his power has welded everything together.
First-born, all-creator, golden-winged, dark mysterious one,
who conceals discreet and crafty thoughts and inspires dark
and ominous passion, thou hidden one who lives in stealth
in every soul; thou kindlest the invisible fire in all that is ani-
mate by thy touch, tirelessly tormenting, with lust, through
anguished rapture, since time began. . . . Thou youngest one,

133
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

lawless, heartless, inexorable, invisible, bodiless, bringer of

passion, archer, torch-bearer, thou master of every movement
of the spirit, of all things hidden, giver of forgetfulness, father
of silence, through whom and to whom the light shines forth,
tender infant when you are born in the heart, ancient of days
when you are quite completed. I call to thee, the inexorable,
using thy great name. Thou hast been the first to appear, noc-
turnal visitor, joyful by night, maker of night, thou who hears
and answers .. . thou in the depths . . . thou hidden in the sea,
thou eldest!1?

Seen from the point of view of woman’s psychology, Eros

in Apuleius’ fairy tale is also a pre-form of the god Osiris; in
woman he is the “‘spirit who shows the way,” in the original
meaning of the word (psychopompos), that is, her positive
animus. One can study his destructive aspect in the very im-
pressive medieval reports of possession by the devil, but here
he is the positive animus-daimon in the role of mediator to
the Self, which for a woman could be seen in the goddess Isis;
Isis was also officially invoked as “Isis of women” in Egyp-
tian religious texts.

The Masculine Companion

in Woman’s Psyche
Just as the anima derives from a man’s mother-imago, so
the animus is a rejuvenated form of the father-image.?° As
“father” he represents a traditional spirit which expresses it-
self in ‘‘sacred convictions” that the woman herself has never
really thought through. The animus as divine puedaeternus,
on the other hand, appears as a creative spirit who can inspire |
a woman to undertake her own spiritual achievements. This
spirit is a spirit of love, that is, of her own living inner mys-
tery, which comes into realization in the Eros between man
and woman. In the tale by Apuleius, therefore, Psyche can be
understood, as Neumann understands her, as a model of the

134
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

Sgrar setteeuitecs herself from a hollow, exclusively female

atriarchal way ife and attains a| higher, individual femi-
nity through much suffering and an experience of the mas-
culineBEweild That Psyche in the story ends up on Olympus
means that even here this way of individuation for a woman
has not yet been reached in human reality. It appears to be in
the nature of the animus to lure the woman away from reality
now and again. Whereas the anima usually appears in the
form of a fascination, an allurement that draws the man into
life, the animus often appears as a spirit of death;?1 indeed
there are even fairy tales in which a woman marries a hand-
some, unknown stranger who is revealed later on as death
personified, a revelation that brings about the death of the
woman herself. This is tied to the fact that, as a projection-
making factor, a man’ s anima produces mainly assive, that

ee
more judgmental, projections that tend to cut the woman o
from the world of objects. In both cases anima and animus _
effect
alienation
an from reality, because the empathetic pro-
jections of the anima are of an illusory nature and the judg-

know, that depicts the masculine daimon of woman in the

context of a biography, but we do have one from the con-
temporary Christian sphere, namely, the tragic story of the
martyr Perpetua of Carthage.?? Perpetua was a proper
twenty-two-year-old Roman woman who was condemned
to death. While in prison awaiting execution she had various
dream-visions in which she encountered figures of her per-
sonal animus in the forms of her fellow-martyr Saturus and
the deacon Pomponius (these correspond to the figure of
Charite in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses) and in which, in particu-
lar, a white-clad divine shepherd and (in a later vision) a help-
ful fencing-master appeared. The former, in the first vision,
gave her cheese as the “food of immortality,” and the latter, in

133
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

the last vision, a green bough with golden apples. Fortified by

these dream daimons, Perpetua went without fear to her
death. To her the two dream figures were appearances of
Christ in disguised form, but the dream-visions themselves
do not say that. These daimons, or better, this daimon (for
the two are identical) is, rather, an archetypal figure that was
constellated at that time in the collective unconscious of the
whole world, including the non-Christian, a spirit of reli-
gious renewal whose special mark of distinction was to appear
directly to the single individual as a spirit who howe Tae, We
shall meet him again as an inner figure in men;?? in the Passio
Perpetuae, however, he is to be understood unequivocally as
an ee ae a mediating spirit.
Just as in the case of Apuleius the mother-anima figure ap-
pears differentiated into a form close to the human (Charite)
and two divine forms (Psyche and Isis), so Perpetua too is
guided in her visions on the one hand teanimus Aree
are symbolized by mer22from NRE nment and o

Fnac eeees In the first vision a Pore -martyr,

Saturus, takes her hand and guides her to the heavenly ladder
that leads to the cosmic shepherd. Saturus in reality sought
martyrdom intentionally and associated voluntarily with
prisoners; in Perpetua he represents her personal animus, her
courageous ‘‘absolute’’ conviction to which she committed
herself. In the last vision a deacon, Pomponius, leads her to’
the amphitheater where she meets the fencing-master. Pom-
ponius was the helper who in reality visited the prisoners and
brought them spiritual comfort. Whereas Saturus embodies
the qualities of courage and conviction, Pomponius is closer
to the figure of a spiritual teacher; he personifies the gradually
deepening Christian insights in Perpetua. She was only
twenty-two years old and had received instruction for only a
short time;?4 she was in every respect still a novice in the
spiritual world of Christianity.25 Corresponding to the god-
dess Isis in Apuleius, the sublime, wholly archetypal power

136
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

appears here as the cosmic shepherd and the giant fencing-

master, both of whom offer Perpetua symbols of eternal life.
The “Shepherd of Men”’ (Poimandres), as he is called in a
writing of about the same period, means a “‘Spirit of Truth”
that “‘accompanies human beings wherever they are.” In a
gnostic Naassene writing, the god Attis is extolled as cosmic
god-man and “shepherd of the shining stars,’ an epithet also
applied to the Egyptian god Anubis and to the god Horus;
the latter, forexample,is called “the good shepherd who
rules over the four races of men,’26
Philo of Alexandria interprets the figure of the shepherd as
follows:
To be a shepherd is something so supremely good that it
rightly applied not only to kings and to wise men and to souls
purified by consecration but also to God Himself, Ruler of the
Universe. Like a shepherd in a meadow or a pasture, God, the
Shepherd and King, governs justly and by His law the earth
and water, air and fire, and the plants and living beings in
them, mortal and divine, and also the nature of heaven and the
course of the sun and the moon and the paths of the other
heavenly bodies and their harmonious rounds by delivering
up to them for their guidance His true Logos, His first-born
son, who will take over the cares of this sacred flock as a ruler
sent by the Great King.?7
Thus in this text the shepherd symbolizes the world-ordering
understanding of God and of the Logos as “a pneuma that
reaches from heaven to earth.” In Christianity all the func-
tions of this widespread shepherd symbol were assigned to
Christ, as shown in Psalm 23:1: ‘““The Lord is my shepherd, I
shall not want.” Early Christian art often therefore depicted
in the tradition ofHermes, with the lamb on his
shoulder, the celestial bodies at his feet. As ruler of the cos-
mos he is everywhere, and at the same time he appears to the
indi vidual as personal guardian spirit, just as the shepherd/
encing-master in Perpetua’ s visions concerns himself with
her. In the final vision, when in the amphitheater Perpetua

197,
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

must fight a giant Egyptian—the spirit of heathendom—she

is first disrobed by beautiful youths and rubbed with oil. In
the process she is transformed into a man and as such, as a miles
Christi, she then conquers the enemy. Clement of Alexandria
quotes a contempory writing?® which says that after death
the male unites immediately with the world-spirit (Logos) in
the Beyond, whereas the female enters the pleroma only after
a process of masculinization.?? The profoundly tragic fate of
the Christian woman is here revealed: because the Christian
god-image is exclusively masculine she can become one with
God only through alienation from her own feminine nature.
This, however, is nothing other than a spiritual possession,
a denial of her feminine consciousness and her physical real-
ity. Thus even Augustine writes (De anima, IV, 18, 26): “Ina
dream I saw Perpetua, transformed into a man, wrestle with
an Egyptian. Who can doubt that this masculine figure was
her soul, not her actual body, which had remained completely
feminine and which lay there, unconscious, while her soul
was wrestling in the form of a masculine body?”
Perpetua changes her sex in an ecstatic state; her transfor-
mation is like that of the priests of the great Syrian mother-
goddess Cybele, who in a state of ecstasy were transformed
into females. In his novel, Apuleius depicts such a scene of
ecstatic effeminization, which he calls a morbid frenzy,
“exactly as if the men had been made weak and sick through
the presence of the gods, and not much better than they were
before.’’3° Apuleius indeed condemned this kind of cult, but
we know that the shaving of the head, the clothing, and the
whole life of the ‘“‘Galloi’” (eunuchs), who castrated them-
selves, were meant as a kind of ecstatic dedication and sacri-
fice to the goddess. If we disregard Apuleius’ moral evaluation,
this is an exact parallel to Perpetua’s masculinization: total
religious possession.
It is understandable that the patriarchal one-sidedness of
the early Christian god-image later called forth compensa-
tions that issued not least from women’s psychic need: the

138
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

proclamation in Ephesus of the Virgin Mary as Theotokos

(god-bearer) and the development of a doctrine of Christ’s
androgyny may well be understood in this sense.31
In its practical effects Perpetua’s masculinization symbol-
izes an ecstatic state of rapture; she is transported into the
realm of the spiritual, just as Apuleius-Lucius dropped down
into his hitherto split-off feeling-side in his encounter with
Isis. Lucius, however, will be summoned after a while to a
further, still deeper experience, to an encounter with the Self,
which takes him through the encounter with the anima and
beyond. Perpetua, on the other hand, perishes; a feminine di-
vinity would have had to come to her aid had she been des-
tined by fate to a longer life.
If we compare the two great daimons, Anima and Animus,
as they are depicted in our two examples, it becomes clear
that, for Apuleius, Isis would be the anima, whereas she
would represent the Self for a woman, just as the cosmic
shepherd appears as animus in Perpetua’s visions but as the
personification of the Self in texts that recount the inner ex-
periences of men. The fully archetypal aspect of these two
figures is thereforefundamentally
beyond all differences of
sex. They are inner images that are of concern to both men
and women, if in rather different ways. They are thus sym-
bols of far-reaching collective significance—scarcely dai-
mons but almost gods, to speak the language of Apulieus.
We see here, too, as in the case of evil daimons, that the
archetypal structure of these figures enters the realm of the
personal only with its tip and that large areas of it are trans-
personal. It is precisely these{unintegrable)parts that, as Jung role ,
has shown, are the _projection-producing factors, that is, the
secret wire-pullers of our destiny that are souncannily dif-
ficult for us to track down. In “Psychology of the Transfer-
ence” Jung tried to show what happens in the case of a strong
love attraction between a man and a woman. It is a question
1e
six-fold relationship offour figures, name
ro SETI
an
and_his anima and of the woman and her animus.

139
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

Anima Animus
e.g., Isis e.g., Shepherd

Man Woman
e.g., Apuleius e.g., Perpetua

Anima and animus, as we have come to know them in the

form of Isis and the shepherd (Hermes-Psychopompos) in the
two examples discussed above, appear in the alchemistic tra-
dition as king and queen. Jung used them as examples to illus-
trate his exposition.
These figures, king and queen or god and goddess,
are the
partners in the “sacred wedding,” the union of the world-
ites that was the goal of the alchenaists. In apparently
“harmless” form this archetype of the s gamos (sacred
wedding) stands behind the most frequent fairy-tale ending
in which hero and heroine come together at last.
Love
is such a fateful factor in atsnego every |
ee (RT else, it h

mystery meen no Cae being has so far ated bu

which is at the same time the goal of life, born anew in each
of us. All that we can — that it ispart of a| Tr
Ca

emeneB LEE: At reine

140
 THE GREAT MEDIATING DAIMONS

-in death”; many dreams of older people Ie are not far

s6E aerthily existence. Thus a deaconess in her eighties

dreamed that she received a bridal gown and wondered what
use she might make of it. A year later she heard a voice in a
dream telling her to prepare for the marriage. Such dreams
are evidently a preparation for the experience of death. A doc-
tor who was only fifty-four years old and did not suspect that
the angel of death was drawing near had the following
dream: He went to a burial, as he was often obliged to do
professionally. The man being buried was unknown to him
and he therefore felt indifferent toward him. The funeral cor-
tege stopped in a square in the center of the city; men carried
the coffin to the meadow in the center of the square and
placed it on a prepared pile of wood. The pyre was lighted
and flames began to lick the coffin. Then the lid of the coffin
sprang open and a marvelously beautiful naked woman
jumped out and ran to the dreamer with arms outspread—
and he awoke with an indescribably blissful feeling of love.
Two years later the dreamer died unexpectedly of heart fail-
ure. The man who was buried in the dream represents his
bodily ego, which had become alien and indifferent to him; in
death, however, his soul (anima) awakes and unites with his
ol Bers in the “‘sacred marriage.”
é man does not awaken to some awareness of the
- that is central to love, he may readily make a
agedy ofiat;inBase case “‘a spark of the eternal fire
ivine child”
of the two tran-
1 of completed individuation,

If we compare the projections that issue from the shadow

complex with those proceeding from the anima-animus
complex, we may say that insight
into one’s own shadow pro-
st of all a moral humiliation, intensive suf-
Insight
into projections originating in the anima or the

141
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

animus, on the other hand, demands not so much humility as

level-headedness and commonsense self-observation and re-
flection, which demand a certain wisdom and humaneness,
because these figures always want to seduce us away from
reality into rapture or pull us down into an inner world of
fantasy. Whoever cannot surrender to this experience has
never lived; whoever foondeeinir lasondestoctacthing.
Ot nn ARE
OE I

142
 iy;

The Inner Companion

The Guardian Spirit

In the final initiation of Apuleius into the Egyptian mysteries
he is called to the worship of Osiris, the son-husband of Isis.
For the man of that day Osiris represented the immortal inner
personality into which a man is transformed after death. In
the alchemistic tradition, therefore, Osiris was the equivalent
of the “stone,” that is, the resurrected body. In Egypt the

143
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

immortal nucleus of the soul was also called the Ba-soul. In

his essay “The Dialogue of a World-Weary Man with His
Ba,” Helmuth Jacobsohn has shown that the Ba represented,
on the one hand, something like the unconscious personality
of a man and, on the other, what Jung has described as the
Self, whereas the Ka embodied something resembling a
man’s vitality and those elements of his personality and con-
stitution that are inherited. The Ba was depicted as a star or
as a bird with a human head. (We know that in the beliefs of
many peoples human beings are supposed to have a number
of different souls; the ancient Greeks also believed that people
possess several souls—psychai.)
According to Plutarch, Isis and Osiris are very great
‘“‘daimons” but they are not gods. Therefore they represent
something which is transsubjective but which is closer to the
human than are the gods, something which can be experi-
enced inwardly in certain states of very strong emotion.
Through initiation into the mysteries, a human being could
become a special servitor of these daimons, could even be
completely dissolved in them after death without losing his
individuality; that is why in Egyptian coffin-texts the dead
are evoked as “Osiris N.N.” Apuleius does not tell us what
happened to him during his encounter with Osiris, maintain-
ing the silence imposed by the mysteries. We can only assume
that in this experience he found an EA SAGN a psychic
ground for going ahead with his life.
We should be skeptical about attempts to relate some of
these “‘souls” or “daimons” to the Jungian concepts of
shadow, anima, animus, and Self. It would be a great mistake,
as Jung himself often emphasized, to suppos&é that the
shadow, the anima (or animus), and the Self appear separately
in a person’s unconscious, neatly timed and in definable or-
der. In the reality of everyday practice it is much more likely
that a person in depth psychological analysis will first meet
with something psychically “absolutely other” in himself, a
dark, chaotic something, appearing to him in complicated

144
 THE INNER COMPANION

dream images in which, little by little, he begins to discover

his alter ego. Some orientation begins to emerge from this
chaos as certain inferior traits in this “‘other”’ begin to separate
out, traits that are relatively easy to recognize as belonging to
the particular person. As this process continues, the contra-
sexual aspects in this massa confusa gradually begin to be dis-
tinguishable. It is only after these, too, have drawn nearer
to consciousness that it later becomes evident that a part of
the great power and the divinity of these figures does not
come from the person himself but originates in a still deeper
and more embracing psychic center, the Self. In the series
of dreams of a modern physicist, which Jung published in
Psychology and Alchemy, there appears the image ofa sublime
and majestic woman whose head radiates light as the sun
does. In this image the anima and the Self (sun) are still en-
tirely one; this is rather like the appearance of Isis toward the
end of The Metamorphoses of Apuleius. It becomes apparent
only later that the anima may be distinguished from a power
emanating from a still deeper level.
If we look for personifications of the Self among the
daimons of antiquity, we see that certain daimons are more
like a mixture of shadow and Self, or of animus-anima and
Self, and that is, in fact, what they are. In other words, they
represent the still undifferentiated “other,” unconscious per-
sonality of the individual.
This is the case not only with the Egyptian Ba-Osiris but
also with the ancient Roman idea of the genius. The genii of
the ancient Romans were originally household gods of a
kind. Their name is etymologically related to gignere—to
“beget” or ‘‘engender’”—so that the genius represented first
of all the reproductive power of the father of a family and of
the son and heir, much like the Egyptian Ka-soul of the
Pharaoh. The marriage bed was called genialis lectus; this re-
ferred not only to sexual potency but also to the qualities that
today we would call psychic vitality, temperament, resource-
fulness, and a lively imagination. The genius rejoiced when

145
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

those who honored him ate and drank well and when their
sexual experience was good (indulgere genio), but homosexu-
ality and sexual perversions put him out of humor. Miserly
and dry people allow their genius to waste away. That the
genius represented much more than the merely sexual is
shown by the fact that for the Romans even places in a land-
scape or fields or groves could possess their genius, the genius
loci, which assured the continuity of their existence. Used in
this way the word genius referred more to the psychic atmo-
sphere or to the mood that such a place can evoke. Here we
have once again that original situation in which the objective
psyche appears to live altogether in outer things, that is, is
experienced by human beings only in complete projection.
For the Romans the house especially possessed several
geni: Vesta guarded the hearth, the Penates protected provi-
sions, the Lar guaranteed safety and good fortune, and, by no
means the least important, the deceased members of the fam-
ily lived on in the house with the living as anonymous Dii
Manes.” The statuette of the genius of the father of the family.
usually stood by the hearth in the kitchen. Itwas the figure of
a youth bearing a horn of plenty in which there were often
phalli, or the genius was itself a phallus or a snake. (The genius
loci was always represented as a snake.) It was not only the
father of the house, however, who had his genius; the mis-
tress also had such a guardian spirit, a feminine figure called
“Juno,” who embodied the power of giving birth and the
maternal-feminine factors in woman.
Originally “genius” and “Juno” were quite impersonal
“atmospheric” house gods, but by the third century before
Christ they had become much more individualized Not only
the head of a family but every man had his own genius, every
woman her Juno, and each person offered certain sacrifices to
his genius at a small celebration on his birthday. It was
thought that the genius was born with the particular person
and was the arbiter of that individual’s fortunes. Horace de-
scribes him: ‘Companion who rules the star of birth, god of

146
 THE INNER COMPANION

human nature, mortal in each man, of changing countenance,

white and black.’’3 Later the genius was thought to be im-
mortal. At the same time that the genius became more indi-
vidualized, his image—probably as a result of the growing
familiarity with the Greek spirit—was extended in the third
century B.C.* The genius loci became the genius of the city, of
schools, of the Senate. The genius of Jupiter, visualized as a
phallus, protected the storehouses. The genius of a god, so
employed, embodied at the same time his moral and psychic
essence.>
The Italic ideas about the genius were altered in still
another way through the encounter with the Greek spirit.
They merged with the philosophic concepts of the Greek
thinkers that centered on an immortal spiritual psychic nu-
cleus. In the Timaeus (90B—90C), Plato sets forth his theory
that every human being has a divine daimon that is the no-
blest component of his psyche. Whoever seeks wisdom and
seriously concerns himself with divine and eternal things
nourishes his daimon, whereas worldly trivialities abase and
mortify him. A more intensive interest was thereby
awakened in the Platonic school in those mysterious “‘voices”’
that, as we know, Socrates was in the habit of admonishing.
This Socratic daimon® was regarded as an example of that
divine daimon of which Plato writes. The extent to which
this daimon or these daimons were thought of as endopsychic
varies.
Some of the Stoics taught the existence of such a daimon in
double form: one is a divine component ofthe psyche (Nous),
but the other is a spark of the fiery world-soul that has mi-
grated into human beings; this latter daimon—or this part of
the daimon— guides a man from without through his whole
life.? In the opinion of Plutarch (died A.D. 125), only a pure
man can hear the voice of this daimon, a completely bodiless
being® who is the mediator of supernatural, “parapsychologi-
cal” knowledge® to the human being he watches over. The
Neoplatonists thought of this genius-daimon as immortal, as

147
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

one who becomes an actual divinity after his mortal sojourn.

Whereas the Italic genius originally died with his bearer,?® in
the later view he lives on after death as a Lar (benign spirit).
As a result of the Stoa’s spiritual-ascetic orientation in late
antiquity, and of Neoplatonism, the Italic genius lost his ear-
lier component of physical vitality, the pleasure principle,
which originally had been innate to him. In De genio Socratis,
a work by Apuleius, there is mention of two genii who live in
human beings; one is the immortal ethical guardian and inner
friend of_a specific person, and the other (who lives in the
genua, “‘knees’”) embodies sensual desire and _covetousness
and isevaluated negatively = itttststst—~S
The idea of the genius also merged quite early with the
astrological idea of a personal fate shaped by the date of birth
(hence Horace: “. . . who rules over the birth-star’’), because
sacrifices had always been made to the genius on one’s birth-
day. In his Saturnalia, Macrobius describes this in detail!? In
his view every human being is a combination offour daimons:
of Eros, as we have become acquainted with him; of a particu-
lar destiny (a fate ordained by God); of a daimon whose na-
ture is stamped by the position of the sun in his horoscope;
and finally by a Tyche (fortune) that is dependent on the posi-
tion of the moon. The daimon knows the future and is at all
times in touch with the world-spirit, with the Logos or sper-
matic pneuma of the universe. In him masculine and feminine
are merged,1> so that he is thus an androgynous symbol of
wholeness, no longer merely genius or Juno but an arche-
typal image that, like the Japis in alchemy, unites the oppo-
sites of masculine and feminine in one figure.
ocrates’ genius (daimonion) as follows:
He is ‘“‘a private patron and individual guide, an observer of
what takes place in the inner person, guardian of one’s wel-
fare, he who knows one most intimately, one’s most alert and
constant observer, individual judge, irrefutable and inescap-
able witness, who frowns on evil and exalts what is good.” If
one “‘watches him in the right way, seeks ardently to know

145
 THE INNER COMPANION

him, honors him religiously,” then he shows himself to be

“the one who can see to the bottom of uncertain situations
and can give warning in desperate situations, can protect us in
dangerous situations, and can come to our rescue when we
are in need.” He can intervene “now through a dream and
now through a sign [synchronistic event], or he can even step
in by appearing personally in order to fend off evil, to rein-
force the good, to lift up the soul in defeat, to steady our
inconstancy, to lighten our darkness, to direct what is favor-
able toward us and to compensate what is evil.”!4 It is well
known that in late antiquity a primitive element of religious
experience in the philosophic-religious theories was much
stronger than in the classic period, perhaps through contact
with the more primitive outlying border areas of the Greco-
Roman culture. I know of scarcely any account from an-
tiquity that gives a better description of the experiences of the
Self than this short summary by Apuleius.1>
As in the case of the other daimons, this daimon, which
embodies the individual’s larger, more comprehensive per-
sonality, was in late antiquity also like a mountain the bulk of
which lay in the transpersonal realm of the psyche, extending
only a small tip into the human being’s personal sphere. With
the Christianization of the ancient cultural world, however, it
was for the most part the transpersonal aspects that were re-
tained,'¢ his aspect as the messenger ofthe gods being assimi-
lated to the idea of the angels; and the other aspects, that is,
the parapsychological knowledge, the vitality, and lustfulness
of the genius, were attributed to the devil and his tribe.1? But
a faint intimation ofthe individuality of this figure lived on in
the idea that the individual may have a particular guardian
angel or patron saint. The reason for this apparently regres-
sive development lay in the fact that the figure of Christ had
attracted to himself all the positive qualities of the genius fig-
ure. He was exalted to one symbol ofthe Self, in a form, how-
ever, in which the collective elements far outweighed the
individual elements. Gradually, as the institutionalized rit-

149
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

ual and the confession of faith increased in importance, less

and less weight was given to the Pauline inner experience of
the Christ and to the visions of the early Christian mar-
tyrs. Among those within the Church, only the mystics re-
mained loyal to that line of tradition which put the central
value on the inner experience of Christ.

The Inner Companion

in Hermetic Philosophy and in Alchemy
An attitude of mind lived on in the Hermetic philosophy of
late antiquity and in alchemy which, in contrast to Chris-
tianity, sought an unprogrammed experience of the “inner
companion” or of the daimon who showed the way. This
daimon was usually honored in these traditions as Hermes-
Psychopompos, as Poimandres (Shepherd of Men), and as
Agathos Daimon (Good Spirit). Richard Reitzenstein has ex-
plicitly drawn attention to the existence of an actual Hermes
religion in late antiquity, but so far his work has not been
adequately recognized.18 In my opinion this religion had a
significance that should not be underestimated. In those cir-
cles a truly religious attention was paid to the “inner compan-
ion,” an attention that in the language of today’s psychology
we would describe as relatedness to the inner “‘guru,”’ or, in
Jungian language, to the Self.
In an astrological document of the third century B.C., in
which the priest Petosiris counsels King Nechopso, Hermes
already appears as the teacher of all secret wisdom, which,
however, can be experienced only in a state of ecstasy. This
wisdom appears to the prophet as a “‘voice’’ wrapped in a
dark garment. As the follower prays, this voice points out to
him the paths of the celestial bodies in the universe and re-
veals to him the wisdom of the cosmos.!9 The same figure ap-
pears as Poimandres (Shepherd of Men) in the tractate of the

150
 THE INNER COMPANION

Corpus Hermeticum and is there described as Nous tes authen-

tias, the “Spirit of Truth.”?° The alchemist Zosimos (third
century A.D.) belonged to a community that worshipped this
figure. The latter revealed himself to Zosimos as “‘spirit”’
(pneuma) and as “‘Lord of the Spirits” and instructed him in
the transformations in the alchemistic opus by acting as his
guide in a journey to the underworld of the kind with which
we are familiar in Egyptian literature. In the Poimandres this
spirit, who appears in the form of a human being of cosmic
size, says to the praying man: “‘ ‘What will you hear and see
and learn through reflection and experience?’ I answer: ‘Who
are you?’ ‘I am the Poimandres, the Spirit of Truth (or of the
Absolute). I know what is in your thoughts and am with you
everywhere.’ Then he changed his form and at once everything
was opened up to me as in one blow, and I saw an unending
vision—and a friendly, joyous, light illuminating every-
thing... and I burned with love for him.”??
This figure, according to another tractate of the Corpus
Hermeticum,?? had sent a mixing-bowl full of Nous (knowl-
edge of God) down to men and had commanded that their
hearts be baptized in it in order to come to God knowing
wherefore it (the heart) had been born. But God can also ap-
pear to men in other forms: He, who imagines (phantasion)
the whole world, “‘appears in all things and He appears espe-
cially to those to whom He wills to appear.”?3 He delivers
them in this way from agnosia —from unconsciousness.74 The
Nous in man, on the other hand, unites man and God; he is
the ‘‘good spirit” (agathodaimon) in human beings.?5 “He will
come to you everywhere on your way through life and will
reveal himself everywhere, where and when you least expect
him, waking, sleeping, at sea, in the street, at night, by day,
when you speak or when you are silent, since there is nothing
which he is not.”’?6 Nock refers to the similarity of this saying
to that of the apocryphal Logion of Jesus: ““Where one is
alone, I say: Iam with him. Lift a stone and you will find me
there, split a log and I shall be there!”’?”

151
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

In the thirteenth tractate of the Corpus Hermeticum, Hermes

gives to the pupil an account of his own awakening to a
higher consciousness in the following words:?8 “After look-
ing within and seeing a formless vision that came to me out
of God’s mercy, I was lifted out of myself and entered an
immortal body, so that I am no longer he who I was but am
reborn in the Nous. This experience cannot be taught... .
Thus came the knowledge [Gnosis] of God to me and
through this act of creation I have become divine.’’??
In a text that was also known to Zosimos it is said of this
same Hermes-Thoth that he, the son of God, in order to save
pious souls “‘became all things, god, angel, a human being
capable of suffering. Because he is omnipotent and can be-
come whatever he wills, he follows the will of his father
(God) by permeating all bodies and illuminating the spirit of
all humanity. . . and guiding it upward towards the light.’’3°
One also comes across this god-daimon in similar form in
the magic papyri of the period, except that in the papyri man
makes the attempt, in accordance with the premises of magic,
to master this god and manipulate him. Aside from this im-
portant difference we find the same archetypal-symbolic fig-
ure. There is a prayer to this power: “From out the four
winds close to me, thou almighty who breathed into men the
breath of life, bearer of the secret name and the unnam-
able... whose tireless eyes are the sun and the moon...
whose head is the heaven, whose body the ether, whose feet
the earth, thou art the ocean (agathos daimon) that gives birth
to the good and nourishes the (inhabited) earth... . Thou,
possessor of unerring truth, ... enter into my heart and my
thoughts for all the rest of my life and fulfill forme every
wish of my soul. For thou art I and I am thou... . For I carry
thy name in my heart as my sole protection (talisman).’’34
Another prayer to Hermes runs as follows: ‘“‘Hermes, ruler
of worlds, cycle of the moon, round and square, who first
taught the tongue to speak, goad to righteousness, wearer of
the chlamys and the winged sandals, thou, whose way leads

132
 THE INNER COMPANION

through the ether to the depths of the earth, the spirit’s

guide... who with light brings joy to those who inhabit the
depths of the earth3? and to the mortals who have come to the
end of their life span. Foreseer of fate art thou called and the
‘divine dream’ that sends oracles by day and by night. Thou
healest all mortal pains. ... Come to me, bringer of bliss,
Mneme,?? who brings plans to fruition, greatest son.’’34 Or:
“Hear my greetings, dwelling-place of the spirit of air. O
spirit who reaches from heaven down to earth, hear my greet-
ings, who fills me and seizes me and departs from me in peace
according to God’s will.’’35
In all these texts the concern is with the one cosmic god
(Hermes-Thoth) who can also become the personal “‘inhabit-
ing’ daimon of a man, an inner partner who appears now
over and now under the man (that is, is dependent on him).
He has the functions of an individual guardian-spirit and
teacher that the Greeks and Romans attributed to Socrates’
daimon and later in general to the genius of human beings; he
is at the same time also a cosmic god of the universe who
preserves and fulfills all of nature.3° Thus an extreme paradox
is contained in the symbol of the Self: it is at once that which
is the most intimate, the most individual, and at the same
time a mirror of total reality as well as a god-image, the An-
thropos who embraces all human beings. Although this god
can dwell in a human being, there is nevertheless a slight but
perceptible difference in relation to the earlier examples: he
comes and goes but he never really becomes human in the
individual; he does not quite become a subjective mood or
state of mind but, on the contrary, pulls the human being in
his ecstasy right out of his ego-existence and into another
divine and blissful state.
It is to be regretted that no documents from the literature
oflate antiquity and the early Christian period have, as far as I
know, come down to us that reveal a similar or parallel de-
velopment of the “Juno” in women. Apart from the Inter-
rogationes maiores Mariae, in which Christ reveals his inner

153
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

femininity to Mary,” I know of only one other report, that of

the Montanist prophetess Prisca, according to which Christ
appeared to her as a woman.?® Apart from these we have
no reports comparable to those by men in which this inner
figure in women appears as a real psychological factor in an
individual.
In the experience of modern women, this content appears
most frequently as a kind of chthonic mother, the earth-
mother goddess.3? Perhaps the likeliest place to look for this
missing figure might be in certain ancient prayers to the fig-
ure of the mother-virgin that was associated with Hermes
and was even in part identified with him. In the magic papyri
there has come down to us a prayer to her as moon-goddess,
a prayer praising this great syncretistic goddess figure in,
among others, the following words:
Hail, mistress of Tartaus, which thou conquerest with light,
hail, sacred brightness of light, coming out of the darkness
where you confuse everything with ill-considered coun-
sel... thou bitch in virgin’s form! ... Awake, thou needy
Mene of the nourishing sun, warder of the subterranean ones
... welcoming, shining one... rich in skills and high and
swift ... manly, courageous, healing one, providing and car-
ing, blood-colored, ominous, Brimo.4° Immortal answerer
of prayers .. . belonging to the herd . . . time-honored radi-
ant one, goddess of the sea, ghostly beauty... she-wolf
...corrupter...savior with radiant embrace, fate-spin-
ning, all-giver. . . pure, mild, undying . . . flowering one, all-
holy. . . suffering one, crafty one, wanton one... thou who
rescues us from terror—cast but a glance at yourself: just
look, thou art as the beautiful Isis in the mirror, behold thy-
self, admire ... 1 know thy great and beautiful and exalted
names, Kore, through whom the heavens light up and the
earth drinks and becomes pregnant, through whom the uni-
verse waxes and wanes, O mistress!41

In another prayer the one who prays names the same fig-
ure: ““Triple-headed nocturnal one, eater of excrement

154
 THE INNER COMPANION

... virgin with the gorgon’s glance.’’4? It is this goddess,

“Isis, who is all things,’4 the companion of Hermes, the
universal god. In love-magic she is identified as Aphrodite
and evoked as follows: “‘Foam-born Cythera, mother of the
gods and of men, aerial and chthonic, all-mother Nature,*4
unvanquished, holding all things together, who drives the
Great Fire in its course.... Thou sendest holy longing
into the souls of men and women toward the men; and this
makes the woman to yearn for the man all her days.’45 An-
other love-magic goes as follows: ““Come, Hecate, thou giant-
ess... Baubo, sender of arrows, unvanquished . . . of noble
birth, torchbearer... exalted one...leader of the mob
... goddess of the way... light-bringer, sublime virgin
... underworldling full of cunning... fire-pacer, cow-eyed
one, all-devourer... and breaker of barriers.’’*®
The many names and symbols in praise of the great god-
dess are enumerated in the prayers in order to ward her off
through the power of the word. However, they also show
the profound emotion with which men and women of
that day approached the mystery of the goddess Nature. A
prayer to the moon-goddess piles up further significant im-
ages in a hesitant and stammering interpretation of her
mystery: ‘““Draw near to me, beloved Mistress, three-faced
Selene*7 . . Queen who brings light to us mortals... thou
who calls out by night, bull-face, lover of solitude .. . god-
dess of the crossways... be merciful to me who calls upon
you, listen kindly to my prayer, thou who rules by night over
the all-embracing world, before whom the demons quake
with fear... high-born . . . crowned one, all-mother Nature
who bringest forth gods and men. . . beginning and end art
thou, thou rulest over everything that is, for everything 1s
from you, and in you, eternal one, everything has its end.’’48
In comparison with the figure of the cosmic Hermes, it is
striking that in the case of the goddess many more dark, even
quite sinister, unfathomable aspects are emphasized along
with the light aspects. To aspire to perfection is, as Jung has

159
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

pointed out, more characteristic of the masculine Logos prin-

while the feminine ideal is more that of completeness

In my opinion, it is no accident that the reports cited above,

in which Christ appears as masculine-feminine or even as a
woman, came from Montanist circles. The Montanists lived
in a region where the great mother-goddess especially had
been an object of worship.
If, at least in the pagan world, there is no lack of documents
that report the worship of a great daimon-goddess along-
side Hermes, we still have none in which a woman has ex-
perienced this figure as the inner center of her being. Whether
the women of that time were less conscious of this inner fig-
ure and experienced her as quite outside themselves, or
whether the relevant written reports are simply missing, I do
not know. We possess reports exclusively from men, who
were beginning to bring this projection back from the outside
world into their own psyches.
As Henri Corbin has proven, the gnostic-hermetic Hermes
figure lived on in Persian mysticism (for instance, Avicenna
and Sohraward). There he is the emissary of the Oriental
world, of the world of the sunrise, that is, of inner en-
lightenment, and he accompanies the visionary in his inner

156
 THE INNER COMPANION

development and realization of the godhead.*° In-this-mysti-

a cicael It was equated with the Metatron, with the original

nthropos, with the Nous,°? and with the Holy Ghost and
the archangel Gabriel.*4 It appears to the soul in order to lead
it On an inner journey to God and to enlighten it with secret
knowledge about God.5> This\angél'sym
the
bolizés
individu-

souls; Here, too, as in the Hermetic philosophy, this perp

ssonification of the Self is the most individual core of the indi-”
_vidual person andausimultaneously the human selfy
Gof.all re that is, the

—“Talem vidi qualem

capere potui” (I saw him as such, in the way in which I was
able to understand him’’), as it says in the Acts of Peter.°?
Ts eG ADS Ug PRENSA
then leads, as Corbin explains, to acontinuing and progressive

As to the attitude of consciousness needed to gain insight

into this projection, the situation is differently modulated
than that of the integration of the shadow and the animus or
anima. In the case of the shadow it is largely a question of
humility; in the case of the other two figures it is one of an at
least partial insight into their individual qualities and simul-
taneously of a wise “‘live-and-let-live”’ attitude toward their
overwhelming nature. When, on the other hand, personifica-

15]
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

<ziste nasstiteste a
|
Self but can only bow before itand try torelate toitinthe —~
‘Fight'way”"That does not mean a total renunciation of one’s
own freedom—even before God, man has to reserve the right
to a last word,®? remaining fully conscious, however, that the
power he addresses is always the stronger one. The encounter
with the Self means, therefore, a deep and far-reaching
WU
Likes change in the conscious attitude. It-isnot-for-nothing-that-the=
inner de
above- sc
daimon is-call ri
ed, other d
amongbe names,
=—_

Lanta
—_—_——

Me

death. In his Memories, Dreams, Reflections, Jung reports a

dream about this: He sees himself walking along a road
through a sun-bathed landscape. He comes to a small road-
side chapel and enters it. Instead of a statue of the Madonna or
a crucifix, there is a beautiful flower arrangement on the altar.
Before the altar sits a yogi in the lotus position and in deep
meditation. “When I looked at him more closely, I realized he
had my face. I started in profound fright, and awoke with the
thought: ‘Aha, so he is the one who is meditating me. He has
a dream, and I am it.’ Iknew that when he awakened, I would
no longer be.’’64
The yogi is the same archetypal figure as the inner Hermes-

158
 THE INNER COMPANION

Psychopompos described above, except that here he appears

in Far Eastern dress. The dream points to the fact, as Jung
himself also mentions, that there is a meaning here of which
those in the East have always been much more conscious
than we have: namely, thatinstheend:the whole worlds ‘only. —
aes lipyent 1 ypieh .
a

159
 5

Consciousness
and Inner Wholeness

*Piterness/Sbiflilltinygeepg- led
Yrecgea b
Atd t er nelusion.

ompanion changed his form and then dis-

solved into ah light. This theme was also hinted at in the
OJ dre Wen
eo adn ae eeewai eae
 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INNER WHOLENESS

Turkestan fairy tale ““The Magic Steed,” mentioned in Chap-

ter 5. There the heroine escapes from the evil demon through
the help of a magic pony, a creature we first interpreted as
her healthy instinct. After the conquest of the demon, how-
ever, the little horse asks to be ritually slaughtered. His four
legs become golden trees growing at the four points of the
compass, his body becomes a paradisal land, and his Be is
transformed into a Silver-bright spe s

~~ repeatedly throughout his work that common

sense, reflection, and self-knowledge are the only means of
clearing away the clouds of projections of unconscious con-
tents. In the long history of philosophy much has been writ-
ten on the subject of reflection. Here my own comments on
the subject will be limited to the context of actual experience
and especially to the preconscious processes that make it possi-
ble for the ego to engage in reflection. The fact that the horse,
instinct itself, asks for its own death contains the implication
that the impulse to reflection comes finally from the uncon-
scious, more precisely from the Self. When reflection occurs
together with insight into the projection, it is very closely
related to the phenomenon of deep moral change, of the
Pauline metanoia (Galatians 6), of a mental and moral about-
face toward a new goal, which for the most part is experi-
enced as coming from within. Metanoia? is a change of charac-
ter, even of mentality, through which the entire personality is
renewed and altered in such a way that it is irreversible. It is
for this reason that the soul-companion in the above-

161
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

mentioned Shepherd of Hermes is also referred to as the “Angel

of Metanoia.”’
The twenty-fourth chapter of the I Ching, the Chinese
Book of Wisdom, bears the title “Return (The Turning
Point)’ and beautifully describes this act of coming-to-
consciousness or transformation. It depicts the moment of
the winter solstice: ““The powerful light that has been
banished returns” in a natural movement, arising spontane-
ously. ‘Everything comes of itself at the appointed time.”
Movement begins again. “Return leads to self-knowledge.” In its
beginnings the new light must be strengthened by rest. ““The
return of health after an illness, the return of understanding
after an estrangement: everything must be treated tenderly
and with care at the beginning.” The single lines of the oracle
then describe the kind of moral attitude a person must have at
such a time: “Return always calls for a decision and is an act
of self-mastery. ... When the time for return has come, a
man should not take shelter in trivial excuses, but should look
within and examine himself. And if he has done something
wrong he should make a noblehearted resolve to confess his
fault.’ If one misses this moment in time, outer misfortune
befalls one. ‘“The misfortune has its inner cause in a wrong
attitude toward the world.’”4
Here, too, we have a dual aspect of the “‘Return”’ as in the
well-known question of works, or grace. On the one hand,
the return occurs, as if spontaneously, at a particular moment
in time (grace); on the other hand, one can fail to make the
right moral resolution and then fall into disharmony with the
meaning (Tao) and aout into misfortune. After a careful ob-
servationof oneself during such a process of return or about-
aceéwOnerm1 biecome en ith the Following, escription of it:

if one is caught in a distu ne’s adaptation,

whet! 1er itbe an Rane mathe ciao or hatred or
y in clinging to a theory or an idea, at first one is
carted aloe by a current of powerful affect as well as of
desire or inner demand (to “devour” the beloved object, to
162
 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INNER WHOLENESS

”’ the enemy, to force theidea onto other people).

ce

“Tae leads to behavior that is is constantlyat odds with the

outer world, and conflicts and disappointments result. Pride
and defiance then seduce one into afurther strug ush
in the same
s direction.Ifthe affect turns inward, it can

= enougBh sOans that

“4 — bid its strength are
3 worn
eel oneself to |be ‘smallae ugly, 99
ital moment wh reflectionis

‘som zatg in one become +sstill. ciate

projection itself is then usually a very simple matter;
poenoale: y cistastdidemionms ee Vi ough a

sabe
ous wrong at itud awojelBehavior one has. ofvalu: e or
has even, through one’s sacred convictions, er core of
very Berens nieces:
In his book The Seven Days of Creation, Maximov shows
quite impressively how a painful insight of this kind dawns
on an old Communist party commissar as he begins to see
through the inhuman party ey and to recogr:nize that it

I remember an sages ee neon? caseoor this rhe in my

own practice. A woman analysand who was psychically ill
had made good progress in her treatment and in developing
consciousness. While I was away for a time, however, she
slipped back into her old erroneous attitudes and conceived
the delusional fantasy that Professor Jung was going to be
murdered by a group of conspirators. Seen symbolically, it
was clear that the morbid tendencies, the “murderers,”
wanted to kill the germ of Jungian psychology in herself.®

163
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

She projected this content quite naively and called the crimi-
nal police, who pulled up at Jung’s house, armed and with the
blue light on their car blinking, only to discover that every-
thing was completely in order. I returned from my trip and
was able to give her an hour. During the first half of the ses-
sion I succeeded in quietening her gradually and in reestab-
lishing human contact with her. We began to converse quite
reasonably. Then, suddenly turning pale, she said, “‘Yes, but if
that’s the way it is, then I would have to admit...’ (She
obviously meant that she would have to admit that she had
“behaved like a fool.”) |She jumped up from the chair with
an unnatural, wrenching motion; psychologically she was
no longer there but back in the same psychic state as at the
beginning of the hour. During the night her condition
worsened to such an extent that she had to be hospitalized.
She recovered quickly, however, and picked herself up. Some
months later, as she showed signs of again becoming excited
and I warned her with some concern, she said, smiling,
““You’ve no need to be anxious; the hospital was so frightful
[ll never let it go that far again.” And for the last fifteen years
she has been as good as her word. It can be seen here how this
woman succeeded at first in recognizing that her delusion of
murder had the character of a projection and how at the same
time her injured pride (“‘. . . then Iwould have to admit . . -”)
ke prevented her from following her insight through to its bitte
i . In my experience the ego’s demand for prestige
quite froaeen does not admit the “better insight.” If the
Ainsig panesvertheless breaks through, a oewais'a one or
lesser act of grace on the part of
Natur
The return of the light is like a winter tts as the
Chinese text so beautifully puts it. It is not by accident,
it seems to me, that this text uses the metaphor of light,
which is, after all, everywhere a symbol of consciousness. Re-
flection, however, is the very essence of every increase in
consciousness.
In keeping with the Eastern attitude, the process and the

164
 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INNER WHOLENESS

course of events are described in the I Ching from the uncon-

scious side; that is where, in obedience to the laws of nature,
the transformation takes place, in the return of the “new
light,” which man’s ego-consciousness must then accept with
the correct change of attitude. This description takes into ac-
count the quality of the time or of the moment in time. That
this really is so is demonstrated over and over again in
psychological practice. One cannot coerce a patient to insight
into a projection; the time must be ripe. With the aid of
dreams, however, one can estimate roughly at least when the
time has come; but even then the ego is free to accept the
required change, the “return,” to reflect or to persist in the
old attitude.

The Eye as Symbol of “Insight”

The moment at which the insight is “ripe” depends on
the archetype of the Self, of inner wholeness, which controls
the equilibrium of the whole psyche and corrects the ego atti-
tude through dreams. Another, inner subject watches us in
dreams; it sees us as too anxious, too reckless, too immoral,
or too anything else that seems to be a deviation from the
norm of wholeness.© This inner eye of self-recognition,
which mediates a different view of ourselves than does the ego,
was described long ago by Gerhard Dorn, a pupil of Paracel-
sus, as the real essence of the alchemical opus. He writes:
“But no man can truly know himself unless first he see and
know by zealous meditation ... what rather than who he is,
on whom he depends, and whose is he, and to what end he
was made and created, and by whom and through whom.”
With the word what (instead of who), Dorn stresses the objec-
tive reality of this vis-a-vis whom he is seeking and whom he
regards as the image of god planted in the human psyche.
Whoever looks upon him with attention, “‘little by little and
from day to day will perceive with his mental eyes and with

165
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

the greatest joy some sparks of divine illumination.’ He who

knows God in himself in this way will also know his
brother.® Paracelsus called this divine psychic center the light
of nature that creates our dreams.? Other alchemists com-
pared it to shining fish eyes or to the eyes of the Lord that
range over the whole earth (Zachariah 3:9).
Whenever one understands a dream or some other sponta-
neous product of the unconscious, “one’s eyes are opened”
—hence the eye motif. Many authors of an earlier day have
described how, after seeking this kind of self-knowledge
in meditation for a long time, many lights or eyes gradually
grow together into one great inner light or eye that is the
image of God or of the light “which faith gives us.’’?° I my-
self understand the words of Paul—‘“‘For now we see in a mir-
ror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then |
shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood”
(I Corinthians 13:12)—in this sense. At first this eye from the
Beyond sees us; then through this eye we see ourselves and
God or the unfalsified reality. Jung says: ““The mandala is in-
deed an ‘eye, the structure of which symbolizes the centre of
order in the unconscious. ... The eye may well stand for
consciousness ... looking into its own background.’!! At
the same time it is also the Self, looking at us.
The divine eye, which, so to speak, looks at us from within
and in whose seeing lies the only nonsubjectively colored
source of self-knowledge, is a very widely distributed ar-
chetypal motif.1? It is described as an inner, noncorporeal eye,
surrounded by light, which itself is also light.15 Plato and
many Christian mystics call it the eye of the soul,!* others the
eye of knowledge, of faith, of intuition. Jacob BOhme even
says: ‘“The soul is an Eye in the Eternal Abyss, a similitude of
Eternity.’ Or: ““The Soul is like a ball of fire or a fiery Eye.’45
Only through this eye can a human being really see himself
and partake of the nature of God, who is himself all eye.
Synesius even calls upon God as “Eye of thy self?’!® When

166
 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INNER WHOLENESS

this eye opens up in a mortal being, that being has a share in

the light of God. When a man closes his outer, physical eyes
in sleep, his soul “sees” the truth in his dreams.!7 This eye is
also related to the phenomenon of conscience. A poem by Vic-
tor Hugo pictures this impressively.1® After killing his
brother Abel, Cain flees from God; with his family he stops
to rest on a mountain but is unable to sleep; he sees ‘‘an eye,
wide open, in the darkness,” fixed upon him. “I have not
gone far enough,” he calls out, trembling, and continues his
flight. For thirty days and nights he hurries on until he comes
to the seacoast, but as he settles down there he sees the eye
again, in the heavens. He cries out to his family to hide him
from God! They build a tent for him but the eye is always
there. Finally, at his request his family digs him a deep grave
in the earth. He sits down in it, on a little seat, and his family
pushes the heavy gravestone over him. As the grave closes
and he sits there in the darkness, “L’oeil était dans la tombe et
regardait Cain.’’19
Not only the highest godhead, however, but also single
gods and demons of the most varied cultures sometimes have
a single eye in their chest with which they can see everything
happening on earth.?° This motif is an allusion to the fact,
which anyone in psychotherapeutic practice can experience
again and again, that the unconscious gives utterance in
dreams to a knowledge of things that we simply cannot know
rationally and consciously. The word telepathy does not ex-
plain this phenomenon; it only describes it. The unconscious
appears to have a sort of diffuse intuitive knowledge that
reaches far out into the environment of the individual and
that Jung has described as ‘“‘absolute knowledge” (absolute
in the sense of being detached from ego-consciousness), a
luminosity of the unconscious or of its archetypal nuclei. Just
as a demon’s evil eye can cast a spell, so also an eye painted on
a pot, a sign, and the like can ward off the evil eye. Seligmann
has collected examples of this from all over the world, sub-

167
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

stantiating the extremely important apotropaic effect of the

eye motif.?! If the evil spirit is “‘seen,” that is, reflected, he is
overcome.
The fact that demon-figures often exhibit a conspicuous
eye motif is connected with the curious fact that autonomous
complexes themselves often possess a quasi-consciousness,
hence also an apparent (but partial and not genuine) gift for
reflection. The shadow or the animus and anima can infuse
a person with curiously distorted thoughts about himself,
but only that reflection which proceeds from the Self, the
inner center, could be correctly described as genuine moral
reflection.
The motif of the eye of God lends a personal nuance to our
feeling of being “‘watched,’ whereas the related motif of the
mirror underlines rather the impersonal aspect of this
“knowledge” that, without intention, simply reflects our be-
ing. In the final analysis it is simply up to us to draw the right
conclusions from our dreams; the unconscious often appears
to be as “‘intentionless” as Nature herself.2? When we have
sugar in our urine, Nature does not tell us we have diabetes;
we must draw this conclusion ourselves and take the neces-
sary countermeasures. Jung interprets the motif of the ob-
serving eye in the unconscious, or more especially of the one
eye (which is usually represented as a mandala), as a “‘mirror-
ing of our insight into ourselves.” It is only with the help of the
inner center, of the Self, that we can know ourselves. There-
fore Christ says to the Apostle in the apocryphal Acts ofJohn:
“A lamp am I to you that perceive me. Amen. A mirror am I]
to you that know me. Amen.” As Jung explains in his beauti-
ful interpretation of the complete text,?3 Christ in this con-
nection is to be understood as a symbol of the Self, as the
consciousness-transcending wholeness of the person, ‘‘the
point of reference not only of the individual but of all those
who are of like mind or who are bound together by fate.’24
Christ is here a mirror that “‘reflects the subjective conscious-
ness of the disciple, making it visible to him,’ but, inversely,

168
 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INNER WHOLENESS

the human being thus ‘‘knows”’ Christ, that is, becomes con-
scious of the reality of the Self.

Re-Collection
The possibility of integrating projected contents instead of
apotropaically casting them out into extrapsychic space does
not arise until symbols of the Self begin to appear. From this
center impulses proceed to a contemplative, thoughtful re-
collection of the personality. The contents now seen to have
been projected are at the same time recognized as belong-
ing to one’s own psychic wholeness. Consequently the psy-
chic energy belonging to these contents now flows toward
one’s own inner center, strengthening it and heightening its
intensity.?5
Another depiction of the same process that appears spon-
taneously among the products of the unconscious is the im-
age, or mythologem, of a ‘‘re-collection” of scattered units or
sparks of light into an ordered, centered unity. This demands
of the conscious side of the personality an attempt to form as
objective an image of one’s own nature as possible. “It is an
act of self-recollection, a gathering together of what is scat-
tered, of all the things in us that have never been properly
related... with a view to achieving full consciousness.’’?®
The demand that we act thus comes from the Self.?” The pre-
viously split-off contents of one’s own psyche are made con-
scious and integrated. “‘Self-recollection,” writes Jung, “‘is a
gathering together of the self.’?®
‘All the things in us that have never been properly related”’
refers to the phenomenon of so-called compartment psychol-
ogy, that is, to the fact that in many people areas of the psyche
are separated. For example, they have one kind of morality
for Sundays and another kind for business; they believe in
the commandment to “love thy neighbor” but not if the
neighbor happens to be black; they make every effort to be

169
 Bf tg ieE tees oe ee Yfe eh CA eR LI, G's Bd
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

honest and sincere but not in politics, and so on. These differ-
ent areas did not “‘fall apart’; their separateness represents
an original state or condition, because the field of ego-
consciousness is a loose structure of originally separate single
islands of consciousness that have gradually grown together.
The seams are therefore still perceptible in many people.
If we try to look back on our own childhood, we see how
at first we remember only single flashing moments of con-
PLD sciousness created by some
OL
A€ECZCERMT
Ga deep impression. It is only at
about the eighth or tenth year that most people begin to have
Lee a more continuous memory of their life. Phylogenetically,
too, human consciousness seems to have grown out of such —
0 sudden flashes of consciousness. This psychological fact is
pictured in the mythological motif of that psychic nucleus, or
soul-particle, already mentioned.
In Stoic philosophy there is the theory that single human
souls are sparks of the cosmic fiery ether, that is, of the
world-soul, and, further, that even ethical inclinations, judg-
ments, and concepts light up in them like little sparks (spin-
xs theres, igniculi). These are the innate mental contents (notiones)
i,PA that are common
Ls
to all men and that constitute the better,
Ni ©~more spiritual part of the psyche. When a human being really
Ptries to lead a spiritual life, these “‘sparks’’ gradually grow

This idea of sparks of the psyche, or light-nuclei of the

soul, is also to be found in the systems of various Gnostics,
ae although there it is formulated more mythologically-picto-
Xe rially.2° The Orphites, for example, taught that when God’s
feminine spirit was floating above the waters, “she” could
Sy not bear the brightness of the light of God and fell down
into chaos with sparks of the Father’s light still clinging to
“Q her.31 With the help of these remaining sparks she tried to
i ae herself up again. When all the sparks are re-collected and __
< “have entered the eternal undying aeon, then creati ill have
> cao istook lero giaMaeTesla Uae aea

S170
 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INNER WHOLENESS

was strewn throughout matter. When a man holds back his

own procreative powers, he helps the godhead to regain its
seed.33 In one of their writings the prophetess sees a great
man (God) and hears him say: “I am thou, and thou art I, and
wherever thou art, there am I, and Iam scattered inall things,
gathering me thou gatherest thyself.’34
~The first tractate of the Corpus Hermeticum describes this
dismemberment of the original man in a similar way.35 The
immortal Anthropos, likeness of the godhead, bent down
through the strongholds of the celestial spheres and showed
his beautiful godlixe figure to the world of nether nature.
Nature saw his image reflected in the water, his shadow over
the earth. He, however, as he saw his image, so like himself,
fell in love with it and wished to remain there. Then he de-
scended into the reasonless form (body). But Nature took her
beloved to herself, entwining herself around him, and they
united, for their love for one another was passionate. Since
then every human being has in himself a mortal physical
human and an essential, immortal human who is a part of the
cosmic Anthropos. Through self-knowledge this part can
once again attain the light and eternal life.
The alchemist and Gnostic Zosimos of Panopolis (third
century A.D.) supported a similar theory. According to it, the
“great light-man” (Anthropos-Adam) abided in Paradise.
There he was persuaded by the evil celestial powers to clothe
himself in the earthly Adam and to take on a form capable of
suffering in order to illuminate and save the light-men who
were of his kind; afterward he returns to the kingdom of
light. The alchemical work of Zosimos was devoted solely to
achieving the liberation of the inner light-man.%°
The teaching
of the Manichaeans, influenced by the Gnos-
tics, also holds that the man striving after immortality and_
perfection must liberate and save the seeds of light scattered
throughout creation, even in stones and plants, as they are
particles of the suffering soul of the Redeemer.%” Similarly,

ii
 i cleaadataniaties till; ME, (BEE ns
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIA PSYCHOLOGY

according to the Gnostic Sethians, a small spark of the ori

nal light of God fell into matter and it is the task of mortal
man to devote himself to helping the upper light to bring this
spark back toitself. *
~ These Stoic and Gnostic texts reveal two trains of thought
to the attentive reader. First, the individual human contains in
itself various kinds of sparks, the sparks of collective repre-
sentations, and must gather them into a unity (in variations it
must even gather light sparks in the outer world). Second, the
spiritual souls of men or of certain chosen men are themselves
sparks that are gathered up by a god-man and redeemer fig-
ure and brought back into unity with God or with the divine
world. Translated into psychological language, the first pro-
cess depicts how a human bein athers”’ or “‘collects”’ him-
CT a enone an Poeoma ththeaidofhis
“Treats Becomes Conscious ofhiscomplexes andprojections
“and inthisWaydevelops intoaspiritually and morally ore—

‘says Jung, in a creative relation to the ego and at the same

G4
lr
; time the individual human being is the form in which the Self _
A becomes manifest. The re-collecting, or gathering together,
Ui

of
of the
the divine
divine light-substance int theGnosis and in Manichae-
ism corresponds psychologically to the integration of the
Self through bringing split-off contents into consciousness.?°
The mythologems cited above also, however, depict a pro-
cess of re-collecting that proceeds from the god-man or the
light-man or some similar Anthropos-Redeemer figure and
that unites the many single human souls into a unity, that is,
into a genuine community. Therefore not only does the indi-
vidual become a whole in himself but a community comes
Ltnrte into being that also represents a whole. In antiquity this
a)
LA
whole was called the Anthropos. Psychologically it means
that an organically united community becomes visible. A
group of human beings of this kind is not organized by laws

(Wien
 Loti
WHiEb ee jam Leh a Be wpaopcaness Gs Se a
f — ‘if,
IN R Uf bales.

or by the accmene of power; che to Me feoe ee

vidual relates to the Self in himself he will quite naturally
assume his rightful place in a social order of a psychological’
kind. In the Middle Ages this thought was expressed by the
belief that the ecclesia spiritualis was the body of Christ, the
Anthropos. Hence Jung writes: “By appealing to the eternal

not only on account of the historical fact that Christ has

roved to be an ordering factor for many hundreds of years,
‘but also because the self effectively compensates chaotic condi-
{oe Se eS CT
Anthropos above and beyond this world, andinhim iscon—
unification or integration of the individual and his integration
into the higher unity of the many appears thus to be a simul-
taneous process, as it is so beautifully expressed in ‘““The Gospel
of Eve” when the great god-man says to the seeress: “And
from wherever thou wilt thou canst gather me, but in gather-
ing me thou gatherest thyself.’
This dual motif of the process of gathering is found also in
the Christian era. Once again it is Origen in particular who
has been impressively explicit about this. In his Commen-
tary on First Samuel, fourth homily, he says, “There was one
man. We, who are still sinners, cannot obtain this title of
praise, for each of us is not one but many... . See how he
who thinks himself one is not one, but seems to have as many
personalities as he has moods, as also the Scripture says: A
fool is changed as the moon.” And regarding Ezekiel 9:1, he
puts it strongly: “Where there are sins, there is multitude . . .
but where virtue is, there is singleness, there is union.” In his
sermon on Leviticus 5:2, he says: “Understand that thou hast
within thyself herds of cattle . . . flocks of sheep and flocks of
goats. .. . Understand that the fowls ofthe air are also within
thee . . . understand that thou thyself art another world in lit-
tle, and hast within thee the sun and the moon, and also the

7s.
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

stars.”’42 The individual human being must, through moral

effort, bring this multiplicity together into one personality. As
to the many individual souls in all humanity, these will each
in its turn be gathered into a unit in Christ, alternatively
united in his corpus mysticum, the Church.*?
The first stage shows the process of the inner unification of

stage, however, has reference to a special process that always

and to mankind as a whole, a relatedness that proceeds not

‘from the ego but from a transcendental inner center, the Self.
A a a a ee

Individuation and Relatedness

It happens again and again in psychological practice that
when a person has been caught in blinding projections relat-
ing to his human environment and they are then withdrawn,
in many cases this in no way annuls or sets aside the relation-
ship. On the contrary, a genuine, “‘deeper” relation emerges,
no longer rooted in egoistic moods, struggles, or illusions but
rather in the feeling of being connected to one another via an
absolute, objective principle. This is well expressed in the
Brihadaranyaka-Upanishad: “‘Verily a husband is not dear,
that you may love the husband, but that you may love the
Self, therefore a husband is dear. Verily a wife is not dear, that
you may love the wife, but that you may love the Self, there-
fore a wife is dear. . . . Verily the Self is to be seen, to be heard,
to be recognized, to be marked. . . . Where the Self has been
seen... then all is known.’“4
The following dream may illustrate the way in which a
relationship that is guided from the “Beyond,” that is, by the
Self, was represented in the dreams of a man who was on the
way toward individuation. The married dreamer had fallen

174
 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INNER WHOLENESS

deeply in love with another woman, also married, and after

long and intense resistance had begun a sexual relation with
her. At the time of the dream both were considering divorces
from their present partners, in order to be able to marry each
other. Then he dreamed:
I was with my teacher, an invisible presence, on the edge of a
sphere which he described as “‘the ultimate reality,’ something
timeless and spaceless, indescribable; only those who have
seen it can describe this experience, an “all-nothing,”’ an
“everywhere-nowhere,’” an everybody-nobody, as “the word
which has not yet been spoken.” Somehow the teacher helped
me to pull two beings or “‘somethings”’ out of this ultimate
reality. I did not see them but I knew about them. In order to
make them visible the teacher helped me to pull a silver-grey
cloudlike material out of the space in which we were sus-
pended. We clothed the two beings in it and a third something
which separated the two. As soon as I saw them clothed a
deep amazement fell over me. “Those are angels,” I cried out.
“Yes,” he answered, “that’s what you are.” I saw the grey
curtain which separated the two angels and the teacher ex-
plained, ““That is the veil ofillusion.” It had many holes. I was
deeply moved and called out, “Oh, it’s going away, it’s going
away,’ and I felt that thousands of years that had been lived in
the half-conscious hope that it could be broken through were
now fulfilled. I went to the angel who was “I” and I saw a
silver cord reaching down from him to a tiny little creature
who was also “I” in the world of illusion. Another cord went
down to a woman, down below; it was Alberta [the woman
he loved]. The two angels appeared to be identical; they were
sexless and they could “think together” in a kind of identity.
(That has sometimes happened to Alberta and me in the real-
ity “down below.”) And we thought, “‘Such a small part of
our consciousness lives in these little creatures and they worry
so much about such little things. Poor little creatures.’ We
saw that their union could only happen really rightly if the
two little creatures met their obligations to their families and
relatives and did not pursue their egoistic desires. And at once

ty 2
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

it was clear to us that it would be a sin against that “‘ultimate

reality” (sin against the Holy Ghost?) if we did not go ahead
in the process of reciprocal coming-to-consciousness.

The figure of the teacher in the dream is a personification

of the drive to individuation by the dreamer’s personality
on its way toward wholeness, and it ‘““knows’’ more than his
ego. The two angel figures that emerge from the obscurity
and indefiniteness of the unconscious are aspects of the two
lovers themselves as they appear in the unconscious in their
consciousness-transcending reality. As Jung explained in
“The Psychology of the Transference’’4> and as we have al-
ready pointed out, four figures take part in every deeper con-
frontation of man and woman, the two conscious egos and
the animus and the anima, the contra-sexual personifications
of the unconscious in the two persons concerned. In this
dream they are sexless beings—compensatory to the fact that
sexuality was too much in the foreground of consciousness in
both partners at the time. Angels are ““God’s messengers,”
emissaries from the deepest level of the unconscious where all
distinctions are dissolved in one unknown. But it is precisely
from that deepest level which transcends the ego-personality
that the realization comes to the dreamer that he has to dis-
charge his earthly obligations to his fellowmen. If it says any-
thing at all, then, this dream states quite unambiguously that
individuation is not an egocentric affair but demands and
even rigorously necessitates human relatedness.
It is not only the relation between man and woman, how-
ever, that is contained in this union through the Self; it is also
many other relations with one’s fellow creatures. The Gnos-
tic sect of the Perates taught that out of the divine original
substance of the world, out of “the water which gives shape
to the perfect man,” that is, from the unconscious and its urge
to individuation, “each creature selects that which is peculiar
to it,’ that which characterizes it. What belongs to him is
attracted to him “more than the iron to the magnet.’4° This
a
_

176
 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INNER WHOLENESS

~ineans that bonds with other people are produced bythe Self
and these relations are very exactly regulated as to distance.
_and closeness. One might describe this as the social function of
the Self. Each person gathers around him his o wn “‘soul fam-

tial spiritual interest or concern: reciprocal individuation.

pee Fen abeze eevee or ene Cha
_telaionshp, by way of the Self, has something strictly objec-_
tive, strangely transpersonal about it.Itgives rise toa feeling.
of
immediate,
timeless “being together.’ The usual bond of
feeling, says Jung elsewhere, always contains projections that
have to be withdrawn if one is to attain to oneself and to
objectivity. “Objective cognition lies hidden behind the at-
traction of the emotional relationship; it seems to be the cen-
tral secret.’47 In this world created by the Self we meet all
those many to whom we belong, whose hearts we touch;
here “there is no distance, but immediate presence.’’48
There exists no individuation process in any one individual
that does not at the same time produce this relatedness to
one’s fellowmen.*?
Along with the mythologem of the re-collecting of light
sparks, there is another motif of archetypal images that refers
to the coming together of certain people through the agency
of the Self. It is the motifof the ““Round Table” around which
the individual persons are seated. The inner unification of the
personality is often represented by this image in dreams, as is
also the attachment to friends who are fellow members and
finally to all of mankind. Arthur’s Round Table, as it appears
in the Grail legends, is the most famous. It is said of it in the
Queste del Saint Graal:
You know that since the advent of Jesus Christ there have
been three most important tables in the world. The first was
the Table of Jesus Christ, at which the Apostles ate on several
occasions. This was the table that sustained bodies and souls

isfy
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

with food from heaven. ... And the Lamb without blemish
that was sacrificed for our redemption established this table.
After this table there was another in the likeness and in remem-
brance of it. This was the table of the Holy Grail, of which
great miracles were once seen in that country, in the time of
Joseph of Arimathea, when Christianity was first brought to
this earth.
After this table the Round Table was set up, on the advice
of Merlin; nor was it established without great symbolic sig-
nificance. For what is meant by being called the Round Table
is the roundness of the world and the condition of the planets
and of the elements in the firmament . . . so that one could say
that in the Round Table the whole universe is symbolized.5°
In the fifth sura of the Koran (verses 112-115), God sends a
table down from heaven to Jesus and his Apostles; on it lies a
fish as a sign that he will feed them. As a result of humanity’s
sinfulness, however, this table is taken away again by God.51I
suspect that the pleasures of the table, in which the dead, ac-
cording to the belief of so many peoples, indulge in the
paradise of the Beyond, refer to the same mythologem, to the
image of ahuman community produced and governed by the
Self. Since this is not yet, however, a realized goal of human-
ity, it appears in most myths as a postmortal goal, that is, one
still in the Beyond, hidden in the unconscious.

178
 9

Reflection

The Original Meanings of Reflection

The “momentary flashes of consciousness” we recall when
we look back on our childhood have usually grown together
in adults into a more or less continuous field of ego-
consciousness.! But still earlier, before these momentary
flashes were consciously recognized as inner experience, they
existed as preconscious components of human existence and

172
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

expressed themselves mainly in unconscious action. Jung

surmised that the unconscious impulses to ritual actions, in
comparison with the teachings and theories formulated in
myths or in religious systems, were practiced at an earlier
date and were the precursors of the latter.? He observed, for
example, that the African natives on Mount Elgon spit on
their hands at sunrise and held them out to the sun without
“knowing” that this action has a meaning. “They had always
done this.’”’ Seen in the light of today’s psychological knowl-
edge of symbols this gesture means: “Oh, God, I offer up my
soul to Thee’”—but, as we have just said, the deed precedes
the word by a considerable period of time.?
The same law prevails in respect to the “momentary
flashes of consciousness.” They, too, were originally repre-
sented in symbolic form and given a ritual application in the
shape of glittering small stones or other shiny, mirrorlike ob-
jects to which were ascribed the power to drive away spirits.
The ethnologist Richard Gould reports a good example of
this which he observed among the Australian aborigines.* He
and his wife stayed for some time with a friendly family
group of thirteen aborigines who, untouched by civilization,
lived by hunting and by gathering plants and who had re-
tained their original age-old outlook and way of living. Even
when the heat was extreme a fire was lighted every evening
and kept burning throughout the night to keep away the
mamu (the evil spirits). But so far, no mamu appeared. One
day Gould decided to go away for a couple of days with the
oldest man, who was the spiritual leader of the group. His
wife remained with the others. In the evening after this deci-
sion had been made, the children became restlegs and re-
ported that they had seen two mamu skulking around in the
twilight. Two men of the group who were versed in magic
took two shiny fragments of mother-of-pearl they had found
in a mission station and, pronouncing exorcistic formulas and
making a great show of aiming, shot them from their bows in

180
 REFLECTION

the direction of the two mamu. They then assured the others
that the mamu had disappeared. It is likely that some of the
men who were to remain with the white woman without the
authority of the presence of the old man may have had some
unorthodox thoughts, especially as these aborigines are not at
all prudish in their views about sex. But evidently they did
not experience these temptations as coming from within;
their sudden restlessness was caused by two undefinable evil
spirits. The: glittering, reflecting pieces of mother-of-pearl
acted as countermagic, as ‘‘apotropaic reflection’’ in the liter-
ally concrete sense.> The magicians asserted that the frag-
ments came back to them at the right time—re-flexio! Thus
even the phenomenon of “momentary flashes of conscious-
ness” was originally experienced as projected onto an outer
object”
Whoever remembers these ““momentary flashes of con-
sciousness” from his own early childhood will know that
they are always connected with strongly emotional states.
This emotion is at its peak at the moment of the “‘flash”’ and
usually subsides at the same time. It is as if the brief light of
consciousness broke up the stifling obsessive emotion. Ob-
jects that “‘reflect’’ can therefore drive away spirits; the reflec-
tion calms the affect or the excited state. That is why when
Perseus killed Medusa, the sight of whom turned people into
stone, he did not look directly at her but instead took his aim
with the help of a mirror. He could thereby protect himself
from being overcome by emotion; rigidity is caused by an
excess of strong emotion, as is shown in the catatonia of
schizophrenics.
Perhaps it is worthwhile in this connection to take a look at
the concept of reflection in physics. All light, as we know, is
produced by the motion of electrons, either spontaneously, as
when an electron changes its energy level in the atom, or
when it is set in motion through the impact of a photon. In
the second case reflection and transmission result. Neither of

181
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

these events can take place, however, unless the electron has a
certain freedom of motion and is not too firmly held in its
atom. Normally, when light hits the electrons held at a certain
energy level in a single atom, the energy of the light can be
absorbed by the energy of the electron.” If, however, the
atoms are held tightly together in a kind of crystalline
lattice-structure, it can happen that electrons are able to move
about freely inside the lattice and are no longer bound to one
atom. In this situation the electron does not absorb the light
energy but radiates it back.® Viewed as a physical phenome-
non, therefore, reflection depends on the presence of certain
atomic lattice-structures. The fact of the matter is that al-
though the larger groupings, the atoms, are mathematically
held together more tightly and with more force than usual,
certain electrons have precisely for this reason more freedom
of motion. Miraculously, as it would seem, the possibility of
reflection in the unconscious area of the psyche is connected
with an unknown factor that reveals itself on the threshold of
consciousness, in dreams and in spontaneous fantasies, as a
crystalline mathematical structure, namely, the symbol of the
mandala. That psychic center which is represented by the
mandala itself and which, as we know, Jung has called the Self
is, when it represents reflected wholeness, very often sym-
bolized by mathematical structures mostly of quaternary
subdivisions and is often illustrated by the symbol of the
crystal.
For primordial man the phenomenon of mirrors and mir-
roring had the quality of a miracle; for him the mirrored
image was a reality in its own right. Spiegel, the German
word for “mirror,” is cognate with the Latin word speculum
and goes back to Old High German scukar, ‘‘shadow-holder,’
from skuwo, “‘shadow,” and kar, “‘vessel.’ In Old Indian, a
mirror was thought of as “‘self-seer” or as “seer of Doppel-
gangers.” The mirrored image was regarded as shadow or as
Doppelganger, that is, as an image of the soul, and the mirror

182
 REFLECTION

therefore possessed great magical significance; it was an in-

strument for becoming objectively conscious of one’s soul by
means of reflection, in the literal sense of the word.
Mircea Eliade has collected abundant documentation on
the part played by shiny or glittering objects as protection
against psychic dissolution by evil spirits. In his book on
shamanism, wherein he discusses the initiation rites of sha-
mans and medicine men of innumerable peoples, he describes
a ritual in which the novice’s entrails are symbolically ex-
tracted, cleaned, and replaced by small shiny stones and glit-
tering chips that give him magic power over the spirits.?
Crystals themselves often have the same function of subser-
vient spirits; they mirror events on earth or reveal what is
going on in the soul of a sick person.!°
In many places mirrors are used as a defense against the evil
eye of both human beings and of spirits, because it was
thought that mirrors throw the harmful “rays” back upon
their source. In Spain, in Tripoli, and generally in China, mir-
rors are used for this purpose.1! A similar purpose is served
by ‘‘fear masks,’ that is, revoltingly evil-looking distorted
faces that show the demon his own image, from which he
flees in terror.??
Reflecting objects have thus had, from time immemorial, a
numinous significance for human beings. The oldest experi-
ence of a reflecting object may well have been that of the sur-
face of water. In what follows I am relying principally on the
excellent book by Martin Ninck, Die Bedeutung des Wassers
im Kult und Leben der Alten. Ninck shows that in the world
of antiquity water was always thought of as chthonic, as hav-
ing sprung from the earth, and that it was always associated
with what he calls the “night conditions” or “‘night-states”’
of the soul: intoxication, dream, trance, unconsciousness,
and death. These states were all connected with the mys-
tery of watery depths.
Psychologically, water is one of the most frequent symbols

183
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

of the unconscious,!3 and hence the depths of the water were

thought of in many places as the source of all prophecy and of
use in seeing phenomena from the ‘““Beyond.’!* The great
gods with knowledge of the future—Nereus, Proteus,
Thetis, and, in the Germanic tradition, Mimir—are all water
divinities. In the water one can see one’s own shadow, one’s
Doppelganger, one’s soul-image, separate and objective, and
also the disembodied outlines of the dead and of gods. The
custom of obtaining secret information by staring into a ves-
sel of water, the so-called hydromantia, is therefore practiced
throughout the world.15 In the Middle Ages, in our own cul-
tural tradition, burning candles were placed around a circular
vessel filled with water and the demon was evoked; the spirit
answered with images on the water’s surface (imagines aquae
impressae). In ancient Patras (Greece) a form of magic was
practiced that combined both mirror and reflecting water. A
mirror attached to a thread was lowered into a well to the
water’s surface and its reflection indicated whether a sick per-
son would recover or die; in Lycian Kyenai, on the other
hand, the same thing was seen directly in the reflecting sur-
face of the water ofthe well.!¢ In European folk magic the use
of an ‘“‘earth-mirror’” was widespread.17 A box was filled
with earth, a glass disc was laid on it, and this disc reflected
what was sought. In some places the magic power was im-
parted to the mirror by leaving the disc for three days and
three nights on the face of the buried corpse of a woman who
had died in childbirth. The association of earth and death
with the prophetic powers of water and mirror is especially
important in this connection. In Vergil, Aeneas receives the
final prophecies just as he is about to descend through the
lake of Avernus into the kingdom of the dead.18 Closely re-
lated to the water-mirror is the dream oracle, which is also
often sent by water divinities.1? The unceasing transforma-
tion of the dream images is like a subterranean current, whose
gods can likewise change without cease.?°
The symbolization of the unconscious by water with its

184
 REFLECTION

mirrorlike surface is of course based in the final analysis on

a projection. Nevertheless, the analogies are astonishingly
meaningful. Just as we cannot “‘see’”’ into the depths of the
waters, so the deeper areas of the unconscious are also invisi-
ble to us; we can draw only indirect conclusions about them.
But on the surface, on the threshold area between conscious-
ness and the unconscious, dream images appear spontane-
ously, not only seeming to give us information about the
depths but also mirroring our conscious personality, although
not in identical form, but rather in a more or less altered
form.*! The mirroring is always by way of the symbolic
image that has a place in both worlds.??
Even though during a dream we feel just as identical with
the dream-ego as we do with our daytime ego, our dream-ego
nevertheless has some features that astonish us when we are
awake. We may, for example, perform bold deeds in a dream
that we would never dare to undertake during the daytime,
or our dream-ego may exhibit other qualities and attributes
we have never seen in ourselves. In contrast to a physically
normal mirror-image in an undisturbed and undistorted sur-
face, the ego mirrored in dreams is sometimes greatly altered,
as is indeed the case with all other dream images. Our dog
can talk in dreams, objects blend into hermaphroditic forms,
people who resemble overlapping photographs of two ac-
quaintances appear, and so on. But as soon as we begin to
interpret the dream according to the rules of the art,?? an idea
of what we are like begins to emerge from the symbolic
dream images and it will astonish us again and again with its
relentless objectivity. In his essay “A Psychological View of
Conscience,’?4 Jung reports the dream of a businessman who
on the previous day had been offered what appeared to be a
perfectly honorable project, which he was inclined to under-
take. During the night he had a dream in which he saw his
hands and forearms covered with black dirt. The dream was
advising him not to become involved in the matter, and in
fact it turned out somewhat later to be “dirty business.”

185
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

Fourfold Mirroring
The “mirroring” surface of the unconscious, manifested in
dream images, shows us another, often compensatory image
of ourselves that seems to have been perceived by another
kind of sight or by another person.
What strikes us as strange or curious, however, is that the
phenomenon of consciousness, which is to us almost com-
pletely mysterious, likewise possesses a kind of mirroring quality;
one need only recall the above-mentioned theories and expla-
nations of natural scientists on the nature of “material”’
phenomena in the external world. In the last analysis they are
nothing but mirrorings, or imaginative, mental, ordered re-
constructions of the external world in another medium,
namely, the human mind. The roots and the basic structure of
these imaginative ideas that reconstruct the external world
indeed lie in the unconscious, as we saw in Chapter 4, but
they are distilled, purified, altered, and given the form in
which they are presented at any given moment by the ob-
servations, reflections, and formulations of the researcher’s
ego-consciousness. Even when we attempt, through indirect
conclusions, to know not the external world but the nature of
the objective psyche, that is, of the unconscious, we mirror it
in our ego-consciousness. And, finally, a certain mirror-
image relation seems to exist between the unconscious and
matter, and this relation is today still filled with riddles.
In the case of these mirrorings there is no longer any ques-
tion of a disturbance of adaptation to inner or outer realities.
This question is contained only by implication, insofar as the
suspicion exists that every psychic model-image we make of
inner or outer facts or sets offacts could turn out, in the course
of evolution, to be inadequate and merely “‘subjective,’ even
though at first it serves as an adequate instrument in the at-
tempt to grasp “‘objective”’ reality. For this aspect of projec-
tion, therefore, I use the term mirroring, which Jung also often
used, for the sake of clarity.

186
 REFLECTION

Self =
Center of Objective Psyche =
Collective Unconscious

Objective Psyche Matter

Ego =
Center of Subjective Psyche =
Consciousness

We must therefore look more closely at four mirror re-

lations: the mirroring of the ego by the Self, the mirror-
ing of the Self by the ego, the mirroring of matter by the
collective unconscious, and the possible mirroring of the latter
in matter.
The mirroring of the ego by the Self, the center of the un-
conscious and of the whole psyche, has already been men-
tioned. We can discover in every dream how our conscious
behavior is “objectively” mirrored and how a glimpse of the
Self is thus mediated from an Archimedean point outside
ego-consciousness, a glimpse that we could not otherwise
have obtained. What we see in the mirror held up to us by the Self
is hence the only source of genuine self-knowledge; everything else
is only narcissistic rumination of the ego about itself.
Not only is the ego of the empirical human being mirrored
in the act of self-knowledge, but also the Self is then first
brought from its state of potentiality into realization by vir-
tue of the fact that it is mirrored in the ego, that is, it is recog-
nized. It is only from the standpoint of the Self that the ego
can be seen as object and, vice versa, that the ego can obtain in
every dream, for example, a clearer notion of the nature and
existence of what it is looking at. Therefore when the ego
follows the signals given in dreams, it is helping the Self at-

187
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

tain realization in time and space. It is then “mirroring” the

Self by lifting it out of its unconscious, merely potential exis-
tence into the clarity of ego-consciousness. So, in a certain
sense, we can say that even the Self can become aware ofitself
only with the help of the ego, only in ego-consciousness,
which is the mirror.
In his memoirs Jung has illustrated this mirror-image rela-
tion between ego and Self with two of his own dreams. In the
first dream a kind of flying saucer appears in the heavens,
flying directly toward him.*> At the time of the dream Jung
had interpreted UFOs as projections of the Self onto un-
known external phenomena; but his dream turns the problem
around, as he himself says, and suggests that the person, that
is, his ego, is a projection coming from the Self. The fact that
the flying saucer is a ‘‘machine’’ might indicate symbolically
that behind this object is a power that devises and arranges
our reality for us and whose goals and purposes are unknown
to us.2 The second dream is still plainer; it is the above-
mentioned dream in which Jung discovers that he is imagined
by a yogi. In that dream the Self (as meditating yogi) creates
the dreamer’s empirical ego; it projects the ego from itself
outward, so to speak, and into the three-dimensional world.
Here the word projection is understood in the technical sense
as, for example, in the optical projection of an image. There-
fore I prefer to use the word mirroring.?”7 This relation be-
tween the ego and the Self is not only epistemologically but
also in practice a delicate matter and a heavy responsibility.?8
Paradoxically, the Self is the “‘other’ in one’s own inner
world and yet again it is also only the ego. Accerding to
whether a person identifies too closely with the Self or re-
gards it as too far away, as the “‘absolutely other,” his dreams
will emphasize one or the other aspect. In the Acts of John,
cited above, it was the mysterious otherness of the Self that
was stressed. In the following dream of a pastor’s son who
saw God as too outer and as the unknowable “‘other,’’ the
opposite was the case. The dream was an anxiety dream that

188
 REFLECTION

had been recurrent for many years until the man’s late forties.
He dreamed that he was walking through a vast wasteland.
He heard steps behind him. Anxiously he walked faster, but
the steps too became more rapid. He began to run, the terror
still behind him. Then he came to the edge of a deep abyss
and had to stand still. He looked down: deep, deep down,
thousands of miles below he saw hell-fire burning. He looked
around him and saw—or rather sensed in the dark—a de-
monic face. Later on, the dream recurred exactly as before,
except that instead of a demon the dreamer saw the face of
God. And when he was almost fifty years old he had the same
dream for the last time. But this time panicky fear drove him
and he jumped over the edge of the abyss into the depths
below. As he fell, thousands of little square white cards
floated downward with him from above. On each card, in
black and white, a different mandala had been drawn. The
cards floated together into a kind of floor, so that he did not
fall into hell but found a firm landing about halfway down.
Then he looked back, upward to the edge of the abyss;
there he saw—his own face! The pursuer in the dream is the
Self, which appears first as “the uncanny,” then as God, then
as the dreamer himself. In the final dream, which evidently
brought with it the solution, since it did not recur, the simi-
larity of ego and Self, one the mirror-image of the other,
is underscored.

Mirroring of
Psyche and Matter (Synchronicity)
A further mirror-relation would be the one between psyche
and matter. Every physicist today is aware that everything we
know about matter in the external world is mental, thus
psychic, mirroring. He devises hypothetical images in the
form of mathematical structures that he hopes will coincide
with the behavior of the material phenomena observed in the

189
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

experiment.2 To a large extent he in fact does the very thing

that caused Eugene Wigner to speak of the ‘“‘unreasonable ef-
fectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences.’’3°
As we saw in Chapter 3, all the great basic themes of
the natural sciences are archetypal images whose content has
varied and has in the course of history been defined with in-
creasing precision. Our ego can therefore make explanatory
statements only indirectly— with the help of the mirror pro-
vided by the objective psyche—about the external world and
the aspect of matter perceptible by our senses.31 That is why
Jung emphasized that the collective unconscious is “a per-
petual living mirror of the universe.”3? Our subject is
“situated between two antithetical worlds—the so-called ex-
ternal world open to the senses, and the unconscious psychic
substrate which alone enables us to grasp the world at all.
This psychic substrate must necessarily be different from the
so-called external world; otherwise there would be no possi-
bility of grasping it, for like cannot cognize like.’’3% Leibniz
had already written of the human soul as an “active indivisi-
ble mirror,” each soul or monad as “‘a perpetual living mirror
of the universe.’’34
We are left with a big problem, namely, the question of the
fourth mirror-relation: whether and how the material world
can mirror the objective psyche. If the psychic mirrorings of
the material world—in short, the natural sciences—really
constitute valid statements about matter, then the reverse
mirror-relation would also have to be valid. This would
mean that material events in the external world would have to be
regarded as statements about conditions in the objective psyche. This
would indicate that a quite concrete event in the external
world could be understood as a symbolic statement about an
objective psychic process, which is conscious to an observer.
Jung spent a good deal of time on this question. He em-
phasized that psychology has no Archimedean point outside
the psyche and that there is therefore no possibility of
measuring psychic conditions or states objectively. Indeed,

190
 REFLECTION

atomic physics is in a similar position, inasmuch as the pro-

cess observed is modified by being observed. The observa-
tion is carried out by the physicist’s psyche.
This strange encounter between atomic physics and psychol-
ogy has the inestimable advantage of giving us at least a faint
idea of a possible Archimedean point for psychology. The
microphysical world of the atom exhibits certain features
whose affinities with the psychic have impressed themselves
even on the physicists. Here, it would seem, is at least a
suggestion of how the psychic process could be “recon-
structed”’ in another medium, in that, namely, of the mi-
crophysics of matter. Certainly no one at present could give
the remotest indication of what such a “reconstruction”
would look like. Obviously it can only be undertaken by na-
ture herself, or rather, we may suppose it to be happening continu-
ously, all the time the psyche perceives the physical world. 35
The psyche creates consciousness or, better, the self-cog-
nition of the universe.7° Elsewhere Jung writes that in telep-
athy an “‘outer event occurs simultaneously inside the psyche
and reaches consciousness by the usual pathways of inner
perception. However, it is not always possible to determine
whether a primary inner process is accompanied by an outer
one or whether, conversely, a primary outer event is being
reflected in a secondary inner process.”’3? Jung is here allud-
ing to the problem of synchronistic phenomena, events in the
external world that have the same meaning as endopsychic
events.
Before going into the problem of synchronicity in some
detail, I would like to illustrate the practical side of this
hypothetical mirroring of the psyche by matter. It is alien to
our modern rational thinking and ideas, and occurrences that
may serve as supporting evidence are generally dismissed as
nonsense. That was not the case in primitive magical think-
ing, which played an important role in our own tradition
down into the seventeenth century.?®
In ancient China the principle of synchronicity was the

191
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

dominant way of understanding events in the environment

and in history. As Liu Guan-ying has explained, it was
lieved that the behavi ate of man, the microcosm,
had a clear connection with the macrocosm.?? It was the em-
~ peror who was first ofall responsible for harmony in nature
and in society. If he or his government deviated from Tao,
heaven expressed its anger in the form of unusual
phenomena. These were appropriately interpreted, and the
ruler then had to atone for his past behavior and change his
ways. Sometimes, though, the interpretation of an event was
disputed. On one occasion, after an earthquake, a mountain
surrounded by a lake rose up out of the earth. The emperor’s
wife, Wu Tse-t’ien, took this to be a good augury and named
the new creation “Happy Mountain.” Whereupon a citizen
sent the following petition to the palace: “I, your subject,
have learned that cold and heat fall into disorder when the
breathing of heaven loses its harmony, that an ulcer is formed
when the breathing of men becomes disordered, and that
heights and hills are raised up when the breathing of earth is
confused. Now, your Majesty, a woman is taking the place of
the original principle Yang, that is, the throne. This means
exchanging the strong for the weak. .. . Your Majesty must
cultivate repentance and fear in obedience to the warning
from heaven. Otherwise I fear calamity will follow.” The
empress did not react with repentance but banned her out-
spoken subject from the court.
Translated into modern psychological language, the sub-
ject interprets the emergence of the mountain (chen, ““moun-
tain,” is a masculine principle in Chinese) as a reflectign of the
fact that the empress was far too masculine in attitude and
action (animus-possessed, in Jungian language). The mas-
culine mountain, which towers over the feminine earth-
symbol (kun) and the equally feminine image of the lake (tui),
indicated this to him. All older Chinese thinking was oriented
in this way to the principle of synchronicity. Whenever
psychic and material occurrences with the same meaning

2
 REFLECTION

coincided, they made visible what was happening in Tao, the

meaning of the universe. Events in nature mirrored the
psychological state of things at the emperor’s court and pro-
vided information about psychic processes of which the rul-
ers were not sufficiently conscious.*°
Jung’s above-mentioned view—expressed more or less
incidentally—that matter might possibly mirror psychic
processes “‘as continuously as the psyche perceives the physical
world,’’ but that for the present it “lies beyond the scope of
our understanding,”’ was further clarified in one of his later
works and in his later letters. The postulate was that a psychic
process could be “‘reconstructed ”’ as being at the same time a
physical process. ‘‘One could also say that under certain con-
ditions the physical process reflects itself in the psychic, just
as the psychic does in the physical.’’41 This idea led Jung in
one of his later works, “Synchronicity: An Acausal Connect-
ing Principle,” to the formation of anew hypothesis, namely,
the existence of an “‘absolute knowledge” in the uncon-
scious.4? This knowledge is directly connected with the ar-
chetypal structure of the unconscious. The archetypes appear
to be connected with a knowledge of themselves that is inde-
pendent of both external causal and conscious influences and
at the same time stand in analogous or equivalent, that is,
meaningful, relationship to objective external occurrences
that have no recognizable or even conceivable causal relation-
ship with them.*?
What Jung describes as the “absolute knowledge” of the
collective unconscious manifests itself, among other ways, in
the extraordinary orientation to space and time of unicellular
organisms,*4 which is at least partly rooted in an inner activ-
ity that functions independently of objective stimuli.45 Abso-
lute knowledge exists “‘in a space-time continuum in which
space is no longer space, nor time time.’’4¢ Inner and outer
events that are parallel can be perceived only if they have
some relation to the ego-consciousness of an observer.4” So
far we have been looking at the archetypes as psychic struc-

193
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

tures or psychic probabilities, but they have another aspect:

they seem to be a structure that “‘also underlies psychophysi-
cal equivalences.” The deepest and most clearly distinguish-
able archetypal factor, which forms the basis of psycho-
physical equivalences, is the archetypal patterns of natural
numbers.*8
Alla priori factors as well as radioactive decay in the field of
physics fall within this category.*? In respect to mathematical
structure, the acausal orderedness in matter is of the same kind as
that in the psyche and each is continually reflected in the
other.°°
On the other hand, events like the appearance of the vol-
cano in analogy with the psychic condition of the empress
belong to those special cases, occurring only sporadically, in
which an observer (in our case, the intelligent subject) is in a
position to recognize the meaning of the equivalence of the
two events.5! But the empress, possessed by her power de-
mon, misinterpreted the event—a problem to which we
must return.
At first sight, “‘mirrorings”’ of psyche and matter that have
the same meaning can be empirically established only in the
FalnGvely Tareaitisregelarly scouting synchronisticevents
[ssn sistioeacuha essen ue that
the reconstruction of psychic processes in the microphysical
world probably occurs as continuously as the psyche per-
ceives the external world is to be understood in the sense that
this mirror-relation exists continuously in the deeper layers of
the unconscious but that we become aware of it only in cer-
tain exceptional situations in which synchronistic phenomena
become observable. That would mean that in the ‘Yeepest
layer of the unconscious the psyche “knows” itself in the mir-
ror of the cosmic world and that matter ‘“‘knows’”’ itself in the
mirror of the objective psyche, but this “knowledge”’ is ‘‘ab-
solute”’ in the sense that for our ego it is almost completely
consciousness-transcending. Only in those rare moments
when we are impressed by synchronistic phenomena do we

194
 SCO FM ME F
REFLECTION

become conscious of fragments or points of this mirror-

relation.5?
The fourth mirror-relation, that of psyche and matter, is
based on the same element as the reflection of light in physics,
namely, an arithmetical order. Number, as Jungwrote, “‘is the.
predestined instrument for creating order, or fora apprehend-
ing an already existing, but still CREASES regularr arrange-
ment or ‘orderedness.’ It may well be the most primitive element
of order in the human mind,’’53 that is, the most primitive man-
ifestation of the spontaneous dynamics of the unconscious
psyche.*4 In the deepest Ievels of the objective psyche there is
probably an acausal orderedness with a numerical structure that is
equally valid both for the psyche and for matter. There in the
lattice patterns of the numerical field, psyche and matter, we
may conjecture, are continuously mirroring each other,
whereas in synchronistic events we become aware of this
mirror-relation only exceptionally and then as specific hap-
penings pregnant with meaning.5> Synchronistic events are
therefore characterized by the intrusion into our “normal”
state of consciousness of a second psychic state, which usu-
ally remains below the threshold.5® In our normal state of
consciousness we are seldom aware of the fact that the un-
conscious psyche makes a substantial contribution to our per-
ception of reality and that we never perceive reality as such.
Moreover, we can apparently put our trust in our ideas of
reality. If I reach for a box aumatches, my hands reach out to
the place where the box “‘is,” the match lights, as expected,
when the match is struck, oe so on. Hence we are scarcely
ever aware that even in this normal state of relation to the
outer world we are moving in a field of images that deviates
considerably from the “‘reality”’ that has been demonstrated
by physics. That space-time and causality are modalities of
apprehending our environment and are dependent upon the
structure of our consciousness and perhaps do not even exist
objectively is hardly ever conscious to us. These modalities
build in us a kind of commonsense reality that makes it pos-

195,
PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

sible for us to communicate with one another fairly satisfac-

torily. When synchronistic phenomena occur, oan normal

ing which one or more external events occur “Hat areexpen

enced as having a meaning parallel to the subjective state.°’
Using ourexample of the patient with a fear of outdoor
stairways, this would mean that the patient perceives and
knows or fears the danger of outdoor stairs as an inner image,
although the event corresponding to the inner image has not
yet occurred. A causal connection is not thinkable, because an
event that has not yet taken place cannot produce effects.
Nevertheless, one can hardly deny a meaningful connection
between the anxiety-filled images and the external event. We
have to understand “‘simultaneity” in a very broad sense in
this example, since there is a distance in time between the
beginning of the phobia and the corresponding event. For
this reason Jung called such phenomena synchronistic and not
synchronous, because the coincidence 1:
is not one in clock time.
As long as the accident on the stairway had not yet yet taken |
place, the patient’s phobia appeared to be a meaningless lack
of adaptation and seemed to be a projection; the undeniable
fact of his death on an open stairway, however, showed that
the phobia was an example of telepathy or, alternatively, a
synchronistic event.
The reverse of this case can, however, also appear in prac-
tice: that an event which should really be described as a syn-
chronistic phenomenon is falsely interpreted and thus becomes
a projection. A man who was on the point of slipping into a
psychotic interval, more precisely into an attack of Messianic
mania, did in fact attack his wife, who called in a doctor and
the police. As they entered the house intending to remove the
unfortunate man against his will to a clinic, the lamp in the
corridor shattered with a bang, so that suddenly they were all
standing in darkness in the midst of the broken glass. The
patient saw clearly that what had happened was a super-
natural sign: just as the sun grew dark when Christ was

196
 REFLECTION

crucified, this event was to him a confirmation that he was a

savior who was being unjustly arrested. We, on the other
hand, would say that he had projected his delusion into the
event. Thus the synchronistic phenomenon, in itself mean-
ingful, was instead covered up by a projection. To a person
with normal consciousness the ‘“‘meaning”’ of the occurrence
would be quite different. A lamp, in contrast to the sun, is not
a cosmic principle but an appliance invented by man; it usu-
ally symbolizes ego-consciousness in dreams and fantasies.
The meaning of the unusual event would then more probably
be expressed thus: In the moment of intense agitation caused
by his imminent arrest the patient’s ego-consciousness was
shattered and a “mental blackout’ resulted. The patient,
however, could not grasp this meaning.
When a synchronistic event takes place and no observer
perceives its meaning, Jung speaks of synchronous (rather than
of synchronistic) events;°8 in our case that would be the shatter-
ing of the light of ego-consciousness in the patient and of the
lamp in the corridor. Nobody saw the “‘meaning”’ at the time;
when the man’s wife reported the-occurrence to me I recog-
nized it. I mention this because it is an example of a type of
situation I have often observed in my psychological practice;
at the time of dropping into a psychotic interval most patients
are in a highly excited, emotional state, and an archetype in
the unconscious or, indeed, the whole collective unconscious
is violently activated. Hence synchronistic events occur with
conspicuous frequency at such times (although they also
occur with normal people when an archetype is activated).
And at such times the patient will make a false interpretation
of synchronistic phenomena in a way designed to confirm his
morbid fantasies rather than to correct them. One of the old
urch Fathers would have said in such a case that a demon
or demons had worked a false miracle with the intention of
misleading people with lying phantasmagoria. We have seen
that the early Christian Fathers were much preoccupied with
the problem of why demons, too, can work miracles and ap-
%* see P4 19g 197
 PROJECTION AND RE-COLLECTION IN JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY

parently speak the truth. Indeed, in the exorcisms of the six-

teenth and seventeenth centuries what the devil spoke
through the mouth of the one possessed was carefully writ-
ten down, because it was thought that the demon often
speaks the truth. Tragically enough, people were sometimes
executed who had been accused of witchcraft by a devil
speaking through a person in the state of possession.

f more
If we want to grasp the differences between projection and
soicieoWiGic cau icrenare oboe tains ei
closely at a point as yet mentioned only peripherally, _

Sey cuaeredud acbane ane 0s eee justifies our

labeling subjective i SEE | Ameer
se Irie Ry TMNT eee jet
we had made for ourselves. The energy flows back to the
subject, either because it is repelled by the object (unrequited
love or an enemy unobligingly offering no opportunity for a
quarrel) or because it simply flows back spontaneously, with-
out any cause that we can discover. The inner self-regulation
of the psyche sometimes causes this in order to “‘charge’”’
another object or to raise the inner potential. In synchronistic
events the situation is different. In this case an archetype in
the unconscious is ‘‘explosively”’ constellated,
which is often
the case, as Jung emphasizes, when consciousness sees no way
out of some life situation or when it sees no solution toa”
problem. In projection, therefore, the undisturbed flow of
energy inward from ego to Self, that is, re-flexio (reflection),
is blocked, whereas in the synchronistic event the flow of
energy from the Self to the ego and daytime consciousness is
thwarted, that is, a_‘‘realization”’ is blocked. In the case of.
projection the psychic energy recedes to the subject’s uncon-
scious; in synchronistic phenomena it flows from the uncon-
scious toward the ego in order to guide it toward a creative
discovery. That is why Jung also called synchronistic events
acts of creation in time; they indicate that the experiencing sub-

198
& psycho. Interv
 REFLECTION

ject should realize something which has been constellated in

the unconscious, whether this be a new idea or a healing
Insight.
In Zen Buddhist meditation the master tries to teach his
pupil how he can forever keep the inner mirror free of dust.
To the extent that he lives in complete accord with the
rhythm of psychic energy and with its regulator, the Self, he
has no projections anymore; he looks at reality without illu-
sion and more or less continuously reads the meaning of all
the synchronistic events happening around him. He lives in
the creative current or stream of the Self and has himself,
indeed, become a part of this stream.
If he remains, so to speak, always in contact with the suc-
ceeding currents of psychic energy that are regulated by the
Self, he no longer experiences disturbances of adaptation, no
l rojects, in the stri ense of the word, but remains
at the center of the fourfold mirror relation. Obviously, only
a person with the most highly reflected concentration can
achieve this. We average human beings, by contrast, will
hardly be able to avoid the necessity, for the rest of our lives,
of again and again recognizing projections for what they are
or at least as mistaken judgments. It seems to me, therefore,
to be extremely important to bear constantly in mind, at the
very least, the possibility of projection. would
This lead to
much greater modesty on the part of our ego-consciousness
and to a readiness to test our views and feelings thoughtfully
BBR Biowaste ourpsychic enetgy imipenem Musionary
goals.

177,
Notes

Chapter 1
1. S. Freud, Totem and Taboo, pp. 61, 92ff. (For full references, see
Bibliography.) For Freud, projection is a defense mechanism
through which the neurotic person frees himself of a feeling of
conflict (pp. 61-64). He displaces this feeling onto another as
the intended object. Freud emphasizes, though, that projection
also has a part in all our perceptions of the outer world because
our attention is originally directed outward and tends to over-
look endopsychic processes (pp. 63-64). The projection of the
latter outward occurs under conditions that, as Freud em-
phasizes, are not yet satisfactorily established (p. 64). On the
Freudian concept of projection, cf. the basic work by S. Ali, La
Projection.
2. Jung, “Concerning the Archetypes, with Special Reference to
the Anima Concept,” The Archetypes and the Collective Uncon-
scious, vol. 9, part 1, of The Collected Works (hereafter ab-
breviated as CW), pars. 121, 142; and Aion, CW 9(2), pars. 43ff.
(The full title and number of each volume of CW cited are
given at first mention; subsequent references appear as CW,
followed by the volume number. See Bibliography for full
details.)
3. Jung, “Concerning the Archetypes,” CW 9(1), pars. 121f.
4. Ibid., pars. 121ff.
5. Jung defines paranoia as “identity of the ego-personality with a
complex,” as something similar to an extreme state of posses-
sion. “Concerning Rebirth,’ CW 9(1), par. 220.
6. E.H. Ackerknecht, A Short History of Psychiatry. See also W. M.
Pfeiffer, ““Politische Thematik im Wechsel der Zeit,’ Transkul-
turelle Psychiatrie, pp. 22f.
7. R. Buhlmann, Die Entwicklung des tiefenpsychologischen Begriffs
der Projektion.
8. Ackerknecht, Short History of Psychiatry, pp. 3f.
9. Pfeiffer, Transkulturelle Psychiatrie, p. 4.

200
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 1

10 . Ibid., p. 140.
ih Jung, “General Aspects of Dream Psychology,’ The Structure
and Dynamics of the Psyche, CW 8, par. 507.
Om Ibid., citing L. Levy-Bruhl, How Natives Think; also cited in
Jung, “Transformation Symbolism in the Mass,” Psychology and
Religion, CW 11, par. 389.
13: Jung, Letters, I, p. 549 (italics added).
14. For example, in hatred against a person previously loved. (My
footnote.)
ilae Jung, “General Aspects of Dream Psychology,” CW 8, par. 507.
16. Ibid., par. 516. See also Jung, ““The Visions of Zosimos,” Al-
chemical Studies, CW 13, par. 122.
17: Jung, Psychological Types, CW 6, “Definitions,” par. 783.
18. For the following, see Jung, “The Spirit Mercurius,’ CW 13,
pars. 247ff.
19: In other words, the apriori aspect of an outer object still appears
to be identical with an unconsciously assumed image.
20. Chinesische Marchen, No. 66: “Die Geister der Erhangten”’
(“The Ghosts of Those Who Were Hanged”’).
2L. Jung, “Concerning the Archetypes,” CW 9(1), pars. 121ff, esp.
ely:
22, Jung, CW 9(2), par. 44.
2a Jung, ““The Philosophical Tree,” CW 13, par. 437. Jung stresses
that it is even dangerous to want to accommodate the whole
archetypal content in consciousness; instead, it must be “reli-
giously”’ taken into account as something autonomous.
24. Jung, CW 9(2), par. 47.
aD. Nordische Marchen II, No. 7.
26. “Die verwunschte Prinzessin,’ Deutsche Marchen seit Grimm I,
Pp. 2o7tt
Dif. Jung, CW 6, par. 784.
28. Not identification.

201
NOTES TO CHAPTER 1

O42) For example, the judgment that this or that person is “pursu-
ing” or “persecuting”’ one.
30. Jung, CW 6, pars. 741, 784.
Sire For details, see Jung, CW 9(2), pars. 17ff.
On Jung, ‘Concerning the Archetypes,’ CW 9(1), pars. 120ff.
5Ey E. H. Ackerknecht, ‘‘Primitive Medicine and Culture Pattern’;
also idem, “‘Natural Diseases and Rational Treatment in Primitive
Medicine.” Ackerknecht correctly emphasizes that primitive man
often has rational explanations, although they generally are al-
lied to magical-religious ideas. Cf. further Ackerknecht, Prob-
lems of Primitive Medicine.
34. For this reason the Eskimos do not scold their children, in order
not to endanger their health through Krankung (“offense,”’
““wound’’).
See L. Honko, Krankheitsprojektile. | am grateful to Dr. Alfred Ribi
for calling this book to my attention.
36. See also Job 16:12f and 34:6.
ou Rig-Vida, 7:46, 1-3. See also Atharva-Veda, 11:2, 12; and Honko,
Krankheitsprojektile.
38: Jung, “Concerning Mandala Symbolism,” CW 9(1), pars. 696,
705.
32, Paracelsus once said: “‘It is possible that my spirit without the
help of the body, and through ardent willing alone and without
a sword, may pierce and wound another.” S. Seligman, Der bése
Blick und Verwandtes, II, p. 423.
40. Sutta-Nipata, trans. by V. Fausboll, p. 146, as cited in Jung, Sym-
bols of Transformation, CW 5, par. 437; see also pars. 438ff for
further literature. In the Old Testament, too, sexuak passion
is described as an arrow that bores through a person’s liver
(Proverbs 7:21ff).
41. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, II, 20, 113, pp. 119ff.
42. Ibid., II, 112 and 114/116. See also Jung, CW 9(2), par. 370, n. 32.
43. This was also investigated with special attention by C. A.

202
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 1

Meier, Projektion, Ubertragung und Subjekt-Objektrelation, pp.

302ff.
44, Aetius, I, 7. 16, in H. Diels, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, II, p.
102; also Plutarch, Quaestiones Conviv., Ill, 10. 2, ibid., p. 103,
and Cicero, Epistulae, XV, 16, ibid., p. 111.
45. Aetius, IV, 10. 4, ibid., p. 111.
46. Jung, “General Aspects of Dream Psychology,’ CW 8, par. 510.
47. Ibid., par. 519. “But the more subjective and emotional this
impression is, the more likely it is that the property will be a
projection.”
48. Ibid.
49, Ibid.
50. See Meier, Projektion, pp. 302ff.
sie Jung, “General Aspects of Dream Psychology,’ CW 8, par. 521.
52: Ibid. Jung emphasizes in a footnote here (n. 17) that no imago
comes “only from outside... its specific form is due just as
much to the a priori disposition, namely the archetype.”
D9: Relative autonomy of the complex.
54. Jung, “General Aspects of Dream Psychology,’ CW 8, pars.
521f.
bicy Ibid., par. 523. Therefore it is not always a disturbance in adap-
tation to society that necessitates the withdrawal of a projec-
tion; it is also often certain impulses toward development in the
individual himself, in other words, the urge toward individua-
tion.
56. “On the Nature of Dreams,” CW 8, par. 242.
D/. Honko, Krankheitsprojektile, pp. 75ff.
58. Cf. here the comprehensive treatment by T: K. Oesterreich, Die
Besessenheit. Unfortunately, this work was available to me only
in the French translation, Les Possédés.
Bo. A. Rodewyk, Die damonische Besessenheit in der Sicht des Rituale
Romanum, passim.

203
NOTES TO CHAPTER 1

60. Honko, Krankheitsprojektile, pp. 27ff.

61. Ibid. ps. 27,
62. Jung, “Concerning Rebirth,’ CW 9(1), par. 213.
63. A complex of this kind, which has not yet reached the surface,
can be revealed by using the association test.
64. The pseudo-Platonic dialogue, ““The Great Alcibiades.”
65. On equating lightning with arrows sent by a god, cf. Honko,
Krankheitsprojektile, p. 66.
66. “To a Passer-by”’ (“‘A une Passante,” trans. by C. F. MacIntyre),
Flowers of Evil, p. 118; original in French, p. 337.
67. For examples, cf. E. Benz, Die Vision, pp. 23ff. Many such vi-
sions, in any case, are visualizations of conscious contents
rather than spontaneous products of the unconscious, or they
can also possess a core arising from the unconscious, which is
then consciously worked over. Jung, CW 9(1), par. 130, n. 19.
68. Benz, Die Vision, pp. 23ff.
69. Ibid., p. 31.
70. In G. Zacharias., ed., Das Bose, pp. 104ff.
16 “Concerning Possession,’ ibid., pp. 112ff. In his work Die
damonische Besessenheit, Rodewyk does attempt to make a diag-
nostic distinction between possession by the devil and psy-
chogenic disturbance. His argument, though, is expressed
in a vocabulary that is, to say the least, overcautious and not
really convincing. What does emerge clearly is that the whole
context of ideas of the Catholic faith must, in a case of posses-
sion by the devil, be present in the patient. That the conscious
cultural context helps to condition the expression even of com-
plexes is well known. Clearer and more detailed is J. de Ton-
quédec, Les Maladies nerveuses ou mentales et les manifestations
diaboliques. Here, too, it comes out that the patient must have a
Catholic background in order to be able fully to accept its dis-
tinctions. Some of the “‘signs’’ that the case is one of Satan’s
influence and not of mental illness seem to me, as an outsider,
unconvincing (for example, unusual physical strength in the

204
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 2

one possessed; this has often been observed in schizophrenics).

A balanced judgment is offered by W. Kasper and K. Lehmann,
Teufel, Damonen, Besessenheit. Zur Wirklichkeit des Bésen.

Chapter 2
tt Unfortunately, I cannot go into the highly significant Islamic
hermeneutic here, but refer the reader to H. Corbin’s essay,
““Herméneutique spirituelle comparée.’
. Cf. Jung, “Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious,’ CW
OM). par. 7,
. Diels, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Fragment 14.
. Cf. Scholion B of Porphyrios to Ilias, V, 67, cited after W.
Capelle, Die Vorsokratiker, p. 53. Ancient and medieval her-
meneutics will be discussed briefly below; for modern
philosophical hermeneutics, see E. Palmer, Hermeneutics.
. Fragment 3, in Capelle, Die Vorsokratiker, poll.
. Phaedrus, 60 B.
. Metaphysics, IV, 4 1091 b, in Capelle, Die Vorsokratiker, p. 49.
. Cicero, De natura deorum, 1, 29. That the images were thought
GH
ex
Sie
ca

of as concrete is implied in Democritus’ assumption that they

were ‘‘disturbed”’ by the falling of autumn leaves.
. Fragment 81, Plutarch, Symposium, VIII, 10, 2.

»tbid,
. Fragment 166, Sextus Empiricus, IX, 19.
. Capelle, Die Vorsokratiker, pp. 465, 469, 420.
. Fragment 168-170.
» Pragment121-
F Cormutus, cap. 31.
. Epiphanius, Adversus Haereses, II, 2.9 = Fragment 538.
. Fragment 1094 (Plutarch).

205
NOTES TO CHAPTER 2

18. Fragment 1027.

1; The Gnostic Justinus also interpreted certain Greek myths and
related them to images in the Old Testament. Cf. Hippolytus,
Elenchos, cited in H. Leisegang, Die Gnosis, p. 176: ““Thus Jus-
tinus takes a myth related by Herodotus, raises it to the level of
philosophical speculation by means of symbolic interpretation,
and produces an intellectual homogeneity between it and the
Old Testament.” (Justinus interpreted the Hercules myth.)
20. J. Christiansen, Die Technik der allegorischen Auslegungswis-
senschaft bei Philo von Alexandrien, pp. 9f, 13.
PA Ibid., p. 51.
Za Ibid., p. 91.
23; Ibid., pp. S1ff.
24. Ibid., p. 133. In this procedure the synthetic function of the
Logos became visible (p. 145). Two principles are at work in
allegory, says Christiansen (p. 137); they are connected through
the idea.
a: Ephrem the Syrian (d. 373), Hymni et sermones, II, col. 770
(Hymnus de resurrectione Christi, XXI, 6). Cf. Jung, CW 9(2),
par. 216.
26. Ephrem the Syrian, Hymni et Sermones, p. 802. Cf. Jung, Mys-
terium Coniunctionis, CW 14, par. 29.
Bi. C. Andresen, Logos und Nomos, esp. pp. 144ff.
28. As Andresen brings out very clearly (ibid., p. 141), the Logos
doctrine of Celsus represents ‘‘an interesting attempt at a reli-
gious interpretation of history by a non-Christian thinker.”
2, Ibid., p. 141.
Ibid., p. 142.
\

30.
at: Ibid.
Oe. Ibid., p. 143.
JS. Cited in ibid., p. 145.
34 H. de Lubac, Exégése médiévale, II, p. 373.

206
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 2

35%. Gegen Celsus, I, 42, trans. by P. Koetschau, Part I, p. 57. What

“empty tales” are remains the subject of the polemic. Cf. II, 58;
IV, 49 and 50.
36. Cf. ibid., IV, 39; and IV, 49.
a7. Cf. ibid., I, 42, 43; and IV, 15.
38. Ibid., III, 46. Cf. also F H. Kettler, Der urspriingliche Sinn der
Dogmatik des Origenes.
Sieh Contra Celsum, I, 46-48.
40. Ibid., I, 48. Cf. also II, 69; III, 35.
41. Ibid., I, 48, esp. Contra Celsum, II, 48, where Origen charac-
terizes this second reality as a psychic one. Cf. also Origen’s
conception of the resurrected body of Christ, ibid., II, 60.
42. Cf. esp., for example, Contra Celsum, I, 43, and IV, 17: “Or is
it perhaps permitted to the Greeks to relate such things to teach-
ings about the soul and to conceive them in images, while the
door to an appropriate explanation remains closed to us, who
begin with the idea that divine spirits inhabit pure souls?” Cf.
also Contra Celsum, IV, 38.
43. Cf. ibid., esp. I, 67, on the greater force of the effectiveness of
Jesus’ life, ibid., II, 35. Cf. in this connection A. Miura-Stange,
Celsus und Origenes, esp. pp. 54ff. Jesus is simply the stronger
“daimon”’ when compared with the parallel pagan healer-
images (p. 103).
= Contre Gelsum, \,.2.
. R. Lobo, Samkhya-yoga und spatantiker Geist, pp. 58f. Cf. also
H. Koch, Pronoia und Paideusis, passim.
. De Lubac, Exégese médiévale, II, p. 401.
. Contra Celsum, II, 2 and 3.
. “What shines dimly in the Old Testament, radiates with light in
the New.” Cf. de Lubac, Exégése médiévale, I, p. 316, and esp. p.
338.
49. Like the godhead itself, Scripture has a threefold aspect: a literal
(Father, as creator of being), a psychic or rational (Son), and a

207
NOTES TO CHAPTER 2

pneumatic (Holy Ghost). De Principiis, IV, 2, 4. Cf. also In

Leviticum homilia, V, 5.
50. De Lubac, Exégese médiévale, II, pp. 397, 403.
51. Ibid., esp. vol. II.
52. Ibid., I, pp. 119ff.
5: Text of the thirteenth century, quoted in ibid., I, p. 117.
54. Ibid... 1) “p: 30:
5D. There are also other classifications and arrangements of four
such great masters. Cf. ibid., I, pp. 26-30. Cf. also E. von
Dobschutz, “Vom vierfachen Schriftsinn,” pp. 1ff.
56. Jung, CW 6, passim.
Die De Lubac, Exégése médiévale, I, p. 39.
58. De divisione naturae 1, IV, c. 5: “. . . est enim multiplex infinitus
divinorum intellectus, si quidem in penna pavonis una eademque
mirabiles ac pulchra innumerabilium colorum varietas conspicitur in
uno eodemque loco eiusdem pennae portiunculae”’ (749C, quoted in
de Lubac, Exégése médiévale, I, p. 123).
59. Reuter, Die Geschichte der religidsen Aufklarung im Mittelalter, I,
pp. 8ff.
60. Ibid., p. 18.
61. Ibid., p. 25.
62. Ibid., p. 52. For John Scotus there are two sources of light:
Holy Scripture and the creation. Scripture explains what crea-
tion makes manifest. Cf. de Lubac, Exégése médiévale, I, pp.
1216 125;
63. Reuter, Geschichte der religidsen Aufklarung, p. 61, Comment. in
Evangelium secundum Joannem, Op. 345A. ‘“Mysteria itaque sunt
quae in utroque Testamento et secundum historiam facta sunt et secun-
dum literam narrata, symbola vero, quae solum modo non facta sed
quasi facta sola doctrina dicuntur” (Op. 348A). Reuter writes:
“The mysteries break down, to some extent, in regard to what is
sensory and temporal; only the invisible, spiritual, eternal re-
mains valid” (ibid., p. 279).
64. Ibid p. 63.

208
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 2

65. Ibid., p. 62. Insights of this kind must, however, be regarded

rather as isolated cases before the year 1000, and at that time
they had no widespread effect. The tenth century was, gener-
ally speaking, a century of barbarism; in France and Italy espe-
cially, paganism and superstition flowered; Pope John XII was
even quite genuinely thought of as a heathen atheist. Gerbert of
Rheims, on the other hand, began to lay the groundwork for
free scientific inquiry, which was expected to develop alongside
faith without encroaching upon it (p. 81).
66. Ibid., p. 211. Cf. also esp. p. 297. Abelard even went so far as to
put reason above faith (p. 229).
67. C. Hahn, Geschichte der Ketzer im Mittelalter, 1, pp. 31ff.
68. Ipad= 1p. 37.
69. Ibid., I, p. 45.
oo. Loi ppg ot.
Th. Ibid., I, p. 157
oe) Ibid., Il, pp. 472ff, 477ff.
TS; Ibid., II, p. 779: “. . . quod possit uniri Deo. . . . Item credunt se
esse Deum per naturam sine distinctione . . . se esse aeternos et in
aeternitate. Item dicunt se omnia creasse et plus creasse quam Deus.
Item quod nullo indigent nec Deo nec Deitate.”’
74. Ibid.: “Item dicunt se credere quod aliquis homo possit transcendere
meritum Christi. Item quod homo perfectionis debet esse liber ab omni
actione virtutis a Christo, ab eius passione cogitanda, et a Deo.’”’ The
followers of Amalriche von Bena also brought many of the
contents of the Credo into the inner psychic sphere: Heaven
and Hell, according to them, were nothing other than inner
knowledge of God or of sin; the resurrection of the dead meant
illumination through the Holy Spirit.
they Hahn, Geschichte der Ketzer, Il, pp. 110, 125f.
76. 126 Expos. in Apoc, in ibid., III, pp. 84, 264.
no Ibid., II, p. 139.
78. Ibid., Ill, pp. 299, 335. Cf. also de Lubac, Exégeése médiévale, III,
pp. 462ff.

209
NOTES TO CHAPTER 3

19) Dobschitz, ““Vom vierfachen Schriftsinn,” p. 13.

80. Cf. the Congress Report, Exégése et Herméneutique, p. 13.
81. Ibid’, p. 85.
82. Ibid., p. 287 (Ricoeur).
Sa lbidy peal:
84. L. Goppelt, in his Typos, attempts to revive the typos theory.

Chapter 3
1. Usually thought of as a world-soul, of which individual souls
are parts.
2. Cf. Plutarch, Fragment I, quoted in Eusebius, Praeparation
evangelica, III, 1. Cf. Andresen, Logos und Nomos, p. 257.
3. R. B. Onians, The Origins of European Thought, pp. 35ff.
4. Ibidespris:
5. Ibid., p. 17. The idea comes from Stout.
6. Ibid., p. 37. Pneumonia was looked upon as love-sickness.
7. D. Mahnke, Unendliche Sphare und Allmittelpunkt, p. 243.
8. Ibid., pp. 239f (not yet in Xenophanes, either).
9. Ibid., p. 240.
10 Ibid..1p. 238:
ifs Ibidzaps236;
12) ibid: ‘pp. .229. 22
13. Ibid., p. 220. \
14. Ibid., p. 217.
15. Ibid... pp 2128 Cr alsop: 4a
16. Ibid., p. 214, and esp. p. 193.
17. Ibid., p. 192, citing De divisione naturae, I, 12, col. 455a.
18. Ibid., p. 193. Equally, God is also the monad that contains all
other numbers in itself in a unity (p. 190).

210
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 3

19: Ibid., p. 164.

20. Ibid., p. 167.
pa Cited in ibid., p. 150.
Ze. Ibid., pp. 132ff. In contrast to Giordano Bruno, Kepler did not
assume an infinitude of worlds but only one sphere which,
though unbounded, was finite.
Zo Ibid., pp. 135ff.
24. S. Samburski, Das physikalische Weltbild der Antike, p. 189. The
stoic idea of a tonos that holds the world together corresponds,
as Samburski points out, to the idea of a standing wave, or sta-
tionary oscillation.
25% Newton, Scholium Generale to the 2nd ed. of the Principia,
quoted in M. Fierz, “‘Isaac Newton als Mathematiker.”
26. M. Fierz, ““Uber den Ursprung und die Bedeutung der Lehre Isaac
Newtons vom absoluten Raum,” pp. 62ff, esp. pp. 67, 69ff.
Bi Mahnke, Unendliche Sphare, pp. 17/19. Henry Moore shared this
view of Newton’s. His work forms, among other things, the
source for Leibniz, who likewise applies the figure of the sphere
to the divine original monad. But all other monads are also, he
says, “des centres qui expriment une circonférence infinie.”’
28: Fierz, “Uber den Ursprung,” pp. 100ff.
Zo. Ibid., p. 100.
30); A. Wheeler, Einstein’s Vision, p. 1. Electric charge would then
have to be defined as electric lines of force, which are every-
where without singularity but are bound together by the topol-
ogy of a multiply connected space (pp. 10f).
Si. Ibid., pp. 11, 43.
De. For further particulars on “gravitational collapse,” cf. ibid.,
Diz:
OD, Ibid., p. 47.
34. Ibid., p. 63, and p. 95, n. 55. In an excellent article, Mary Gam-
mon has attempted to relate the Einsteinian space-model to the
Jungian unus mundus concept. The essential points of this at-

Zit
NOTES TO CHAPTER 3

tempt are to be found in Gammon, “Window into Eternity:

Archetype and Relativity,” pp. i1ff.
RE Mahnke, Unendliche Sphare, p. 12.
36. Ibid., pp. 8f.
otk Ibid., p. 3.
38. Cf. aso G. Holten, “Uber die Hypothesen, welche den Natur-
wissenschaften zugrunde liegen,”’ passim.
52: CW 9(1), par. 116.
40. Samburski, Das physikalische Weltbild, p. 228 (Leucippus). But
the uncertainty relation, too, had long been suspected. Epicurus
says that atoms are possessed of free will (p. 238). Cf. also p.
219, where it is recorded that the divine pneuma in Stoic philos-
ophy anticipates the idea of the causal nexus.
41. Descartes, Meditationes, V1, and Principia, Il, 36. 7. Cf. H. Stock,
The Method of Descartes in Natural Sciences, pp. 11-15.
42. M.-L. von Franz, ‘““The Dream of Descartes,” p. 84, quoting
Descartes, Principia, Il, 37.
43. Ibid. |
44. F. Capra, The Tao of Physics, pp. 274ff. Capra reckons with only
three forms and includes singularities under the causality prin-
ciple, which does not seem admissible to me, for which reason I
count them a fourth. Another possibility is that the electro-
magnetic reactions are the fourth.
45. G. Holton, “The Roots of Complementarity,” pp. 7Off.
46. Ibid., p. 73 (from “The Quantum Postulate and the Recent De-
velopment of Atomic Theory,” in Niels Bohr, Atomic Theory
and the Description of Nature, pp. 90f).
\
47. W. Pauli, ““The Influence of Archetypal Ideas on the Scientific
Theories of Kepler,” p. 152 (italics added).
48. R. Carnap, Einftihrung in die Philosophie der Naturwissenschaft, p.
174.
49. Ibid., p. 175.
50. Ibid., pp. 177ff, 290.

212
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 3

SL Physik und Philosophie, pp. 52ff.

a2. Ibid., p. 55.
23; Ibid., p. 56.
54. Ibid., p. 150.
52: Ibid., p. 159.
56. Ibid. Max Jammer ends his paper on the history of the concept
of mass in physics (in Der Begriff der Masse in der Physik) with
the following words: “Although it [the concept of mass] is of
decisive importance for all branches of physics and represents
an indispensable conceptual tool of scientific thinking, it seems
to elude every attempt at a completely satisfactory explanation
and a logical as well as scientifically unobjectionable definition”
(p. 241).
aT: M.-L. von Franz, Number and Time, passim.
58. On this and what follows, cf. Jung, “On Psychic Energy, CW
8, pars. 114ff.
ape For examples and references to the literature, cf. ibid., pars.
lobede
60. Ci ibid. para 117:
61. Ibid., par. 126, citing A. O. Lovejoy, “The Fundamental Con-
cept of the Primitive Philosophy.”
62. Ibid., par. 127.
Gs. Ibid. Cf. Jung, “On the Psychology of the Unconscious,”
Two Essays on Analytical Psychology, CW 7, pars. 108f.
64. Capelle, Die Vorsokratiker, p. 133 (22 Fragment 76).
65. Ibid., p. 139 (45 Fragment 67).
66. Ibid., p. 142 (58 Fragment 30).
Ys On the further development of this concept of energy, down to
the most recent times, cf. C. G. Gillespie, The Edge ofObjectiv-
ity, chaps. 6ff.
68. Samburski, Das Physikalische Weltbild, p. 219.
69 wlbid |ppa219,1220;.225:

213
NOTES TO CHAPTER 3

70. As Fierz has shown (‘Uber den Ursprung,” pp. 74ff, 82ff ), this idea
of Newton’s goes back to certain Italian Renaissance philos-
ophers, especially Francesco Patrizzi (1529-1593), who postu-
lated one absolute light-filled space, created by God, in which
all motion took place (though still imagined as local-
ized), and Giordano Bruno (1548-1600), who first postulated
infinite space in the sense of contemporary physics; this infinite
space contains the universes animated by God.
71. Ibid., pp. 89-91.
72. For further examples, see Jung, Psychology and Alchemy, CW 12,
par. 473; and M.-L. von Franz, Aurora Consurgens.
73. Jung, CW 12, pp. 323¢f.
74. Jung, CW 9(1), par. 68; and Gillespie, Edge of Objectivity,
chap. 6.
75. Das physikalische Weltbild, p. 405.
76. Ibid., p. 619 (italics added).
77. R. Anschiitz, August Kekulé, I, p. 625, and Il, pp. 941f; see also I,
p. 611.
78. Cited in ibid., II, pp. 941f.
79. Cited in ibid. The hypothesis concerned the ringlike structure
of benzene.
80. Ibid., pp. 942f.
81. Cf. Jung, Letters, I, p. 412: Every explanation is, in the last anal-
ysis, projection.
$2.. CW 11, par, 279.
83. Cf. CW 13, par. 88.
84. Jung, CW 12, par. 346. \
85. Ibid.
86. Ibid. (italics added).
87. Ibid., par. 380.
88. Ibid., par. 394.
89. Ibid., par. 394 (italics added). Cf. the contemporary work
by R. Ruyer, La Gnose de Princeton, passim.
214
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 4

90. Cf. Capra, Tao of Physics, passim.

91. Cf. von Franz, Number and Time.
92. Max Jammer, in Der Begriff der Masse in der Physik and Concepts
of Space, has described very well how baffling, even for modern
physicists, concepts like space-time and mass, as well as matter,
can be.
93. Jung, CW 9(1), pars. 151 ff.
94, jung, GW 11, par: 375.

Chapter 4
1. Jung, CW 9(1), par. 54.
Zoid, parc.
3. Ibid., par. 8.
4. Jung, Letters, I, pp. 199f.
5. G. Isler, Die Sennenpuppe, passim.
6. Jung, CW 11, par. 944.
7. The word comes, as we know, from the Greek symballein, “‘to
lump together,” ‘“‘to join or connect or unite,’”’ and served at
first as a sign of recognition. When guests separated from one
another, a ring or a potsherd was broken in two, so that who-
ever was in possession of the one “symbol” could, by joining it
to the other, show that he was an acquaintance of the other
“guest.”
8. The unconscious is not an epiphenomenon of consciousness; it
is a reality of psychic dynamic and a carrier of meaning that
cannot be reduced to anything else. Cf. Jung, CW 5, par. 670,
and CW 9(1); pars. 7, 8.
9. Jung, Letters, I, p. 59. An idol, on the other hand, is a petrified
symbol that causes “an impoverishment of consciousness”
(pp. 59f).
10. Jung, CW 6, par. 816.
it) Ibid... par. 819,
12. Cf. ibid., pars. 823-824.
219
NOTES TO CHAPTER 4

13 . Ibid., par. 827.

14. Ibid., par. 828.
15. CW 11, par. 945.
16. Cf. Jung, Letters, I, pp. 393ff.
Wie Ibid., p. 58.
18. Ibid, p. 395:
19: Ibid.
20. A. Jaffé, ““Synchronizaitat und Kausalitat,” pp. 1ff.
pale Which does not answer the question of what “‘light in itself”
may be, any more than do those experiments that appear to
show that light consists of particles.
Pa, CW 9(1), par. 155.
23: This presupposes that the method of observing psychic
phenomena in general is based on the energetic principle, as it
was postulated by Jung. Cf. Jung, “On Psychic Energy,”’
CW 8, passim.
24. E. Benz, Neue Religionen, p. 168. Benz stresses that the de-
velopment of religions occurs in unpredictable “spurts.”
25: A method created by Jung for encountering inner fantasy
images.
26. For more detail, cf. Jung, “On the Nature of the Psyche,”
CW 8, pars. 384 ff.
OT; Ibid., pars. 398ff.
20: Ibid., par. 403.
29; Ibid., par. 405.
30. Ibid., par. 406. a
OL One thinks of the conversion of St. Augustine from instinctual-
ity to spirit. On the other hand, people with unusually high
spiritual aspirations often become victims of their instincts un-
awares. Cf. also ibid., par. 414.
32. Jung, “Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle,”
CW 8, par. 855.

216
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 5

Do: Jung, CW 9(2), par. 257.

34. Jung, “Synchronicity,” CW 8, par. 840; cf. also CW 14,
par. 661.
Se), Latent, because it does not occur with regularity but only in its
sporadic actualization in the form of synchronistic phenomena.
36. CW 12, par. 411.
S7, ibid? .n 229:

Chapter 5
tly Jung, CW 9(2), par. 62.
ie Jung, Letters, II, p. 276: “‘ ‘Devil’ is a very apt name for certain
autonomous powers in the structure of the human psyche. As
such the devil seems to me to be a very real figure.”
3. “The Magic Steed,” Marchen aus Turkestan und Tibet, p. 126.
4. This is also true in the case of a negative mother-complex in a
man Or a WOmMman.

5. Marchen aus Siberien, p. 81.

6. M.-L. von Franz, ‘‘Das Problem des Bosen im Marchen,”’
pp. 91ff.
. A. Friedrich and G. Buddruss, trans. Shamanengeschichten aus
Sibirien, pp. 20, 26, 97.
Ibid., pp. 50f. For example, nine shaman maidens live in the heav-
ens and their spirits spread madness among human beings.
. Cf. the illustrations in H. Mode, Fabulous Beasts and Demons,
passim.
. Indianermarchen aus Sudamerika, pp. 26ff.
. Ibid., “Der Mond,” pp. 232ff.
. K. Preisendanz, Papyri Graecae magicae, I, pp. 83f, 119; and G.
Soury, La Démonologie de Plutarque (Plutarch, De Deisideimonia),
p. 47. Concerning the effects of the spirits of the dead on the
living, cf. Jung, Letters, I, pp. 256f.
WS; Or perhaps the deceased himself. On this, more detail below.

PA,
NOTES TO CHAPTER 5

14 Jung, ‘The Psychological Foundations of Belief in Spirits,”

CW 8, par. 598.
tS: Ibid., par. 600, n. 15. Cf. also Jung, Letters, I, p. 100.
16. Jung, “Psychological Foundations,” CW 8, par. 597. Cf. also
Jung, Letters, I, pp. 341f.
Lz. Jung, Letters, I, p. 344.
18. Ibid., p. 336 (italics added).
1 Cf. the tendency to mislead man into the idea that machen (to
make, to perform) equals Macht (power). Cf. ibid., p. 352.
20; Ibid., Il, pp. 81f.
yA Ibid., p. 82.
22. Ibid., pp. 82f.
25). Ibid., p. 81.
24. For examples, cf. Mode, Fabulous Beasts.
Pe), Cf. R. C. Thompson, The Devils and Evil Spirits in Babylonia,
passim.
26. Cf. C. Colpe, ‘““Damonen,” in Reallexikon
fiirAntike und Christ-
entum.

TAAfp Ibid.
xem Plato, Symposium, 202e (Joyce translation, p. 555). Cf. F. Regen,
Apuleius philosophus Platonicus, pp. 9f.
Pp Plato, Symposium, 202e—203a. In Plato’s Epinomis, whose au-
thenticity is questioned, the demons are further subdivided:
their home is the elements; there are visible and invisible de-
mons, heavenly gods, gods of the ether, water demons, water
demigods, and so on.
30. De Deo Socratis, cap. 12. Excerpted and translated from
Apuleius, Opuscules philosophiques et fragments, I, pp. 31ff.
31: Cf. cap. 15, ibid., pp. 34ff.
32. Soury, La Démonologie, pp. 23-26.
oD) Ibid., p. 30. Nymphs, for example, live for 9,720 years, accord-
ing to Hesiod. Tree-nymphs live as long as their trees.

218
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 5

34. Ibid., pp. 43f.

ep Ibid., p. 49.
36. De Divinatione, 2. 58, 119.
obs Regen, Apuleius, pp. 16ff.
38. Ibid., p. 18.
O29: There are naturally a number of variants; cf. Pseudo-Plutarch,
De fato, 9, 572f, and Nemesios, De natura hominum, 44, 167.
40. They correspond to the spirits that are the “lords of nature”’
among the Yakut.
41. H. Wey, “Die Funktionen der bésen Geister bei den griechis-
chen Apologeten des zweiten Jahrhunderts nach Christus,”
pp. 270-272.
42. Jung, “Psychological Aspects of the Mother Archetype,” CW 9
(1), par. 189.
43. Wey, ‘‘Funktionen der bosen Geister,” pp. 6ff.
44. Ibid., p. 10. ;
45. Ibid. p 320;
46. Ibid., p. 28. Expressed in modern language, demons produce
projections.
47. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, pp. 327f.
48. “Answer to Job,” CW 11, par. 669.
49. Cf. Jung, Letters, I, pp. 336, 355-356, concerning the meaning
of the hieros gamos.
50. Wey, “Funktionen der bésen Geister,” pp. 35ff.
yi Ibid., pp. 41ff.
oy Ibid., pp. 47ff. Athenagoras’s theory concerning angels recalls,
in a number of points, Pseudo-Plutarch, Defato, 9, and Nemi-
sios, De natura hominis, 44, 167.

5D) Metamelesas; cf. ibid., p. 53.

54. Ibid., p. 58.
SEE Ibid., pp. 63, 65.

219
NOTES TO CHAPTER 5

56. Ibid., pp. 71ff.

EYE Ibid.,, p./2.
30. Ibid., pp. 73ff.
DU: Ibid., pp. 97ff.
60. Ibid., pp. 109ff. The gods of the heathens were called daimonia
(p. 121).
61. Ibid., p. 163.
62. Ibid., p. 165. For Justin Martyr the passion on the cross is “the
greatest symbol of the fish and its (Christ’s) arche.”’
63. Ibid., p. 221.
64. C. Ernst, Teufelsaustreibungen.
65. The same attitude comes out in Wunneberg’s judgment of the
girl exorcised by Father Jussel.
66. E. Niderberger, Sagen, Marchen und Gebrauche aus Unterwalden.
67. Officially, according to the Rituale Romanum, the innocent can
also sometimes be possessed. Cf. Rodewyk, Die damonische Be-
sessenheit, p. 130. In this case their suffering serves the “‘glorifi-
cation of God’s power’”’ (p. 131). It can also be caused by black
magic or the magic of others used for the purpose of damaging
or hurting; or the condition can be voluntarily taken on as expi-
ation or as a penitential exercise (p. 135). God can give his con-
sent to a case of possession; the possessed stand under his very
special protection (p. 138).
68. Jung, “Concerning the Archetypes, with Special Reference to
the Anima Concept,” CW 9(1), par. 142.
69. Jung, Letters, I, pp. 82f, 108f.
70. CWO). para: N
Ty Ibid., pars. 209ff.
APA The doctrine of the fall.
WS: In other words, an inflation.
74. CW 9(2), par. 114.
7D. Ibid., pars. 209f. Cf. the fact that devils or demons often hide

220
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 6

behind mandala drawings. Jung, “Concerning Mandala Sym-

bolism,” CW 9(1), par. 689: “This shadow aspect of the
mandala represented the disorderly, disruptive tendencies, the
‘chaos’ that hides behind the self and bursts out in a dangerous
way as soon as the individuation process comes to a standstill or
when the self is not realized and so remains unconscious.”
76. Ibid., par. 209.
Tae Ibid.
78. Ibid., p. 141. On the demonic nature of religions and ideologies,
cf. also Jung, Letters, I, pp. 158f.
TS. Jung, “The Undiscovered Self (Present and Future),”’ Civiliza-
tion in Transition, CW 10, pp. 247ff.
80. Cf. Jung, Letters, Il, pp. 163ff, esp. p. 168.

Chapter 6
1. Cf. esp. Jung, CW 9(2), par. 20.
. Cf. the outstanding collection of earlier articles on The
Metamorphoses in G. Binder and R. Merkelbach, eds., Amor
and Psyche.
. K. Kerényi, Die griechisch-orientalische Romanliteratur in reli-
gionsgeschichtlicher Beleuchtung; and in greater detail, R. Merkel-
bach, Roman und Mysterium in der Antike. B. Lavagnini offers an
appraisal of the literary unity of the book in II significato e il
valore del romanzo di Apuleo.
. [have dealt with this in more detail in my book The Golden Ass
of Apuleius.
. For example, in the Risus episode.
. Cf. J. O. Swahn, The Tale of Cupid and Psyche.
. For details, cf. Merkelbach, Roman und Mysterium, pp. 8ff, 47.
. Cf. Jung, CW 9(2), pars. 24ff.
Cr. “Winged” equals “psychic.” In Greek, butterfly, as we know,
COs
NOS
ONe
I
is one of the meanings of“psyche.”
10. Merkelbach, Roman und Mysterium, pp. 47, 78.

raeas|
NOTES TO CHAPTER 6

it; It has been observed that the cosmetic is connected with the
waters of Lethe in the Beyond (ibid., pp. 50f), but that does not
explain why it is specifically a cosmetic preparation. What has
beauty exactly to do with Lethe?
ive He has this in common with the style of the day, but this too
originates in a (neurotic) attitude toward life that he also shares.
13; She equates her husband with Liber, that is, Dionysos, so that
she herself thereby becomes Semele or Ariadne, partner in the
divine marriage.
14. Heraclitus, cited in Capelle, Die Vorsokratiker, p. 133 (21 Frag-
ment 62).
15: Apuleius, The Metamorphoses, translated by Robert Graves as
The Transformations of Lucius, Otherwise Known as The Golden
Ass, pp. 226-227.
16. Plutarch, Uber Isis und Osiris.
t7- Merkelbach, Roman und Mysterium, pp. 11ff, 67f, and passim.
18. In an appendix Neumann briefly touches on Apuleius’ anima-
problem but does not go into it in any detail.
19. Preisendanz, Papyri, I, p. 129.
20. Jung, CW 9(2), par. 28.
PAN One thinks of stories of the Bluebeard type.
22} For an interpretation of the passion of Perpetua, cf. my work
“Die Passio Perpetuae.”’
2a) Just as, in the case of Apuleius, Isis appears as anima but else-
where can also be understood as “‘Isis of women.”
24. Von Franz, “Die Passio Perpetuae.”
25% Ibid., p. 403 *
26. Ibid., pp. 433f.
ate “De agricultura,” 50, Philonis Opera, I, p. 105.
28. “Excerpta ex Theodoto,” c. 21, in J. P. Migne, ed., Patrologia cursus
completus, P. G., IX, col. 668.
20% Further in von Franz, “Die Passio Perpetuae.”’

222,
 NOTES TOI CHAPTERY

30. Metamorphosen, VIII, 27. The passage in Graves’s version, p. 201,

is too poorly translated.
Ole june. Ow O(2) parse o19k:
32. As Jung put it, in Letters, I, p. 73.

Chapter 7
1. H. Jacobsohn, “The Dialogue of a World-Weary Man with His
Ba, pp..5it.
2. Nitzsche, The Genius Figure in Antiquity and the Middle Ages,
chap. 1.
3. Epistolae, 2, 2, 187ff.“. . . natal comes qui temperat astrum, naturae
deus humanae, mortalis in unumquodque caput, vultu mutabilis, albus
et ater.”
. The phallic form may have originated in the Etruscan god
Mutinus Titinus.
. Nitzsche, Genius Figure, p. 13.
. The Romans translated daimonion as “genius.”
. Nitzsche, Genius Figure, pp. 31ff.
. Some daimons have, as we know, a subtle body.
en
SS. Nitzsche, Genius Figure, pp. 36ff. Cf. also E. Rohde, Psyche, for
eer
Ne}
a
more general treatment.
. Cf. Horace, Deus mortalis, etc.
. Nitzsche, Genius Figure, pp. 32f.
. Cited in ibid., pp. 23ff.
. Cf. Valerius Soranus, chap. 133 (quoted by Augustine); cf.
Nitzsche, Genius Figure, p. 25.
. De Deo Socratis, chap. 16.
. With the exception, naturally, of Apuleius’ great teacher,
Plutarch, who followed exactly the same line.
. Certain magic papyri are an exception. Cf. Preisendanz, Papyri,
II (Prayer to Christ).

223
NOTES TO CHAPTER 7

Le For example, the case of Lactantius; cf. Nitzsche, Genius Figure,

pp. 38f.
18. R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres.
19) Ibid., pp. 4-6.
Al): I prefer the translation “Truth” to that of “Power”’ because it is
less ambiguous. Truth is the kingdom of the Beyond and its
“power.”
ok Hermes Trismegistus, Poimandres, in Corpus Hermeticum, I, pp.
Yea
22. Ibid., I, pp. 50f.
23. Ibid., I, pp. 58f.
24. Tractate X, ibid., I, pp. 116f. The human psyche is doisi-daimonia
when it is God-fearing.
2D: Tractate X, ibid., I, pp. 124f. Here it is a case, as Nock remarks
(p. 139), of amixture of the idea of the Nous-daimon and of the
Platonic Nous (as spiritual component of the human psyche).
Ciralso p.195.
PLe% Tractate XI, ibid., I, pp. 156f.
2]. Ibid., I, p. 166.
28. Ibid., II, pp. 201f.
08fe Tractate XI, ibid., II, pp. 204, 206.
30. Ibid., IV, pp. 118-121. That Hermes himself is this son of God.
Cf. Reitzenstein, Poimandres, p. 104, n. 1. Cf. also Jung, CW 12,
pars. 456ff.
St: Cited in Preisendanz, Papyri, Il, pp. 122ff (ellipses added). Reit-
zenstein adduces relevant Egyptian parallels (Poimandres, pp.
19-21), as does Preisendanz (Papyri, Il, p. 146).
a2: The subterranean gods.
35: Recollection, memory.
34. Preisendanz, Papyri, I, p. 195. Cf. also the prayer to the same
god, as Nous, quoted in Jung, CW 9(2), p. 184.
Bey Preisendanz, Papyri, I, p. 111. Cf. also II, pp. 45ff: “Come to me,
Hermes, as children into the womb of women.... Hear me,

224
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 7

Hermes sepatron toteticsart jor) healingis so... Protect: me

everywhere as long as I live... . For thou art I and I am thou,
thy name is mine and mine is thine. For I am thy image.’’
36. Cf. also ibid., I, p. 238.
oy Cf. Jung’s commentary on this in CW 9(2), pars. 314-323.
38. Cf. P. de Labriolle, La Crise Montaniste; and M. Y. van Beek,
Passio Sanctarum Perpetuae et Felicitatis.
59} Jung, CW 9(2), par. 42.
40. A name of the goddess of the Eleusinian mysteries symbolizing
strength.
41. Preisendanz, Papyri, I, pp. 141 ff. Cf. the evocation, ‘“‘Subterra-
nean Hermes and Subterranean Hecate,” ibid., I, p. 121.
42. Ibid) tps 119:
43. Reitzenstein, Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen, p. 15.
44. In this text this is physis.
45. Preisendanz, Papyri, I, p. 167.
46. Ibid!) 1, p2 159:
47. Moon; cf. also ibid., I, p. 179.
48. Ibid., I, p. 161.
49. “Answer to Job,” CW 11, par. 620.
50. H. Corbin, Avicenne et le récit visionnaire, I, pp. 19ff.
it. Ibid., p. 23 and esp. p. 25. It is the heavenly counterpart of the
soul.
a Ibid., p. 25.
D2. Intellectus activus.
54. Corbin, Avicenne, p. 77, and the natura perfecta, p. 106.
22) Ibid. p; 12:
56. Ibid., p. 90.
ne Ibid., p. 106.
58. Ibid., p. 107.
ao, Ibid., pp. 107f. Many saw the resurrected one there—an inde-

22
NOTES TO CHAPTER 8

scribable light—and when those who looked on were later

asked, some saw a child, some a youth, and still others an old
man. Similarly, the Hermetic visionary, too, can see only that
which is in him. Even at that time, therefore, there was a suspi-
cion that it had to do with projection!
60. Ibid., I, p. 109. Cf. also the report of the first encounter of Hayg
ibn Ygazan with the wise man, the “living one, son of the
waking one,” in Corbin, Avicenne, I, pp. 21f, and II (the whole
report with commentary is given in vol. II).
61. Ibid., II, p. 75, n. 50. The teacher says: “Whenever you are alone
and become a monad, I am your companion.”
62. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, p. 220: ““Man always has
some mental reservation, even in the face of divine decrees.’
63. Change of mind. In The Shepherd of Hermes, mandata 12.6.1,
quoted in Reitzenstein, Poimandres, p. 13, n. 2.
64. Jung, Memories, pp. 323ff.

Chapter 8
1. Jung even equates the withdrawal of projections with indi-
viduation. Cf. CW 9(1), pars. 82ff.
2. “The Visions of Zosimos,’ CW 13, par. 111; cf. also ‘‘Trans-
formation Symbolism in the Mass,” CW 11, pars. 434ff.
3. The Lutheran translation of metanoia as “‘repentance”’ is no
longer understandable to most people in its deeper meaning.
4. I Ching, Il, chap. 24, pp. 145ff (italics added). The so-called Acta
Vercellenses interprets the cross-beam of the cross symbol as
“the return and change of meaning of a man’s life.’ Cf. also
Jung, “Transformation Symbolism in the Mass,’ CW 11, pars.
432ff.
5. In professional language, her native animi had won the upper
hand.
6. On the personified aspect of the collective unconscious, cf.
Jung, Memories, pp. 68ff, 87f.

220
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 8

7. Quoted by Jung, CW 14, par. 684.

8. Ibid., par. 685. The eye of self-knowledge is, so to speak, a
counter-magic to the “evil eye,’ which operates in the same
way as disease-projectiles (Seligmann, Der bose Blick).
. Jung, “On the Nature of the Psyche,” CW 8, par. 390.
. Ibid., pars. 389 and 394, n. 68. Cf. also Jung, “Concerning
Mandala Symbolism,’ CW 9(1), par. 704. Here the eye has the
meaning of the Self.
. “A Study in the Process of Individuation,’ CW 9(1), par. 593.
. Jung, “On the Nature of the Psyche,’ CW 8, par. 394.
. W. Deonna, Le Symbolisme de l’oeil, pp. 46ff.
Abid Pp. 4),00, o:
. Jung, “Concerning Mandala Symbolism,” CW 9(1), par. 704.
. Deonna, Le Symbolisme de l’oeil, p. 49.
. Ibid., p. 51. Aeschylus (Eumenides) says that while we sleep the
whole soul is lighted up by eyes; with these eyes it can see
everything withheld from its sight during the day. A Hermetic
philosopher acknowledges: “The body’s sleep produced that
illumination of the soul; my closed eyes saw the truth”’ (quoted
in ibid., p. 51).
18. “La Conscience,” from Henri Sens in Chrestomathie francaise du
XIX siécle, pp. 99f (from La Légende des siécles, pp. 73, 83).
1?) “The eye was in the grave and looked at Cain.” On conscience
as a manifestation of the Self (not of the superego), cf. Jung, “A
Psychological View of Conscience,’ CW 10, pars. 825-827.
20. Deonna, Le Symbolisme de l’oeil.
Zi. Seligmann, Der bése Blick, II, passim.
be A practical example in Jung, Man and His Symbols: An old pa-
tient who was too active dreamed that at the head ofa band of
riders he galloped over a grave. The unconscious shows here to
what extent he behaves too youthfully. A young man who was
too timid had the same dream. In his case it would be better to
tell him that the unconscious was encouraging him to a more
active attitude. In neither case, however, can we say that the

22)
NOTES TO CHAPTER 8

unconscious is “willing” anything—it simply mirrors what is

constellated.
ae “Transformation Symbolism in the Mass,’ CW 11, par. 415.
24. Ibid., pars. 419, 427.
Pay Jung, “Concerning Mandala Symbolism,’ CW 9(1), par. 682:
‘, . in the individuation process what were originally projec-
tions ‘stream’ back ‘inside’ and are integrated into the personal-
ity again.”’ Cf. also Jung, “Transformation Symbolism in the
Mass,” CW 11, pars. 398-402.
26. Jung, “Transformation Symbolism in the Mass,’ CW 11, par.
400.
Zt. Ibid., par. 400.
28. Ibid.
20; Cf. von Franz, “Dream of Descartes,’ p. 122, n. 257.
50: On this remythologizing of older thought in the Gnosis, cf.
Leisegang, Die Gnosis, pp. 12ff.
re That is a projection represented from the side of the un-
conscious.
a2. Leisegang, Die Gnosis, pp. 183, 186ff (from Epiphanius,
Panarium, chaps. 25-26).
a2) Ibid., pp. 186, 189ff (“Gospel of Eve’’).
34. And at the same time, the Barbelo. Epiphanius, Panarium,
XXVI, 3, from James, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 12,
cited in Jung, CW 14, par. 6, n. 26 (italics added).
oo: Cf. Hermes Trismegistus, Poimandres, Tractate I-II, pp. 12ff.
(Tractate I, chap. 14ff.)
36. For detail, see Jung, CW 12, pars. 456ff; and Reitzenstein,
Poimandres, pp. 103¢f.
bY. H.-C. Puech, “Der Begriff der Erlosung im Manichaismus,’
esp. pp. 285ff.
38. Leisegang, Die Gnosis, pp. 151ff (from Hippolytus, Elenchos, V,
22).
ops Jung, “Transformation Symbolism in the Mass,” CW 11, pars.
399, 400f.

228
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 9

40. Ibid., pars. 399-401.

41. Ibid., par. 444.
42. In Librum Regnorum Homiliae (Migne, P. G., vols. 12, 13), cited
by Jung, CW 14, par. 6, n. 26.
43. Cf. Jung, Letters, I, p. 395.
44. The Upanishads, trans. F. Max Miller, p. 182.
45. CW 16, pars. 437ff.
46. Cited in Jung, CW 9(2), pars. 288ff.
Ae Jung, Memories, p. 297.
48. Jung, Letters, I, p. 298.
49. This is why group therapy and “‘self-experience” groups are
so harmful. Composed artificially, they obscure the working
of the Self in the individual and encourage in its place shameless
projections, aggressions, egotism, and narcissistic self-mirroring.
50. E. Jung, and M.-L. von Franz, The Grail Legend, pp. 162f.
ble lbid..p- 167.

Chapter 9
1. On the subject of consciousness conceived as a field, cf. Olde-
meyer, “‘Uberlegungen zum phanomenologisch-philoso-
phischen und kybernetischen Bewusstseinsbegritf,’ pp. 83ff,
and the literature cited there.
2. Gilbert Durand in Le Symbole makes the same surmise.
3. Jung, “On the Nature of the Psyche,’ CW 8, pars. 411f. Many
modern people hide eggs at Easter-time “‘because people have
always done it,’ without knowing what this means symboli-
cally. The same is true of lighted trees at Christmas.
. R. Gould, Yiwara, Foragers of the Australian Desert, pp. 199ff.
5. For further examples of the use of pieces of glass as defense
against the evil eye and against evil spirits and persons, see
Seligmann, Der bose Blick, Ul, pp. 41f.
. Cf. Jung, “Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious,’ CW
9(1), par. 69: “Ultimately they [important ideas] are all founded

Leg
NOTES TO CHAPTER 9

on primordial archetypal forms whose concreteness dates from

a time when consciousness did not think, but only perceived.
‘Thoughts’ were objects of inner perception, not thought at all,
but sensed as external phenomena—seen or heard, so to
speak. .. . Thinking of this kind precedes ego-consciousness.”’
. For example, when silver is finely pulverized, it no longer re-
flects but is black (that is, light-absorbent).
. For the same reason it can also conduct electricity, which is
why good reflectors are often good electric conductors. There
are also crystalline formations in which the electrons are not
free but are only loosely bound. Such materials are transparent
to light but are electric insulators (for example, glass). I am
grateful to Art Funkhouser for this information.
. M. Eliade, Shamanism, pp. 49f, 153-154.
. Cf. Jung, ‘““The Visions of Zosimos,” CW 13, par. 132.
. Cf. Seligmann, Der bose Blick, Il, pp. 176-178.
. Ibid., Il, pp. 310ff.
. Cf. Jung, “Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious,’ CW
Ot), pats. Jor
. M. Ninck, Die Bedeutung des Wassers im Kult und Leben der Alten,
p. 47.
. Ibid., pp. 54f.
. Ibid., citing Pausanius, 7th book, chap. 21, 12.
. Ibid., pp. 71ff.
nibids p. 72:
. Ibid., pp. 81ff.
. Ibid., p. 136. =
. Cf. Jung, “Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious,’ CW
9). pars. 33ft.
. Cf, Jung; Letters, 1. p. 87.
. Cf. Jung, “General Aspects of Dream Psychology,” CW 10, par.
826, pars. 443f.
. CW 10, par. 826.

ZOU.
 NOTES TO CHAPTER 9

Pde: . Jung, Memories, p. 323.

26. Ibid., p. 324, n. 6; cf. also Jung, Letters, I, pp. 325ff.
pAfp This aspect of projection corresponds rather to the alchemistic
concept ofproiectio, which, as Fabricus shows, corresponds to a
double perception by the subject of his Self after leaving his
usual state of consciousness and his own bodily identity (‘“The
Symbol of the Self in the Alchemical ‘Proiectio, ” pp. 47ff).
28. In E. Edinger’s excellent book Ego and Archetype, the casuistic
handling of this is impressive, and I would refer the reader to
this book.
29. W. Pauli, “The Influence of Archetypal Ideas on the Scientific
Theories of Kepler,’ pp. 208ff.
30. E. Wigner, Symmetries and Reflections, pp. 222f.
ol Cf. Jung, “Transformation Symbolism in the Mass,’ CW 11,
par. 442.
32: Leibniz on the soul as monad; cited in Jung, “Synchronicity,”
CW 8, par. 937.
33: Jung, Letters, I, p. 143.
34. Cited in Jung, “Synchronicity,” CW 8, par. 937.
3D: Jung, ‘“‘Analytical Psychology and Education,’ The Develop-
ment of Personality, CW 17, par. 164 (italics added).
36. Cf. ibid., par. 165. Cf. also Jung, Letters, I, pp. 255ff.
DT Letters, II, p. 539. See also Jung, CW 14, par. 662.
38. Cf. the summary of the doctrines of correspondentia or of the
sympathy of all things and preestablished harmony in Leibniz
and Schopenhauer, in Jung, ‘“‘Synchronicity,’ CW 8, pars. 937ff,
828ff.
39) “Die ungewohnlichen Naturerscheinungen in den T’ang Anna-
len und ihre Deutung,’ pp. 32ff.
40. In the West the astrologers of another day proceeded from
premises similar to those of Chinese natural philosophy. The
constellations of the stars in the heavens reflected psychic com-
ponents of the fate of human beings. Jung therefore concluded
that the starry heaven is in fact the open book of cosmic projec-

231
NOTES TO CHAPTER 9

tions, of mirrored mythologems, that is, of the archetypes. The

“truth” of astrological statements is probably to be explained
on the basis of the principle of synchronicity, which, however,
presupposes a qualitative aspect of time. (““On the Nature of the
Psyche,” CW 8, par. 392.)
41. Jung, Letters, I, p. 366. Dr. L. Bendit discovered such a “‘knowl-
edge” independently of Jung and named it Paranormal Cogni-
tion. See Jung’s letters to him, ibid., pp. 389, 420.
42. CW, 8; pars; 8567912;
43. For details I must refer the reader to ibid., pars. 856ff.
44. Ibid., par. 842.
45. Cf. also Jung, Letters, I, p. 249.
46. Jung, ‘‘Synchronicity,’ CW 8, par. 912; Letters, I, pp. 256f.
47. Cf. ibid.
48. Ibid., par. 870.
49. Jung, as is well known, calls this “‘acausal orderedness,” ibid.,
par. 965.
50. Cf. also Jung, Letters, I, p. 87.
oF Cf. Jung, “Synchronicity,” CW 8, par. 965.
52 Cf. also the excellent comments by Mary Gammon that point
in a similar direction, in “Window into Eternity,” pp. 11ff.
see “Synchronicity,” CW 8, par. 870 (italics added).
54. Jung defined “spirit” similarly in ‘““The Phenomenology of the
Spirit in Fairy Tales,’ CW 9(1), par. 393.
55: For a detailed discussion of this problem I must refer the reader
to my book Number and Time. €
56. Cf. Jung, “Synchronicity,” CW 8, pars. 856ff; and Jung, Letters,
], pp. 1/6ft, 378f.
57: Cf. Jung, “Synchronicity,’ CW 8, pars. 849, 850f.
58. Ibid., par. 849.
Bibliography
Ackerknecht, E. H. ‘‘Natural Diseases and Rational Treatment in
Primitive Medicine.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine, vol. 19,
May 1946.
. “Primitive Medicine and Culture Pattern.” Bulletin of the
History of Medicine, vol. 12, no. 4, 1942.
. A Short History of Psychiatry. New York and London, 1959.
Ali, S. La Projection: Une étude psychoanalytique. Paris, 1970.
Andresen, C. Logos und Nomos: Die Polemik des Kelsos wider das
Christentum. Berlin, 1955.
Anschutz, R. August Kekulé. 2 vols. Berlin, 1929.
Apuleius. Metamorphosen, oder der Goldene Essel. Translated by
R. Helm. Berlin, 1956. [English version: The Transformations of
Lucius, Otherwise Known as The Golden Ass. Translated by Robert
Graves. New York, 1951.]
. Opuscules philosophiques et fragments. Edited by J. Beaujeu.
Paris,.1973.
Atharva-Veda. See Bloomfield.
Baudelaire, C. The Flowers of Evil. Edited by M. andJ. Mathews.
Rev. ed. Norfolk, Conn., 1962.
Beek, M. Y. van. Passio Sanctarum Perpetuae et Felicitatis. Leipzig,
1936.
Benz, E. Die Vision. Stuttgart, 1971.
. Neue Religionen. Stuttgart, 1971.
Binder, G., and Merkelbach, R., eds. Amor and Psyche. Darmstadt,
1968.
Bloomfield, M. Hymns of the Atharva-Veda. Sacred Books of the
East, 42. Oxford, 1897.
Bohr, N. Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature. New York,
1934.
Buhlmann, R. Die Entwicklung des tiefenpsychologischen Begriffs der
Projektion. Zurich, 1971.
Capelle, W. Die Vorsokratiker. Leipzig, 1935.
Capra, F. The Tao of Physics. Berkeley, 1975.
Carnap, R. Einfiihrung in die Philosophie der Naturwissenschaft. Nym-
phenburg, 1969.
Christiansen, J. Die Technik der allegorischen Auslegungswissenschaft
bei Philo von Alexandrien. Tubingen, 1969.

233
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Clement of Alexandria. Stromata. Edited by von Camélot and

Montdésert. Paris, 1954.
. Excerpta ex Theodoto. See Migne, P.G., vol. 9.
Colpe, C. ““Damonen.” In Reallexikon ftir Antike und Christentum.
Stuttgart, 1974.
Corbin, H. ‘“‘Herméneutique spirituelle comparée.”’ Eranosjahrbuch,
vol. 33. Zurich, 1965.
. Avicenne et le récit visionnaire. 2 vols. Teheran and Paris,
1954.
Deonna, W. Le Symbolisme de l’oeil. Berne, 1965.
Diels, H. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. 6th ed. 3 vols. Berlin,
1951-52. [English version: Freeman, Kathleen. Ancilla to the Pre-
Socratic Philosophers. A Complete Translation of the Fragments in
Diels, Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Oxford and Cambridge, Mass.,
1952.]
Dobschutz, E. von. ‘“Vom vierfachen Schriftsinn.” In Beitrage zur
Kirchengeschichte, edited by A. Harnack. Leipzig, 1921.
Durand, G. See Le Symbole. Kongressbericht. Strasbourg, 1975.
Edinger, E. Ego and Archetype. New York, 1972.
Eliade, M. Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy. Translated by
W. R. Trask. New York (Bollingen Series LXXVI) and London,
1964.
Ephrem the Syrian, Saint. Hymni et sermones, vol. 2. Edited by T. J.
Lamy. Mechlin, 1886.
Ernst, C. Teufelsaustreibungen: Die Praxis der katholischen Kirche in
16ten and 17ten Jahrhundert. Berne, 1972.
Exégeése et herméneutique. Congress report. Edited by X. L. Dufour.
Paris<1971-
Fabricus,J. ““The Symbol of the Selfin the Alchemical ‘Proiectio.’ ”’
Journal of Analytical Psychology (London), vol. 18, no. 1, 1973.
Fierz, M. “Isaac Newton als Mathematiker.” Neujalrsblatt der Natur-
forschenden Gesellschaft in Ziirich, 1972.
. “Uber den Ursprung und die Bedeutung der Lehre Isaac
Newrane vom absoluten Raum.” Gesnerus (Zurich), vol. 2, 1952.
Franz, M.-L. von. Aurora Consurgens: A Document Attributed to
Thomas Aquinas on the Problem of Opposites in Alchemy. Vol. 3 of
Mysterium Coniunctionis. Translated by R.F.C. Hull and A.S.B.
Glover. New York (Bollingen Series LXXVII) and London, 1966.

234
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

. C. G. Jung: His Myth in Our Time. Translated by W. H.

Kennedy. New York, 1975.
. “The Dream of Descartes.’ In Timeless Documents of the
Soul. Studies in Jungian Thought. Evanston, 1968.
. The Feminine in Fairytales. New York, 1972.
———.. The Golden Ass of Apuleius. Zurich and New York, 1970.
. Interpretation of Fairytales. New York, 1972.
———.. Jung’s Typology. New York, 1971.
. Number and Time: Reflections Leading toward a Unification of
Depth Psychology and Physics. Translated by A. Dykes. Studies in
Jungian Thought. Evanston, 1974.
. “Die Passio Perpetuae.” InC. G.Jung, Aion: Untersuchungen zur
Symbolgeschichte. Psychologische Abhandlungen, VIII. Zurich,
1951. [English version: “The Passio Perpetuae.” Spring (New
York), 1949.]
. “Das Problem des Bosen im Marchen.’ In Das Bose. Stu-
dien aus dem C. G. Jung-Institut. Zurich, 1961.
. The Problem of the Puer Aeternus. New York, 1970.
. Shadow and Evil in Fairytales. New York, 1974.
. Time, Rhythm and Repose. New York, 1978.
Freud, S. Totem and Taboo. London, 1975.
Friedrich, A., and Buddruss, G., trans. Schamanengeschichten aus
Siberien. Munich, 1955.
Gammon, M. “Window into Eternity: Archetype and Relativity.”
Journal of Analytical Psychology (London), vol. 18, no. 1, 1973.
Gillespie, C. G. The Edge of Objectivity. Princeton, 1959.
Goppelt, L. Typos: Die typologische Deutung des Alten Testaments im
Neuen. Darmstadt, 1973.
Gould, R. Yiwara, Foragers of the Australian Desert. New York, 1969.
Hahn, C. Geschichte der Ketzer im Mittelalter. Aalen, 1968.
Heisenberg, W. Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Sci-
ence. London, 1952.
Hermes Trismegistus. Corpus Hermeticum. Text established by A. Y.
Nock and translated by E. Festugiere. 4 vols. Paris, 1960.
Hippolytos. Elenchos (Refutatio Omnium Haeresium). In Werke, Vol.
3. Edited by P. Wendland. Leipzig, 1916. [English version: The
Refutation of All Heresies. Translated by J. H. Macmahon. Edin-
burgh, 1911.]

Zo
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Holton, G. “Uber die Hypothesen, welche den Naturwissenschaf-

ten zugrunde liegen.” Eranosjahrbuch, vol. 39. Zurich, 1970.
. “The Roots of Complementarity.” Eranosjahrbuch, vol. 37.
Zurich, 1968.
Honko, L. Krankheitsprojektile.
Horace. Horace: Satires, Epistles and Ars Poetica. With an English
translation by H. R. Fairclough. Loeb Classical Library. London
and New York, 1926.
Hugo, V. “La Conscience.” In H. Sens, Chrestomathie frangaise du
XIX siécle. Lausanne, 1899.
I Ching, or Book of Changes. The German translation by
R. Wilhelm, rendered into English by C.F Baynes. 3rd ed.
Princeton (Bollingen Series XIX) and London, 1967.
Isler, G. Die Sennenpuppe. Basel, 1971.
Jacobsohn, Helmuth. “The Dialogue of a World-Weary Man with
His Ba.” In Timeless Documents of the Soul. Studies in Jungian
Thought. Evanston, 1968.
Jaffe, A. “Synchronizitat und Kausalitat.”’ Eranosjahrbuch, vol. 42.
Zurich, 1973.
Jammer, M. Der Begriff der Masse in der Physik. Darmstadt, 1974.
[English version: Concepts ofMass in Classical and Modern Physics.
Cambridge, Mass., 1961.]
. Concepts of Space.
Jung, C. G. The Collected Works ofC. G. Jung. Edited by Sir H.
Read, M. Fordham, G. Adler, and W. McGuire. Translated by
R. F.C. Hull (except for vol. 2). New York/Princeton (Bollingen
Series XX) and London, 1953-76. Volumes cited:
5. Symbols of Transformation. 2nd ed. 1967.
6. Psychological Types. 1971.
7. Two Essays on Analytical Psychology. 2nd ed. 1966.
8. The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche. 2nd ed. 1969.
9. Part 1. The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. 2nd ed.
1968.
9. Part 2. Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self.
2nd ed. 1968.
10. Civilization in Transition. 1964.
11. Psychology and Religion: West and East. 2nd ed. 1969.
12. Psychology and Alchemy. 2nd ed. 1968.
13. Alchemical Studies. 1967.

236
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

14. Mysterium Coniunctionis: An Inquiry into the Separation and

Synthesis ofPsychic Opposites in Alchemy. 2nd ed. 1970.
17. The Development of Personality. 1954.
. Letters. Selected and edited by G. Adler in collaboration
with A. Jaffé. Bollingen Series XCV. 2 vols. Princeton and Lon-
don, 1973 and 1975.
. Man and His Symbols. (With M.-L. von Franz,J.L. Hender-
son, J. Jacobi, A. Jaffé.) New York and London, 1964.
. Memories, Dreams, Reflections. Recorded and edited by A.
Jaffe. Translated by R. and C. Winston. New York and London,
1961.
Jung, E., and Franz, M.-L. von. The Grail Legend. Translated by A.
Dykes. New York and London, 1971.
Kasper, W., and Lehmen, K. Teufel, Damonen, Besessenheit: Zur
Wirklichkeit des Bosen.
Kerényi, K. Die griechisch-orientalische Romanliteratur in reli-
gionsgeschichtlicher Beleuchtung. Tubingen, 1927.
Kettler, F H. Der urspriingliche Sinn der Dogmatik des Origenes. Berlin,
1966.
Koch, H. Pronoia und Paideusis: Studien tiber Origenes und sein Ver-
haltnis zum Platonismus. Berlin, 1932.
Labriolle, P. de. La Crise Montaniste. Paris, 1913.
Lavagnini, B. II significato il valore del romanzo di Apuleo. Pisa, 1927.
Leisegang, H. Die Gnosis. Kroners Taschenausgabe. Leipzig, 1924.
Lévy-Bruhl, L. How Natives Think. Translated by L. A. Clare [from
Les Fonctions mentales dans les sociétés inférieures|. London, 1926.
Liu Guan-ying. “Die ungewohnlichen Naturerscheinungen in den
T’ang Annalen under ihre Deutung.” Symbollon: Jahrbuch fiir
Symbolforschung, vol. 2. Basel, 1961.
Lobo, R. ‘‘Samkhya-yoga und spatantiker Geist: Eine Unter-
suchung der Allegorese des Origenes in Licht der indischen
Philosophie.” Dissertation. Munich, 1970.
Lubac, H. de. Exégése médiévale: Les quatre sens de l’Ecriture. 4 vols.
Aubier, 1959.
Mahnke, D. Unendliche Sphare und Allmittelpunkt: Beitrage zur
Geneologie der mathematischen Mystik. Stuttgart, 1966.
Marchen der Weltliteratur. Edited by J. van der Leyen and P. Zaunert.
Jena-Cologne-Duisseldorf.
Chinesische Marchen. Edited by R. Wilhelm. 1921.

Le),
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Nordische Marchen II. 1922.

Deutsche Marchen seit Grimm I. 1922.
Marchen aus Turkestan und Tibet. 1923.
Marchen aus Sibirien. N.d.
Indianermarchen aus Stidamerika. 1921.
Meier, C. A. “Projektion, Ubertragung und Subjekt-Objekt-
relation.” Dialectica (Neuchatel) 29, vol. 8, no. 4, 1954.
Merkelbach, R. Roman und Mysterium in der Antike. Munich and
Berlin, 1962.
Migne, J. P., ed. Patrologiae cursus completus.
P.L. Latin Series. 221 vols. Paris, 1844-64.
P.G. Greek Series. 166 vols. Paris, 1857—66.
Miura-Stange, A. Celsus und Origines: Das gemeinsame ihrer Welt-
anschauung. Giessen, 1926.
Mode, H. Fabulous Beasts and Demons. New York, 1973.
Neumann, E. Amor and Psyche: The Psychic Development of the
Feminine. A commentary on the tale by Apuleius. Translated by
R. Manheim. New York (Bollingen Series LIV) and London,
1956.
Niderberger, F. Sagen, Marchen und Gebrauche aus Unterwalden.
Stans, 1914.
Ninck, M. Die Bedeutung des Wassers im Kult und Leben der Alten.
Darmstadt, 1960.
Nitzsche,J.C. The Genius Figure in Antiquity and in the Middle Ages.
New York and London, 1975.
Oesterreich, T. K. Les Possédés. Paris, 1927. [English version: Posses-
sion, Demonical and Other, among Primitive Races in Antiquity, the
Middle Ages and Modern Times. New York, 1966.]
Oldemeyer, E. “Uberlegungen zum phanomenologisch-philoso-
phischen und kybernetischen Bewusstseinsbegriff’’ In K. Stein-
buch, Philosophie und Kybernetik. Munich, 1970. ‘
Onians, R. B. The Origins ofEuropean Thought. Cambridge, Eng.,
1954.
Origen, Contra Celsus. See Migne, P.G., vol. 11, cols. 641-1632.
[English version: Contra Celsus. Translated by G. W. Butter-
worth. London, 1936. German version: Gegen Celsus. Translated
by P. Koetschau. Munich, 1926.]
Palmer, E. Hermeneutics: Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher,
Dilthey, Heidegger and Gadamer. Evanston, 1969.

238
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pauli, W. “The Influence of Archetypal Ideas on the Scientific

Theories of Kepler.” In C. G. Jung and W. Pauli, Synchronicity: An
Acausal Connecting Principle. New York, 1959.
Pfeiffer, E. H. Transkulturelle Psychiatrie. Stuttgart, 1971.
Philo of Alexandria. Philonis Opera, vol. 2. Edited by P. Wendland.
Berlin, 1897.
Plato. ““Timaeus.” Platonis Opera, vol. 4. Edited by J. Burnet. Ox-
ford, 1955.
Plutarch. Uber Isis und Osiris. Edited by T. Hopfner. 2 vols.
Darmstadt, 1967.
Preisendanz, K. Papyri Graecae Magicae. 2 vols. Stuttgart and Leip-
AVaN es
Puech, H.-C. “Der Begriff der Erlosing im Manichaismus.” Eranos-
jahrbuch, vol. 4. Zurich, 1936.
Regen, F. Apuleius philosophus Platonicus. Berlin and New York,
17d
Reitzenstein, R. Poimandres: Studien zur griechsch-dgyptischen und
friihchristlichen Literatur. Leipzig, 1904.
. Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen. Leipzig, 1920.
Reuter. Die Geschichte der religidsen Aufklarung in Mittelalter.
Rig-Veda. Translated by Ralph T. H. Griffith. New rev. ed. Delhi,
1973.
Rodewyk, A. Die damonische Besessenheit in der Sicht des Rituale
Romanum. Zurich, 1963. [English version: Possessed by Satan: The
Church’s Teaching on the Devil, Possession, and Exorcism. New
York, 1975.]
Rohde, E. Psyche. Translated from the 4th German ed. by W. B.
Hillis. London, 1925.
Ruyer, R. La Gnose de Princeton. Paris, 1974.
Samburski, S. Physical Thought from the Presocratics to the Quantum
Physicists. New York, 1975.
. Das Physikalische Weltbild der Antike. Zurich, 1965. [English
version: The Physical World of the Greeks. London, 1956.]
Seligmann, S. Der bose Blick und Verwandtes. 2 vols. Berlin, 1910.
Soury, G. La Démonologie de Plutarque. Paris, 1942.
Steinbuch, K. Philosophie und Kybernetik. Munich, 1970.
Stock, H. The Method of Descartes in Natural Sciences. New York,
1931.
Swahn, J. O. The Tale of Cupid and Psyche. Lynd, 1955.

Bie)
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Symbole, Le. Congress report. Edited by J. Ménard. Strasbourg,

1975.
Thompson, R. C. The Devils and Evil Spirits ofBabylonia. 2 vols.
London, 1902.
Tonquédec, J. de. Les Maladies nerveuses ou mentales et les manifesta-
tions diaboliques. Paris, 1938.
Upanischaden. In Indische Weisheit. Dtsseldorf-Cologne, 1975. [Eng-
lish version: The Upanishads. Parts 1 and 2. Translated by F. Max
Muller. Sacred Books of the East, 1 and 15. Oxford, 1879 and
1884.]
Wey, H. “Die Funktionen der bosen Geister bei den griechischen
Apologeten des zweiten Jahrhunderts nach Christus.” Disserta-
tion. Winterthur, 1957.
Wheeler, A. Einsteins Vision. Heidelberg, 1968. [English edition:
Einstein’s Vision. Heidelberg, 1968.]
Wigner, E. Symmetries and Reflections. Cambridge, Mass., 1970.
Zacharias, G., ed. Das Bose: Dokumente und Interpretationen. Munich,
i972:

240
Index

Abel, 167 negative, 97; positive, 134, 136; in

Abelard, Peter, 49 projection, 32, 123, 139, 141-142, 157
active imagination, 88, 119 Anthropos, 153, 157, 171, 172-173;
adaptation, disturbances of, 7, 9, 16, 20, -Adam, 171
71, 94, 162, 186, 198, 199 Antichrist, 47, 119
affect(s), 19, 21, 23, 33, 35-36, 55, 91, 181; antiquity: daimons of, 36, 107-110,
lack of, 125; and projection, 162-163 116-117, 122, 123-124, 145-149, 150
Agathos Daimon, 150, 151, 152 Anubis, 137
aggression, 23, 39, 55 Aphrodite, 38, 39, 155
Agobard ofLyon, 48 Apollo, 22, 38, 104
air, 38, 62, 67-68 Apostles, 177, 178
Alain de Lille, 58 apotropaism, 37, 39
Albertus Magnus, 106 Apuleius of Madura, 135, 136-137, 138,
Albigensians, 49 139, 143, 144, 148; on demons, 109;
alchemists, 151, 165, 166, 171; and fantasy, literary aestheticism of, 129; Psyche
74 and Eros in, 124-135; on Socrates’
alchemy, 140, 143, 148, 151; essence of daimonion, 148-149
opus of, 165-166; Jung on, 74-75; archetypal contents of unconscious, 24,
Mercurius in, 68-69; two faces of, 74 33, 93, 112-113, 126, 128; and evil, 117,
allegory, 37-38, 40-41, 43, 44, 45, 124; in 119; and mythologems, 85-86, 172, 177,
early Christianity, 41—42; in Gnosis, 178; in projection, 13, 14, 15, 19, 22,
40-41; Jungian concept of, 82 121, 139; “‘redemptive,” 106; spirits
Ambrose, 46 and, 104; and synchronicity, 91, 193
Amor, 22, 33, 88, 124, 126; see also archetypal image(s), 23, 69, 90, 105, 136,
Cupid; Eros 148, 177; daimon as, 148; of gathering,
analysand(s), 14, 98, 163-164; see also 177; in projection, 33, 56; in scientific
patient(s) tradition, 57—76 passim, 190
analysis: as act ofreflection, 161; as archetypes, 72, 79; and creation of
therapy (see Freudian school; Jungian symbols, 82; ofevil, 119; and evil
school) spirits, 105, 110, 111; formlessness of,
Anaximander, 57 117; function and effects of, 90, 91;
Andresen, C., 42 multiplicity of, 84-85; in projection,
angel(s), 111, 113, 157, 158; in dream, 24, 86-87, 117, 139; relation of, to
175-176; fallen, 111, 113-114, 115; as subject, 116-121; ofSelf, 161, 165; and
God’s messengers, 149, 176; of synchronicity, 193, 197, 198; and
Metanoia, 158, 161-162 thought-models, 56, 70-71, 72; unity
anima, 93, 128, 129, 130, 134, 140, 141, of, 81
144, 145, 176; characteristics of, Ares, 38, 39
123-124, 135, 168; development of, Aristides, 31
132-133; meaning of, 123; mother-, Aristotle, 38
136; negative, 126; in projection, 24, arrow/arrowhead, as symbol of
32—33, 88, 123, 127, 133, 135, 139, projection, 20, 23, 31, 32, 87-88, 92,
141-142, 157; redemption of, 127 120
animal(s), 29, 38, 109; magical, 85-86; Artemis, 22, 114, 131
mythical, 106 Arthur, King, 177
animal souls, 23—24 assimilation, 118; of projection, 39-40
animus, 49, 123, 140, 144, 145, 176, 192; Astarte, 39
characteristics of, 134, 135, 168; astrology, 23, 73-74, 148, 150

241
INDEX

Athena, 38, 39 181; in fairy tale, 96-97; parental

Athenagoras, 113 images of, 2-3; parental projections
atom(s), 181, 182; dancing, 69, 70, 88; onto, 16-17, 18; play of, 7
soul-, 61-62 Chiron, 106
Attis, 137 Christ/Christ figure: androgyny of,
Augustine, Saint, 46, 138 138-139; Ascension of, 48; crucifixion
automorphic functions, 88 of, 114; duality of, 49; femininity of,
Avicenna, 156 153-154, 156; as historically real, 41; as
Logos, 45, 137; as mirror, 168; moral
effect of, 44; prophecy of, 45; as
shepherd, 137; as symbol ofSelf, 149,
Ba, 144; -Osiris, 145 168; unity in, 174
Baader, Franz, 60 Christianity, 41, 44, 78, 82, 113, 115, 132,
Basilides, 23 135, 136, 150, 153, 178; and Christian
Bastian, Adolf, 78, 79 ethic, 117; demons in, 111-116, 117,
Baudelaire, Charles, 31 119, 122-123, 149; and gathering
behaviorism, 90, 119 motif, 173; God-image in, 47, 63, 138;
belief, concretistic vs. ‘intelligible,’ 49 and interpretation of Scripture,
ben-Gabirol, 57,58 47-52; shepherd symbol in, 137;
Bes, 107 women and, 138
Beyond, the, 34, 78, 104, 166, 178, 184; in Christians, 33, 41-42, 113, 129; female,
ghost stories, 14, 15; gods in, 117; 138
guidance from, 174; union in, 130, 138 Chrysippus, 39
Bible/Holy Scripture, 29, 43-52; see also Church Fathers, 40, 41, 45; and theory
New Testament; Old Testament about demons, 113-114, 115, 197
body, 40, 84; resurrected, 143; seat of Cicero, 110
soul in organs of, 55—56; subtle, 44, circle, 57; see also sphere(s)
74-75, 85 Claudius of Turin, 48
Boehme, Jakob, 60, 166 Cleanthes of Assos, 39
Bohr, Niels, 63, 64 Clement of Alexandria, 40, 110, 138
Buddha, 23 clergy, 18, 50
Buddhism, Zen, 199 collective psyche, see world-soul
Bultmann, R., 51 collective unconscious, 105, 111, 129, 136;
absolute knowledge of, 193, 194;
archetypes of, 117; center of, 81, 84,
87; concept of, 76; hypothesis of, 76,
Cain, 167 77-94; as mirror, 190; model of, 80,
Camus, Albert, 5 81; multiple unity of, 84-89; polar
Carnap, Rudolf, 65 nature of, 89-94; subjective contents
catatonia, 181 of, 52; and synchronicity, 197; as
Catharists, 49 transsubjective, 54
Catholic Church, 29, 52, 98, 115 collectivism, unconscious, 14, 32
causality, 63-64, 195-196 Communism/Communists, 19, 51, 106 >
Celsus, 41—43, 44, 110 163
Ceres, 131 community, 172-173, 178
chaos, 106, 170, 173 companion(s): daimon as, 108, 134-142;
Charite, in Apuleius, 126, 129, 130, 135; in fairy tales, 14-15; inner, 143-159,
Isis-, 128 160, 161-162
child, divine, 141 compassion, 15-16
childhood, 170, 179, 181 compensation, law of, 87
children: consciousness of, 7, 170, 179, complementarity, 64, 87

242
 INDEX

complex(es), 2, 13, 14, 24, 25, 32, 104, projectiles, 21-22; in dreams, 140-141;
107, 116, 172; autonomous, 96, 100, in fairy tales, 14-15, 130; and loss of
103, 121, 168; avoidance of, 98; as soul, 30; marriage in, 140-141; of
demons, 96; father, 98, 104; Perpetua, 136; premature, 102; and
integration of, 95-107, 121; mother, resurrection, 143
104; projected, 100, 121; and psychic Delphi, 36
energy, 30-31; subjective, 107, 115 delusion(s), 114, 163-164, 197; paranoid,
conscience, 167, 185 2, 4,16
consciousness, 20, 79, 130, 145; Democritus, 25, 38, 39, 61
archetypes and, 110, 112; of children, 7, demon(s), 20, 36, 183; of antiquity, 36,
170, 179, 181; as complement to 108, 109-110, 116-117, 122, 123-124,
unconscious, 64, 185; of demons, 118; in Christianity, 111-116, 117, 119,
eye as symbol of, 166; flashes of, 179, 122-123; classification of, 102-104,
181; frailty of, 120; Greek emphasis on, 122-123; as complexes, 34; evil,
37; higher, 152; and inner wholeness, 95-121, 161, 167, 183; eye of, 168,
160-178; invasion of, 111; and matter, 183; as “‘mixed” figures, 103-104,
54; and order, 74; and possession, 30; 106; possession by, 93, 105-106, 193;
of primitives, 7; in projection, 88, power of, 167—168, 193; in
157-159, 161, 172, 181, 186; quaternary projection, 121; public tribute to,
functions of, 46, 62; and reflection, 110, 114, 115, 118
105, 161, 163, 164, 183; religious, 39, depression, 3, 126; endogenous, 30
48—49; of scientists, 70, 71, 75, 76, Descartes, René, 63, 68
88-89; of shadow, 123; and devil(s), 21, 47, 149; exorcism of, 95, 98,
synchronicity, 191, 195, 198; see also 100, 115, 198; objective, 107;
ego-consciousness possession by, 116, 117, 134; in vision, 33
conservation, law of, 66 Dioscuri, 39
Corbin, Henri, 156, 157 Diotima, 108
Corpus Hermeticum, 151, 152, 171 disease(s), 21, 22, 29, 33, 44; see also
cosmos, 113, 137, 150, 157; law of, 62-63; illness
sphere as image of, 57 divinities, 21, 147-148; father and
counterprojection, 27 mother, 19; see also god(s); goddess(es)
countertransference, 17, 27 Dodona, 36
creation, 58, 59, 170, 171, 198-199 Don Juan, 93
creativity, 8, 75, 88, 105, 106, 199 Doppelganger, 182, 184
cross, 114, 115 Dorn, Gerhard, 165
Cupid, 22, 24, 88 dreams, 6, 118, 124, 135-136, 149, 182,
Cybele, 138 183; anxiety, 188-189; and archetypes,
79-81, 112-113; death, 141; helpfulness
of, 28, 165, 166, 172, 176, 187; images
in, 38, 144-145, 177, 187; interpretation
daimon(s), 118, 144; divine, 147; double, of, 25-27, 28, 94, 174-176, 185,
147-148; dream, 135-136; evil, 111, 188-189; of Jung, 158-159, 188-189;
139; “great,” 123, 139, 144; mediating, and loss ofsoul, 30; mirroring in, 185,
122-142; nature and functions of, 187-189; and projection, 24—25, 52;
108-109, 110, 149, 150; personal, 108, prophetic sight in, 43-44; subjective
150, 153, 158 and objective levels of, 26, 28
Daphne, 104
dead, the, 12, 144, 178, 183; attachment
to, 104-105; in fairy tales, 14-15;
spirits of, 102-103, 104-105, 107, 113 earth, 62, 68, 184, 192
death, 158, 161, 183, 184, 196; caused by ecstasy, 138, 150, 153, 157

243
INDEX

ego, 23, 56, 73, 105, 164, 174, 176; exegesis, Biblical, 40, 45, 47, 51
absolute, 61; dream, 24, 25, 185, 186, exorcism, 34, 95, 115-116; in Catholic
187; and fantasy images, 118; lack of, 7, Church, 29, 98, 115; of mamu, 180-181;
30; and mirroring, 186-188, 190, 194; psychotherapeutic, 119; by shaman,
possession of, 96; and power ofevil, 99-100; in 16th and 17th centuries, 114,
119; and reflection, 161, 163; and Self, 198
157-158, 172, 187-189, 198-199; and extroversion, 87
shadow, 116; subjugation of, 23, 117, eye: evil, 167, 183; of demons, 100; of
163; and synchronicity, 198 God, 166-167, 168; as mandala, 166,
ego-complex, 13-14, 24 168; of soul, 166; as symbol ofinsight,
ego-consciousness, 87, 90, 117, 128, 179, 165-169
193; of children, 7, 16; and fantasy
images, 118; and integration of
archetypal contents, 13; and
mirroring, 186-188; nature of, 170; of
primitives, 7, 9; and projection, 165, facts: correspondence ofimages with,
199; release from, 140, 167; and 65; new, 72
synchronicity, 197; see also fairy tale(s), 100, 126-127, 129, 135, 140;
consciousness Chinese, 11-13, 107; German, 15;
Einstein, Albert, 60, 62, 63 Grimms’, 17, 100; Norwegian, 14-15;
Eleusis, 131 Siberian, 98—99; Turkestan, 96—98,
Elgon, Mount, 180 99, 160-161
Eliade, Mircea, 183 faith, 52, 166, 173; and knowledge, 49
emotion(s), 23, 33, 56, 91, 106, 144, 181; fall, the, 111, 113, 114
destructive, 19, 120; lack of, 125; fantasy(-ies), 20, 24, 25, 31, 88, 118, 142,
and projection, 19 182; for alchemists, 74; and
Empedocles, 57 archetypes, 86—87, 90; pathological,
energy, 62, 69, 86, 92, 181-182; 105; predisposition for, 85; and
God-image in concept of, 68, 71 projection, 85, 197; suicide, 163; and
Enlightenment, the, 34, 115 synchronicity, 197
Enoch, Book of, 111 fascism, 19
Ephesus, 131, 138-139 | fate, 94, 148, 192
Erigena, John Scotus, 47, 48, 58 Father (in Holy Trinity), 50
Ernst, Cecile, 115, 116 father-image, 2—3, 19, 27, 134
Eros (god), 22, 33, 39, 88, 108, 123, 133, feeling (function), 23, 25, 26, 28, 72, 126,
148; in Apuleius, 124-134; prayer to, 127, 177; defined, 46; as influenced by
133-134 gods, 55
Eros (psychological principle), 16, 97, feminine principle, 97, 133, 148
134 femininity, 134, 138, 155; of Christ,
Euhemeros, 37, 113 153-154, 156
Evangelists, 46, 49 Fichte, Johann G., 61
evil, 24, 27—28, 148, 149; as black magic, field: of collective unconscicks, 86;
105-106; Christian view of, 47, 111, electromagnetic, 86; of force, 67, 68,
113; principle of, 119 69; of images, 195; metric, 59;
evil spirit(s): archetypes and, 105, 110, physical, God as image of, 58, 59
111; attributes of, 113-114; exorcism Fierz, Markus, 59
of, 29, 99-100; in fairy tale, 98-99; fire, 62; “‘hidden,” 68; as Logos, 67-68
and loss of soul, 30-31; in projection, Freud, Sigmund, 18; on projection, 1, 34,
10-14 passim; protection against, 88
180-181, 183; see also demon(s); Freudian school, 36, 51, 115, 119
devil(s) Friedrich, Adolf, 99

244
 INDEX

Gabriel, 157 grace, 163, 164

Garuda, 106 Grail/Grail legend, 132, 177-178
gathering, 173-174 Great Mother, 85
genius(-tt), 145-147 Greece/Greceks, 69, 111, 114, 115, 144, 184;
geometry, 58, 59, 60 daimons of, 108, 147, 153; demons of,
ghost(s), 109; in fairy tales, 12, 15, 108-110; gods of, 36-40, 108, 109, 110
101-102; place-bound, 107 Gregory, 46
ghost story(-ies), 14; Chinese, 11-13; guardians/guardian spirits, 137, 143-149,
German, 15; Kaschinaua, 101-102; 153; see also daimon(s)
Norwegian, 14-15 guru, inner, 150
Gideon, 45
Girard di Monteforte, 49
Gnosis, 152; allegory in, 40-41; divine Hades, 127, 128
light-substance in, 172 Hardenberg, Friedrich von (Novalis), 61
Gnostics/Gnosticism, 41; and divine Harpocrates, 132
light-substance, 62, 170-171; and head: in fairy tales, 101-102; as seat of
“on-grown”’ soul, 78; and social soul, 56, 102-103; as spirit form, 100
function ofSelf, 176-177 healer, 30; demon as, 114; as exorcist, 29;
God, 40, 44, 47, 48, 61, 111, 120, 127, 148, -hero, 85, 87
151-152, 153; arrows of, 21; cosmic heart, as seat of feelings, 56
law of, 63; vs. demons, 113, 114; as heaven, 57, 178, 192
divine sphere, 57—59, 61; in dream, Heisenberg, Werner, 65, 66, 67
188-189; eye of, 166-167, 168; in Helios, 38
interpretations ofScripture, 49, 50; hell, 113, 120
and man, 158; omnipresence of, 59, Hephaistos, 38
152; as pneuma, 68; as shepherd, 137; Hera, 38, 42
soul and, 58, 157, 172, 180; as summum Heraclitus, 67, 68
bonum, 47; and table motif, 178; see heresy/heretics, 49
also God-image hermeneutics, 90-91; and withdrawal of
god(s), 73, 88, 118, 127, 128, 132, 139, 140, projections, 37—41, 71
144; approach of, to men, 35—40; as Hermes, 38, 137, 150, 154, 155, 156; on
archetypal symbol-forms, 23, 104, own divinity, 152; prayer to, 152-153
116-117; cosmic, 153; distinguished Hermes-Psychopompos, 150, 158-159
from demons, 108-110, 117; and Hermes-Thoth, 152, 153
“eternal ideas,’ 42; heathen, 114, 115; Hermetic philosophy, inner companion
household, 109, 146; as “‘influences”’ in, 150-159
on mind, 55; as “‘senders,”’ 20—22; as hero(es), 85, 96, 113; in fairy tales, 14, 15,
spherical, 57; universal, 155; water, 140; in myths, 81, 124
183-184; see also individual names Hesiod, 37, 108
goddess(es), 127, 138, 140; daimon-, 156; history, 44-45, 190, 191-192; cultural,
moon-, 131, 154-155; mother-, 154, 34, 35-36, 54, 77; philosophy of,
156; see also individual names; gods 41-42
godhead, 44, 61, 67, 157, 167, 170-171 Holton, Gerald, 69
God-image, 47, 89, 152; and concept of Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit, 44, 50, 58, 93,
energy, 68, 71; and cosmic law, 63; 157; symbols of, 43, 45, 47, 68
dark aspect of, 119-120; and divine Homer, 37, 55-56
eye, 166; mandala-formed, 61, 71; as Honko, Lauri, 21, 28-29
masculine, 138; projected as “divine” Honorius of Autun, 47
number, 65, 66 Horace, 146-147, 148
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, 103, 133 Horus, 107, 132, 137
Gould, Richard, 180 Hugo, Victor, 167

245
INDEX

I Ching, 162, 164-165 Jacobsohn, Helmuth, 144

idea(s), 39, 56, 62, 72, 90; Platonic, 40, James, William, 64
44,117 jealousy, 107, 156; of demons, 114
identity: archaic, 7, 8, 10, 36, 38, 48; Jerome, 46
ego-, 25; negative, 16; unconscious, 16 Jesus, 29, 44; ascension of, 49; law of, 45;
illness: caused by projectiles, 20—22; Logion of, 151; Table of, 177-178; see
caused by spirits, 107; loss of soul and, also Christ
30; and mirroring, 183, 184; psychic, Joachim da Fiore, 50
44, 116; see also disease(s) Jordan, Pascual, 59
illusion(s), 10, 115, 158, 163; freedom Joseph (father ofJesus), 49
from, 199 Joseph of Arimathea, 178
images, 62, 78, 92, 105, 171; delusory, Judaism, 21, 45, 107, 111
115; doubling of, 33; dream, 25-26, Jung, C. G., 13, 37, 64, 67, 155-156, 197;
70, 185; fantasy, 24, 25; of healing and on alchemy, 73, 74; on anima, 123, 127,
protection, 78, 85; for Holy Scripture, 139, 144, 145, 176; on animus, 97, 123,
45-46; inner, 65, 195, 198; 139, 144, 176; on archetypes and
interpretation of, 45—46; mirror-, 38, archetypal contents, 23, 72, 86, 89, 90,
157, 182, 185; model-, 186; parental, 2, 118, 119, 161, 167, 198; on collective
3, 19, 27; primordial, 54, 57, 60, 63, 69; unconscious, 75—94 passim, 190, 193;
in projection, 6—7, 8, 19, 27, 33, 38, 88; delusional fantasy about, 163-164; on
religious, 36, 40, 45-46; soul-, 184; demonism, 105-107; on dreams,
symbolic, 90; see also archetypal 26-27, 28, 52, 185; dreams of, 158-159,
image(s); father-image; God-image; 188-189; on ego, 61, 72—73, 176, 188;
mother-imago on evil, 119, 120; on eye motif, 168; on
imago(s)/imagines, 104; inner, 104; faith, 52, 173; on fall of angels, 111; on
parental, 2, 19, 27; see also functions of consciousness, 46; on
mother-imago mandala, 166; on mirroring, 186-195
individuation, 133, 135, 141; reciprocal, passim; on number, 195; on
140, 177; and relatedness, 174-178 possession, 105—106; on projection,
inflation, 14, 50, 93, 111; negative, 119 1—9 passim, 15, 26, 27—28, 52, 73, 86,
initiation: in Apuleius, 127-128, 130, 143, 104, 139, 158-159, 161, 177, 186, 198; on
144; of shamans, 99, 183 psyche and matter, 73, 74-75, 91-92,
initiative, 23 190-195 passim; on re-collection, 169,
insight, 107, 119, 199; eye as symbol of, 172; on rituals, 180; on Self, 61, 144,
165-169; into projection, 9, 14, 19, 141, 145, 158, 161, 166, 172, 173, 182, 188; on
157, 158, 161, 163, 165; true, 44 shadow, 15, 116, 123, 144; on sign and
inspiration(s), 47, 88, 105, 106, 134 allegory, 82; on soul-atoms, 61-62; on
instinct(s), 23, 24, 90, 92, 97, 98, 161 symbols, 81-83; on synchronicity,
integration, 119; of complexes, 95-107, 91-92, 104, 191-197 passim
121; and evil, 119; meaning of, 11-12, Jungian school, 36, 61, 62, 72, 110, 119,
118; moral, 11; in projection, 7, 11, 13, 163
14, 25, 169; of Self, 158, 169, 172, 173 Juno, 146, 148, 153 a
intellectualism, 19, 125-126, 132 Jupiter, 147
introjection, 78 Jussel, Friedrich, 34
introversion, 34, 87 Justin Martyr, 111, 114
intuition, 47, 78, 89, 166; defined, 46
Iphigenia, 115
Isidor (son ofBasilides), 23
Isis, 39, 124, 128, 134, 143, 144; in Ka, 144; -soul, 145
Apuleius, 124, 128, 130, 132, 134, 136 > Kama, 23
140, 144; as Nemesis, 126 Kant, Immanuel, 103
-isms, 19, 120-121 Kekule, Friedrich August, 69-70, 88-89

246
 INDEX

Kepler, Johannes, 58, 60 of, 50; in relation to spirits, 108,

Kerényi, Karl, 124 109-110, 116; and share ofinfinity, 58;
knowledge, 37, 73, 111; absolute, 76, 167, taskworulis
193, 194; belief enlightened by, 49; eye mandala(s), 84, 161, 182; in dream, 189;
of, 166; secret, 157; Self-, 162, 166, 171, eye as, 166, 168; as God-image, 61, 71
187; “true, 74 Manichaeans, 171, 172
Koran, 178 Marinaua, 101-102, 105
Kore, 128 marriage, holy (heiros gamos), 112, 129,
Kyenai, 184 130, 140
marriage in death, 140-141
Mars (god), 22, 24
martyrs, 136, 150
Lar(es), 109, 146, 148 Mary (mother ofJesus), 45, 138-139,
Lee, Tsung Dao, 66 153-154
Leibniz, Gottfried, 190 masculine principle, 97, 148, 156;
Lévy-Bruhl, Lucien, 7 mountain as, 192
liberalism, 19 masculinization, 139
light(s), 86, 87, 90, 166, 170; of God, mathematics, 66, 194; of physics, 59-60,
170-171; in I Ching, 162, 164; inner, 65-66, 189-190, 195
166; reflection of, 182, 195; seeds of, matter, 54-55, 59, 65, 69, 92, 113,
171-172; sparks of, 170-171, 177; 170-171, 172; in Einstein’s theory, 60;
theories of, 64, 85 and psyche, 73-76, 91, 187, 189-199
Liu Guan-ying, 192 Maximov, Vladimir, 163
logoi spermatikoi, 39 medicine men, 96, 183
Logos, 16, 68, 132, 148; Christ as, 45, 137; meditation, 118, 166, 172, 199
ofhistory, 42; see also world-fire; Medusa, 181
world-spirit Mercurius, 68—69
logos physikos, 55, 89 Merkelbach, Reinhold, 124, 127
logos theologikos, 55, 89 Merlin, 178
love, 30, 31, 32, 55, 87-88, 123, 127, 133, metamorphosis, in Apuleius, 125-132,
134, 139, 141; Christian, 16, 50; 133; see also transformation
meaning ofexperience of, 133-134; metanoia, 158, 161
passionate, 22-23, 171; power of, 141; Metatron, 157
ofspirit for human, 104; unrequited, microcosm, 192
198 Middle Ages, 115, 173, 184; signs of
Lubac, Henri de, 45, 46-47 schism during, 47—52; typos in, 45-47
Lucius, in Apuleius, 124-132, 139 miller, as technocrat, 18
lust, 47; 107, 124, 125, 127; of demons, Mimir, 184
113, 114 mind: and matter, 55, 77-78; meaning
of, 55
Minkowski, Hermann, 62
Minnedienst, 132
Macrobius, 148 miracles, 48, 118, 178, 197; of healing, 44,
macrocosm, 192 114; and mirroring, 182
magic, 36, 37, 90, 102, 152, 191; active mirror(s), 166; Christ as, 168; earth-, 184;
principle in, 67; black, 105-106; folk, inner, 199; and magic, 181, 182, 183; of
183; love-, 155; mirror, 182-183, 184 universe, 190; water-, 183
“magic flight,’ motif of, 96-97, 99 mirror-image(s), 38, 66, 157, 182, 185
Mahnke, Dieter, 57—58, 61 mirroring(s): as aspect of projection,
man/mankind, 111; cruelty of, 119; as 185, 188; fourfold, 186-189; of psyche
evil, 47; gathering of, 172-173, and matter, 189-199
176-177; and God, 158; God as spirit monad, 190

247
INDEX

monomania, 100 projection, 135, 163, 181, 198;

Montanists, 154, 156 reflecting, 183-184
moods, 55, 90 objective psyche, see collective
Moore, Henry, 68 unconscious
morality, 71, 169 object-subject relationship, see
Moses, 45 subject-object relationship
mother archetype, negative, 126 Odysseus, 56
mother-imago, 125, 128, 134; projection Old Testament, 40, 43, 45, 107
yi PAIR AE ee) Olympus, 36, 40, 109, 127, 129, 130, 135
mother-virgin, 154 “One,” the, 57—58, 63, 113
mysterium, 47 Onians, R. E., 56
mystery(-ies): antique, 78; of goddess opposites, 121; psychic, 83, 87, 113; union
Nature, 154; of love, 140; of Osiris, of, 130, 148
130, 143, 144; and Scripture, 45, 46, 47, order, 166; arithmetical, 195
48 orderedness, acausal, 195
mystic(s), 58, 117, 150, 157, 166 Origen, 40, 41; on gathering, 173; typos
myth(s), 17, 20, 37—38, 178, 180; in, 43-45
Christian, 41, 50; demons in, 100; Orphism/Orphites, 57, 170
interpretations of, 36—42; new, 39, 41, Osiris, 143; in Apuleius, 124, 130, 132,
48, 50, 66, 71; of projectile, 20; and 134, 143; Ba-, 145
psyche, 79, 81; regional vs. universal,
80-81
mythologem(s), 85-86, 169, 172, 177, 178
mythology, 20, 22, 79, 84, 96, 104; paganism, 43, 44, 111, 114
comparative, 78—79 Pamphile, in Apuleius, 125
Paracelsus, 165
Paradise, 46, 171, 178
paranoia, 2, 4, 16, 96
parental images, 2, 3, 19, 27; see also
Nature, 79, 164, 165, 168, 192; as
goddess, 155, 171; and society, 192
father-image; mother-imago
Parmenides, 57
Nazism, 106
Neoplatonism, 58, 110, 124, 148
participation mystique, 7
Nereus, 36, 184
particle(s), 61-66, 68, 69; soul-, 170;
Neumann, Erich, 133, 134
sphere as image of, 57
New Testament, 21, 29, 43, 45 passion(s), 22—23, 24, 32, 33, 47, 50, 111,
Al
Newton, Isaac, 59, 68
Nicholas of Cusa, 58 pathology, 5, 16, 105
Ninck, Martin, 183 patient(s): alter ego of, 144-145;
Nock, A. Y., 151 drawings by, 22; dreams of, 52; and
Nous 147, 151, 157 loss of soul, 30; neurotic, 2; phobias of,
94, 196-197; and possession, 98,
nucleus(-ei): archetypal, 86, 167;
psychic, 147, 170 115-116; and projection, 95—96, 165,
number(s), 194-195; “divine,” 65, 66;
197-198; psychotic, 106, 198: see also
analysand(s)
natural, 66, 194
Numenius, 40 Paul, Saint, 43, 49, 90, 114, 150, 161, 166
numinous, the, 114, 183 Pauli, Wolfgang, 65
Pegasus, 106
Penates, 146
Perpetua of Carthage, 135-139
object(s): ego as, 188; Greek attitude Persephone, 128
toward, 36, 38; powers in, 67; and Perseus, 181

248
 INDEX

personality, 23, 61, 100, 185; invasion of, evil, 119

31; re-collection of, 169; prefigurations, see typoi
transformation of, 161—162; pride, 113
unification of, 177 Prisca, 154
Pfeiffer, W. M., 5 probability: mathematical, 63, 66;
phallus, genius as, 146, 147 reaction, 63
phantasmata, 114, 115 projectile(s): disease, 20-21, 28-29, 33;
Philodemos, 38 as symbols in projection, 20--25, 29,
Philo of Alexandria, 40, 110, 137 Bil, SS
philosophers, 42, 54; Greek, 37, 38, 67, projection(s), 94, 172, 177, 185, 196;
147; see also names of individuals; active, 15, 16; and affect, 162-163;
Stoics/Stoicism anima and, 24, 32—33, 88, 123-124,
philosophy, 161; Hermetic, 150-159; 127, 133, 135, 139, 141, 157; animus in,
natural, 37, 39, 54-55, 56, 67; see also 32, 123, 139, 141, 157; archetypes in,
Stoics/Stoicism 24, 86-87, 117, 139; in child-parent
phobias, 94, 196 relations, 2, 3, 16-17, 18-19, 27;
photons, 181 collective, 4; of complexes, 25, 100,
phrenes, as site of soul, 55-56 121; compulsive character of, 9;
physicist(s), 54, 62, 63, 65, 66, 189; concept of, 6; definition of, 1-2, 3;
dreams of, 145; and psychic and delusional fantasy, 163-164; denial
influences, 75, 189-191; see also names of fact of, 5—6; in dreams, 24—25;
of individuals double nature of, 92; ending of, 158,
physics, 54, 59-72 passim, 86, 194; 160-161; and everyday error, 3; in
atomic, 190-191; mathematics of, everyday life, 1-9, 123; fading of, 88;
65-66; and psychic influences, 75, of God-image, 65, 71; images in, 6-7,
189-191 8, 19, 26-27, 33, 38, 65, 88; insight
Pincinellus, 120 into, 14, 141, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165;
pistis, 43 integration of, 7, 11, 12, 14, 25, 169;
Plato, 37, 38, 40, 57, 125, 166; on interpretations of, 1—6; involuntary
daimons, 147 nature of, 20; legal aspects of, 4, 10,
Platonism, 65, 108, 109, 147 93; and loss ofsoul, 31; and mirroring,
pleroma, 41, 138 184-185, 188; moral aspects of, 10, 11,
Plotinus, 57 14; mythical, 37; negative, 3-4, 14,
Plutarch, 40, 109, 110, 114, 123, 124; on 16-17, 20-22, 25, 120; objective level
daimons, 132, 144, 147 in, 25-28, 146; onto outer objects, 34,
pneuma, 39, 68, 70, 114, 137, 148, 151 135, 164, 181, 198; by parents, 16-17,
poets, 42, 89, 109 18-19; passive, 15, 16; positive, 4, 14,
Poimandres, 137, 150-151, 160 25; and projectiles, 20—25, 28, 31, 33;
Poincaré, Henri, 88 and psychic energy, 3, 22, 40, 105, 169,
polarity, 89-94 198-199; “‘receiver’’ in, 20-22,
politics, projections in, 18-19 religious ideas as, 36; renewal of, 13;
Polyphemus, 100 and scientific hypotheses, 53-76;
Pomponius, 135, 136 “sender” in, 20—22; shadow, 15,
Poseidon, 36 18-19, 24, 120, 141; in shaping of
Poseidonius, 110 archetypes, 86; subjective level in,
possession, 5, 93, 101, 105, 116, 134; and 25-28; symbolization of, 20; and
complexes, 98, 103; destructiveness of, synchronistic events, 198; wanderings
99-100, 119; by ideas, 19; and loss of of, 13, 56; withdrawal of, 9-19, 35-36,
soul, 28-34; religious, 93, 138; and 71, 78, 94, 95, 115, 174, 177—in
witchcraft, 198 religious hermeneutics, 35-52; world
power/power drive, 19, 67, 114-115; of as, 159

249
INDEX

prophecy(-ies), 184; of Christ, 45 transpsychic, 104, 117; ultimate, 175;

prosphyes psyche, 23, 78 unitary, 92
Proteus, 184 reason, 39, 48, 51, 55, 170; overvaluation
Psalms, 21, 44, 137 of, 71
psyche, 10, 40-41, 54, 55, 71, 79, 85, 106, re-collection, of Self, 169-174
117, 186, 187; collective (see redeemer, 171, 172
world-soul); disintegration of, 120; redemption, 5, 120, 131; of anima, 127
equilibrium of, 165; God within, 127; reflection, 7, 105, 163, 168, 179-199; in
ground levels of, 129; and matter, physics, 181-182; in withdrawal of
73-77, 91, 187, 189-199; meaning of, projections, 10, 161, 163, 164
55; objective, 84, 146, 186, 190, 194; Reitzenstein, Richard, 150
and projection, 78, 123, 156; relatedness, and individuation, 174-178
self-regulation of, 87, 198; separation relativity, theory of, 59, 60
in, 169; sparks of, 170; spirits and, 107, religio, 114
115, 147, 149; subjective, 187; and religion(s), 5, 19, 51, 53, 54, 150, 180
synchronicity, 191, 194, 195; repression, 88, 98, 125—126; parental, 18;
unconscious, 34, 182; and sexual, 18
underworld, 125-126; woman’s return, the, 160-165; in J Ching, 162, 165
companion in, 134-142 revelation, 29, 45, 48
Psyche (goddess), 123; in Apuleius, Rhabanus Maurus, 47
124-134, 136 Rig-Veda, 21, 22
psychiatry, 5 rites and rituals, 180; exorcistic, 116;
psychologist(s), 76, 94; and projection, 2 protective, 183; reconciliation, 113
psychology, 75, 76, 78, 83, 150, 190; Rome/Romans, gods of, 22, 145-147, 153
analytical, 90; and atomic physics, Round Table, 177-178
190-191; compartment, 169-170; Rudra, 21-22
depth, 34, 36, 115, 144; existentialist, 5, Ruysbroeck, Johannes, 58
6; Freudian, 36, 51, 115, 119; of group,
32, 86-87; ideo-motor theory of, 56;
Jungian, 61, 62, 72, 89-90, 110, 119,
161, 163 sacrifice, 115, 146, 148; animal, 29; in
psychopharmacology, 119 fairy tale, 97-98, 160
psychopompos, 134, 140, 150 Samburski, S., 62, 68, 69
psychosis, mass, 5, 106 Satan, 47, 111, 113
psychotherapy, 17, 20, 89, 95-96, 167; Saturn, 23
and exorcism, 119; and projection, 17, Saturus, in vision ofPerpetua, 136
20, 95-96, 165, 174; and synchronicity, schism, in Second Millennium, 47—52
199 schizophrenia, 96, 181
Pythagoreanism, 65, 66 science/scientists, natural, 48, 63, 77, 186,
190; and consciousness, 70, 71, 75, 76,
88-89; errors and values of, 71, 72;
and psychic influences, 75—¥6;
quaternity, 46, 62, 63-64, 161, 176, 182, purpose of, 65; vs. religion, 54;
187 “themes” of, 54, 69, 73, 190
Scripture, see Bible/Holy Scripture
seeress, 170-171, 173
Self (archetype), 61, 119, 130; defined, 87;
rationalism, 37, 47—54 passim; of God, and ego, 165, 172, 187-189, 198; and
63 end of projections, 160, 161, 163,
reality, 105, 195; alienation from, 135; 198-199; as eye, 166, 168; as inner
objective, 186; psychic, 10, 84; “guru,” 150; integration of, 158, 169,

250
 INDEX

172, 173; realization of, 133, 158, 160, space, 59-60, 61, 84, 91, 188, 193;
161; and re-collection, 169-174; and metaphysical, 117; Newton on, 59;
reflection, 168; and relatedness, 174, super-, 60
177, 178; symbols of, 88, 132, 134, 140, space-time, 60, 68, 84, 91, 193, 195;
144, 149, 153, 157, 168, 182; as sphere as image of, 57, 61
undifferentiated ‘‘other,” 144, 145 sparks: “fiery,” 62, 170; oflight, 169,
Seligmann, S., 167 171-172, 177
sensation (function), 46, 92; defined, 46; sphere(s): in dream, 175; as God,
myths and, 79 cosmos, and soul, 57—61
Seth, 107 sphere-image, 57, 60-61
Sethians, 172 Spirit, see Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit
Seuse, Heinrich, 58 spirit(s), 36, 67, 90; characteristics of,
sex/sexuality, 23, 145-146, 175, 181; and 105, 108; creative, 134; of dead, 86, 102,
demons, 111, 113, 114; repression of, 18 103, 104-105, 107, 113; in fairy tales,
sex transformation, of Perpetua, 138-139 98-99, 100, 101; fire-, 68-69; guardian,
shadow (archetype), 119, 168, 184; 137, 143-150, 153; haunting, 102;
ignoring of, 116; nature of, 123; higher, 99; house-, 108; invading, 24,
projection of, 15, 18-19, 21, 24, 32, 29, 30-31, 107; nature, 101, 104, 109,
120, 123, 141, 157; symbols of, 80, 126; 111, 115; possession by, 101;
as undifferentiated “‘other,’ 144 primordial, 58; in projections, 10-11,
Shakti, 140 20; subtle, 68; see also daimon(s); evil
shamans/shamanism, 29, 30, 96, 99, 100, spirit(s); ghost(s)
183 spirit-matter opposition, 54-55
shepherd, cosmic, 136-137, 139 Stans, 116
Shiva, 140 stars, 73,113, 144
sickness, see disease(s); illness Stoa, 39, 40, 108, 110, 148
sign, Jungian concept of, 82 Stoics/Stoicism, 62, 78, 147; and concept
simultaneity, 196 of pneuma, 68, 70; and interpretation
sin/sinfulness, 116, 124, 173, 178; offallen of myths, 39-40; and theory of
angels, 111, 113 sparks, 170, 172
S-matrix, 62, 63 structuralism, 51
socialism, 19 structure(s): mathematical, 117; theory
society, and nature, 192 of, 69
Socrates, 31, 108, 125; daimonion of, 109, subject, 190; inner, 165; relation of
147, 148, 153 archetypes to, 116-121; in
Socrates (character in Metamorphoses), synchronistic event, 198
125 subject-object relationship, 6—8, 13,
Sohraward, 156 15-16, 19, 55, 64, 67, 163
son, divine, 130 suicide, 102; fantasies of, 163; mass, 12
Son of God, 49, ‘58; Hermes as, 152 sun, 80, 145, 148, 197
sophia, 43 symbol(s)/symbolism: in dreams, 26, 81;
Sophists, 37 ecclesiastical, 43-51 passim; of
soul(s), 40, 49, 65, 67, 68, 81, 109, 130, insight, eye as, 165-169; mandala, 84;
138, 143, 160; animal, 23-24; Ba-, 144; meaning of, 81—84; in projection, 6,
demons as, 110, 113; evil and, 119-120; 20; in rituals, 180; of Self, 88, 132, 134,
eye of, 166; “grown-on,”’ 23, 78, 110; 140, 144, 149, 153, 157, 168, 182; of
loss of, 30—31, 32; as mirror, 190; shadow, 80, 126; of unconscious,
possession ofseveral, 144; reflection 183-184
and, 182; and relation with God, 58, symbolon, 40
157, 172; of spirits and gods, 24; unity sympathy, 15, 69
of, 172 synchronicity/synchronistic

Zl
INDEX

phenomena, 91—92, 104, 118, 149, uncertainty principle, 63

189-199 unconscious, 24, 72, 79, 90, 97, 129, 130,
synchronous events, 197 144; and active imagination, 118, 119;
syncretism, religious, 39 and attribution problem, 93; as
Synesius, 166 complement to consciousness, 64, 185;
creative contents of, 89, 90, 106; and
demonism, 105, 106, 114-115, 119; and
table, mythologem of, 177-178 dreams, 25—26, 28, 167, 175, 176,
tabu, 29, 109 184-185; eye motif and, 166, 167, 168;
Tao, 162, 192, 193 mirroring surface of, 185, 186, 195;
Tatian, 114 myths created by, 79, 84; and
Tauler, Johann, 58 projection, 6, 7, 11, 16, 27, 71, 72,
teacher: in dream, 175-176; inner, 157; 73-74, 88, 123, 124, 160, 161, 184; and
projection of, 17 psychic energy, 30, 198; and reciprocal
technology, 71 individuation, 177; and re-collection,
telepathy, 167, 191, 196 169; “revelation” from, 72; symbols
tertium comparationis, 40 of, 46, 83, 160, 183-184; and
Theagenes of Rhegion, 37—38 synchronicity, 194, 195, 198; and
theologians, 51, 54; and depth thought-models, 71, 72, 75; see also
psychology, 36; Protestant, 51 archetypal contents of unconscious;
theology, 54, 58, 60, 72; as poetic art, 48; collective uncenscious
Protestant, 51 unity, 169; in Christ, 173; ofcollective
Theophilus of Antioch, 114 unconscious, 84—89; of souls, 172
theoria, 43 unus mundus, 91, 92
Thetis, 184 Upanishads, 174
thinking (function), 71, 72; defined, 46;
as influenced by gods, 55
thought-models, 60, 62, 75; and
Valentinus, 24
archetypes, 56, 71, 72
value(s), 8, 26
Thrasyllos, in Apuleius, 130
Vedas, 21-22
thymos, 56
Venus, 23, 33, 47, 126
time, 61, 84, 91, 165, 193, 195; Newton’s
Vergil, 184
concept of, 59; religious concept of,
Vesta, 146
50; see also space-time
Vincent de Beauvais, 47
tongue, as destructive instrument, 21,
virtue, 173
120
vision(s), 33, 152; Christian, 33; of
transcendent function, 83
transference, 27; see also
Kekulé, 69-70, 88; of Perpetua,
135-136, 137, 139; of Poincaré, 88
countertransference
transformation: after death, 143; in fairy
Voluptas, in Apuleius, 127, 129, 130
tales, 17, 99; into inner teacher, 157;
magic flight and, 99; ofpersonality, \
161; of sex, 137-139; spiritual, 48; see water, 62, 68; as symbol of the
also metamorphosis unconscious, 183-185
transpsychic, the, 53-54 Weigel, Valentin, 60
transsubjective, the, 53-54, 55, 144 Wheeler, A., 60
Trinity, Holy, 50; see also Father; Holy wholeness, 97, 165, 168, 176, 182; of
Ghost; Son of God community, 172; and consciousness,
Tyche, 148 160-178; and re-collection, 169, 172;
typo, 40, 45; in Middle Ages, 45—47; in from union ofopposites, 87, 130, 148
Onigen, 43-45 Wigner, Eugene, 190

200
 INDEX

wise men, 42, 137 Xantippe, 125

witch(es)/witchcraft, 198; in Apuleius, Xenocrates, 114
125; in fairy tale, 17
woman: Christian, 138; modern, 154;
pagan, 156 Yang, C. N., 66
world-fire, 67—68; see also Logos Yang (principle), 64, 192
world mind, 67 Yin (principle), 64
world-order, 109
world-soul (collective psyche), 54, 55,
56, 78, 89, 147, 170; and collective Zen Buddhism, 199
unconscious, 85 Zeno of Citium, 39
world-spirit, 78, 89, 148; see also Logos Zeus, 38, 42, 57
Wunneberg, Wulf, 34 zodiac, 74
Wu Tse-t’ien, 192 Zosimos of Panopolis, 62, 150, 152, 171

25)
“, . . a brilliant delineation of the objective psyche and how it
has been experienced through the ages—from primitive religjgg
to nuclear physics and synchronicity. It isJungian perches
its finest.”
—Edward F. Edinger, author of Ego and Archetype and
Melville’s Moby Dick: A Jungian Analysis
ill
Marie-Louise von Franz worked directly with Jung for 31 y
She is one of the founders of the Jung Institute in Kiisnacht
Zurich, where she is now a training analyst. Her works av
in English include: Number and Time; The Grail Legend (
Emma.Jung); C.G. Jung: His Myth in Our Time; Time, Rin
*T2-AYK-
TI
UATE
NN
and Repose; and Dreams and Death.

JUNGIAN ANALYSIS
Edited by Murray Stein
Volume II, The Reality of The Psyche Series
“A valuable and unique contribution .:. . establishes Jungian
psychology .as a field with wide-ranging, practical significance.
This book goes a long way toward removing Jungian psychology
from the frequent, uninformed notion that it is esoteric.”
—Nathan Schwartz-Salant, President of the National
Accreditation Association and the American grape 2
Board of Psychoanalysis-
ISBN. 0-87548-350-X

The Reality of The Psyche Series

From your bookstore, or prepaid from
OPEN COURT PUBLISHING
La Salle, linois 61301

ISBN 0-87548-417-4