Vocabulary of the Soul Part Four: The Mediator – Anima and Animus

The figure of the mediator is central to the Neo-Sethian mythical structure. In The Secret Gospel of John a Pharisee named Arimanios challenges John about the teachings of Jesus causing John to ask questions. In the same Scripture the Christ comes to John in the forms of a child, and old man, and finally the figure most familiar to John, that of Jesus of Nazareth. In this you have Arimanios acting as the mediator as accuser, and the Christ in the role of mediator as revealer.

In another Sethian scripture called Trimorphic Protenoia it is the Barbelo who extends her-self into the material world. It is she who is the spirit in all beings, whether physically alive, or in the land of the dead. It is she who extends her voice – speech – word to awaken us. She is the Self as the whole of psychic individual, and the mother of the archetypal Self, as well as being the mediator as revealer and redeemer.

In Zostrianos and Marsanes we have the Angel of the Acquaintance, and the aeonic intermediary, Gamliel who act in the role of mediator. The mediator within the structure of Neo-Sethianism is a primary figure. Within Neo-Sethianism there is an understanding that along with spiritual attainment, psychological maturity should be developed.

The mediator in Jungian thought is called the Anima and Animus. Anima is a Latin term for the soul, and Animus is a Latin term for the spirit. These two terms are used almost interchangeably, linking the soul and spirit. Jung decided to use the terms largely because of their gender orientation. Anima has a feminine attribution and is most often used to refer to the mediator in the male. Animus has a masculine attribution and is used for the mediator in the female.

The understanding of gender issues was less complicated in Jung’s time, and the gender attributions reflect this. However, the gendered language of anima/animus gives an important clue as to the typical relationship between the mediator and the persona. Usually, the mediator’s relationship to the persona is as the opposite gender. This is similar to the relationship between the shadow and the persona, where the shadow is morally opposite the persona, but in this relationship the gender of the shadow is usually similar to the gender of the persona.

Today we understand that physical sex and psychological gender are not always the same; and complicating this even further are the many hermaphroditic variations. Recognizing these issues, it is better to describe the attributes of the mediator in relationship to the persona in something like the Taoist terms of Yin and Yang. In this language, if the persona is yang, then the mediator will usually appear as yin. Conversely, if the persona is yin, then the mediator will usually appear as yang.

This is not to say that the mediator has its origin in the persona or the ego. Rather, the mediator has its origins in the deeper reaches of the unconscious soul. In function, it is similar to the persona in that it protects, processes, interprets, and reveals the collective unconscious in a similar way as the persona does for the external world. The relationship between the persona and the ego however is different than that of the ego and the mediator. And the quality of the relationship between the ego and the mediator is different during each phase of the ascent process and the descent process.

During the ascent process, the mediator is guide and revealer. The mediator is an authority figure, and seems to have more “power” than the ego. This is dangerous, because the mediator is a very powerful archetype which can act in much the same way as the trickster figure in many mythologies. This happens when the ego is weak, and the mediator is undeveloped. The cause for a weak ego and an undeveloped mediator is the same thing; over identification with the persona. Remember, the shadow reflects what the persona has deemed bad or evil, and fills the individual with distress. The mediator reflects what the persona has deemed unacceptable and taboo, and fills the individual with excitement and desire. Just as the rejection of personal qualities that are labeled evil feed the shadow, personal qualities that betray taboo (without crossing the line into what is evil) feed the appearance of the mediator. Like the eruption of the complexes of the personal unconscious, if neglected, the mediator can build up enough energy to erupt onto the ego, even to the point of possession. This often is a primary cause of the proverbial mid-life crisis.

The manifestation of this type of eruption will depend on the quality of the persona. It is here where we find the typical successful man who throws it all away for a shiny, new sports cars, and younger women. You will often hear this man say that he just couldn’t help himself, and to a degree he is right. Another manifestation of this is the perfect, dedicated mother and housewife, who has a passionate love affair with passing stranger, and says that she discovered depths of passion that she never knew was there. After the end of both of these situations, in spite of the social cost, both of these people are often psychologically healthier than they were before the eruption. This is because, finally, the mediator has received attention and development. This is the eruption of the mediator, possession is something altogether different.

In possession we see a pathological manifestation of the opposite of the accepted persona. In this situation you will see the hyper-emotionally sensitive man, and the hyper-aggressive, hard woman. In both of these pathologies, the individual feels out of control. They do not see how they can be anything else than what they present to the world. The ego has completely identified with the mediator and has overpowered the persona. If this occurs in mid-life, there will seem to be a total shift of personality, but there is the potential for growing past it with minimal effort. If it occurs in childhood, growing out of it is more difficult.

So, in the ascent process the mediator acts as authority in the face of the maturing ego. In the descent process the relationship is a bit different. At this point, the ego has unified with the Nous, and the Self is consciously in control through the light of awareness. Even though the ego is the servant of the Self, it is in many ways the governor of the soul. From this perspective, the mediator is still guide and revealer, but now it is the servant to the Self-strengthened ego. Possession at this point is all but impossible. The mediator serves the purpose of guiding the saturation of the psyche and the soma with the spirit. In this situation, the mediator acts as companion, and even friend to the consciousness. It is here where we find the illuminating angel of our higher natures, who guides the light of awareness through the depths of the unconscious, bringing this light to the darkness of the depths of our soul. It is in this guise that we can find the lower Sophia (wisdom), who works diligently with the Logos (the developed, mature, and unified ego/Nous) to bring the light of redemption to every aspect of the individual universe.

But where do we start?

The mediator is a major aspect of the soul, and needs to be cultivated if consciousness is going to be raised to the heights of the spirit. The appearance of the mediator (in feeling, voice, and image) engenders attraction and the desire for union. The mediator is our guide through the adventurous terrain of our own unconscious. The charge that the mediator carries is one of dramatic movement that leads us to transformation.

As dramatic and attractive as the mediator is, it is necessary to refrain from running headlong into the passionate embrace of this image. Like the ego, if the mediator is going to serve the purpose of leading us deeper into relationship with God then it must be developed and refined. We do this through the dialectical process. In this process we deconstruct the appearance of the mediator through challenge and dialogue. It is in this process where the differentiation between the ego and the mediator is determined and accepted. Within the mind and soul, this process will usually begin on an emotional footing. With time, however, the emotional content of the attitudes will lessen and the intellect can be brought to bear.

Why do we do this? Why not just drown in the sea of the Holy Spirit? Why not just run into the arms of the goddess and loose ourselves in her embrace? Because we still have a life to live. Possession is psychosis. Spiritual growth is fulfilling our lives, not abandoning them. As discussed above, the raw energy of the unrefined mediator will seek to dominate and possess the ego. Running into its embrace, without challenge, is like throwing your-self off a skyscraper. You will feel the ecstasy of fight, until you hit the ground. Remember, the key to growth in Gnosis, is raising and strengthening consciousness, which requires strengthening the ego.

We challenge the appearance of the mediator because we need to be able to see through the illusions that we have projected onto the mediator. When we first encounter the mediator, like most things, we are encountering our own projections, rather than the-thing-in-truth. And with an essence like the mediator, there are layers of projections to see through. This is the reason for the principle of radical-personal-integrity.

For over a century our spiritual culture has treated content that comes out of the unconscious as if it is somehow truer than anything else. We trust the images and messages we receive from the depths of the unconscious without testing or reservation. We believe insight and intuition without the balance of the intellect. We think that because a message seems to come from a “higher” source, it can be trusted without challenge. There is a hard truth for many of us to grasp; we lie to our-selves. Much of the content that we see, and the messages that we receive from our unconscious or what we perceive as the spirit realm has its origin or has been tainted by the trauma’s and programming of our lives. If we do not rigorously and even ruthlessly test these things, we will do nothing but strengthen the prison of our own illusion.

This is even more important if the image or message really is coming from a transcendent source. It is foolish to recklessly give our trust to an entity who claims to be an ascended master, or enlightened being from another place, time, or dimension. It is even more foolish to allow such an entity to possess you. All things, material, psychological, and spiritual should be tested with the same intensity. The first step in this testing is the dialectical process.

What this process does, on the inner plain is to allow us to dissect our own internal universe. Not only will we become familiar with our own illusions, but we will learn the ins and outs of whom and what we actually are. It is an adventure of discovery. It is profound in its depth and height. We are so much more than we think we are, and we have the opportunity to discover that through experience. It is through this process that we begin to understand the whys of our-selves. It is only then that we can choose to be what we always have been, or to transform into something new.

Most of us are simply stimulus – response machines, and we misunderstand our automatic responses to stimuli as intuition. It is through the application of conscious understanding that we develop the ability to choose our responses to stimuli. Through this application of consciousness we discover the richness of the mythical universe that is our souls. This universe is filled with figures out of legend, ancient gods and heroes. It is this universe that gave birth to the richness of myth, legend, fantasy, and lore that is the true art of the human being.

As much as dialectic is the starting place for our interaction with the mediator, we must never forget that the core of this interaction is relationship. Because of the gendered nature of the mediator, we will most often encounter it through projection onto someone of the opposite gender. This is important for us to keep in mind. When we meet a new person, and we find them attractive, especially if that attraction has energy, and “ummmph,” we are invariably dealing with a projection of our mediator onto this person. This is another reason why the initial dialectic is necessary. If we can recognize the projection when it occurs, we are more likely to be able to see through that projection.

There is a lot of confusion as to why the divorce rate is so high in the Western world. Since the fifties (and even before then) the educational system in the West has continued to move away from the art and skills of philosophy and critical thinking. We are not nearly as scientifically minded, or intellectually based as we like to think we are. What occurs in infatuation is that the individual falls in love with a projection of the part of them-selves that is most enticing. The other person is almost beside the point. These individuals believe them-selves to be in love with the other, when in fact they are in love with them-selves. As time goes on, the reality of the other challenges the illusion of the projection and these individuals think that “the spark is no longer there.” This is when they either try to find a way to re-project onto the partner, resolve them-selves to living in a “loveless” marriage, or they abandon the relationship as a failure, or they grow up, and learn to love this person for them, not who they want them to be.

This occurs on the inner plain as well. We will often encounter the mediator as our projection, and never learn to see beyond it. If we do this, we may develop a rich fantasy life, but we will not grow beyond this place. This is because we are not seeing the mediator for what it is; we are seeing the projection of the opposite of the persona onto the essence of this archetype. Just like what we do when infatuated, we never learn to see the mediator as what it is, we only see it as what we want it to be. It is important to note here, that we do this to all of the archetypes. If we have not learned to see beyond our own projections, we will never grow beyond our own concepts. We will remain imprisoned by our programming, and we will never learn to be a true human being beyond that programming.

So, the first step is to stay aware of your responses to people. If you find someone attractive, especially when that attraction has a touch of passion, don’t run head long into a relationship, pause and learn to observe yourself at that place. Notice the emotions that arise. Try to see inward to what image those emotions are attached to within your own mind. Try to do this with each of the responses you have to this individual. Learn to see the why of your attraction. Make a list of the attributes that attract you and your responses to those attributes; if you have discovered the source of those responses than write that down too.

Once you have the list then use it to build a mental image. Fill the image with personality traits that also trigger the same type of response. Open a dialogue with this image. Understand that this image is of your making, and is obscuring the essence of the mediator. However, also understand that it is this depth of emotional response and desire that will call the mediator forth. But be prepared, there will be a moment when this image will seem to take on a life of its own. When this occurs, the attraction to the image will redouble. Maintain the distance, and challenge this image with questioning. You will find that answers will arise in you consciousness in responses to these questions. Once this occurs then start challenging the validity of the image you created. Begin to try to see beyond that image. One way to begin this process is through Thematic Amplification. The image you are dialoguing with will have an echo in mythology. Research and find that echo. Use the information you have to expand on the theme of the archetype. Then use the mythical figure to find similar figures of mythology (both in the same culture and in others). Use this information to expand your interaction with this archetype. This includes animal companions, associated holidays, colors, scents, jewels, plants, etc.

At some point, the figure will take on a numinous (or holy, sacred) quality. When this occurs, the mediator can act as guide to and through other archetypal figures and realms. As you begin to interact with these other figures, do the same. Embrace the dialectical process first, recognizing the archetypal projection on those around you, gathering information, creating a mental image, developing relationship with that image, expanding your understanding of that archetype until you can move beyond that archetype.

This process will do many things for you. You will develop sensitivity to people, their moods, their pains, their needs that you have never had before. But this will be a sensitivity that does not possess you. You will develop the ability to understand what needs to done for that person, and what will exacerbate the situation. In other words, you will begin to develop what Paul called, the discernment of spirits. And this will be true intuition (sub-conscious conclusions based on more information than the ego is aware of having access to) and not pre-patterned reactions that could do as much harm as good.

You will also develop the ability to center yourself in a place of calm, while in the midst of the storms of passion, emotion, pain, and joy, and make decisions based on wisdom and understanding rather than reaction. Related to this, you will develop a great deal of understanding of your own needs, desires, priorities, values, strengths, and limitations. But it begins with controlling that initial reaction to run forward and embrace that which entices you.

Also, you will come to understand what type of person you are truly compatible with. You will come to understand what qualities this person needs to have in order for you to have a healthy and lasting relationship. Remember, in the beginning the projections of the mediator represent the undeveloped side of the individual. Through this process, you will begin to develop that side of yourself, and this development will lead to deeper, related elements that can now be actively cultivated. This process takes discipline, but condemnation and punishment will work against you. So, embrace the process but refrain from self-condemnation.

That is where we will end today.

Vocabulary of the Soul Part Three: Instincts, Archetypes, the Self, and the Collective Unconscious

We can never forget that the human modes of experiencing the Spirit are the Soul and the Body. Yes, it seems as if we can transcend these modes of experience, but we must always return. As we saw in the language of Salvation, the descent process is one of saturating the Soul, Soma, and body with the Spirit. For this reason we need to understand the field in which we play.

It is in the realm of the personal unconscious which includes the personae, the Ego, the personal complexes, and the cultural complexes, where we find our individuality. In entering the collective unconscious, the instincts, and the archetypes we enter the areas of the soul which are common to all. There are no individual archetypes. There are no individual instincts. Just as the average human as two legs, two arms, a torso, and a head, so does the average human have the same basic instincts, archetypes, and collective unconscious. True individuality, what we call here individuation, and elsewhere, Gnosis, is the product of the process of bringing the light of consciousness to the far reaches of the soul. It is within the process of individuation where we actively engage with what is common to us all.

We need to understand that the human being is not “born in sin,” but neither is he born as an enlightened being, he is simply born unconscious. However, the human being inherits a number of systems that do not have to be learned in life. Just like the breeding and migratory impulses which we see in other animals, the human being is born with a general pattern that forms the foundation of his nature. This is a general pattern which manifests in all mythology. The particulars of this pattern correspond to the reality of the human experience from far before recorded history. Being born, growing up, interacting with parents and others, surviving, breeding, and death, are all elements which are common to the human experience. Our ancestors have experienced these things for as long as there has been life. We have inherited methods for dealing with these issues which are grounded in our body and soul.

As societies have developed and religions have taken root (from the most primitive animism to the loftiest liturgy) we have accepted and rejected parts of our own soul. The cause for this is simply that we have had a limited understanding of ourselves, and social cooperation demands a great degree of self-control. Without a full understanding of the drives, impulses, and inspirations of the human soul, this self-control required various levels of repression. We, as human beings, all have the potential to become the greatest saint or the worst monster. Each is representative of the human condition. Now that we have a greater grasp on what it means to be human, we have greater potential for self-control without repression, and greater potential for healing the wounds of the soul.

Today we are going to talk about the extremes of the human soul, from boundaries of pure body to pure spirit, from the instincts to the archetypes. We have categorized the human condition as spirit, soul, and body. In order to make the most out of each of these gifts, we need to embrace each of them in their fullness, and balance their functions. It is the work of the soul to bring balance to the extremes of the spirit and the body.

Pure instinct is a manifestation of the body. The body has its own capacity for memory, emotion, and drive. The most commonly used example for this is a developed skill such as riding a bike. If this skill is learned, years can pass and the skill will remain. This is not dependant on the function of the soul. This is a purely physical memory-function.

As we have evolved, and the soul has taken precedence over the body, the impact of the instincts has been softened. With the development of consciousness, we have evolved the ability to consider our instinctual drives, and choose our actions.

At the other extreme, the soul has softened the raw drives of the spirit, and allowed an interrelationship between the spirit and the body. It is the soul that is the mediating principle between the spirit and the body. From a Neo-Sethian perspective, it is the soul that allows the spirit to saturate and manifest in the material, thus embodying the spirit, and redeeming the material. In so doing, the soul is shaped by and shapes the raw power of the spirit. It is these shapes that are called archetypes.

Neither extreme should be repressed or demonized. Rather they should be explored, experienced, and shaped. At this point, it needs to be understood that consciousness is the function of freedom from the drives of both extremes of body and spirit. Which if not moderated contend with each other for control. It is the soul that offers the potential for peace and wholeness. It is the consciousness that is the tool for the directed harmony of these extremes.

In the language of salvation we mentioned the superior and inferior veils. In the language of the soul, these veils correspond to the Pneumatic Psychoid (which is the boundary of the soul and spirit), and the Somatic Psychoid (which is the boundary of the soul and body). These boundaries act as initial buffers for the raw energies of the body and spirit. Crossing the Pneumatic Psychoid is the Nous (the “mind,” or superior intellect, what Paul refers to as the “mind of Christ”). Ultimately it is our goal to unify the ego-consciousness with the Nous.

An immature ego is motivated primarily by the instincts, and secondarily by the archetypal images. As the ego matures, it begins to identify with the archetypal images causing inflation. Even though this is the process of ego growth, as mentioned before, if this process is not balanced it can lead to extremes such as megalomania, or psychosis caused by archetypal possession.

As the ego reaches the peak of the initial ascent process it is motivated primarily by the archetypes, and secondarily by the instincts. This establishes the superiority of the Nous over the ego-function within the consciousness. This allows the ego to become an active tool for the Pneuma (the spirit) through the Nous, while maintaining the integrity of the soul.

We have come to the point where we need to discuss the principle of Enclothement.

The whole of the soul is the interpreter for the ego-consciousness. On the top end, as the raw energy of the spirit passes through the Pneumatic Psychoid it is modified to lessen its intensity. As it leaves the Pneumatic Psychoid and enters the collective unconscious it is clothed with the image of an archetype that resonates with its essential nature. Most of the time, this archetype will unify with an instinctual desire within the collective unconscious. This image, however, will still maintain a numinous quality. If it is not further enclothed within the complexes of the personal unconscious, this archetype/instinct will enter the consciousness as intuitions, visions, dreams, emotions, images, ideas, and even insight into instinctual desires. This process can be triggered on the reverse end by a raw instinct passing through the Somatic Psychoid and into the collective unconscious. The resulting manifestation within the consciousness is the same.

There is a stage beyond this, however. This is where the Nous and the ego unify at the Pneumatic Psychoid. This is a point beyond the mediating archetypes, such as the anuma / anumus, and reaching into the archetype of the Self. The archetype of the Self will manifest in various forms, however, this place is the true encounter and unification with the Self. This is the point of enlightenment where the Self (as the personification of the Spirit) obtains conscious control over the whole of the individual being. This is not possession, since the Self will not dominate the will of the ego, it will not supplant the ego-consciousness. The Self will influence as “the still small voice.” As the mature relationship between the ego and the Self develops, the ego will willingly maintain the superiority of the Self.

But what is the Self?

On one hand, the Self is the whole of the psychic being. On the other, the Self is an archetypal image that represents the highest form of the individual being. The Self is the indwelling Christ, the Adamas, and God as One all at the same time. In the beginning, the Self is the transcendent Father that seems beyond reach. After unification, the Self is the incarnate Christ manifesting itself within the material world. The Self is the Logos as the ultimate pattern of the whole of the individual being, and the Logos as the ultimate organizing principle through which the whole of the soul is made. It is the Self as the whole of being that is the image of the transcendent God, and it is the archetypal Self that is the anthropomorphic image of God.

The ego unified with the Self is centered in the both the transcendent and the immanent aspects of life. On one hand, it sees the broad view, and is not affected by the small events of everyday life. But on the other hand, it is intimately involved in the events of everyday living, and is the ultimate director of the individual’s responses to everyday events.

We must keep in mind that the ego is the core of individuality, and thus the experience of the Self (even after unification) maintains a sense of distance. This is a healthy distance that serves to maintain the integrity of the ego and continue with the growth of consciousness. At this point, the sense being is twofold with the experience of (B)eing as the whole of all existence, and the experience of individual being. If the shift of perspective has actually occurred, this sense of both modes of being will be continuously maintained without effort, in spite of everyday occurrences.

This does not mean that your personality will dramatically change. There will still be much healing needing to be performed. You will still be comprised of the same soul patterns as before. Your perspective is what has shifted.

Our image of the enlightened being as non-reactive and somehow floating in a sea of serenity is the wrong image for the path of individualist spirituality. That picture of the enlightened being is an aspect of a strong and refined persona which is fully supported within a communal environment. In fact, the enlightened being that has attainted enlightenment through an individualist path is more likely to appear as the grumpy old mage. This is because he has accepted and assimilated every aspect of his personality, including those which will never be socially acceptable.

To summarize;

Instincts are the automatic inherited survival programming present in the physical mechanism. Archetypes are the images the soul uses to encode the raw energy of the spirit. These archetypes are continually present in potential in every human being. And these archetypes are common to the whole of humanity, regardless of culture, family, or personal experience. In conscious manifestation, the instincts and the archetypes are almost always unified and must be dealt with together. The Self is both the whole of one’s being, and an archetypal manifestation of the highest of one’s being. The Self makes itself known in the consciousness through a series of related images, usually in the form of god-like images or other divine-oriented symbols. The Collective Unconscious represents the deepest reaches of the soul. It is the playground of the archetypes, and the soul pattern that is common to every human being.

The difficulty with any spiritual discipline is the dynamic of the inter-relationships of the parts of the soul. Individualist spiritual paths usually emphasize some form of radical acceptance as a major aspect of their praxis. Doing Gnosis is this type of path. Radical acceptance balanced with radical, personal integrity is the core attitude of this discipline. In order to make the most out of this type of path, Doing Gnosis embraces a complex, but complete model of the soul.

We will end here, today. Next time we will discuss the middle ground of the collective unconscious, the realm of the mediator (anima / animus).

The Ego within an Individualist vs. Communal Social Structure

Within the framework of a highly structured society, the personae (the designated roles of that society) are to become the personal identity of the individual. A warrior IS The Warrior, a priest IS The Priest, and an outcast IS The Outcast. There is no room for individuality – the individual must conform to a designated social role. In regards to religious or spiritual life, the individual must become the teachings, must submit to the Dharma. In this type of society, the community plays the role of the ego. The individual ego is repressed, and the persona is embraced and reinforced until there is total possession of the ego by the complex that is the persona.

By contrast, in a society that respects the maturity and personal growth of individuality, when someone identifies too closely with their role, they are considered boring and “up-tight.” When someone comes out of the first social structure and enters the second, they suffer great insecurity, and sometimes even mental breakdowns, because they no longer have the support of the communal social structure. On the other hand, when someone comes out of an individualist social structure and into a communal structure, they will often feel suppressed and claustrophobic, and will become depressed, rebellious, and sometimes have a mental breakdown because of the weight of the communal social pressure which demands conformity.

How is this related to spirituality, and how is this directly related to my earlier statement, that the “killing of the ego is the result of a misunderstanding of Eastern concepts, as translated to a Western social context?”

Unless you live in a communal social structure, purposefully damaging the ego can be psychologically catastrophic. Within a communal social structure, the individual conforms to the structure. This conformity is the strength of the structure. Within an individualist social structure the structure supports individual innovation and advancement. This requires continually challenging the structure itself in order to understand where the structure could be improved in its support of individual freedom and growth. In a communal structure, freedom is fully embracing your role. In an individualist structure, freedom is becoming something new and different.

Spiritually speaking, a communal structure supports spiritual growth through regimented discipline, and conformity to pre-discovered psychological and spiritual terrain. An individualist structure supports free experimentation. In this structure psychological and spiritual growth is a process of self-discovery and expansion, rather than conformity. In a communal structure, the individual serves the tradition. In an individualist structure, the tradition serves the individual.

The major complication is this:

The pattern of our personal unconscious is developed in accordance with our personal context. This personal context is made up of our inherited-natural tendencies, the familial group we were raised in, the social group we were raised in, and the cultural group we were raised in. It is our interaction with these groups that pattern our personal unconscious. If these groups were highly individualistic we will have a comparatively weak persona, and strong ego. If these groups were communal in structure, we will have a strong persona, and weak ego.

To attempt to embrace a tradition that is structured around a context that is different than our internal pattern is to set our-selves up for failure or even damage. Now let’s take the person with a strong ego who genuinely wishes to embrace the spirituality of a tradition build for those with a strong persona. The psyche of this person is not patterned to receive adequate support from the community, nor is the persona well developed enough to compensate for the breaking of the ego.

If this person succeeds in the breaking of the ego, this person will no longer be able to function within the framework of an individualist society. In this person, their weaknesses have not been built up enough to compensate for the loss of their strength. They will, in essence be psychologically crippled. As long as this person remains within the community structure, they will be fine. But when they are removed from that supportive structure, and are expected to make their own way in the world, they will usually break.

Most (but not all) Eastern spiritual disciplines are built with the communal context in mind; thus the idea of “killing the ego.” Usually, this isn’t much of a problem. Most of the time, the Western individual has a strong enough ego, that their attempts to kill it, are really efforts to ensure the humility of the ego in the light of the Self. And this is proper approach. The drawback for those who are in this position but wish to develop deeply, is that they will never be able to make use of the deepest disciplines of this type of tradition without significant alteration of the methods of the tradition, since it is built on a foundation that is foreign to the pattern of their personal unconscious. Most people will make initial headway, simply because the strangeness of the discipline will ensure the ego’s collision with new ideas of reality. Which as we have seen causes ego growth.

Now, this is not only the case for Eastern spiritual practices. Western spirituality which was developed within a communal context also will be unsuited to the individualist pattern of the personal unconscious. Most of these traditions can be altered to suit the individual, but the semantics need to be dramatically changed. Instead of “kill” the ego, we need think of it as “humble,” or “redeem,” the ego.

The reason semantics are so important, is that when you reach a place of real psychological and spiritual depth, ideas have greater impact. If you have the idea of killing the ego at depth, the energy released to do so will be greater than having that idea at the surface. However, if we have the idea of humbling the ego to the function of the Self, then at depth, the greater energy will be mobilized to ensure that outcome. Even though the basic intension (when translated) is similar, the semantic code used is remarkably different. The first causes effort comparable to chopping off your own arm; while the second is comparable to using resistance training to strengthen and discipline the arm. One causes damage, the other causes growth. At depth, this is a real danger.

There are disciplines which cultivate the development of the individual, as well as being deep and well rounded. These disciplines tend to run in opposition to the dominant communal ideals. These disciplines also tend to be demonized by the dominant communal structure. It is my opinion that the difference between the communal ideal and the individualistic ideal is one of the primary sources for the tensions (and maybe even hatred) between the proto-orthodox forms of early Christianity, and the heterodox forms of early Christianity.

But that strays wide of this lesson’s focus.

What is remarkable is that most of the time, the disciplines that cultivate individualist growth use the same basic methodology as the communal disciplines. However, the attitude and language of these methods will have been radically changed. You see this in both the East and the West.

Doing Gnosis is a discipline that is individualistically focused. It is this reason that the cultivation of a strong and expansive (although humble) ego is necessary. It is also for this reason that we must strongly resist the tendency to condemn or demonize any aspect of our-selves, even when our previous traditions told us to. One of the primary goals of this discipline is become aware of even those parts of our-selves we have condemned and repressed. Self-knowledge of the scope we are working towards requires radical self-acceptance. We cannot practice radical self-acceptance if we are busy condemning parts of our-self.

I hope that I have clarified enough for those who asked for clarification. If not, let me know.