View Single Post
  #39  
Old 18-01-2022, 09:02 AM
Greenslade
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthat
Some of us would question Jung's understanding and conclusions. He was not infallible.
Who is this 'us'?

I watched a BBC documentary of monks in a monastery who had successfully 'transcended' their egos. They were being spoon-fed and had their nappies changed. In psychology, severe emotional trauma can cause the ego to collapse into the self and leaves the sufferer dysfunctional.

By the way, Jung also gained great accolades from the higher echelons of Advaita Vedanta for his work on bringing aspects of the religion/philosophy into the Western consciousness. Did any of the 'we' who question his understanding achieve such acclaim, and what standing do you have in the science of psychology to contradict?

The clinic definitions and the opinionated definition that most people have are two very different things. Most Spiritual people have the opinionated version.

'I am' is the ego, 'that' is the 'content'. In a truly egoless state - which I have achieved for short periods - there isn't very much at all. If you want a good tip for gaining brownie points, don't use the words 'self' or 'ego', especially in threads about them. The world and his cat have an opinion and another one gets lost. Use words like 'Atman' and 'Ahamkara' instead.

Last edited by Greenslade : 18-01-2022 at 09:42 AM.
Reply With Quote