Author’s Note:
This material draws on the work of my friend and colleague Jeff Woodgate in the course of his Masters Degree in Psychology.
The numbers at the beginning of some paragraphs refer to discussion-points, which are listed after the discussion text.
Today’s session was a workshop event, in preparation for a similar presentation to/at the Canberra Jung Society on Friday 7 August, in Canberra.
Preface:
The conjunction of these three remarkable characters was made possible as a consequence of an application of time-binding: a general-semantics principle with a wonderful capacity to transcend little difficulties like gaps in time-space ...
Introductions
Gautama (‘the Buddha”):
Siddhartha Gautama was born into a royal family in the area around Northern India and Southern Nepal, in 563 BCE.
Siddhartha realised at the age of 29 that wealth and luxury did not guarantee happiness, so he explored the different teachings, religions and philosophies of the day, to find the key to lasting human happiness.
After six years of study and meditation he finally discovered (not invented) 'the middle path' and gained enlightenment at the age of 35. The title Buddha means ‘the awakened one’.
After enlightenment, the Buddha spent the rest of his life teaching until his passing away at the age of 80. The Buddha taught a path to enlightenment (or lasting happiness) from his own experience.
His teachings are called ‘the Dharma’, meaning Truth. These teachings later came to be known as Buddhism. His teachings are maintained by the Sangha, the community of monks and nuns.
Today, Buddhism is a religion (or, as some say, a “non-theist” philosophy) to about 300 million people around the world, including about half a million in Australia, growing rapidly..
Dr. Carl Jung
Dr Jung was born in 1875, died 1961, a Swiss psychiatrist and psychotherapist who founded analytical psychology. His work has been influential not only in psychiatry but also in philosophy, anthropology, archaeology, literature, and religious studies. He was a prolific writer, though many of his works were not published until after his death.
Dr Jung created some of the best known psychological concepts, including the archetype, the notion of collective unconscious, and the foundations of personality typing.
Count Alfred Korzybski
Our third guest is rather well known to us by the time-binding process of his writings. The Count was an approximate contemporary of Carl Jung, living from 1879 until 1950. He is remembered as a Polish-American independent scholar who developed a field of practice called general semantics (dear to the hearts of all here), which he viewed as both distinct from, and more encompassing than, the field of semantics.
The Count is not generally considered as colourful a character as our other two guests, but I’m sure he won’t mind that comparison.
He argued that human knowledge of the world is limited both by the human nervous system and the languages humans have developed, and thus no one can have direct access to reality, given that the most we can know is that which is filtered through the brain's responses to reality. His best known dictum is "The map is not the territory".
Motivated by his experiences and observations in the destruction and carnage of World War I, Count Korzybski became convinced that civilisation as we know it could be greatly improved by application of scientific method to our public and private lives. His many publications include “Manhood of Humanity” and “Science and Sanity”, which have become the foundations of other disciplines and lifestyle-improvement programmes.
***~ ***
So, welcome to our guests. I know that it may seem a little strange to some of us that these gentlemen have been able to transcend the limits of space and time to be with us again today, but it just goes to show what can be achieved by the application of such intellectual and psychic power.
The Luncheon Discussion:
Gautama the Buddha: I’d like the lentil compote, please.
Dr Carl G Jung: An inspired choice, Gautama. And I’ll take your English roast beef.
Count Alfred Korzybski: For me, I think, the Kranski.
Waiter: Yes, gentlemen. Anything to drink?
CGJ: A red wine please.
B: A glass filled with ice please.
AK: And a nice little Polish Vodka for me, please!
W: Yes, gentlemen, will that be all for now?
B: Thank you.
1)
CGJ: As I was saying, here in the West our so-called Age of Enlightenment dawned several centuries ago. We began to look at things differently. We even began to apply our new scientific methodology to the causes of suffering of men and women. We made some great advances and replaced superstition with knowledge. Today, many, perhaps most, people are better off than a few generations ago, but still, suffering persists.
B: It is always so. An unavoidable condition of being human. As you know, I am not unacquainted with suffering. Indeed, all my father’s careful maneuvering to keep me sheltered from the world of pain came to naught – how could it be otherwise? The West and the East are not so far apart.
AK: Technically, we are very advanced, but the elementalistic premises underlying our human relations, practically since Aristotle, have not really changed. In the structure of our languages, methods and habits of thought, orientations etc, we preserve delusional, psychopathological factors. I believe that our exploitation of symbolism, particularly language, is fundamental to many of these problems.
Think of the language of ISIS, in the Middle East – they talk of Western civilization as “the Great Satan, which must be put to the sword” . Our Prime Minister replies by referring to them as “evil terrorists”. The language on both sides (and many other sides) polarizes a complex set of conflicts, and stirs up passions of fury and radicalism.
CGJ: Nothing human is alien to me, the Roman poet Terence said. Our Age of Enlightenment may have cleared away many falsehoods but we awoke from our feudal past and suddenly found ourselves in a modern world unavoidably responsible for our own well-being.
B: No doubt a great shock but, as you say, unavoidable. Carl, how did you come to devote yourself to the problem of suffering?
2)
CGJ: When I left my sheltered childhood world I fell into studying medicine, and graduated to work in the field of psychiatry. It seemed a world full of possibilities. Then I encountered patients suffering from the strangest ills, without apparent cause. They were not physically ill, organically diseased. Their mysterious mental suffering seemed unnecessary.
B: Were these patients fully aware of their suffering?
3)
CGJ: I took note of their words and actions and eventually saw that their illnesses often made sense according to their own internal logic. I came to understand their ills served a “secondary gain” purpose. Symptoms were really a way of coping with painful aspects of their lives. Their symptoms were distorted internal responses to environmental challenges. These were not ideal adaptations, to be sure, but they allowed the patient to cope after a fashion.
B: Did you cure them of their ills?
CGJ: Some. There were some lasting cures. My associates in Freud’s circle had also begun exploring this field. Separately and together for some years our small band of fractious pioneers set out to chart the territory of the human mind. This was not entirely new ground but we brought a certain fresh intellectual rigour to mapping out the largest landforms of the human psyche – id, ego, superego, collective unconscious.
AK: I'm worried by use of this word "cure". As you know, Carl, symbols are very important in the way we think and act. Particularly language as a symbol system. Can you really "cure" anyone ... ?
W: The lentils are for you. The roast beef. The kranski over here. Another glass of wine sir?
CGJ: Yes, thanks.
W: You are right sir?
B: Yes, thanks.
4)
CGJ: (Seems to have forgotten, or is avoiding, Alfred's question): Our main legacy, for which some reviled us, was, ironically, the upending of a key notion of our Age of Enlightenment. Our charting of unconscious forces scared many people.
5)
With God having been dethroned, we then dethroned the ego from its privileged seat of rationality. We showed that other actors – unconscious drives and motivations, emotions – sometimes held the human stage, even if we weren’t consciously aware of this shadow play.
6)
B: Carl, it has been my observation that most people are usually all too conscious of their drives and motivations. These – shall we call them disorders? – constantly motivate people to pursue particular desires. Attaching to these desires causes discontent and dissatisfaction. Only by freeing ourselves from these desires can we realise an end to such suffering.
CGJ: Let go of suffering. Just like that?
B: This letting go can be aided by the cultivation of wisdom, ethical behaviour and mindful awareness. Essentially, our suffering arises from the illusion that the individual self is enduring and needs to be protected.
7)
CGJ: What I call psychological complexes, our personal patterns of thought or behaviour charged with strong emotional energy, can drive us to pursue illusions or throw us off balance psychologically. So it is never enough to think we know what we are doing; we need to become aware of these internal forces, see where they are leading us and then act accordingly to put ourselves in control.
B: Yes, attaining mindful awareness and wisdom. This is necessary. In the meantime, we talk of being in control, but in control of what? We live as if everything is cut and dried. We try to control things. But in the end, we rely on God’s grace, or fate or luck to carry our plans through.
AK: Assuming the existence of a supreme being. But we need to be aware of our inner being, and it’s interaction with the reality unfolding around us.
8)
B: We are not in control of our lives. Existence can't be dictated by human beings. All things are always shifting. So are we, moment by moment. Nothing is permanent. When I realised this it wasn't frightening. On the contrary, it was ... liberating. How is your steak, Carl?
CGJ: Very good, Gautama. And the lentils?
B: I haven’t tasted such a lentil in millenia!
9)
CGJ: Nothing is permanent. Yet, to ourselves, we always retain the view that we remain the same person, don't we?
B: It is a very enduring illusion. But we must admit that we change, or else psychoanalysis couldn't hold out a promise of cure, could it?
AK: I go along with a lot of this. We do have to live with uncertainty. One of our most common and damaging misevaluations is that we remain the same while others around us are changing. But our sensory perception is incomplete – we never know the full stories behind what we see.
10)
CGJ: I see therapy as really a process of taking up responsibility for managing our changing selves to the fullest extent we are able.
B: Cure or enlightenment or salvation demands effort and practice. It won't come from outside. We have to go inside. This is why training in meditation is so useful. It aids in concentrating the mind but, more importantly, helps us to remain mindful in all circumstances. After all, we can hardly let go of our attachments if we are not aware of them.
AK: I’d like to refer to this process of change. Language indicates a false permanence. Permanence is only in our illusory self.
11)
CGJ: My old friend Freud said something like that. “Where id was, there shall ego be.”
B: I do not frame it in terms of restoring ego to the throne. The self is constantly changing. It has no lasting structure and content.
AK: Of course. Any notion that there is real permanence is at odds with reality. However, some principles retain validity in new time or context – a case of “invariance under transformation”. It’s very true, as they say, that “The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak”.
CGJ: So you don't have a concept of a whole integrated self?
B: I find it more fruitful not to think in terms of either self or non-self. Neither attachment nor aversion. There is a middle path. It is because we are ignorant of the truth that we think we can be made happy by fulfilling our attachments to a specific person, place, feeling, thing and then we form aversions and dislikes. We don't like it when we don't get what we want. When dislike is reinforced it often escalates to anger, hate and enmity.
AK: You’re referring to a two-valued approach. Is this evaluation a linguistic trap?
12)
CGJ: Frustrated desires can paralyse and poison us.
B: Yet desires are natural. I am not sure it is useful to focus upon the origins or content of desires. It is enough to understand that desires naturally arise and just as naturally cease. That is part of our existence. Things arise together. All is dependent upon all other things.
CGJ: Although I don't have knowledge of past lives, I certainly know that our past can condition or influence our present way of living. Most patients come to analysis with a particular problem. Sometimes together I can help them find a solution. They may suffer through an attachment to a frustrated desire or because they have an aversion to something. The cause of this suffering lies in the present, to be sure, but the patient's tendency is often to apply to the present problem a pattern of thought or action that formed in response to some previous setback to the ego's wants. It is this inappropriate choice of response that fails to overcome the present obstacle.
B: If it can be viewed as an obstacle.
AK: Western society has an unfortunate strong habit of treating our assumptions as reality. We call it “identification”. This includes the process of “projection”, where we impose our understandings or expectations onto what we see, thus distorting our rue perceptions..
13)
B: Our past conditions us to be in the present in a certain way. But we have choice. One can see what is really occurring now. Understand the truth of the situation. And act ethically. No longer need we be prisoners of past deeds of ourselves or others. We can be in the world in a new way. Perhaps for most it’s best to start with small things. Take that pipe of yours, for instance. If you were of a mind to quit smoking, you might start with examining your desire for smoking. Become aware of when and how it arises. Observe it. Feel the desire. Feel your attachment to it. Practise letting go of your attachment and see what happens to this desire. It will hang around for a while, and then eventually disappear. Seeing the desire for what it is will allow you to come to grips with it. Before you can actually choose to stop smoking you must admit to the strength of your desire – not deny your desire or try and hide from it.
CGJ: Gautama, your glass is still empty. And that reminds me, we have an organisation for problem drinkers that operates along much the same lines. The desire of the drinker for attaining a particular alcohol-induced psychic state cannot be resisted or denied forever. That ties up too much psychic energy.
14)
The 12 steps path to freedom arises only when the drinker can sit with his or her desire comfortably without being compelled to act to satisfy this transient urge.
B: Yes, it is a case of learning the soft way to resist the seemingly irresistible. But the soft way is not the easy way – it can be immensely difficult to overcome the habits of a lifetime.
15)
CGJ: (with a hint of sarcasm): How fortunate then that we may be given many lifetimes.
B: (Ernestly) Indeed.
AK: Carl, I'm always surprised to hear you talk like this. Where's the evidence for this astonishing assertion of "many lifetimes". You talk about "scientific method", and go on, with a perfectly straight face, to wallow in groundless speculation of "our eternal soul". Give me the evidence of that which I cannot experience, and I'll join you in your journey!
CGJ: (condescendingly): My dear friend Alfred (patting him on the back like a little child) ... You can't dispute other people's experience ...
(A brittle silence ensues. Only the Buddha seems to think that it's not necessary for anyone to speak just now. The situation is rescued by the waiter).
W: More ice for you, sir, and the red wine, and here's a larger tumbler of vodka you you, sir.
16)
B: Letting go asks a lot of us. On the external level, think about all the things we don't want to relinquish. Think about possessions, money, youth, people, accomplishments, career and status. On the internal level, notice how we cling to self concepts and images, to our ideas, opinions, beliefs, politics and habitual ways of doing things; think about how attached we are to our feelings, moods, regrets, grudges, memories and the stories we tell ourselves. Think about all the ways we hold on to and control all the aspects of our lives. On the innermost level, reflect on how we don't want to let go of our egoistic, selfish, self-important view of self and who we think we are. As we walk the spiritual path to enlightenment, ego-clinging is what we are really attempting to shed. We want to let go of and empty out our separatist tendencies and our selfish agendas.
CGJ: I think this ego-clinging, all the discontent it engenders, must be understood ultimately as the suffering of a soul which has not yet discovered its meaning. Now, I am not suggesting that one may achieve a life without suffering but, rather, that the suffering is already upon us and we are obliged to find its meaning.
17)
B: Although much in the universe is unfathomable, we are obliged to realise our Buddha nature. The ultimate goal of our lives is to be happy.
AK: Well, that's what my time-binding proposition is all about. But I would have thought that you gentlemen would have a more profound philosophico-religious perspective ... ?
W: Any dessert sirs?
B: We’ll take some cheese, please.
CGJ: I am not so sure.
B: Of the cheese?
18)
CGJ: No, about happiness being our ultimate goal. But it all depends on what you mean by happiness. It all starts when we ask the question, ‘Who am I apart from my history and the roles I have played'?
19)
B: Will my life pass swiftly by as I wander upon this world like a hungry ghost, or will I undertake the work necessary to achieve salvation, which is already within me? Carl, everybody should become their own psychologist and learn to control the undisciplined mind in order to lead it from suffering to happiness.
AK: Well, as far as I'm concerned, we're only here once. This life is not a dress rehearsal for something more perfecter. In fact, I'm exhilarated by the brevity of human existence. Let's enjoy the dessert and our life while it lasts, and pass-on our experiences for others to minimise their suffering.
CGJ: Suffering is painful, certainly, but is it really bad or undesirable? There are as many nights as days, and the one is just as long as the other in the year's course. Even a happy life cannot be without a measure of darkness, and the word ‘happy’ would lose its meaning if it were not balanced by sadness.
20)
B: Suffering arising from attachment to obsessive desires is certainly painful and completely unnecessary. Enlightenment is a state of becoming freed of limiting desires.
AK: Minimal expectations. Are you under the illusion of unjustified, hidden assumptions. It’s how we respond.
CGJ: Even so, and I agree that freeing yourself of limiting desires is a good thing, is not enlightenment itself limiting? Are you not advocating that the highest value lies in becoming a detached and happy carrot? Can suffering itself ever be eliminated? Should it?
B: Enlightenment is a permanent transformation of consciousness, leading to freedom from suffering and a life without discontent. The mind can be permanently transformed. There is a stage beyond egocentricity that is everlasting.
CGJ: Even though everything is in a constant state of flux?
AK: We always have choices, such as how to respond to suffering.
21)
B: Enlightenment is an unchanging achievement, but there are different stages of enlightenment. You could think of it as a process. After all, it took me many lifetimes to reach my final stage of enlightenment.
(K. guffawes into his vodka)
22)
CGJ: Nevertheless, suffering that is worked though can enrich and deepen a human life, by generating greater knowledge, openness, sensitivity, compassion and passion.
B: Yes, that is so, even in the grip of this changing world.
CGJ: How can one ever get beyond the changing world? Even after death, our material substance continues to change and transform. Even the enlightened follower of the way continues to age, change.
B: Our intrinsic Buddha nature is unchanging. It is our original face and has existed since before we or our parents were born. And will continue to exist after our death. This world is transitory but it is nevertheless real. Suffering exists. Pain is real.
CGJ: But our pain and suffering shows us the way to liberation, does it not? In this way worldly delusions can be valuable.
AK: Delusions valuable ... ? I wouldn't have thought so. Not a very extensional approach to "reality" (whatever that is), if you ask me!
B: The world of delusions and suffering is not to be underestimated. It provides many valuable lessons.
CGJ: What do you seek to do in the world?
B: I set up the individual mind of each one who seeks peace, bring it to quietude, unify it, gather it together.
CGJ: Many patients lack a sense of wholeness. They are off-centre or out of balance, like a wheel riding off its axle or a bone riding out of its socket. This off-centeredness is most often experienced as negativity and restlessness.
B: Yes, we call that dukkha - "suffering", "anxiety", "stress", or "unsatisfactoriness".
AK: Yes. In my book “Science and Sanity”, I refer to this as the result of mis-evaluation - that is, not accurately perceiving and mapping the territory – or what is real.
23)
CGJ: People think they want this, or that, but all along they are looking for someone else or something else to save them. They think, if only this person would like me more, if only things could be the way they used to be in the past, or if only I could live in such a way I'd be happy. They don't have what they want ...
B: – and so they are able to go on blaming some other cause for their misery. They are absolved from any responsibility, and guilt too, I suppose.
CGJ: But the guilt doesn't disappear. It just goes into hiding, papered over with neurotic or false suffering, a way of escaping from having to do the hard work themselves.
AK: We have to evaluate, or assess, what we are confronted with. Our assessment will inevitably be couched in language. How we respond will determine whether we grow with it!
24)
CGJ: Neurosis is always a substitute for legitimate suffering.
B: Exactly. The hardest task of all is to become truly aware of our own strategies for avoiding ourselves. The self, our true self, sometimes plays a devious game of hiding itself in its shell of wants. If we continue to follow our own desires, we remain in the world of samsara still. Enlightened self-interest cannot lead to enlightenment.
25)
All beings already have everything we need to live the existence allotted for us. We just don't realise it. This is the world of samsara.
AK: You use, there, an “allness” statement. Surely that’s an over-generalisation? Allness is one of our greatest hazards.
CGJ: We need courage to risk all our ego defences and unconscious avoidance strategies in order to move from our one-sided off-balanced position towards wholeness.
B: There is value in wholeness. Living an off-balance life will get us nowhere. We’ll eventually run out of steam.
CGJ: Usually around the time of our middle years, when the great tasks of the ego are accomplished – establishing ourselves in the world independently of mother and father, becoming educated about things we need to work in a job, make money and gather possessions around us, find a mate and raise a family of our own. And then where are we?
B: But this is important. We first need to develop a healthy ego before we can move beyond its one-sidedness towards wholeness. We must be somebody before we can be nobody, so to say.
AK: Again, you’re using the term “ego”, a Freudian term. And “wholeness”. These are empty terms. We need to balance “mind” and “body”. To emphasise wholeness, I like to hyphenate these terms: “mind-body”, “thought-feeling” etc.
25)
CGJ: If we live long enough, the life passage eventually arrives where we have to face what we have avoided so far in our journey. Some people live too much in their heads and block out or avoid dealing with their emotions. These patients have to really feel their emotions first, painful as it is, in order to get better. Other people are constantly swayed by emotional reactions. Their task on the other hand is to work at developing a rational framework to better deal with their emotions.
B: The ways of escaping these tasks are endless.
CGJ: I am constantly amazed at how so many of my patients will do anything to prevent themselves getting better.
AK: I call it misevaluation, or working from maps that don't necessarily fit the territory.
B: We think we know what is good for us, but it is neither thoughts alone nor emotions alone that have the answers we need. This is apparent when we sometimes get what we think we really want. It doesn't satisfy. Things don't turn out right ever after. Even wanting to be enlightened won’t satisfy. Striving for enlightenment will only make it so much harder to attain.
CGJ: My thoughts exactly. Now Gautama, tell me this, how should I live my life?
B: (LOL) Act always as if the future of the Universe depended on what you did, while laughing at yourself for thinking that whatever you do makes any difference.
CGJ: Well said. Yes, some Christians say "Act as though it all depends on you, and pray as though it all depends on God".
B: And you, Alfred?
AK: Well, I think that you’re both thinking in absolute terms. I would say that we should not consider that “it all depends on me” or that “I should leave it all to God”, but rather that we should build on what other have done, and work together to do the best we can in our own lifetime.
26)
CGJ: Your vision will become clear only when you can look into your own heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakens.
B: I wish I had said that.
CGJ: Why aren’t you drinking?
B: I always like really cold water and I have just been waiting for the ice to melt. But look! We seem to be finished. Shall we have a little after dinner brandy?
CGJ: Why not? And you can tell me all about reincarnation and what happens after death.
AK: (Snorts into his vodka ... B pretends not to notice)
B: Oh, certainly. But it’s not really all that interesting, you know.
CGJ: Waiter!
This conversation continued on in this vein for a glass or so.
~ 0 ~
The Day that Gautama (“the Buddha”), Dr Carl Jung, and Count Alfred Korzybski, came to lunch …
Distinguished company, indeed, but WE played a role!
Some timeless principles applied to contemporary issues.
We did not expect the mouthing of platitudes this time.
Led by Robert James
Author’s Note:
This discussion occurred after a memorable luncheon attended by our three remarkable guests. The luncheon discussion was recorded for our ongoing (time-binding) edification.
Preface:
The conjunction of these three remarkable characters was made possible as a consequence of an application of time-binding: a general-semantics principle with a wonderful capacity to transcend little difficulties like gaps in time-space ...
Some After-Luncheon Reflections
1)
CGJ: As I was saying, here in the West our so-called Age of Enlightenment dawned several centuries ago. We began to look at things differently. We even began to apply our new scientific methodology to the causes of suffering of men and women. We made some great advances and replaced superstition with knowledge. Today, men and women are better off then before but, still, suffering persists.
a. How does scientific methodology make us better-off than before (eg for our parents)?
b. Why does suffering still persist in your own life?
c. How much of this could be relieved by better application of scientific methodology?
2)
CGJ: ... I encountered patients suffering from the strangest ills, without apparent cause. They were not physically ill, organically diseased. Their mysterious mental suffering seemed unnecessary.
a. Is much of our illness really "unnecessary"? What do doctors say about this?
b. Is it often caused by "semantic maladjustment" or "misevaluations"?
c. Is mental illness and distress really "without apparent cause"?
3)
CGJ: I took note of their words and actions and eventually saw that their illnesses often made sense according to their own internal logic. I came to understand their ills served a “secondary gain” purpose. Symptoms were really a way of coping with painful aspects of their lives. Their symptoms were distorted internal responses to environmental challenges. These were not ideal adaptations, to be sure, but they allowed the patient to cope after a fashion.
a. Is illness really "a way of coping"? What's the (or an) alternative to "coping"?
b. What sort of "secondary gains" can apply" Where's the time-binding in this?
c. Does this ever represent an effective evaluation of reality?
4)
CGJ: Our main legacy, for which some reviled us, was, ironically, the upending of a key notion of our Age of Enlightenment. Our charting of unconscious forces scared many people.
a. Do you ever catch a surprising glimpse of your own subconscious?
b. Do you think the subconscious is important in your life?
c. Are you ever scared of your own "unconscious forces"?
5)
CGJ: With God having been dethroned some time earlier, we now in turn dethroned the ego from its privileged seat of rationality. We showed that other actors – unconscious drives and motivations, emotions – sometimes held the human stage, even if we weren’t consciously aware of this shadow play.
a. Is the "ego the master of its own house" in your life?
b. Do you have surprising dreams? Can you remember them? Where do they come from?
c. Can we regard dreams as a part of our personal "reality"?
6)
CGJ: Let go of suffering. Just like that?
B: This letting go can be aided by the cultivation of wisdom, ethical behaviour and mindful awareness. Essentially, our suffering arises from the illusion that the individual self is enduring and needs to be protected.
a. Do you have problems "letting go" - holding on to part of yourself too long?
b. What about in relationships - Can you "let go" of resentment, indignation, jealousy?
c. Are principles like the "cultivation of wisdom" enough to achieve this?
7)
CGJ: So it is never enough to think we know what we are doing; we need to become aware of these internal forces, see where they are leading us and then act accordingly to put ourselves in control.
a. Are you the master or the slave to these "internal forces" ?
b. Can you identify an "internal force" that's important in your life?
c. Can you "objectify" such forces? Is it useful to do this, or dangerous?
8)
B: We are not in control of our lives. Existence can't be dictated by human beings. Life is a moving target. So are we, moment by moment. Nothing is permanent. When I realised this it wasn't frightening. On the contrary, it was ... liberating.
a. Do you feel that you're the master of your own destiny? How so / Why not?
b. How do you blend the need to be both directive and responsive in your own life?
c. How can we be liberated by uncertainty?
9)
CGJ: Nothing is permanent. Yet, to ourselves, we always retain the view that we remain the same person, don't we?
a. Do you remain "the same person" over time?
b. How do you apply indexing / dating to your "concept of self"?
c. Do you agress with Jung that our personality is intrinsic, ie "Nature" rather than "Nurture"?
10)
CGJ: I see therapy as really a process of taking up responsibility for managing our changing selves to the fullest extent we are able.
a. Is therapy really a metter of "managing our changing selves" - Is it as simple as that?
b. What about time-binding: Doesn't Science and Culture have a role in therapy?
c. If we have to "manage ourselves", isn't there a role for "Destiny" ?
11)
CGJ: My old friend Freud said something like that. Where id was, there shall ego be.
a. Freud was all for the basic instinctive drives and urges - Must we be bound by these?
b. Can we overcome eg childhood trauma by exercising the ego to prevail?
c. Can we change our "inner nature" by determination, training and practice?
12)
CGJ: Frustrated desires can paralyse and poison us.
a. Do you suffer from "frustrated desires"? Do you feel poisoned by them?
b. Can frustrated desire be managed by adopting "civilised behaviour" and restraint?
c. Can we be "objective" in describing desires and management options?
13)
B: No longer need we be prisoners of past deeds of ourselves or others. We can be in the world in a new way. Perhaps for most it’s best to start with small things. Take that pipe of yours, for instance. If you were of a mind to quit smoking, you might start with examining your desire for smoking. Become aware of when and how it arises. Observe it. Feel the desire. Feel your attachment to it ...
a. Do you feel like a prisoner of past deeds (or omissions to act) ?
b. Is there some part of your life that you'd like to change? Why can't you?
c. Are you effective in examining your own desires?
14)
B: Yes, it is a case of learning the soft way to resist the seemingly irresistible. But the soft way is not the easy way – it can be immensely difficult to overcome the habits of a lifetime.
a. Are "exercises or the mind" sufficient to bring about fundamental change?
b. Do you know people who have overcome eg serious addiction problem by mental effort?
c. Can you be "extensional" about observing your own habits?
15)
CGJ: How fortunate then that we may be given many lifetimes.
a. Have you ever had a sense of "having lived before"? Do you know people who have?
b. Seems like the ultimate in time-binding! Any reason why it should not occur?
c. Can time-binding via scientific method deliver "eternal life"?
16)
B: On the innermost level, reflect on how we don't want to let go of our egoistic, selfish, self-important view of self and who we think we are. As we walk the spiritual path to enlightenment, ego-clinging is what we are really attempting to shed. We want to let go of and empty out our separatist tendencies and our selfish agendas.
a. Do you have a clear sense of "who we think we are"?
b. Could you envisage changing this perception as circumstances require?
c. Do you sometimes feel lost in your "path to enlightenment"?
17)
B: Although much in the universe is unfathomable, we are obliged to realise our Buddha nature. The ultimate goal of our lives is to be happy.
a. Is it good enough to agree that "The ultimate goal of our lives is to be happy"?
b. Were you surprised to hear the Buddha say that?
c. Isn't this the natural conclusion of time-binding? And of Humanists?
18)
CGJ: It all starts when we ask the question, ‘Who am I apart, from my history and the roles I have played'?
a. Can you separate who you basically are, from the roles you have played?
b. Are you concerned about your history, ancestors, community etc?
c. Are you conscious of the roles you play? Are they part of your identity?
19)
B: Will my life pass swiftly by as I wander upon this world like a hungry ghost, or will I undertake the work necessary to achieve salvation, which is already within me? Carl, everybody should become their own psychologist and learn to control the undisciplined mind in order to lead it from suffering to happiness.
a. Do you feel like a "hungry ghost"?
b. Do you actively try to be "your own psychologist"?
c. Is it important "to control the undisciplined mind"?
20)
B: Suffering arising from attachment to obsessive desires is certainly painful and completely unnecessary. Enlightenment is a state of becoming freed of limiting desires.
a. Is the term "obsessive desires" an exaggeration of factors in your life?
b. Does it cause happiness, or can you be truly happy with "being driven" to a goal?
c. Is this always unnecessary? Don't some of us really need to be strongly focussed?
21)
B: Enlightenment is an unchanging achievement, but there are different stages of enlightenment. You could think of it as a process. After all, it took me many lifetimes to reach my final stage of enlightenment.
a. If we talk about "achieving enlightenment", isn't it a destination, rather than a journey?
b. Can enlightenment be an everyday experience?
c. How can time-binding assist us to achieve progressive "stages of enlightenment"?
22)
CGJ: Nevertheless, suffering that is worked though can enrich and deepen a human life, by generating greater knowledge, openness, sensitivity, compassion and passion.
a. Do you know people who have had great suffering? How have they survived / developed?
b. Can you recall some personal suffering which has had a benefit to you?
c. When do we "need to be cruel to be kind" to ourselves, and to others?
23)
CGJ: People think they want this, or that, but all along they are looking for someone else or something else to save them.
a. Have you ever been "saved" by someone else? Do you know people who have?
b. Have you ever wanted "to be saved", but found your own resources to be sufficient?
c. Do you ever find yourself wanting to blame others when you should take responsibility?
24)
CGJ: Neurosis is always a substitute for legitimate suffering.
a. Always?
b. What could the good doctor mean by "legitimate suffering"?
c. Should we think of "neurosis" as "habitual misevaluation"?
25)
B: All beings already have everything we need to live the existence allotted for us. We just don't realise it. This is the world of samsara.
a. "All beings" ... "everything" ... Dangerous words! Could they be "true"?
b. "Existence alloted for us" ... Sounds a little anthropomorphic, doesn't it?
c. Is it useful (rather than "true") to consider that the world has been created for us?
26)
CGJ: If we live long enough, the life passage eventually arrives where we have to face what we have avoided so far in our journey. Some people live too much in their heads and block out or avoid dealing with their emotions. These patients have to really feel their emotions first, painful as it is, in order to get better. Other people are constantly swayed by emotional reactions. Their task on the other hand is to work at developing a rational framework to better deal with their emotions.
a. Are there parts of your life where "emotions" have been largely excluded? Why?
b. Are there parts of your life dominated by "emotions"? Why?
c. Could you benefit from a better balance of "eros" and "logos"? Should it be "eros-logos"?
27)
CGJ: Your vision will become clear only when you can look into your own heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakens.
a. What do you "think" of this? Should we say "think-feel"?
b. Is this realistic in terms of taking an extensional view of "reality"?
c. How can you "awaken" by looking inside?
This is a "living document", subject to ongoing evolution as recollections re-emerge from our memories of the event, and are re-evaluated in light of ongoing experience and reflection. It will never be "the full truth and nothing but the truth", or "a map that expresses everyone's notion of the territory"!