Edinger
- the ego prophet
The American psychoanalyst and author
It is necessary to maintain a critical attitude when reading quaint literature like this. I am not convinced that Edinger's intellectualization of religious symbols will serve any good purpose. Sometimes the intellect ought to keep its fingers away from numinous symbols.
Although an increased spiritual awareness is
very desirable in the materialistic era, Edinger's notions cannot consort with
Christianity, nor with Jungian psychology. The Jungian archetypes are not
Platonic images and the conscious ego cannot integrate the totality of the self.
E. says that he builds his notions not only on Jung, but also on the medieval
alchemists. But, as I will exemplify, these are subject to a shallowness of
symbolic understanding. It's not evident to the uninitiated that these ideas do
not belong in Jungian psychology, nor in a Christian worldview, but derive from
a private Gnostic religion where Jungian and Christian terms are thoroughly
reinterpreted.
In "Ego and Archetype" Edinger's subjectivism
has not yet blossomed out, although he is contesting Jung by postulating two
contestant autonomous centers of psychic being (ch.1). Jung repudiates this
notion in CW 9, par.492ff. In Edinger's later production, "Anatomy of the
Psyche" and "The Christian Archetype" matters become worse. E.
repudiates Jung's notion of the self (the psychic totality) as the precursor to,
and incentive to, the drive towards psychic totality. E. alleges that it is, in
fact, the ego which generates the self and it is the ego which unites the
opposites of the psyche. To E., the process of individuation is identical with
the development of the ego, i.e., an increase of the power and consciousness of
the ego. This contradicts Jung who argued that the ego must give up its struggle
and confer the victory on the self (e.g., "Two Essays..," ch. "The
Mana-personality" ). This entails a depreciation of the ego's power. In
what follows the citations are from the English originals except "The
Christian Archetype" which is translated from the Swedish edition.
Edinger asserted that the ego and its
consciousness can be strengthened until it finally attains a divine stature.
This is a form of ego-transcendentalism that should not burden Jungian
psychology nor Christianity. Contrary to this,
"Again and again I encounter the mistaken notion that an archetype is determined in regard to its content, in other words that it is a kind of unconscious idea (if such an expression be admissible). It is necessary to point out once more that archetypes are not determined as regards their content, but only as regards their form and then only to a very limited degree. A primordial image is determined as to its content only when it has become conscious...." (C.G. Jung, CW 9, par.155 "Ps. Aspects of the Mother Archetype").
"These images are "primordial" images in so far as they are peculiar to the whole species, and if they ever "originated" their origin must have coincided at least with the beginning of the species. They are the "human quality" of the human being, the specifically human form his activities take. This specific form is hereditary and is already present in the germ-plasm" (C.G. Jung, Ibid. par.152).
"In former times, despite some dissenting opinion and the influence of Aristotle, it was not too difficult to understand Plato's conception of the Idea as supraordinate and pre-existent to all phenomena. "Archetype," far from being a modern term, was already in use before the time of St. Augustine, and was synonymous with "Idea" in the Platonic usage. When the Corpus Hermeticum, which probably dates from the third century, describes God as [ ], the 'archetypal light,' it expresses the idea that he is the prototype of all light; that is to say, pre-existent and supraordinate to the phenomenon "light." "Were I a philosopher, I should continue this Platonic strain and say: Somewhere, in "a place beyond the skies," there exists a prototype or primordial image of the mother that is pre-existent and supraordinate to all phenomena in which the "maternal," in the broadest sense of the term, is manifest. But I am an empiricist, not a philosopher; I cannot let myself presuppose that my peculiar temperament, my own attitude to intellectual problems, is universally valid. Apparently this is an assumption in which only the philosopher may indulge, who always takes it for granted that his own disposition and attitude are universal, and will not recognize the fact, if he can avoid it, that his "personal equation" conditions his philosophy. As an empiricist, I must point out that there is a temperament which regards ideas as real entities and not merely as nomina.[...] Anyone who continues to think as Plato did must pay for his anachronism by seeing the " supracelestial," i.e., metaphysical, essence of the Idea relegated to the unverifiable realm of faith and superstition, or charitably left to the poet. Once again, in the age-old controversy over universals, the nominalistic standpoint has triumphed over the realistic, and the Idea has evaporated into a mere flatus vocis. This change was accompanied-and, indeed, to a considerable degree caused-by the marked rice of empiricism, the advantages of which were only too obvious to the intellect. Since that time the Idea is no longer something a priori, but is secondary and derived. [...] Greek natural philosophy with its interest in matter , together with Aristotelian reasoning, has achieved a belated but overwhelming victory over Plato" (C.G. Jung, Ibid. par.149).
It is evident from the above excerpts that Jung repudiates an unequivocal transcendentalist view and even scorns the "philosophers" who indulge in such crafts. Edinger belongs to this category of philosophers. His writings tends toward ego-transcendentalism. He is guilty of exactly those mistakes which Jung warns against, i.e., translating one's own temperament and subjective notions to universal truths. It is problematic that his subjectivistic ideas are embraced as Jungian. The doctrine that the ego-personality is transformed into an archetype does not comply with the Jungian theory of archetypal morphology. There is no place for Edinger's conceptions within Jungian psychology. For instance, Edinger says:
(concerning Paul's "heavenly body") "My own hypothesis is that they mean the goal of individuation, i.e the transformation of the personal ego to archetype" (Edinger, "The Christian Archetype", ch."Resurrection...")
"Heaven is the abode of eternal Platonic forms, the universals, the archetypal images" (Edinger, "Anatomy of the Psyche", Open court 1985, p.118).
"It seems to imply that consciousness achieved by individuals becomes a permanent addition to the archetypal psyche" (Ibid, p.140).
"In psychological terms, it is a revelation of the archetypal psyche which releases one from a personal ego-attitude, enabling one to experience oneself as an immortal--that is, as living with archetypal realities and making a contribution to the archetypal psyche."(citing Frey) "Death is for me the gate to a new birth, and the breaking-through of the transcendental realm into our empirical existence. I am convinced that we experience a complete transformation of our being in the last moments of our life" (Edinger, Ibid. p.128).
"I think, whenever an item in one's personal psychology is decisively objectified. It then becomes an eternal fact, untouchable by joy or grief or change" (Edinger, Ibid. p.142).
The ego is focal in Edinger's mode of thinking. According to E., the entirety of the contents within the unconscious must be moved into the light of the ego. Edinger says:
"The usual formulation is that the Self unites and reconciles the opposites. However [...] the operator--that is, the ego-- brings about the union of opposites and thereby creates the Self, or at least brings it into manifestation" (Edinger, Ibid, p.218).
It's apparent what E. means by the notion of the self "incarnating" in the ego. It simply means that consciousness is struck by the insight that it is really the ego which is the self and therefore must hold the psychic opposites together by making them conscious. To Edinger, individuation is the same thing as ego-development. E. says:
"In summary, this dream pictures ego development as a process in which the latent, preexistent totality, the Self, is first incarnated and then assimilated through the living efforts of the individual [...] In conclusion, the alchemical operation of coagulatio, together with the imagery that clusters around this idea, constitutes an elaborate symbol system that expresses the archetypal process of ego formation. When the ego is approaching the coagulatio of the psyche in its totality--then the symbolism of ego development becomes identical with that of individuation" (Edinger, Ibid, s.115).
However, this one-sided conscious expansion, which E. advocates, only leads to spiritual death. Unconsciousness is necessary to maintain the dynamics between conscious and unconscious in order to make room to wisdom and life so that it can spontaneously emerge out of the unconscious. A balance is necessary. In fact, conscious understanding hampers the constellation of wisdom within the unconscious. One must not lift everything living into the blazing light of consciousness and "understand" it. It thereby becomes merely a dead thing. It becomes a function of consciousness, and the freed libido is engulfed by the self, so there is no reward either. That is what Jung is hinting at in the following excerpt reported by Aniela Jaffé.
"When Jung, in his eighties, was discussing at his house the process of becoming conscious with a group of young psychiatrists...he ended with the surprising words: And then you have to learn to become decently unconscious."
What's more, Jung says:
"However, accentuation of the ego personality and the world of consciousness may easily assume such proportions that the figures of the unconscious are psychologized and the self consequently becomes assimilated to the ego. Although this is the exact opposite of the process we have just described it is followed by the same result: inflation. The world of consciousness must now be levelled down in favour of the unconscious" (C.G. Jung, "Aion", par.47).
Edinger psychologizes the self and makes it a dead function in the realm of consciousness. Since E. can hardly find any support for his views in Jung's writings he tends to distort (consciously or unconsciously) the contents of diverse interviews and letters. A good example is the obvious misstatement in "The Christian Archetype":
"The individual's ego is the crub where the Child Jesus is born" (Edinger, "The Christian Archetype", p.18)
This utterance is hardly acceptable to a Christian or a Jungian. E. ascribes this comment to Jung in order to lend credence to his ideas. The truth is that the comment reads: "We are nothing but the crub wherein our Lord is born" (transl. from Swedish, C. G. Jung, CW 11:267). The latter assertion is quite logical and complies with Paul's letter to the Galatians 2:20: "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me." This notion that the ego must be overcome and even die is common to Jung, Christianity and especially Eastern wisdom, such as Taoism. It seems that the "ego religion" of E. thus goes against the collected wisdom of the world.
When "The King" is penetrated by a lance (transfixio), Edinger understands this as a coagulatio image. He says that the ego is coagulated and becomes "a concretely realized ego." According to Edinger the ego ("The King") needs to be nailed fast to the tree in order to stay in reality. So he sees the fire baptism and the crucifixion of Christ in this way, too. They, allegedly, are ego-forming processes and ordeals from which the ego emerges strengthened (Edinger, "Anatomy of the Psyche", Open court 1985, p.38, p.115).
But, according to Jung and
Isn't it far-fetched to interpret the
transfixion and the crucifixion as birth and the arrival on earth of a new ego?
The transfixion of the King may imply something quite contrary to what E.
alleges (Ibid. p.105). Traditionally, it represents the defeat of the old, passé
ego-consciousness (see, especially,
Edinger sometimes maltreats the alchemical symbols. For instance, he contends that the skeleton is a mortificatio symbol (precedes putrefactio) when it is a well-known symbol of albedo (whiteness) since putrefactio (rotting) is concluded and the whiteness of the skeleton is exposed. Looking at fig 6-1 (Ibid.) or in Jung's writings, there is a skeleton image from The Hermetic Museum (see below). From this image one can tell that it is early morning and the boats are leaving the shore, setting white sails. These are unmistakable albedo symbols. There is also a wax candle to the left, shining its white light. Even the church weathercock, of sheet metal, is out merrily flying in the upper right corner. This signifies artificial life, which is the correct denomination of albedo, since true life arrives only at rubedo. Although one could argue that this image combines the processes of nigredo and albedo, one is completely mistaken if one denotes it a mortificatio image. Mortificatio precedes putrefactio (rotting) which has obviously been completed here.
The skeleton as albedo symbol. It's
morning and the tin weathercock is out flying.
Notice the candle. The
alchemist artist wants to convey that albedo is artificial life.
Only at
rubedo true life arrives.
Furthermore, E. comments on the picture of a woman in a grave entwined by a serpent (fig. 8-1, Ibid. fetched from Atalanta Fugiens by Maier). Edinger says:
"Another text, quoted earlier, speaks of the woman who slays her husband while he is in her embrace:
(citing Maier) Nevertheless the Philosophers have put to death the woman who slays her husband, for the body of that woman is full of weapons and poison. Let a grave be dug for that dragon, and let the woman be buried with him, he being chained fast to that woman; and the more he winds and coils himself about her, the more will he be cut to pieces by the female weapons which are fashioned in the body of the woman. And when he sees that he is mingled with the limbs of the woman, he will be certain of death, and will be changed wholly into blood. But when the Philosophers see him changed into blood, they leave him a few days in the sun, until his softness is consumed, and the blood dries, and they find that poison. What then appears is the hidden wind.
This text needs elucidation. As with dreams, the images are fluid and flow into each other. Who is the dragon that is to be chained fast to the woman? He is apparently the husband that is slain by the woman. The sequence of the text suggests that as the husband begins to lie with the woman he turns into a dragon; or alternatively, as they lie together, the dragon aspect of the instinctual relationship (lust) is constellated" (Edinger, Ibid. p.212).
Here he says that the killed husband becomes the dragon (that strangely enough needs to be killed again) and that lust is constellated. To me, this image corresponds to the withdrawal of an "anima projection", withdrawing libido from a woman, and the outward world. The image of the woman sinks into the unconscious and the libido will there be disintegrated together with the instinctual libido. So the alchemical adept is like the "husband" that adheres to Christian piety, withdraws, and lives in celibacy. The complexes in the unconscious then become activated and begin to flow, because of the increased libidinal resource. The dragon is dissolved in the libido formerly attached to the external world, symbolized by the woman. The snake is disintegrated into its parts, i.e, its constituent unconscious complexes. The consciousness in the form of the sun looks down upon the disintegrated complexes and turns them to "wind," i.e, they become spirit and are subsequently integrated with consciousness.
So this is a solutio image wherein an object of conscious desire is dissolved in the unconscious. Lust is not at all constellated like he says. It is the other way round since the husband "kills" the object of his love. This is the point of this "woman-sacrifice." There are ancient myths centered around this motive also, namely a woman is chained fast to a rock and offered to a sea-monster, or whatever. Here is also the motive of making spirit ("wind"). This text speaks about removing the spirit from matter, not merging them. So this text would be about an earlier stage in the process.
Regardless of whether you want to study
alchemy or whether you want to improve your understanding of Jungian psychology,
you should choose another author than
© Mats Winther 1999
