The interpretation of dreams according to Jung.
He believed that every mean of transport appearing in our dreams illustrates the dreamer’s character of mental life. For example, people travelling by plane are being carried by “an unknown pilot’, what means that they follow their intuition in life which comes from our unawareness. People travelling by tram, bus have tendencies to imitate others’ behaviour and they deafen signals of their subconscious.
Carl Gustav Jung (1875-1961) was the most outstanding student of Sigmund Freud.
At first, he worked with his great master. However, Jung did not agree with some of Freud’s ideas, especially with the fact that sexuality dominates in our dreams. Jung believed that sexuality is only one of many aspects that appear in the dreams of every man. In addition – in contrast to Freud – he thought that dreams do not hide our ignorance, but on the contrary – they express it.
Studying dreams, Jung went in the direction of parapsychology and areas of the human psyche, which have never been discovered. He created the theory of “collective unconscious”, according to which every human being, regardless of culture, race, etc. is connected with other people by common knowledge and experience, which manifest themselves in our dreams as psychological archetypes.
These archetypes are stories, tales and myths inherited by our mind at the moment of birth, created even before our birth and common to all people around the world. Their content is always expressed through symbols and metaphors. For example, we can mention here the archetype of birth, rebirth, death, power, unity, the archetype of the hero, baby, demon, animal, water, tree or fire. Jung in his studies paid particular attention to the esoteric realm, so on telepathy, precognition, astrology, or ghosts.
In seemingly random events he was looking for patterns known as synchronicity, which in his view was a symptom of conventionality in nature. He pointed out that many of his discoveries about the unconscious initially appeared in dreams. So he considered dreams as a source of information and the way by which man has an incredible opportunity to connect with deeper mystery. Carl Gustav Jung made the complete redefinition of psychology, deepening it and making it accessible to all areas.
Symbolism According to C.G.Jang
The concept of archetype appears for the first time in Philo of Alexandria (1st century BC): “So after all other creatures […] man was created, and, as we read, according to the image of God -” Kata eikona theou “and on his likeness (Genesis I, 26). […] However, one should not look for this similarity in the specificity of the body, because neither God has a human form, nor is the human body like God. This resemblance to the image – “Eikon” refers only to the guide of the soul, to the spirit of “Kata tou thys psyches egemiona noun”, because the spirit in each individual person was created according to the one guiding Spirit of the Universe as a prototype – archetypos “…
Carl Gustav Jung, Swiss psychiatrist and psychologist, creator of depth psychology, on the basis of which he created his own concept called analytical psychology. This concept was introduced into psychology by Jung on the basis of Jacob Burckhardt’s term – “Das Urbild or the proto-image”, “primary image”. Jung argued for the existence of archetypes based on the fact that people in their dreams have common and recurring motifs as archetypal images. He introduced the concepts of the collective unconscious (in the mystics of the Subconscious), synchronicity and archetype, which play a great role in translating dreams, because dreams are specific images that can be reduced to the language of symbols used by our subconsciousness. They are dynamic quantities and are capable of change and development in the direction in which social development is heading. Jung’s works focus on the problem of the existence of the collective and individual unconscious and their content, which comes to the fore in dreams, and the manifestations of which are reflected in human creative activity while awake. Jung expressed these views in the works of Aion, created in the 1940s. Contributions to the symbolism of the Self, Psychology and alchemy, Mysterium coniunctionis.
So Carl Gustav Jung, based on his own internal experiences and on the basis of his knowledge, created the foundations of a modern dream book, including in the formula the symbolic meaning of depicting the archetype – “Archetype is a symbolic formula that begins to function wherever there are no conscious concepts or in they cannot exist at all for internal or external reasons. The contents of the collective unconscious are represented in the consciousness by expressive inclinations or approaches. As a rule, the individual treats them as conditioned by the object? this is a misconception because they come from the unconscious structure of the psyche, except that they are liberated by the interaction of the object. These subjective inclinations and approaches, however, are stronger than the influence of the object, and their psychological value is higher, so that they impose on all impressions “… the corresponding constellations, in a way, “develops” in the historical axis from a hidden, somehow “coiled” figure, into a more and more “complete” but also multi-faceted form in meaning. ” with himself a significant emotional charge, the source of which are the records fixed in the psyche, repeated in the experiences of many generations. It is a reflection of emotionally instinctive reactions to certain situations, along with patterns of behavior, drives and instincts …
The dream symbol as an archetype
The key concept for understanding the concept of archetypes is the concept of symbol. The symbol is a means of expressing the content of the unconscious. It is characterized by: constructiveness and purposefulness of influence.
A symbol in the Jungian approach is a message presented in the form of an image, expressing archetypal content and being a link between consciousness and unconsciousness. As Jung writes, the symbol is neither abstract nor concrete, nor rational, nor irrational, neither real nor unreal? he is always both; the symbol is? non vulgi ?, it is the aristocratic? cuiuslibet sequestrati ?, it is something separate, something that God chose and defined from the very beginning. These symbols can be generally divided into four groups: into anthropomorphic (symbolic-mythological) exemplification, into theriomorphic symbols, into? Object-concrete? (e.g. stone, magic vessel, jewel, crown) and graphic (e.g. circle, square, point, mandala)
Jung treated the symbol as a means of expressing something unknown and categorically distinguished it from the concept of a sign. Mental content, just like cultural content, can be analyzed either semiotically as symptomatic signs expressing facts, or symbolically as hidden, unknown content that should only be identified in the act of interpretation. Whether a certain content is perceived as a symbol or a sign depends in Jung’s work on the attitude of the recipient. However, he gave the symbolic perception of phenomena a certain superiority? it is a constructive attitude, using the understanding of meanings, and therefore referring to the spiritual reality, not the reductionist attitude assumed by Freud.
For Jung, the language of symbols is the language of the unconscious (Subconscious). They attracted him because of their activity, vitality, and constant transformation, dependent on the change of the direction of internal energy. For him, a symbolic essence had, for example, religious processes or creative processes, which included not only the creation of art, but also, for example, scientific work. In the language of symbols, the unconscious speaks to man in dreams, fantasies, using imagination, but also in visions under the influence of psychoactive substances or in visions of people with mental disorders, e.g. in schizophrenics.
The concept of the collective unconscious has not found scientific confirmation, although it has an interesting continuation in the form of an equally unconfirmed but beyond psychology concept of Sheldrake’s morphogenetic fields …
The structure of archetypes
The structure of each archetype is bipolar? it has a constructive and destructive side, it contains all the potential richness of the field it covers. Archetypes appear as symbols? their content is always expressed metaphorically, without being fully verbalized. We can catch these symbols in myths, dreams and visions. Archetypes can therefore be divided into male influences, subordinated to logic and influences, sun, light, order, order, strength, intellect, constancy, as even, external, extroverted and equated with the male beauty of Apollo, and female influences reflected by the moon, darkness, chaos, chronicity, souls, emotions, variability, as odd factors, internal, introversion and female Dionysian beauty …
Types of archetypes
According to Jung, the collective unconscious contains many different archetypes, from the archetype of birth, rebirth, death, power, unity, the archetype of the hero, child, God, demon, animal, the archetype of water as a symbol of motherhood and addiction, trees as a symbol of personality and the unconscious, fire as a symbol burnout and cleansing. The number of archetypes for each of us is not limited and depends on our own experiences. However, the universal core is limited and common to all people on Earth, regardless of race or culture. The following archetypes are most often described in senna …
Anima the prototype of a woman
Anima is an internal, female, in its polarization, aspect of a man’s psyche, complementing his interior and related to our consciousness, enabling a diversified attitude in relation to another human being. Like a woman’s psychic animus, a man’s anima is projected onto a partner in a relationship. This complementary character is similarly expressed in pictorial forms, i.e. in the form of images somewhat complementary within the framework of the gender division, and the symbols appearing most often refer more or less directly to the opposite sex. Jung also defines anima as the sphere of the “personification of the unconscious”, an eternal dancer delusing people with illusions. On the one hand, it represents an unconscious inner-psychic attitude, on the other hand, it is a factor shaping the projections, and on the third, it is expressed in the designed symbols. So if it manifests itself in his dreams, visions and fantasies, it usually takes the female form: the imago of mother, daughter, sister and beloved,? The heavenly goddess and chthonic Baubo? Always, however, is essentially sentimental, resentment. On the negative dimension, anima will therefore be expressed in irrational and unpredictable moods, in the positive aspect, both anima and animus are guides or intermediaries between the world of consciousness and the unconscious? anima expresses herself as a bright guide on her way through mysterious, dark worlds. Anima, as Jung emphasizes, becomes the eros of consciousness through integration. Despite their differences, the anima and animus have one thing in common, namely that their influence on the? Self? it is basically based on the same, that is, on strong affective rooting. Both of these factors cause an extremely strong, emotionally tinged belief in the legitimacy and validity of one’s own views, which is accompanied, as we have already mentioned, by a projective displacement of the unconscious source of these states onto a different external object …
Animus prototype of a man.
The animus is an internal aspect of a woman’s psyche that complements her diverse attitude related to consciousness. It is the inner image of the male aspect in the woman, the animus archetype incarnating in every female child. The animus is, like the anima, the personification of the unconscious, and like all archetypes, it has a dual character, expressing itself in two forms:? Bright? and? dark ?,? higher? and lower ?,? positive? and “negative”. The animus, as it expresses an element to the logos, is exemplified in various: constructions, takes, interpretations, innuendo. On the negative level, it will be expressed in unclear and demanding absoluteness, though usually erroneous, judgments. On the positive side, both anima and animus are human guides or intermediaries between the worlds of consciousness and unconsciousness? the animus then takes the form of a psychopump …
Both archetypes focus attention mainly on the fact that getting to know them is based on the principle of opposition, building fullness, and this means that in the process of shaping her personality, a woman confronts the cultural representations of the archetype of masculinity, man? femininity. The starting point is to build your mental fullness and supplement your psyche with the missing link. Both archetypes are burdened with culturally very rich symbolism, usually juxtaposed according to the principle of opposites. Anima and animus as archetypes of the psyche in Carl Gustav Jung’s analytical psychology. An element that is the opposite and complement of a persona. The harmonious development of the personality requires the presence of both of these elements and a balance between them. Lucretius distinguished between the biological soul, anima, and the subtle soul found at the heart, known as the animus, which is the center of cognitive faculties and emotions. This concept is echoed in psychoanalysis. The female aspect of the male psyche; the ideal of a woman existing in the male unconscious. It is an expression of all female tendencies in a man’s psyche. The male archetype in the female psyche is the ideal of a man existing in the woman’s unconscious. Today, these concepts are used as the equivalent of the dimensions of femininity and masculinity for both sexes …
Great Mother
The Great Mother is an archetype characterized by ambivalence, meaning the simultaneous evaluation of an object with positive and negative features, that is, creating opposite impressions. By referring to the symbolism of the female and female womb, on the one hand, it symbolizes giving life, and on the other hand, absorbing it, fear of the unknown, loss of identity and independence. Great Mother? it is an image that embodies the element of nature in a woman. The Great Mother archetype is linked to the Spirit-complementing mighty Mother Nature, the Great Mother Earth, who is the all-encompassing “world”. On the one hand, it is the quintessence of motherly love, all-encompassing compassion for all living beings, who understands everything, forgives everything, always wants the best, always lives only for others, never seeks its own benefit, is a discoverer of great love and at the same time a proclaimer of the ultimate truth? and at the same time it can manifest itself as unrelenting, to the point of blood, embracing the child with its hard, merciless hands. The Great Mother archetype, like other archetypes, can be actualized in an infinite number of forms, it can take on light or dark, good or bad, attractive or repulsive, love or fear forms. Each of these symbols, however, is followed by a reference to the world of nature, to the forces of nature, which on the one hand give, and on the other can be destructive …
Old Sage
The archetype of the Old Sage is a primitive image of wisdom, knowledge, acquired not only through the intellect, but also mystical, magical, spiritual knowledge, or simply life knowledge resulting from experience. The archetype of the Old Sage, in its dual nature, may take not only bright forms, but may also take negative or ambivalent forms; can turn out to be both the embodiment of the eternal, boundless knowledge and understanding, the embodiment of the spiritual element, as well as blinded by his logo-owl omniscience, closed to feeling and to others, an old man. Both the archetype of the Old Sage and the archetype of the Great Mother, Anima or Animus described elsewhere, can update in an infinite number of characters? they can be good or bad, high or low, alluring or repulsive, loving or fearful. What about their attractiveness, or is it dangerous for? Me? character is determined, inter alia, by the fact that their realization is directly related to the factor of fascination which? by man it then becomes the seed of pride. On an individual level, it is carried out by the father. On a collective and cultural level, by individuals identified with “fathers of nations”, guardians and spiritual guides. These characters are also often identified with the sacred sphere. This archetype is often projected on people of science, scientists, philosophers, thinkers …
The Child Archetype
A distinctive symbol of the Self archetype is the mystical child. According to some experts on this subject (C.G. Jung, J. Jacobi, P. Skogeman), it is a symbol of the Primary Self. A child in many cultures symbolizes the beginning, new potential, innocence and the purity of feelings and emotions, making it a symbol of the original state of the soul. It is not without reason that our Master Jesus Christ said: “Let little children come to me, do not forbid them, because the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to such as them.” It is not only about children as small, immature creatures, it is about all people who must become children again, that is, return to the pure state of mind that a child has, get rid of all the internal ballast accumulated throughout the years of life in illusion. Then a perfect state of consciousness will be possible, which allows direct contact with higher consciousness here and now, and not in some undefined future …
Archetype of the Tree of Life
One of the symbols of the richest in meaning and the most widespread; revered as a powerful representation of the plant kingdom, often as a symbol of divine beings or the abode of supernatural powers. The tree of life, with its annual leaves renewing itself, is first and foremost a symbol of the rebirth of life that constantly overcomes death, while the pinewood is a symbol of immortality. The shape of a tree with its roots sunk into the ground, a powerful, vertically rising trunk and often seemingly rising to the sky, often allow it to be a symbol of the connection of the cosmic underground sphere? chthonic, life on earth and heaven. […] Anthropomorphic interpretations of the tree (which stands upright like a man and like him, grows and passes) are widely distributed, and so it appears in various tribes in Central Asia, Japan, Korea, and Australia as a mythical order of people. […] A tree that bears fruit and provides shade and protection was understood by many peoples in terms of femininity or motherhood, while a simple shadow is usually a phallic symbol. Tree and fire are also commonly associated with fire, which is presumably related to the life force attributed to it: fire is supposed to hide in the wood of specific trees, from where it must be drawn by rubbing. The Indian tradition knows the image of an inversely growing tree whose roots are in heaven and whose branches extend underground, which is perhaps a symbol of the life-giving power of the Sun in the physical world and spiritual light in the spiritual realm. The Bhagavad-gita also interprets the inverted tree as a symbol of the development of all existence from some foundation: the roots represent the principle of all manifestation, and the branches the specific and detailed realization of this principle. The inverted tree also occurs in other contexts, such as in Kabbalah as the tree of life or in Islam as the tree of happiness. In the Bible, the tree appears primarily in the dual form of the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The tree of life symbolizes the initial fullness of Paradise and is at the same time a symbol of the long awaited fulfillment of the end of time; the tree of knowledge with its tempting fruits symbolizes the temptation to act against God’s commandments. Christian art and literature often establish a close relationship between the trees of Paradise and the cross of Christ who “returned us to Paradise” and who is the “true tree of life” …
The Shadow Archetype
A shadow can be called the dark, hidden side of human nature. At the level of the individual unconscious, this includes all the contents suppressed by the ego, negative experiences, complexes, fears. Is the problem of evil expressed in culture? at the level of the collective unconscious? precisely using the symbolism of the Shadow archetype. The shadow corresponds to a negative personality that embraces all traits that we feel unpleasant or regrettable for. The personal shadow contains parts of the personality that have been previously repressed, split off due to the lack of acceptance of the environment in which the development of the person was taking place. The shadow is responsible for the emergence of socially unacceptable negative feelings, thoughts or actions in human consciousness and behavior. It is the “dark side” of the personality, and its sources are located in the collective unconscious. As one of the components of the personality, it gives it a more spontaneous, open and fiery character. Jung emphasizes that:? Shadow integration, that is, becoming aware of the individual’s unconscious, is the first stage of the analytical process? without him it is impossible to know the animas and animus. The shadow can only be realized in relation to someone else, the anima and animus only in relation to the partner of the opposite sex, because only in him are their projections effective. If such a relationship is established, does it arise in the case of a man? as Jung says? a triad which is one-third transcendent: for a relationship is born of the male subject, the opposing subject of the female sex, and the transcendent anima. In the case of a woman, this relationship is made up of opposite elements. The fourth missing member of the triad to Totality is in the case of a man this archetype of the old sage [?], In the case of a woman? chthonic mother. These four components constitute the Fourth, half immanent, half transcendent, that is, the archetype that I have called the conjugal four. In shadow mythology, Hades, Charon, Cerberus, Sisyphus, in the Bible? Job. Shadow appears where pain, suffering, death, but also instincts. In Christian philosophy, the personification of the Shadow is Satan, Lucifer and all other figures from the circles of hell. In folk tales it is Diabeł, Bies or Chochlik. (C. G. Jung) …
Persona
Persona is a concept introduced to describe a mask worn by a human to hide true feelings or character. At the same time, a person can take on many people depending on a given situation. Every person wears many masks during their life, but it is not treated as a pathology until they are too identified with it. Persona is related to Jung’s belief that man has no real character and is not essentially individual but collective, adapting to the conditions and expectations of the environment. If it were not so, despite all his accidental differentiation of attitude, he would still have only one coherent character and would not be identified with the attitude taken in various circumstances …
Unus mundus
Unus mundus is a term used in Carl Gustav Jung’s alchemy and psychology. Jung argues that: “The idea of unus mundus undoubtedly rests on the assumption that the multiplicity of the empirical world is established on the basis of its unity, that two essentially different worlds, or that many worlds cannot exist together, cannot mix with each other. According to this view, everything that is divided and different is rather one and the same world, but not a world that falls under the control of the senses? this is a postulate, and the more probable that so far we have not been able to discover a world in which the laws of nature known to us do not apply. The fact that the psychic world, also so remarkably different from the physical one, is not rooted somewhere outside the cosmos, is due to the direct fact that there are causal relationships between the soul and the body pointing to their essentially homogeneous nature. Our cognition does not encompass existence, and so we are unable to comment on its overall nature in any way. Microphysics in the dark explores the unknown aspect of matter, just as complex psychology blows blindly into the unknown world of the psyche. Both lines of research have made discoveries that can only be presented in the form of antinomies, and both have forged concepts that are peculiarly analogous in many respects. Behind the idea of unus mundus is such an image of the unity of the human soul, according to which there is an invisible, intangible basic mental structure common to all souls? a structure which, although analogous to the anatomical structure of the brain, is not identical with it …
Prima materia
In alchemy, it is considered the basis of the opus, according to Jung, it is both the basis of a person’s mental life and the carrier of all his projections of autonomous psychic content, both in everyday life or observed during psychoanalysis, as well as those experienced by alchemists. This prime matter was and still is the greatest secret of alchemy, among other things because of the many names that alchemists gave it. Jung writes:? For some, therefore, prima materia was mercury, for others ore, iron, gold, lead, salt, sulfur, vinegar, water, air, fire, earth, blood, water of life, lapis, poison, spirit, cloud, sky. , dew, shadow, sea, mother, moon, dragon, Venus, chaos, microcosm.? [?] In addition to semi-chemical and semi-mythological terms, there are also ‘philosophical’ terms indicating a deeper meaning. Thus, in the treatise of Komarios we find the term “Hades”. In Olympias, the black earth contains the “damned by God?” (theokatáratos). And the consilium coniugi says that the father of gold and silver? so their prima materia? is the living nature (animal) of the earth and the sea ?,? man? or “part of a human”, such as hair, blood, etc. Gerard Dorn refers to prima materia as? Adamica? and? based on Paracelsus? “limbus microcosmicus”. Stone matter? Is nothing but fiery and perfect Mercury ?, the true hermaphroditic Adam and the microcosm (human). Hermes Trismegistos described the stone as “orphans”. [?] Referred to as en tó pán, the mercurial dragon of Greek alchemy gave the impetus to characterize prima materia as unum, unica res, monas and to the statement appearing in Liber Platonis quartorum that a man is needed to complete the Work because he has what is simple ? soul. Johan Daniel Mylius describes prima materia as elementum primordiale. It is a “pure subiectum and a unity of forms” into which, if necessary, any form will be taken. (in quotation marks C.G. Jung …
Mercury
Mercurius (Mercurius), in the text? Der Geist Mercurius? Jung writes: “Mercury is made up of all conceivable opposites. He is, therefore, a distinct two, which, however, is always called one, even if even its many internal contradictions may, dramatically, dissolve into as many different and apparently independent figures. He is a physical and spiritual being. It is the process of changing the low, the physical, into the higher, the spiritual, and vice versa. He is the devil, the Savior showing the way, the elusive trickster, and the Deity as reflected in the maternal nature. It is a reflection of the mystical experience of artificis, convergent with the opus alchymicum. As this experience, he presents the Self on the one hand, and on the other hand? the process of individuation and, thanks to the limitless nature of its terms, also the collective unconscious. ? In Mystery Coniunctionis (GW 14) we read:? [?] From an external perspective Mercury corresponds to mercury, but when viewed from the inside, it appears as? Deus terrenus? i anima mundi, in other words: it is the deity part which? when? imagined? is it your world? stuck, so to speak, in a creature or? like Sofia with Irenaeus? lost herself in the Physis. Mercury therefore has the same qualities that [the alchemist] Gerardus Dorneus also attributes to the soul. He is “bonus cum bonis, malus cum malis” and thus occupies an intermediate position in moral terms. As the soul tends towards earthly bodies, Mercury often appears as a spirit in matter, and therefore as a chthonic or even katachthonius (subterranean) being … Mercury is therefore the spirit that binds Physis, and therefore must be freed from it? (C. G. Jung) …
Mandala
Mandala is an ancient Indian term for a circle, symbols of fullness, which describes the pictorial elements and signs conducive to meditation in the form of a circle or a polygon. According to Jung’s understanding, the mandala is a symbolic expression of the inner center of a person. Sometimes it is also read as a symbolic manifestation of the Divine Being, as an expression of its elusive Totality, which in turn led Jung to a direct relationship between Imago Dei and the Self of man. Another form she takes is the image of the mandala as a “vessel” in which man transforms into a divine being. The symbolic representation of the insight experience in the form of signs affecting the mind can be an aid to deep meditation on the way to union with God. Mandalas can be interpreted as symbols of individuation in the symbolism of human dreams. The image of mental fullness in dreams appears in various forms, such as a sphere, a square, a square inscribed in a circle, a cross. It can also take an image of a light or a tunnel. Sometimes it also appears as a spiritual guide. The image of the mandala shows that we are getting closer to fully understanding ourselves, our place in the world and finding the meaning of existence. The circle with a dot in the center symbolizes cyclical perfection. The circle with a square is an alchemical symbol of conjunctio, the union of heaven and earth, masculinity and femininity, spirit and matter. Circles also have magical power and are universal protection against evil, it is then associated with the number 10, a symbol of completeness and perfection. The essence of the mandala symbol is that it expresses a special moment of unification of opposites. It is an amplification of that point at which what exists becomes unified. This is why Jung refers to it as a? Unifying symbol? …
Snake
One aspect of the Serpent’s symbol is its dual nature. On the one hand, it represents the “dark”, chthonic forces of God and nature, on the other hand, it represents the luminous, “bright”, “spiritual” ones. the divine element. The serpent in Gnosticism was perceived not only in a negative sense, but also? maybe a bit contrary to our expectations? with a strong positive tint. It resulted, inter alia, from his kinship in the gnostic imaginary sphere with both the mythical figure of Agathodaimon and the mythological figure of Noús? the prehistoric Spirit who, seeing his reflection in the depths, descended into it to be enveloped and engulfed by the Physis. And so, on the one hand, the Serpent was associated with the image of Anthropos, constituting an essential Christ’s allegory, and on the other hand, he was treated as a representative of the chthonic animal world, in which, as a cold-blooded vertebrate, he represented the sphere of the “dark?” impulses in man. The serpent, therefore, represents something inaccessible, hidden, and operating out of hiding. The serpent is therefore also in alchemy the symbol of Mercurius non vulgi seen as a figure parallel to the god of revelation Hermes. They are both of a pneumatic nature, with Serpens Mercurii meaning above all the chthonic spirit inhabiting matter, and in particular the aspect of primal chaos, massa confusa or globos hidden in it (in creation) …
Ouroboros
Ancient Egyptian Uroboros and Greek symbol representing a serpent with its tail in its mouth, which constantly devours itself and is reborn from itself. As a symbol of the Gnostics, Ouroboros expresses the spiritual and physical unity of all things that will never disappear and will last forever in the form of constant destruction and rebirth. Uroboros was originally a symbol of the river that was to flow around the Earth, without springs or mouths, into which the waters of all rivers and seas in the world poured. It is a symbol of infinity, eternal return and the unification of opposites. The snake biting its own tail indicates that the end in the process of eternal repetition corresponds to the beginning. Are we dealing with the symbolism of cyclical repetition? the circulation of time, the renewal of the world and worlds, death and rebirth, simply eternity. In alchemical symbolism, Uroboros is a symbol of a closed, constantly repeating metabolic process? a process which, in the form of the phases of heating, evaporating, cooling and condensing a liquid, is supposed to lead to the sublimation of a substance. Uroboros is the equivalent of the philosopher’s stone. In the analytical psychology of Carl Gustav Jung Uroboros, it is a metaphor combining the child’s development phase, in which the process of differentiation into the external and internal world has not yet taken place, and therefore the phase in which sexual identity has not yet formed. Only the emerging consciousness? Me? it will allow us to break the postmortal phase, differentiating the world into matriarchal and patriarchy? It is a symbol of something important in our subconsciousness that stuck in it very deeply and often a long time ago, something that weighs us down and gives us peace, but prevents us from developing. The sight of a snake writhing in a dream speaks of anxiety that has crept into the soul. Dark snakes can indicate a dreamer to change his current lifestyle, green ones to his own energy, which can still be used. The proverbial breeding of a viper on one’s own breast can also be used in explaining a dream as overly friendly intercourse with a snake leads to betrayal and deception. In combination with other sleep symbols, the snake is often rated positively as a healing factor …
Trickster
Trickster, or trickery, in symbolism the name of the archetype of a god, joker, joker, sometimes also a demigod or mortal who defies established norms, works against the established order. This word is also used to describe the type of literary character by analogy or even, in the real world, the type of person who plays a similar role in a given environment. The role of the trickster in various mythologies is to break the rules and keep the cycle of creation and destruction repeated. A trickster is a rogue who changes his character, lies, cheats or steals, but is often a positive or at least ambivalent character in myths. Usually, though not always, he also brings humor and laughter, he is the author of jokes mocking authorities. In some mythologies, the imperfections of the material world are explained by the fact that it is a trick: he created the world against the will of the chief deity, created the world against the orders of the chief deity, somehow prevented the creation from being perfect. In various mythologies this role is played by: Norse Loki, Slavic Weles, Greek Hermes and Prometheus, Roman Mercury, Indian Coyote and Raven, African Anansi. In the myths related to Christianity, the role of the trickster is played by folk devils …
The Archetype of the Self
The Self is a symbol of the mental, inner Fullness, symbolizing the harmony and balance of all psychic elements. The same symbolism applies at the collective level. The self is the axis around which the human psychological structure is organized. It is responsible for the flow of energy from the conscious to the unconscious and vice versa. It performs the function of integrating the whole until it is fully aware and extends its impact to the entire inner space of the self. Therefore, the goal of the Self is its own realization in the process of internal development on the basis of external experiences, where during the development of the individual, the intermediary element on this path is the creation of a separate “I” or ego. The self encompasses the entire mental existence of man and is thus by definition something much more extensive than the conscious personality associated with the “ego”. The self determines the general scope of all mental phenomena that take place in a person’s full consciousness. For Jung, this concept means, above all, the completeness of the psyche, i.e. consciousness and unconsciousness. Jung speaks of it, comparing it to the figure of a circle, that it constitutes both its center, the center point, and the arc of the circle that covers the entirety. The self is at the center of the mental whole, as is the? Me? it is the center of consciousness, having a personal and superspersonal character at the same time, being on the one hand its “real subject” and, on the other hand, the ultimate goal of man’s path to self-realization. Due to this feature of unity, the Self can be said to be identical with the psyche because? Similarly? how it is composed of conscious and unconscious content. Nevertheless, he does not seem to have any yes, “spiritual” character, not being opposed to matter to the same degree as the psyche, as a complementary aspect of man. The concept of the Self is only partially empirical. It embraces both what is experimental and what is not yet experienced, and even what is not experimental at all. However, due to its trait of going beyond the jurisdiction of consciousness, it is a significance that can only be partially described, and therefore remains essentially unknowable and postulative to us. The self encompasses the entire mental existence of man, and thus is by definition something much more extensive than the conscious personality associated with the self. For it also contains the shadow of the individual and the unconscious collective aspect. This symbolism is unequivocally equated with mystical and spiritual symbolism. It is often based on geometric figures based on 3 or 4 elements. In the Christian religion, it is reflected in the symbolism of the Cross and the Holy Trinity. At the Slavs? Światowid. In Buddhism? Mandala. The swastika as a solar symbol also reflects the archetype of the Self …
In Carl Gustav Jung’s terminology, the Self is the center of the mental life and the whole of the psyche. From the level of the unconscious, he tries to manage the psyche of the individual. It is the goal and source of energy for human development through the process of individuation, as well as the engine of all creativity and spiritual search. The self is classified as an archetype. It contains the original image of God for the individual. She is sometimes referred to as a part of the divine being inside man …
The concept of the Self is only partially empirical. It embraces both what is experimental and what is not yet experienced, and even what is not experimental at all. And since it transcends the domain of consciousness, it is a significance that can only be partially described, so it remains essentially unknowable to us in terms of personal experiences and associated associations. This indescribable whole that man becomes then cannot be visualized or conveyed, but it is indispensable as an intuitive concept for all those who are on the path of personal development. On the empirical level, it can only be said that the self is on all sides surrounded by an over-conscious being. Evidence for this can be provided by any association experiment ad oculos that demonstrates the frequently occurring fact that “I” and his will fail. Psyche is a certain equation that will not work without the superconscious factor? The psyche constitutes a whole which, on the one hand, embraces the empirical “I” and, on the other hand, its substrate that transcends consciousness. ” The self encompasses the entire mental existence of man and is thus by definition something much more extensive than the conscious personality associated with the “ego”. For it also contains the shadow of the individual and the unconscious collective aspect. However, this is a special type of containment, because as we read in the fragment of Jolande Jacobi’s work: “The self is the center of the psychic system, embraces it and penetrates it with the force of its radiation, it is our true” midpoint “, which is the center of tension between the two worlds and their forces “, These worlds are the internal and external world, which in the ultimate sense is what she herself calls” …
When we consider the problem of the Self, it inherently appears in the context of self and consciousness. And this is not a coincidence, because the only content of the Self as we know it is what appears in the field of consciousness, i.e. it relates and is “grounded” precisely in relation to “I”, and the relation of this “I” to the Self is unique : on the one hand, “I” is the only “support” point for the field of consciousness that centers around it, which is accompanied by a tendency towards relative emancipation and treating oneself as one, independent of everything that might exist outside of itself; on the other hand, “I” is contained in the Self and, as a part of it, can appear in relation to it on the basis of pars pro toto. The Ego or “I” arises from the Self in the process of psyche development and becomes a relatively independent creation. Jung compared the ego to a child who, although comes from his parents, becomes an independent adult …
The “I”, however, is primarily a conscious exponent of the Self and: “it remains in relation to it as patiens to agensa or as object to subject, because the provisions coming from the Self are of a more general nature and therefore are superior to those taken by the” I ” . Like the unconscious, the Self is given a priori, from which the “I” follows. The Self, so to speak, shapes the “I” in the bud. I am not creating myself, but rather I am creating myself.
Therefore, when Jung addresses the question of the cognition of the Self, he also points out that this cognition does not in any case refer to the self-conscious self in a personalistic sense, but to that factor hidden in relation to the self, which is in fact the psyche in itself. This factor is “unknown” to the conscious subject and at the same time demands unprejudiced knowledge from him. Jung even claims, paraphrasing the opening fragment of Ignacy Loyola’s Fundamentum, that: “consciousness was born to recognize (laudet) that it comes from a higher Oneness (Deum), to carefully consider its source (reverentiam exhibeat), and thus to ensure throughout the psyche of the optimum possibility of life and development (salvet animam suam) ”.
In this context, it should be emphasized that what, according to Jung, is “known” to man are all contents directly related to “I”, while what is “unknown” to man consists of everything that is not with him. in an internal or external relationship.
What is “I” alone? stresses Jung? it is difficult to define unequivocally, as it is a complex factor and rests on two grounds: psychological and somatic. We conclude on the somatic basis from the totality of endosomatic experiences, which in turn are psychological in nature, as they are associated with the ego, and therefore conscious. On the other hand, we conclude about the psychological basis by perceiving, on the one hand, the contents of the general field of consciousness, and, on the other, the contents coming from outside this field? unconscious content.