[Contents][1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][Next]

Chapter 4. Answer to Jung: Failed Individuation and the Dark Magician

Where Job Fits:

Arguably, Jung's greatest contribution to understanding was his realisation of the prime importance of the phylogenetic component of the psyche. #CW9/1 P77 ¶151 - 154. Furthermore, to the degree that this genetic component of psyche pre-existed consciousness, it acts in accordance with different rules, for different purposes, from those of consciousness.

For a Class or Species with a huge number of offspring from every successful fertilisation, parenting need not be a factor. The Class Amphibia need only produce a few surviving adult progeny to continue their survival. But, starting with the Reptilia, extending through birds and particularly in mammals, most of all humans, fewer offspring are produced, with greater parental investment in each. The long period of living under parental protection permits the young to learn from parents or surrogates, thus avoiding extinction from repeated generations making the same fatal mistake, and enabling increased adaptation to varieties of environments by members of the same species learning special tricks from parental figures.

Neither the copious offspring/zero parenting nor the fewer offspring/comprehensive parenting options have ended up displacing the alternative. Humans are assumed to be the world's dominant species, but are we? If so, by what criteria, if not human? There are still more insects on earth than people. Equally there are probably more birds, and more fish; so are we the most successful species, or just different in that whereas elephants have developed exaggerated probosci, and giraffes have exaggerated necks, we are characterised by exaggerated and hypertrophied egos?

The ego in the sense of 'me, an individual living entity,' is after all, merely an organ which exists in most of the higher vertebrates; certainly in most mammals. It is clearly of genetic advantage that gene-carriers 'assist' nature by each individual taking a personal interest in its own survival, and that of its offspring and social group. If a species takes the few offspring/long parenting option, that personal interest is essential.

But the relatively rapid expansion of the human neocortex had two unique consequences:-

1. There was a disproportionate expansion of areas other than the sensory and motor cortices. The sensory cortex processes information about what is happening to various parts of the individual organism; but it has no ability to process what is happening to the brain itself. In most animals, most of the cortex is occupied by sensory or motor (and optic) nerve tissue, so this 'short-coming' may not matter. In humans it does. We, more than any other animal, have a greater expanse of neurones of which we have no ability to be conscious; the frontal and parietal areas. Activity in those areas, and of the 'lower centres' from which they radiate, must come to awareness, consciousness, by routes other than direct apperception.

2. The acquisition of speech very suddenly threw the scales dramatically in favour of learning over inherited ability. This would not matter, were it realised that learning will follow archetypal (instinctually determined imaginal) patterns, but this realisation has been prodigiously difficult to resurrect from a massive neglect by one-sided linear-thinking people.

The consequence was that instead of the total psyche wagging the ego as an organ for adapting and serving evolutionary aims to the person's immediate needs, the now truly inflated ego attempted to usurp the role of wagger - rather like the tail trying to wag the dog. The results were predictably funny.

Our senses of humour took a sudden nose-dive during the Cuban missile crisis when, for most people, it suddenly dawned on us that we had encompassed our own destruction, not because of any irresponsibility of our own lust for power, but because, Lemming-like, we had entrusted that power to people who were driven by power, rather than survival instinct. Worse than Lemmings, we didn't even drown ourselves of our own accord: we paid people to push us over the cliff. (And virtually exterminate the whole biosphere at the same time.)

That episode taught anyone receptive to realise we have no time any more. By speech and its consequences, the dissemination of ideas, including the delusory idea that we need not pay the consequences of human stupidity, we can now teach anybody anything, even global destruction. We need to re-establish contact with the objective psyche, the collective unconscious, whose prime consideration is human survival.

If each of us can learn how that mechanism works, and how to co-operate with it for our own individual benefit, we're laughing. Let's face it: if we don't learn how it works, or we ignore its rules, the consequences are unattractive. It wants to help us. Why not let it; and understand it. What alternative do we have? When Greta Garbo was asked how it felt to have achieved her eightieth birthday she said, "When you consider the alternative, it feels terrific!"

It's going to affect us anyway. Every time we drop a 'Freudian' slip of the tongue, every time we can't remember a person's name, or forget an appointment we really should have remembered; every time we get a migraine on our own road to Damascus - there is the unconscious, telling us to beware. It may even be that ignoring this virtual inner friend, with all its linking abilities, makes us Altzheimers victims. After all, the best break-through yet in that disease, is to improve short-term memory loss: and what is that, if not an injured ability to use unconscious connection of ideas?

How did we become so alienated from our unconscious roots? Because memes evolve many times faster than genes.

Our biological tendency is to live a nomadic hunter-gatherer existence, in tribes of about thirty. Agriculture diminished seasonal starvation, but tied people to one area, where an ever-decreasing proportion of the population were able to provide food for the rest. Division of labour and specialisation allowed an increasing proportion of society to develop an increasing diversity of ideas, many of which had little or nothing directly to do with food production, especially hunting. Nevertheless these memes spread, replicated and evolved, while the brains which they inhabited remained essentially the same. (Jung: The Undiscovered Self p 81.)

The split between instinct and intellect was already evident in urban communities when the Gilgamesh stories were told, four thousand years ago. #Mercatante p 276. The format is already there in that Gilgamesh dreams of, and eventually meets his instinctive alter ego, the hirsute Enkidu, but loses him after insulting the Goddess Ishtar (anima.)

The pattern remains the same throughout Western History, because the problem remains the same. (Jung: The Undiscovered Self p 82.)

We have not detached from our instinctual archetypal roots at all. In our fascination with logos, the word, we are still tragically acting precisely in accord with our archetypal patterns; true to those uniquely human weaknesses and strengths, we have even made gods out of logos. E.g. John 1. Wotan's poem about acquisition of the runes concords.

We patronise or castigate 'primitives' for participation mystique involving trees, animals etc., but (as is usual with shadow projection,) do precisely that whenever anyone asks "What are you?" We identify with our occupations. They are primitive because they identify with objects. We are civilised; we identify with our way of manipulating objects! Worse still, we try to manipulate other people; and that power lust has its counterpart in our own minds as ego tries to rule the unconscious, instead of co-operating with it.

Evolution of the Schism between Ego and Unconscious

Joseph Campbell, in his Historical Atlas of World Mythology, Vol. 2, Part 1, outlines evolution of our relationship to the unconscious in terms of:-

1. Diffusion of cultural ideas.

2. Convergence: Independent, apparently accidental development of similarities between separate cultures due to paideuma,( meaning 'that which is educated, nurseling, pupil, or scholar,')a concept borrowed from Leo Frobenius, and derived from the same root as pedagogy, education. i.e. "The educative influence of an inhabited space upon its population...a force that can be formative, not only of cultural, but even of biological particulars." #p 19 Col 1. Frobenius did not know the mechanism whereby it worked. We do now. There is a 'use it or lose it' mechanism in brain development. (Time Magazine, February 3, 1997. Pp 36-46.)

3. Parallelism: Independent development of similar elements or traits in several cultures from a common element, the human psyche "which is a function of the human body." Differentiating factors are:

a. geography

b. stage of cultural development.

Quoting Spengler, he asserts, "A plant is nothing of itself. The individual is not free to look out for itself, to will for itself, or to choose. But an animal can choose. It is released from the bondage of all the rest of the world."#8

"Bondage and independence: that finally is the deepest differentiating feature of all vegetable and animal existence. And yet only the plant is wholly what it is. A plant is nothing but a plant; an animal is a plant and yet something more... it is free and independent in the face of the universe... yet at times seeking to return from life in freedom to that vegetal bondage from which they had been emancipated into solitude." #p 9. The tutorial effects of open plains, dominated by animals, and the plant-dominated forests, influenced culture of even simple hunter-gatherer tribes. Bushmen vs. Pygmies (Vol. p103-112) After 10,000 BC when cultivation of plants evolved, those differences were increased.

The plant way (of bondage and rootedness to earth) is described as cosmic, distinguished by periodicity, pulse, and rhythm, characterised by 'salvation from without.' The animal way adds the concept of a microcosm in relation to a macrocosm,(although only insofar as the animal can distinguish itself from the All and determine its position with respect to it:) characterised by 'self-reliance,' distinguished by polarity and tension; I/Thou, hunter/prey, cause/effect, subject/predicate. Relaxation of that tension leads to fatigue and sleep, so the two classic methods of release are:

1. Surrender to the authority of some endowed group or charismatic individual: the Christian approach; "I am the vine, you are the branches" (John 15:5) and "no-one comes to the Father but by me" (John 14:7)

2. Realisation in full tension, of one's metaphysical identity as a microcosm in a macrocosm: the Buddhist way;

"Now, O priests, I take my leave of you; all the constituents of being are transitory; work out your salvation with diligence." (Last words of the Buddha to his monks.)

#(But cf. Spengler on Campbell p72, col3. Why reversed?!)

Of the various ways that mythologies can be classified, Campbell chose the paideumatic, pedagogical method.

1. Hunting:

Dating from the late Palaeolithic era, 30,000 years ago, evidence of ritualistic sacrifice of animals, contemporary with burial rites appeared. Both indicated the notion of life beyond death for beast and man. Such animals were seen as both spiritual and physical life-sustainers. The I/Thou tension of confrontation reflected awareness of distinct individuals in a space-time field, but an underpinning mystical power was involved. This supporting consciousness was roughly similar to the Homeric Apollonian view of a world in the light of divinity, a real world into which we are born and of which we are an integral part.

2. Plant World and Agriculture:

From about 10,000 BC, three centres of agriculture arose, apparently independently in Southeast Asia, Central America, and Africa/Southwest Asia. In all these cultures, the mythical notion involved the prior self-emptying of an eternal being as source of life. Appropriate ceremonies reproducing that act were held to renew life. The sacrificial victim was identified with the god, and ceremonial procedures attempted symbolically to remove the location of the sacrificial act from secular time-space concepts, so as to compel a relaxation to Dionysian vegetative nature of the body, accentuating flux rather than form.

3. Cosmic Order, Mathematically Determined:

At the time of the early organised city-states of Mesopotamia, about 3,500 BC, discovery that the sun, moon, planets and stars cycled through the sky in mathematically predictable patterns, led to concepts of supernatural organisation of ordinary life, and the symbolic life of the royal courts. At certain critical junctures, the whole court would be sacrificed, marking the end of an era.

4. Turning to Humanity:

From the ninth century BC, arose a recognition that all phenomenal forms, whether of earth, of sky, or of the imagination, are created, pervaded and upheld by the same will or power that can be experienced within as the very life of oneself. Campbell quotes the early Vedic Upanishad, the Brihadaranyaka: "This that people say; 'Sacrifice to the god! Sacrifice to that god!' - one god after another...These are but It's names according to differing functions. The worshipper of one or the other knows not; for in each It is incomplete. One's meditation should be on the Self atman alone, wherein all such are united. For this Self is the imprint of the All and through it one knows the All, just as by following foot-prints one finds the animal ."

"By about 500 BC the turn of the mind from the heavens to the search, not only for an inward truth, but also...for specifically human values in the social-political sphere, had become general across...Eurasian high civilisations." p84

Buddha: 563-483.

Confucius: 551-478.

Pythagoras:580-500.

Heraclitus:540-480.

Aeschylus: 525-456.

"On the whole, across the whole field,...pronouncements of...the Philosophia perennis of mankind accord in general sense with the messages of myth, being as it were translations of the import of the archetypes of myth into verbal discourse: mythos into gnosis, image into word." #p85.

i.e. An adult human is an autonomous organism, capable of self-government, so education should not be imposition of laws from without, but opening of each of us to knowledge from within of our own genius.

This view was furiously opposed in the emerging Persian Empire with its supporting myth, Zaroastrianism. This proposed two creators, the good Ahura Mazda and the evil Angra Mainyu, who were opposed absolutes. People were to forget their bondage to laws of nature, and fight for righteousness under a tyrannical system of laws obeyed without question. Thus occurred a split between East and West, and the pattern clearly influenced Judaism, as it was Cyrus the Persian who defeated Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon in 539 BC and two years later ordered that the Jews return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple.

Jewish monotheism, which came to maturity at this time, was unique and unprecedented, in that it identified its local tribal patron god or ancestor as creator of the universe, who, after the usual mythological separation (Genesis story dates from C900 BC) retained an ongoing interest in his people. The corollary (later taken up by its two daughter religions, Christianity and Islam,) was that gods of the gentiles are devils and abominations, to be destroyed, together with their idolaters. Hence whole cities were massacred;

Midianites (Numbers 31)

Jericho (Joshua 6)

Ai (Joshua 8)

Amorites (Joshua 10)

It is against this background that the book of Job was written, at about this time.

The book of Job is a story of how NOT to try relating to the Selbst; no more, no less. It is an account of the futility of attempting to contact the divine, the archetypes, the instincts, the Selbst, what Jung calls God, other than by mediation of the anima.

It is fundamentally repellant to the Gaelic mind to trivialise our link with our own personal and collective unconscious,( a link symbolised by poetry, strategy and fire,) by making it some tiny paracletical flame that descends as some ex gratia gift from a departed puer aeternus consequence of a misunderstanding between man and an imagined masculinised deity. The link with the unconscious is a bright column of flame extending from heaven to earth, from conscious to unconscious; an intuitive, living, dynamic bridge typefied by Brighida's heaven to earth flaming column, or Hera's suspension from heaven by golden chains, with the two anvils hanging from her ankles; the iron of her two sons, Ares/Mars and Hephaestos the smithy, Geburah and Gedulah/Chesed; destroyer and creator, Kali!

The true story of Judaism,Christianity and Islam, is an attempt to destroy the essential eros in human nature and perception of the universe, and replace it with some intellectual, anti-instinctual logos-inspired concept, roughly equivalent to Saturn.

This might have sufficed for the half-developed males and the father-complex-fixated females of the day, but it won't work. It doesn't even make sense. In order to see it through to its logical conclusion, we have to hypothesise a race of castrated men #; not an attractive, and not an evolutionarilly viable possibility.

Neumann attributes this dubious state of affairs to the acquisition of consciousness, which is identified with as their own by young males, whereas females find this identification with consciousness more difficult, and feel more at home with the femininity of the unconscious.

Males' repression of the perceived irrational has led to high cultural and technical achievements, but also detachment from instinctual roots with serious consequences for both personal and general mental health. It has also led to men tending towards immaturity in human relations. Carotenuto's aim is for a state "where the capacity for relationship and the tendancy to explore coexist in a creative dialectic within the individual."#39. According to Edward Edinger, "Jung...in his Answer to Job ...treats the Job story as a turning point in the collective development of the Hebrew-Christian myth, involving the evolution of the God-image or Self-archetype. Job's encounter with Yahweh is considered to represent a decisive transition in man's awareness of the nature of God, which required in return a response from God leading to His humanisation and eventually as His incarnation as Christ."

Edinger prefers to examine Job as an individual experience of the ego's first major encounter with the Self. #E&A 78.

In making this 'distinction' Edinger misses the point made by Aniela Jaffé‚ that "Personal individuation is not separate from collective individuation, since the spirit of the age realises itself in the individual and the specific, time-bound God-image is constellated in his unconscious as an image of totality, the self."#Jaffé‚ MMp112.

A bland unsupported assumption underlies both approaches; that Yahweh is a symbol of Self, not merely an obstacle to perception of Self. More directly, to what degree is Yahweh an archetypal image, spontaneously generated by the unconscious, and to what degree a man-made (ego-generated) political construct?

"The mythological images by way of which the universal archetypes or elementary ideas are given local form...are the local 'masks'(personnae) of Jung, and the 'ethnic, or folk ideas (Volkergedanken) of Bastian. In traditions like those of the Greeks, the Romans, the Hindus, and the Buddhists, where the masking of 'folk ideas' or 'personnae' have been generally recognised for what they are, the universal inward, psychological, or spiritual guidance of the imagery is readily realised, whereas when an unremitting emphasis on the local form or forms, over and against and above all others, becomes the cardinal dogma (as in Judaism, Christianity and Islam), such a calcification of the local masking follows, that archetypes become locked to personnae, elementary ideas become ethnic, and all the passion that might have been turned to illumination is short-circuited into inflating programs for the world. There is no sense of humour, furthermore, with regard to one's own mythic forms. Mistaken for natural and historical facts, they are especially vulnerable to science. And where the light of day has dissolved them like dream, there is no supporting ground to one's life."#Cam.111.

During the captivity in Babylon of the people of Judah, (586-539 B.C.) close contact was certain with Ishtar/Inanna, Patron Goddess of the city of Uruk, popular, venerable, and, as Sylvia Brinton Pereira pointed out, superbly individuated.#When the Persian Cyrus invaded, and permitted them to return home and rebuild the temple at Jerusalem, they took with them some prominent features of his Zaroastrian religion. The concept of Adam's two sons was based on the Persian Zigurd, god of time and space, whose sons Ahura Mazda and Ahriman/Angra Mainyu were respectively good and evil. A second coming, with a Saviour conceived of a virgin, also rated a mention, as did an apocalyptic end of the world, complete with resurrection of the dead.

An on-going problem for Yahweh, or at least His prophets, was Israel's fascination with the various other deities abounding in the area. Sometimes this problem could be dealt with simply by killing all the apostates, as in the case of Baal Peor (Numbers 25:1-5,) but despite fulminations against Her from almost every Yahwistic prophet from Jeremiah onwards (Jer.7:17-20 and 44:16-22, Isiah 1:29, Hosea 4:13, Amos 7:17) the people persisted in worshiping the Queen of Heaven, Ishtar.#A2J 612.(aka Astarte/Innana, Yahweh's true anima.)

So if, as Jung mentioned,"Yahweh had lost sight of his pleromatic coexistence with Sophia since the days of the Creation."#AJ 620, he was at least constantly reminded of her presence. From the point of view of survival of the culture and racial purity of the tribes of Israel and Judah, it was mandatory that Yahweh furiously and uncompromisingly forbid any miscegeny, sexual or cultural, especially with those surrounding tribal nations who worshipped the Queen of Heaven, and She was very popular.

The problem was that "Her place was taken by the covenant with the chosen people, who were thus forced into the feminine role."(ibid.) In other words, a whole culture had become anima-posessed; they did not see the need for an intermediary between themselves and their God, because they believed (or at least their priesthood did,) that they were that intermediary themselves.

What Jung did not mention is that Job first arose as a pair (sic) of folk-tales, significantly Babylonian. The Poem of the Righteous Sufferer and Acrostic Dialogue on Theodicy.#M. Ironically the former, known as Ludlul bel nemeqi (lit."I will praise the Lord of wisdom") like Job, describes a long series of calamities suffered by a man prior to the patriarchal Marduk helping him. No Goddess here. The Babylonian Theodicy is "…an acrostic in which all eleven lines of each stanza begin with the same syllable, and the syllables make up a sentence which names the author. It was probably written at about 1000 BC." (Saggs p 152) The dialogue is between a sufferer exposing divine injustice and a friend attempting to show there was no injustice. Given the length of time it takes for little people's stories to be developed into important people's myths, Job might have been popular with the common people who baked cakes for the Queen of Heaven, Jerusalem, and Babylon, for a long time before the aristocracy took notice.

We then face the possibility that the plot went something like this. Job personifies the righteous law-abiding God-fearing man, epitomising an apparently monotheistic self-satisfied left-brained materialistic patriarchal conformist. He doesn't need an anima to contact Self; he thinks he is an anima, God's anima. He makes sacrifices directly, and hands out advice to his inferiors.

What more could a true real live anima, especially one so skilled in strategy as Ishtar, possibly want? If this man wants to be Yahweh's girl-friend, see how he likes it.

Anima as mirror has a history which, pardon the pun, is venerable. The mirror even constitutes the sigil for Ishtar's planet, Venus . Any man (and by extrapolation, any nation) which forgets its anima, will lose his posessions and health and be reduced to a pathetic helpless creature sitting among ashes, and scratching himself with a potsherd.(Job.2:8) Then after being derided and criticised by his friends, he is finally confronted, not with Self, for that would utterly anihalate him, but with a mirror-image of the stupid juvenile bad-tempered erratic and cruel deity that he had created for himself; a bombastic bullying primitive loud-mouth, totally devoid of eros or sympathy, for whom the entire "question becomes one of personal vanity and touchiness."CW9/2 29 In other words, anyone arrogant enough to feel anima is redundant in the search for Self, will be shown, not Self, but their own pathetic artificially contrived husk, which they deluded themselves into believing might suffice in its place. It is as if, after tolerating generations of abuse and neglect, She slammed a mirror in front of him and said,"There! This monster, this tyrant, this grotesque parody of Self, this is your Yahweh!"A2J 601-4.

Even more embarrassing, Job spends all of verse 28 talking about man's mining skills, then asks where wisdom may be found.#A/J 622 If he took one look at what he was scratching himself with, he would see. Qliphoth (potsherds) were the dangerous reverse aspects of the Qabalistic Sephiroth, from which we are protected by Da'ath.# As to where wisdom is, Visita Interiora Terrae; Rectificando Invinies Occultum Lapidem,

V.I.T.R.I.O.L., or in plain English,"You're sitting on it!"

Job was never confronted with an image of Self, because Yahweh can at most be only an image of half of the male half of Self. (Gods are notoriously inanimate without their Shakti to animate.) He was confronted with a half-image, and even that was enough to terrify him into prostrating himself. Much has been made of Job's apparently sudden apprehension of the evil half of Yahweh,#Jaff‚ 114,A2J 623,yet nobody seems to have noted that Yahweh without the Queen of Heaven is only one quarter of a Self-image; but nobody is going to tell Job that, least of all Yahweh, because He is terrified of Her, like you (or any other God-fearing person since,) wouldn't believe. But the job (pardon the pun) is done.

"With the birth of the symbol, the regression of libido into the unconscious ceases. Regression is converted into progression, the blockage starts to flow again, and the lure of the maternal abyss is broken."#CW6, 445.

At this point in his account of the story, Edinger equates Wisdom with Satan(?!)#E&Ap93 which is not edifying for Edinger,(You can't be Satanic just because you get things moving: after all, someone once said "Take up thy bed and walk."John 5:8. Was that Satan?)

but Edinger is forgiven for it by his next masterly quote from John Donne. But I digress.

The next step Jung proposes is that God has to become human, because Job has noticed His antinomy as good and evil. To the degree that incarnation symbolises consciousness, there's no point. Yahweh has already been consciously discerned in the mind of humanity.

But good and evil is not the only antinomy in the unconscious. There is one much profounder ana-lysis which remains: the antinomy of male and female, and the fracture of the sexual perversion of male/good and female/evil, of which even Edinger remains unconscious to this day!(v.s.) Yahweh can't contain the syzigy, because he is only part of it. His problem is not to become conscious; he already is. What he's got to do is get a life, get a woman. She's been staring him in the face for half a milennium, and now he has to surrender to what he has always resisted. It's not what a man agrees or disagrees with: it's what he talks about.#Jung ? Yahweh goes on about harlotry and high places and the Queen of Heaven until you almost wish he'd leave off it. That guy needs a comprehensive rogering, and who better to do it than his old adversary, Astarte/ Innana/Ishtar, or in Greek, Aphrodite,(pandemos!)

"The unconscious mind of man sees correctly even when conscious reason is blind and impotent."#A2J 608. Remember, Yahweh is already conscious, although obviously not impotent. So who does he select for this next step towards incarnation/consciousness? You guessed it! He goes for the Egyptian archetype of a "human" mate#A2J 625 and of course, as a true Zaroastrian, incarnates via a virgin, but her name just happens to be Mary (i.e. of the sea) which, as any fan of Botticelli (or Greek mythology) knows, means Aphrodite, who was conceived from the froth which formed when Saturn/Chronos' genitalia were thrown into the ocean. Mary's star was of course 8-pointed, as was Ishtar/Astarte's; star of the sea.

The myth of the origin of the constellation Pisces is that Athene hid Aphrodite and Eros (the Goddess and the God of love) in the Euphrates, disguised as fishes, when Typhon (animus?) was about to consume them. She formed Pisces in the heavens to celebrate that event; and what is the current favourite Christian symbol for the God of Love, Ichthys,(IXΘΥΣ) the notariquon for "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour."#SeeCharbonneau-Lassay p 298.

Mary of course, gets impregnated by a dove, Aphrodite's bird, (in good Greek tradition, like Leda's Swan and Hera's Cuckoo and Danae's eagle etc.etc.) But Jesus' only claim to membership of the house of David is via Joseph. (Matt.1:1-16)

One of the annoying habits of Jungian writers is to say that crucifiction is "a sort of dismembering." It isn't. It constitutes being nailed to a piece of wood. And when Ishtar went to the underworld and was killed by Ereshkigal, she was hung on a nail (or a pike, like Longinus' spear,) and was dead for three days before she was rescued, When she returned to the upper world, she brought souls of the dead with her. These habits do seem to run in the family.

Jung's assertion,# 623p34"Taking a highly personified form that is clear proof of her autonomy, Wisdom reveals herself to men as a friendly helper and advocate against Yahweh, and shows them the bright side, the kind, just, and amiable aspect of their God" is difficult to reconcile with the fact that Yahweh made no mention of her, Job's only reference to her is in passing#Job 28:12, quoted in Jung's footnote 24, and the only person to give her much role in the proceedings is Jung himself.

# 640 p43"Yahweh must become man precisely because he has done man a wrong. He, guardian of justice, knows that every wrong must be expiated, and Wisdom knows that moral law is above even him. Because his creature has surpassed him he must regenerate himself."

But what incarnates,becomes conscious, regenerates?

Christianity believes that incarnation solves the conflict, but neither Judaism nor Islam recognise Jesus as any more than an important prophet, and seem to do quite nicely. Campbell goes further;"Jesus and the Bodhisattva ideal are of the same archetype, but also - given the simultaneity in development of the two legends at the western and eastern terms of the same Late Hellenistic culture province - that they represent together a single, historically defined development in what has long been recognised as a very old and widespread oriental tradition." #Cam p 111 col 1.

Jung canvasses comprehensive evidence for the idea that "...the Israelites worshipped Saturn. The Sabaeans called him the "god of the Jews." The Sabbath is Saturday, Saturn's day...Saturn is the star of Israel."# 128 p75 Aion. And

"The ass pertains to the "second sun," Saturn, who was the star of Israel and is therefore to some extent identical with Yahweh." CW5 p401, 622.

But therein possibly lies the clue.#MC 332p247 "Black sun responsible for split-mindedness, accused of all darkness in a man..." and #334"Wisdom never violent: no conflict of thinking and feeling."

Wisdom's darkness is often the first face we see, especially for extroverted sensates like the aspiring egoists of Job's time."A type who is so accurate on a factual level can suddenly get melancholy, suspicious premonitions, ideas of dark possibilities..." "...dark intuition of something murky, for his intuition, being inferior, was like a dog sniffing in garbage pails."#von Franz 23.

"Even in her lighter, day aspect as queen of heaven... Inanna's symbolism is not an expression of static reliable security...She represents a consciousness of transition and borders...creativity and change and all the joys and doubts that go with a human consciousness that is flexible, playful and never certain for long." Whit 134

As goddess of war,"More passionate than Athena (with the energies of wild instinct which were later in Greece assigned to Artemis...she sings with abandoned delight of her own glory and prowess;"Heaven is mine, earth is mine, - I, a warrior am I. Is there a god who can vie with me?...seven lions pull her chariot... she slayed the dragon of kur... Equally passionately, she is goddess of sexual love. She sings ecstatic songs of self-adornment and desire and delights of lovemaking. More extroverted than Aphrodite, she craves and takes...Her receptivity is active... healer, life-giver, composer of songs,...creative in all realms...behaviour of emotions is considered to be in her keeping:

To pester, insult, deride, desecrate - and to venerate - is your domain, Inanna.
Downheartedness, calamity, heartache - and joy and good cheer - is your domain, Inanna.
Tremble, afright, terror - and dazzling and glory - is your domain, Inanna...

she is not motherly.... Like the goddess Artemis, she is at the "border-region midway between motherhood and maidenhood joie de vivre and lust for murder, fecundity and animality." She is the quintessential positive puella, an eternally youthful, dynamic, fierce, sensuous, harlot-virgin...she keeps her independence and magnetism as lover, young bride, and widow. And she is not a mother-lover, to sons."#Perera 18."...a many-faceted symbolic image, a wholeness pattern, of the feminine beyond the merely maternal... combines earth and sky, matter and spirit, vessel and light, earthly bounty and heavenly guidance." ibid 16

Spiritual if not biological sister to Sekhmet, one eye of Amen Ra; the other eye was Horus, the falcon, but "The gods are sparrows - I am a falcon;" #Perera 17

Repression of a force this powerful required considerable psychological adjustment, with profound consequences. One has to ask why.

Whitmont canvasses most of the socio-political explanations for suppression of the feminine #122-3, but feels that "Regrettable and even destructive as this attitude may have been, nevertheless it was apparently necessary for the development of ego-consciousness itself."#125 but then asks

"Why, ...was the feminine felt to be so antithetical to the developing new consciousness that it had to be judged as evil incarnate?"#126 He accentuates the importance of distinguishing between sexual and archetypal gender, to avoid the sociological error of perceiving the discrimination as against women primarily, rather than repression of femininity in both women and men.

He correlates the transformative features of Inanna-Ereshkigal to right cerebral hemisphere function, in contrast to the left hemisphere's penchant for order and stability.

"Devaluation ... was a result of the need to separate the nascent ego from the encompassing field-consciousness of the magico-mythological world of need and instinct with its transformative (hence ego-threatening) dynamic of existence. This sense of separateness is illusory; yet this does not change its validity for the mind that believed in it."#144

Basically, he is talking of denial of instinct, with two corollaries,

1. Alienation and loss of sense of meaning.

2. Danger of global destruction by suppressed perverted instincts, cut off from interaction with reason.

 Re: Jung's attitude towards the Book of Job:

Despite Jung assuming that Job's confrontation was with Self/God, it is possible to argue that Job met no such person; in fact Jung himself states that Yahweh was a form of the "magician," the man who becomes inflated with the delusion that he has conquered the anima, and appropriated her mana.

CW7 p229 380,""I and the Father are one"- this mighty avowal in all its awful ambiguity is born of just such a psychological moment."#John 10:30 ascribes precisely that avowal to Jung's other favourite Self character, Jesus.

Why did Jung assert so strongly and frequently in "Job" that Yahweh was Self, yet provide throughout his collected works all the raw material necessary to argue that Yahweh was no more Self than is Saturn?

Aneila Jaffé‚ provides a clue in quoting from two letters Jung wrote in 1951 and 1952. To Erich Neumann he described how his encounter with the Judeo-Christian God-image held him "in thrall, almost crushed, and defend myself as best I can." He admitted that the thraldom was "barbaric, infantile, and abysmally unscientific." And to a theologian (sic - probably Fr. Victor White) "... I am forced to use even means I find reprehensible in order to deliver myself from the Father ... Sarcasm is the means with which we hide our hurt feelings from ourselves, and from this you can see how very much the knowledge of God has wounded me..."#Myth/Mean pp106-7.

If Jung found sarcasm reprehensible, yet used it, one might re-quote Job 28:12,"But where can wisdom be found...?" but add verse 28,"... the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom." If that's all there is to wisdom, the enormous human potential available in the Self can never be tapped. Jung's sarcasm might better be understood by considering anima as wisdom, and proposing that Jung was crushed, not by the Magician archetype which he confused with Self, but by what (or who) is half of the real Self. Ishtar's Greek equivalent was Aphrodite/Athene/Hera, and the sarcasm of the Queen of Heaven was legendary.

"The Lady Hera answered, with wide eyes:

'Majesty, what a thing to say. I have not
"harried" you before with questions, surely;
you are quite free to tell me what you will tell.
This time I dreadfully fear - I have a feeling -
Thetis, the silvery-footed daughter
of the Old One of the sea, led you astray." #Iliad p16

Jung's relationship with anima was, on his own admission, rather ambivalent. #MDR re 'art' A man so interested in evil might have given a little more attention to naughty. Shipping Toni Wolff into the matrimonial home so soon after his marriage to Emma hardly sounds like good contact with the feeling function. And the less said about Sabina Spielrein, well...? It is hardly surprising that a thinker's attempts to exclude anima/feeling from considerations of Self would lead to 'long passages that are charged with emotion, ironic and aggressive." #Jaffé‚105

_

[Contents][1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][Next]