This Sunday sermon in St. Ottilien (http://mp3.erzabtei.de/2014-05-25-0915-konventamt.mp3)addressed (from minute 23) an interesting line of thought: the four shades of love – derived from the different Greek words for love. I must confess, that those thoughts about the four archetypes of love and their shadows have both inspired and somewhat unsettled me. The priest happened to be a catholic monk and Jungian psychoanalyst and so by listening to the sermon, quite a few thoughts or association crossed my mind.
The Greek language distinguishes four distinct words for love: agápe, éros, philía, and storgē.
Four Archetypes of Love
Storge (στοργή) means “affection” in ancient and modern Greek. It is natural love, like that is felt by parents for offspring, or between brother and sister or by children for their parents. It is a descriptor of relationships within the family. It is also known to express mere acceptance or putting up with situations, as in “loving” the tyrant. The key attribute is natural.
Philia (φιλία) is “conscious” love, we know from words like philosophy – love for wisdom (Sophie). It mean a feeling of friendship and enjoyment of an activity, again used in both ancient and modern Greek. It is a dispassionate virtuous love, a concept developed by Aristotle. It includes loyalty to friends, family, and community, and requires virtue, equality and familiarity. The key attribute is rational.
Agape (ἀγάπη) means love in a “spiritual” sense. In Ancient Greek, it often refers to a general affection or deeper sense of ” unconditional love” or altruistic love , coming from the heart. In latin the eqivalent word is “caritas”, it gives and expects nothing in return. Agape is used by Christians to express the unconditional love of God for us and loving each other like we love ourselves. The key attribute is spiritual.
Eros (érōs) is “physical” passionate love, with sensual desire and longing without the balance of consciousness. The Modern Greek word “erotas” means “intimate love”. Plato expanded this definition: as appreciation of the beauty within an object, or even of beauty itself. Indeed the word platonic love today describes, “without physical attraction.” Plato argues that eros helps the soul find knowledge in beauty which contributes to an understanding of spiritual truth, leading to transcendence. The Greek believed that beauty can never be evil. The key attribute here is sensual.
The sermon continued with a few examples describing the opposite of love. Obviously indifference and hate are opposite of love, so is antipathy. A few other examples were given, like egoism and narcissism, which seem to be so common today. Now what would be the four opposites for love: agápe, éros, philía, and storgē. in some languages
storge
The opposite of storgē, would be indifference. In German I associated immediately “herzlos” (heartless) as in “herzlose Mutter” or “Rabenvater”. Also there is rarely hate in families, but quite often you find indifference in this relations.
The opposite of philía would be antisocial and disloyall behaviour in regards to community and society. Here I associated immediately “antipathy” may be mutual and unilateral disloyalty in friendship (Falscher Freund).
The opposite of Agape would be of course narcissism and egoism. Here I associate immediately, “lieblos”, “hartherzig” und “Eigenliebe” instead of “Nächstenliebe”. Narcissus feels no empathy.Narcissus is a character from Greek myth… a young man of incredible beauty that one day caught his own reflection in the surface of a pond – and became so enamored of his own face that he stayed there, gazing at himself, until he died. Modern psychology has taken this mythology and describes narcissism is a disorder wherein an individual is so wrapped up in themselves that they have trouble maintaining healthy relationships with other persons. There is reason to believe that many “successful” (and unsuccessful) leaders nowadays suffer from narcissism and narcistic wounds. I have written here about it: Archetype of the vampire in todays culture of Narcissism.
The remedy against egoism is according to the pater the holy spirit. Pope Franciscus tweeted a few days ago: “Come, Holy Spirit! Help us to overcome our selfishness”. According to C.G. Jung the Ego must be overcome to find the Self (which is our window to god). The remedy against narcissism is according to his sermon humor (or jokingly 2 years of psychotherapy). Like a needle it punches and deflates the inflated ego, allows “heart talk” and empathy. Now I do not know if he knows the book, “Heart Talk”, a study of the emotional range of the Thai language through the word ‘jai’ or heart in English. It provides a comprehensive list of 900 jai phrases, neatly organized for different situations. I will later give a few examples of this linguistic heartscape where ideas take shape and feelings are formed.
The opposite of Eros is hate. Hate is passionate and strong like love is. It is a deep feeling, often triggered by rejection. Any student of the psychotherapies would have heard of the terms: Eros and Thanatos – Life instinct and the death instinct. Sabina Spielrein wrote originally on this concept and it was sized by Freud in his revised theory of human nature. In his book “The ego and the id” he discusses this theory of opposites: Eros is a “…self-preservative instinct,…”. On the other hand there is the death instinct whose task it is to, “…lead organic life back into the inanimate state;…” We are entering into the field of the philosophy of opposites. Where has philia as in philosophy and metaphysic its place? The word philosophy comes from the two Greek words: philia and sophia. Philia is the Greek word for ‘love’ (a bond of friendship), while Sophia is Greek for ‘wisdom’. Philosophy is literally the “love of wisdom”. But love may pursue, but not possess. Wisdom comes form the mind, love from the heart. Clearly love is another, a different form of wisdom.
philo
The sermon mentioned of course that love comes from the heart. By marriage and business experience I am also familiar with the many words of heart in Thai language – Jai. Jai is one of the most important concepts for consultants to understand when they commence business in Thailand. The Western capitalism is often very pragmatic and business-like, but this culture can be misinterpreted (and sometimes rightfully interpreted) as “jai dum” – black heart.
One may consider Jai dum as opposite of Eros, very similar to a person full of hate. Jai dum is a cruel lack of humanity (dum =dark or black). In Thailand, as in many other cultures, the color black has negative associations as black is quite literally the “full lack of light”.
Kao jai (understanding) may relate to Philia.
I think Nam jai relates to Storge. Nam jai directly translates as “Water from the heart” (Nam = water). It refers to a kind, generous person, who thinks about the other person. Nam jai is one of the strong values by which Thai people judge each other. If you are perceived as mai mee nam jai (lack of nam jai), people will perceive you in western term as heartless and not cooperate.
I think Jai boon relates to Agape. Jai boon means “generous” and “full of merit”. Someone who is jai boon gives away or donates what they have to others (Boon = “merit”, reflecting the Thai Buddhist custom of “merit making” in this life for the afterlife by doing “good works” and providing alms to monks).
A lot of expressions I learned from the mentioned Canadian novelist Christopher G. Moore – his fiction is quite useful for cross cultural training: chua jai – believe, dee jai – happy, dtaam jai – please yourself, up to you, dtang jai – purposefully, dtat sin jai – decide, dtok jai – shocked, frightened, goom jai – worried, greng jai – be afraid of offending, jai baap – sinful, jai dum – cruel, malicious, jai dee – kind, generous, jai deeoh – faithful, jai keng – stubborn,jai lai – mean, nasty, jai orn – soft-hearted, jai rorn – hot tempered, impatient, jai yen – calm, jai yen yen – calm down, mai por jai – dissatisfied,man jai – confident, nam jai – generous, por jai – satisfied. There is a motto that say “Sabai jai krue Thai tae (Sabai jai is the true Thai). Sabai means “comfortable”. For example, “Sabai jai loan” is a highly advertised.
E. munch-eros
There was some relationship advice in that sermon too. You may relate agápe, éros, philía, and storgē also to relationship and marriage. When we first meet, woo and eventually commit to one another we experience Eros, a passionate love in a strange long distance relationship. However, a successful marriage must hold on Eros, but also understand that a more cooperative, sustaining connection must be formed. Philia is a love based on friendship between two people, it is patient and kind. In a marriage it is important that you not only love, but also like your mate. When we get older, sexual lure wains or shared experience decreases, a sense of connectedness must remain. Get to know your partner now as a friend, not only as lover. Next, Agape love is beyond Philia and Eros love. Selfless and non-judgemental, it is considered the spiritual dimension of love. Agape is given without self benefit, expectation or condition. Last but not least, storgē means take care for each other in a very literal sense, during sickness or old age. “For better and worse” means love despite disappointment and shortcomings, at difficult times.
marc-chagall-agape
Now, finally, what is the love of God? What the Biblical concept of ‘Love’. We’ve travelled so far away from the love God today. It was agape that the early Church used to denote the Love of God demonstrated in His sending of the Son to effect reconciliation (I John 4:10, Rom 5:8, Eph 2:4-5). It’s these twin concepts of ‘undeserved merit’ and ‘the giving of oneself’ that lie behind the concept of the love of God in the NT.
So sad whats going on in Bangkok and everywhere now. Evil is the opposite of love – in all four dimensions of it. As C.G. Jung said, your vision will become clear only when you can look into your own heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes. This is what the dynamic model of love and anti-love proposes. Up to date psychotherapies have learned from the church on the (moral) static dichotomy of good and bad and the god and the devil.
The Article Lupus and Astronomy is an extension of the last post: the archetype of the wolf. I am a hobby astronomer and fond of its older sister Astrology. So lets look to the Wolf from that perspective. The wolf is inherently pagan and shamanic, that means American Indian, Chinese, Egyptians, Babylonians should have big stakes in in its Astronomy representation. There is a Constellation – Lupus (the Wolf) in the southern hemisphere, originally listed as a constellation by the Greek astronomer Ptolemy in the 2nd century CE. Besides the fact, that Lupus was once the site of the brightest supernova SN 1006 (1006 A:D), there is little of archetypal concern.
But the Dog Star” Sirius matters as Noah Brosch said in his book. Sirius is the brightest star in the night sky and can’t be missed in a city, nevermind in a desert. Mostly called the “Dog Star”, in China the “Blue Beast (wolf)” Sirius represents the Heavenly Wolf and in Greece and Roman culture it was associated not only with the dog, but also with wolf and jackal.
Lupus and Astronomy Facts
Sirius: The Embodiment of Isis
Sirius absolute brightness is 23 times as bright as our sun and the fifth nearest star to our solar system. Known to astronomers as Alpha Canis Major, it is the principal star of the constellation Canis Major (the Big Dog). The brightest of the nighttime stars, Sirius caught the eye of the early sky watcher and can even been seen in daylight with a telescope. Sirius is a binary star. Very long ago, Sirius could not even be seen in the sky from some places. This was because of a phenomenon known as the Precession of the Equinoxes. The Precession is a very slow wobble of our planet taking the polar axis of the Earth in a circular swing of 47 degrees every 26,000 years.
For the Egyptians, Sirius was, astronomically speaking, the foundation of their entire religious and temporal system. It was the embodiment of Isis, wife of the god Osiris, who appeared in the sky as Orion. Egyptians called Sirius the “Dog Star”, after their god Osiris, whose head in pictograms resembled that of a dog.The ancient Egyptians called it Septit, the Hebrews knew it as Avrek or Sihor, to the Greeks as Sothis and also as the “the Dog Star” that followed Orion the Hunter. On that latitude the “Star in the East” in our Gospel accounts, was on the meridian line.Egyptian
senenmut zodiac
The reason why the Egyptians and many other civilizations of that era used Sirius as their marker for the passage of time is because they picked the most stable object as their reference point. In Egypt, almost all the temples were aligned with this line, including the gaze of the Sphinx. Many of the temples had a tiny hole in the wall somewhere; then there would be another wall and another, going into some dim inner chamber. The tomb of Senenmut, chief architect, lover and astronomer during the reign of Queen Hatshepsut the only female pharaoh, featured lovely astronomical ceiling. On its walls are extracts from the Book of the Dead. Hatshepsut’s temple is ideally placed to view astronomical events towards the eastern horizon, particularly the Orion constellation and the star Sirius. The alignment of the temple is set on an azimuth of 116½° ±½°. On the Senenmut calendar it is surely the sext idol from right with dog-head and a star above his name. In this case it can be the Canis Major, the Sirius dog, opposite to the Sumerian dog Rahu.
The periodicity of the helical rising of Sirius was such that the Egyptians based their calendar on it. Every year for millennia the appearance of Sirius coincided with the flooding of the Nile, an event that remarkably still happens to this day. Etymologists have suggested a connection with the ancient Egyptian god Osiris, but none can match the “Star of Isis”. Since earliest times the ancient Egyptian paid particular attention to Sirius, which they identified to the ‘soul’ of the Goddess Isis. Historic and mythological descriptions of Sirius provides further insight into the nature of the relationship between the Sun and Sirius. A shaft leading from the Queens chamber of the Great Pyramid of Egypt has been aligned precisely with Sirius.
In his book Echoes of Ancient Skies, the archaeo-astronomer Dr. Ed Krupp writes that, “After disappearing from the night sky (for 70 days) Sirius eventually reappears in the dawn, before the sun come up. The first time this occurs each year is called the star’s heliacal rising, and on this day Sirius remains visible for only a short time before the sky gets too bright to see it. In ancient Egypt this annual reappearance of Sirius fell close to the summer solstice and coincided with the time of the Nile’s inundation. Isis, as Sirius, was the ‘Mistress of the Year’s beginning’, for the Egyptian new year was set by this event. New Year’s ceremony texts at Dendera say Isis coaxes out the Nile and causes it to swell.
The metaphor is astronomical, hydraulic, and sexual, and it parallels the function of Isis in the myth. Sirius revives the Nile just as Isis revives Osiris. Her time in hiding from Seth is when Sirius is gone (70 days) from the night sky.
She (Isis) gives birth to her son Horus, as Sirius gives birth to the new year, and in the texts Horus and the new year are equated. She is the vehicle for renewal of life and order. Shining for a moment, one morning in summer, she stimulates the Nile and starts the year.”
“The coming of Osiris – the savior of Egypt – was associated with the “Star in the East” because the Egyptians recognized that the rising of Sirius with the sun, or “heliacally,” occurred around the summer solstice, the time of the Nile flooding. L ife along the Nile was highly dependent upon the inundation associated with the heliacal rising of Sirius, a flood deified as Osiris, who was said to be “born” at that time.
In addition, Pyramid Text 593:1636b/M 206 states: “Horus the pointed has come forth from thee, in his name of ‘Horus who was in Sothis.’” “Horus in Sothis,” therefore, refers to when the sun rises with Sirius. Thus, in ancient texts we find the birth of Horus the sun associated with the star in the east.
As we can see, the annual emergence of both Sirius and Orion were closely noted, meaning that these celestial events were significantly in the minds of Egyptians for thousands of years. Moreover, the “rebirth of life” in Osiris – his resurrection on Earth – constitutes an annual event, in the Nile’s flooding.
Christian
There is more than one connection between the Egyptians and Christianity. “Osiris’s coming was announced by Three Wise Men: the three stars Mintaka, Anilam, and Alnitak in the belt of Orion, which point directly to Osiris’s star in the east, Sirius (Sothis), significator of his birth.” One must envision that the Virgo was rising in the East at the same time Sirus was visible in the east as well. But also Orion, called “The Three Kings” by oriental astronomers, was in proximity to these other two constellations. Virgo is called Spica; it is to be found in the “ear of corn” (sign of fertility) which the Virgin holds.
Much has been made of the Matthew gospel account of the “star in the east” followed by “wise men” from afar, claimed to have heralded the birth of the newborn savior of the world. And many ancient gods, kings and heroes were said to have been born under a ‘bright star’ or some other sort of celestial sign.
In the gospel story, Jesus’s birth is signaled by a bright star and a visit from wise men or magi, as they are termed in the New Testament, representing Persian astrologers following the star. Despite the stellar brilliance and obviousness, this tracking was apparently not a simple act, since these “wise men” are depicted as nevertheless illogically becoming hopelessly lost and must ask Christ’s enemy King Herod for assistance. (Mt 2:1-10) “It may be inferred from Mt 2 10 that in some way or other the wise men had for a time lost sight of the star. (Mt 2:10 states: “When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy.”)
Although in the gospels these magi are not numbered, their gifts are counted as three. Hence, the familiar understanding is that Jesus’s birth was accompanied by a “star in the east” and “three wise men.” At a certain point the “three kings” were given names, Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar. Coincidentally, there happen to be three very conspicuous stars in the “belt” of the constellation of Orion that are also called the “Three Kings.” Moreover, as French philosopher Simone Weil (1909-1943), herself a Christian, remarked, “The Christians named the three stars of Orion the Magi,” revealing esoteric knowledge of Christian astrotheology, regardless of when it was first adopted. Within the constellation of Orion, “the Hunter,” are three bright stars said to make up his “belt.” Concerning these stars, in The Geography of the Heavens the astronomer Elijah Hinsdale Burritt remarks:
They are sometimes denominated the Three Kings, because they point out the Hyades and Pleiades on one side, and Sirius, or the Dog-star, on the other. In Job they are called the Bands of Orion…
The biblical Book of Job (38:32) also contains reference to the Mazzaroth, or “zodiac,” and demonstrates significant astronomical knowledge, an important fact in consideration of the contention that, centuries later, the Jewish priesthood rehashed the Egyptian astrotheology in its “midrashic” or fictitious account of Jesus Christ.
The three highly visible “king-stars” of the splendid constellation of Orion are named Mintaka, Aniltak and Anilam or Alnilam, the latter of which means “string of pearls,” while the former two signify “belt.” The statement in the Egyptian texts that Sothis “leads Orion” thus constitutes the motif of the bright star followed by these three “kings,” which have also been called the “three kings of the soothsayers,” a title that may indicate the antiquity of this royal appellation.
The bright star Sirius rose with the sun at the summer solstice, signaling the birth of Osiris as the Nile inundation and the birth of Horus as the daily solar orb. In winter, the Three Kings in the belt of Orion pointed to Sirius at night before the annual birth of the sun, which is also Horus.
The appearance of the three stars in a line with Sirius occurred in the night sky over Egypt thousands of years ago, pointing to the horizon as the new sun was born at the winter solstice. Thus, it could be asserted that the three kings trailing the bright star announced the birth of the savior at the winter solstice in Egypt, ages prior to the same event purportedly taking place in Judea.
Greek
There is much speculation on the origin of its modern name which is generally thought to be derived from the Greek word “Sirio” meaning sparkling. Around 150 AD, the Hellenistic astronomer Claudius Ptolemy described Sirius as reddish, along with five other stars, Betelgeuse, Antares, Aldebaran, Arcturus and Pollux, all of which are clearly of orange or red hue. The discrepancy was first noted by amateur astronomer Thomas Barker, squire of Lyndon Hall in Rutland, who prepared a paper and spoke at a meeting of the Royal Society in London in 1760. The existence of other stars changing in brightness gave credence to the idea that some may change in colour too; Sir John Herschel noted this in 1839, possibly influenced by witnessing Eta Carinae two years earlier. Thomas Jefferson Jackson See resurrected discussion on red Sirius with the publication of several papers in 1892, and a final summary in 1926. He cited not only Ptolemy but also the poet Aratus, the orator Cicero, and general Germanicus as colouring the star red, though acknowledging that none of the latter three authors were astronomers, the last two merely translating Aratus’ poem phenomena. Seneca, too, had described Sirius as being of a deeper red colour than Mars.
Mayan
2013 is upon us, and we survived all the dire predictions about how the world would end did not happen. Among their reasoning was a total misunderstanding of the sacred Mayan calendar. The Maya understood 17 different Calendars based on Venus, Mars, Sun and Moon and most prominently the Pleiades with the precession of the equinoxes, a cycle just short of 26,000 years. So even Sirius was not accurate enough for the “Keeper’s of Time”, the Mayans. With their remarkably advanced astronomy they quickly detected the inaccuracies in using Sirius as a marker for the passage of time, and switched to an even more accurate cycle involving the Pleiades.
The Mayan view of the afterlife consisted primarily of a dangerous voyage of the soul through the underworld, which was populated by sinister gods and represented by the jaguar, symbol of night. The majority of Maya, including the rulers, went to this underworld. Heaven was reserved for those who had been sacrificed or died in childbirth. Like in any ancient belief system, to the Maya, science and religion were one and the same. The Maya developed an impressive mathematical achievements included positional notation and the use of zero; and in astronomy, they accurately calculated a solar year, compiled precise tables of positions for the Moon and Venus, and were able to predict solar eclipses.
For the ancient Maya, the Pleiades represented the principle of life on Planet Earth, and this is why it formed their sacred calendar. Mayan religion and mathematics were intimately connected with the seven stars, or suns, of the Pleiades. I traveled Yucatan once, where Mayan temples are fascinating. The calendars that are most important to beings of earth are the Haab, the Tun-Uc and the Tzolk’in. The Tzolk’in is the most important and the one with the most influence.
The Haab is the Sun calendar. It has 360 + 5 days, totaling 365 days. The Haab uses 18 months with 20 days in each month. There is a 19th month called a Vayeb and uses the 5 extra unlucky days. Each month has it’s own name/glyph. Each day uses a sacred sun/glyph.
The Tun-Uc is the moon calendar. It uses 28 day cycles that mirrors the women’s moon cycle. This cycle of the moon is broken down into 4 smaller cycles, of 7 day each.
The Tzolk’in is the sacred calendar of the Maya and is based on the cycles of 260 days. The cycle of the Pleiades uses 26,000 years, but but encompassing 260 days might allign the Venus cycle. The Mayas knew the importance of the period of 2920 days equal 8 years by 365 days, in which the Venus repeats its movement in relation to the sun, same as the Babylonian did. The “Dreseden codex” in Germany contains tables for predicting solar and lunar eclipses and ephemerides from Venus and Mars for two rounds.
Two kinds of empiric sidereal intervals of Mars were used, a long one (702 days) that included a retrograde loop and a short one that did not. While Kepler solved the sidereal problem of Mars by proposing an elliptical heliocentric orbit, anonymous but equally ingenious Maya astronomers discovered a pair of time cycles that not only accurately described the planet’s motion, but also related it to other cosmic and terrestrial concerns.
Today we only choose the Sun as our reference point, and this is obviously highly inaccurate. Every 4 years a day has to be added to keep accurate time. There is however an even more stable reference point than the Pleiades and that is the Galactic center, which from the perspective of our galaxy is the ultimate center of rotation. And indeed the Mayan’s chose the Galactic Center as a reference point to mark the passage of time, which is evident as the Mayan Long Count ends with the galactic alignment of the Solar System on December 21st 2012.
Sufism
Even as late as the 1970s Sirius became the subject of a (now rejected) theory linked to the Dogon tribe of Mali to recent scientific knowledge of Sirius. The majority of Dogon practice an animist religion, with a significant minority of the Dogon practice (Sufi) Islam, another minority practice Christianity. Sufi historian Indries Shah traces the name of the Illuminati back to a verse in the Koran which mentions a shining star, and Umar Al Sufi a Persian astronomer mentioned it in the 10 century. That knowledge of the Mail tribe concerns Siriusas a binary system. Sirius A is the highly visible star, but there is a companion known as Sirius B. From Africa, where the Dogons live, the star Sirius disappears below the horizon and is out of sight for a couple of months; then it appears again on the morning of July 23, when it rises about one minute before the Sun. It appears bright ruby-red, just above the horizon, almost exactly due east. Sixty seconds later the Sun emerges. So you can see Sirius for just a moment, then it’s gone. This is called the helical rising of Sirius, which was a very important moment for most of the ancient world, not just for the Dogons and Egypt. This is the moment when Sirius and the Sun and the Earth are in a straight line across space.
Conclusion
Sirius has been found linked with every great religion of antiquity. Why? One reason might be was a much better timekeeper than the Sun. But as has been shown, the star Sirius has played a prominent role in astronomy, myth, religion, literature, and history always with an archetype of wolfish character.
Sources
Cosmos An illustrated history of astronomy and cosmology, John David North
The Fontana history of astronomy and cosmology, John David North (German Translation)
The Rise of Early Modern Science – Islam, China and the West, Huff, Toby E.
The Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers, Springer Reference. New York: Springer, 2007 (via web)
Starry Night Complete Space and Astronomy Park Deluxe Edition 6
It became clear during my research of Jungian Archetype of the wolf, that in mythology, religion, in legends and fairy tales the wolf has played an outstanding ambiguous, dualist and multidimensional role. The wolf archetype is so central, that how the wolf is viewed, indicates the mindset of the human, secular or spiritual organisations of the society we live in.
In a few weeks, there is Whitsun, and I will make one of my occasional trips to the monastery. Writing this article was a preparation to the theme and will be updated afterwards The rock monastery St. George is a development center of the Benedictine order in the Austrian Inn valley. From the monastery to the St. George mountain (Karwendel) on foot takes approximately one hour. The religious exercise will be lead by a Benedictine monk, who happens to have formal psychoanalytic credentials and introduced the theme “The archetype of the wolf” for what to my understanding is a spiritual hiking weekend.
st_georgenberg_stift_fiecht
But there is much more. Joland Jacobi, a close assicate of C.G. Jung mentiones the archetype of the wolf a few times in her book “Complex, Archetypes, Symbol in the Psychology of C.G. Jung”, Bollingen Series Princton University Press, 1957. Joland Jacobi writes, “being devoured or swallowed is also a widespread archetypal motif… the wolf that devours the kid”…. [page 155, 181,185]. C:G: Jung writes numerious times about Wotan, who was eaten at Ragnarok by the giant wolf Fenrir and then avenged by his son Vidar e.g. “Four Archetypes Mother, Rebirth, Spirit, Trickster”, Routledge and Paul, 1957. In the the same book, C-G. Jung writes about the wolves about the German fairytale, in which the wolf gives the hero a magic gift of his hairs (page 109) .
Historical encounter between man and wolf
You may refer my recent article “The Wolf as an Jungian Archetype Vessel” which argues that the wolf is one of the most persistent and structurally overdetermined animal-symbols in human civilization because the historical encounter between man and wolf unfolded simultaneously on three inseparable levels: biological rivalry, social mirroring, and archetypal projection. The wolf therefore persists not merely as zoological memory nor merely as mythological ornament, but as a privileged symbolic convergence point through which deep psycho-biological structures become visible in religion, myth, dream, political imagination, and collective anxiety. In his book Of Wolves and Men, Barry Lopez argues from a naturalist view similarly that traditional hunting cultures suggest deep behavioral analogies achieved through a respectful, reciprocal relationship. These societies and wolves viewed the hunt as a sacred covenant requiring humility, dignity in the ‘conversation of death’ and hunting skills. Barry Lopez shares a Nunamiut elder’s insight that a old man and an old wolf possess identical knowledge of the land and hunting: “After a pause the old man looks up and says: The same. They know the same.“
The wolf reminded men to their domestication and their inner struggle with it. The wolf became also an image of remaining wild and sexuality, in a Jungian sense became men’s Shadow of undesired and unwanted. Those of us with Western background, do often not realize the depths and subtle (subtile) differences and similarity of Pagan German or Norse, Eastern or Native American stories. Especially wolf stories examine reincarnation, spiritual energy, gift exchange, the vitality of the body, and the spirit of the soul. In the old worldview everything is in flux and begins, balances out from, and ends with polarities akin to yin and yang. Even the gods are subject to this, undergo transformation, and often pay for what they gain with a corresponding loss. For indigenous people – including the indigenous Celts and Germanic – religion as such did not exist. Native views of spirituality wed it to time and place, land and sea and sky. Our forebears lived side by side with the wolves in an inspirited world, and that world abides, as do its instinctive, but sacred dimensions:
Axe-time, sword-time, shields are sundered,
Wind-time, wolf-time, ere the world falls;
Nor ever shall men each other spare….
Now do I see the earth anew
Rise all green from the waves again…
Myth wolf – gods, goddesses, demons and outlaws
Wolves make quick decisions, often need to trust their own instincts and make firm emotional attachments. They teach us to do the same, to trust our instincts and intuitions, and have control over our own lives. At some point in psychological development, most people struggle with the transformation of spiritual and physical aspects of their being. In many stories, the wolf was described as wild, tearing, biting, grim and bloodthirsty. The image of the wolf has been used to represent all those aspects. From where does the primeval fear and awe of the wolf originate?
The Dark Wolf Outlaw
Demons: In the Edda, the ancient Icelandic sagas, the wolf was a symbol for demonic powers: Odin, the God of war and death was accompanied by two wolves. The mythical wolf Fenrir, a son of the fire god Loki and the giant Angrboda was stronger than gods. In Indian mythology, the wolf is described as demonic. Furthermore, the wolf is portrayed as thievish, deceptive and false. In India, the demons were named after the wolf. In Christianity the wolf was even equated with the devil: Jesus Christ advised against false prophets dressed in sheep’s clothing which in fact were wolves. Numerous myths from Eastern Europe, Russia and Scandinavia tell about the creation of the wolf by the devil. During the creation of the wolf, the devil relied on the help of God and it was God’s will that the wolf kills sheep and goats.
Gods: Many different cultures worshiped the wolf. For the Egyptians the wolf symbolized the god of the empire of the dead. For the Romans the wolf was the symbol for Mars, the God of war. The combination of the wolf with war was not meant to be negative but, instead, correlated it to the glorious death of a warrior or emperor. Furthermore, the fighting heroes were compared with furious wolves.
Positive Male power: The combination of the wolf with war was not meant to be negative but, instead, correlated it to the glorious death of a warrior or emperor. Furthermore, the fighting heroes were compared with furious wolves. The wolf is also worshiped as the protector of human beings. The wolf was either seen as a fierce guardian or caring provider. The wolf is very often also associated with war and strength. In both German and Norse mythology, wolf was a symbol of chaos, destruction and death. Wolves are seen as teachers of hard, but necessary lessons. The wolf is also a symbol of guardianship, ritual, loyalty, and spirit.
Positive female power: Many different cultures worshiped the nurturing she-wolf as symbol of fertility.. The most famous myth is Romulus and Remus, the founders of the city of Rome, who were abandoned as small children. A wolf found them and raised them as her own cubs. In other contexts, the wolf also was honored as a symbol of motherly sacrifice and fertility. The frequent connection between goddess figures and totemic wolves may be taken as another indication of the great role of wolves in primitive matriarchal societies and shamanic religions.
Fenir
Negative untamed power: People from many cultures and traditions have interpreted the wolf as representing the untamed (unconscious). The word wolf is widely common in the Indo-European roots of language and often not only stands for the animal, but describes in the old Germanic languages the bandit, murderer, slayer, defied criminal, evil ghost or supernatural beast.
The Wolf in the wild
The basic social unit of wolf populations is the pack. Packs usually consist of between five and eight members, up thirty wolves or more depending of the size of the prey being hunted. Wolves generally establish territories ranging from forty to more than four hundred square miles in some cases. They define their ranges with scent markings and such vocalizations as growls, barks, and the legendary howl and will defend this area against intruders. A wolf pack is typically a family unit, consisting of the adult pair, their cubs and yearlings – two generations offspring. Wolf packs rarely accept unfamiliar adult wolves, often chasing or killing intruders to protect their territory. However, they are unique in their natural willingness to adopt unrelated orphaned pups. Members of the pack form strong social bonds that promote internal cohesion. Order is maintained by a dominance hierarchy. The alpha couple, more often the male sometimes the she-wolf depending on prey and situation, initiate pack activity and lead the group on hunts. During a hunt, they will guide the pack’s movements and assume control at critical moments. Communication is especially important for wolves, where coordinating, cooperating, and reinforcing bonds and status are necessary. Within a family of wolves, communication helps maintain social stability and solidarity. Communication among wolves is particularly complex and use a range of vocalizations to “talk”, body language and scent. The “wolf” talk conducted by the dominate male keeps the family pack together and working as a group. Research at wolves in captivity are not transferable in the wild, because here wolves of different origin or family groups were locked together.
Wolf family the-alpha-wolf-couplef-amily-the-yearling-missing
Wolves and humans were always fellow hunters, rivals, and sometimes enemies, perhaps because they were so similar to humans in many ways as mentioned before. Wolves have a strong social nature and are, like humans organized as a family tribe. In any case, through gestures and body movement, they communicate their feelings. Wolves like to howl as a pack for several reasons. It may be to encourage their closeness, to celebrate a successful hunt, and to tell other packs to keep away. The dispersed wolf, a younger male or female, is usually in search of his own territory and a mate. He will skirt the territories of others, but rarely howl. Leaving the pack allows for the sexually mature young wolves to begin the cycle of life by finding a mate, and starting their own family. This coined the misleading term ‘lone wolf’, they exist, but as exception.
Until today, the wolf evokes fear. Yet the wolf is not dangerous monstrosity, but rather an intelligent carnivore with a distinct social behavior. Anybody who “owns” a good hunting dog, observes that good dogs, good leaders and good men in general share some attribute of a wolf. The life of a man and a wolf did not differ very much a few thousand years ago: Both were either successful hunters or perished – as simple as that. During those early years of mankind wolves were always competitors with humans for the same prey species. Yet the competition between them increased when men settled 10,000 years ago and began agriculture and cattle-raising. The farm animals were for wolves easy prey, and many sheep or goats fell victim to them. The wolf became the hateful animal, which threatened the livelihood or at least property of the man. Even as backpacker I was more afraid of a wolf(s) pack than of a brown bear.
Archetypal significance of the Wolf
Wolf Archetype: Dual Archetypes – conflicting messages
No matter how polite, on the question how well advertising works, a marketer said once: One must know and find archetypal images and connect them with the products of the market. So the message becomes strong and the desired behavior tendency is more easily constructed. One finds few wolves in advertizing, since the archetypal significance of the wolf symbolizes evil as well as positive and spiritual aspects. As shown before, you do see the claimed by ideologies and religions. The wolf represents as noted before, and like the picture on the left an integration of opposites. It has always carried a sense of contradiction: a wild and fearful animal, that can represent death and evil; but at the same time a companion to the goddess Artemis and the norse god, Odin. Theis dual imago of the wolf is also represented by the contrast between its masculine and feminine nature. The masculine nature of the wolf is depicted by many cultures as the protector and warrior. The feminine nature is symbolized as the she-wolf form nurturing the twins, Romulus and Remus, or in the Irish myth of Cormac, or Kaspar Hauser who were suckled by wolves. Interesting enough, Christianity enforced and broke this dualism in early Biblical sources presenting a contrast between the wolf symbolizing bloodshed and destruction versus the symbol of the wolf and the lamb lying down together representing peace and the coming Messianic rule. The middle ages also presented this contrast between the image of the wolf as devil, versus the wolf as an “emblem of Saint Francis of Assisi who tamed the wolf”.
C.G. Jung’s basic archetypes and the Wolf
BasicArchetypesWolf
Jung developed an understanding of archetypes as being “ancient or archaic images, that derive from the collective unconscious”. There are many different archetypes, and Jung has stated they are limitless, but they have basic examples in very person include the ‘persona’, the ‘shadow’, the ‘anima’, the ‘animus’, and the Self. Four more archetypes are prominently mentioned by C.G. Jung; ‘great mother’, the ‘trickster’, the archetype of transformation and the ‘hero”. It is interesting, that the wolf can represent them all.
Jung proposed, that the archetype had a dual nature: it exists both in the psyche and in the world at large. He suggested also, that not only do the archetypal structures govern the behaviour of all living organisms, but that they were controlling the behaviour of inorganic matter as well. The archetype was not merely a psychic entity, but more fundamentally, a bridge to matter in gnostic entities in occult tradition are known as aeons. The Germanic Wotan (Norse Odin) is such an aeon described by Jung (who was very much drawn to Gnosis).
In another Jung’s theory about Wotan, invoked in the Germans by Hitler’s disposition as a “seer” drew a lot of political and academic fire. Interesting here is also, that Hitler, who was inseparable of Blondi, his wolf-hound chose a name for himself – Wolf. In Egyptian mythology a god, Upuaut was the scout, going out to clear routes for the army to proceed forward. One old inscription found mentioned Upuaut “opens the way” to king Sekhemkhet’s victory. Over time, the connection to war, and thus to death, led to Upuaut also being seen as one who opened the ways to, and through, Duat, for the spirits of the dead.
But back to my interpretation the basic sub-archetypes of the wolf:
The nurturing and protective wolf appearing as the great she-wolf who nursed Romulus and Remus (Mother, Anima).
The male wolf initiated by society forces the young adult in becoming a good hunter (Warrior,Animus).
The guard conducting souls through the gates, which had to be passed as in Egyptian mythology (Shadow).
The wolf in sheep’s clothing who attempts to hide its instinctive and wild self by developing a persona of meekness and innocence (Persona).
The howling wolf who has a voice to communicate with others and is reclaimed inner voice of the soul (Ego)
The wolf and lamb lying together, which represents inner peace (Self).
The wolf who has accepted his (or her) role in life (Ego after individuation).
C.G. Jung wrote little about wolves as archetype directly but wrote extensively about fairy tales and myths in which the wolf often plays a major role. Four archetypes “per se” are prominently mentioned by C.G. Jung; ‘great mother’, the ‘trickster’ , the archetype of rebirth (transformation) and spirit, the wolf can represent them all and more. Many references to wolves and werewolves can be found in Jung’s Collected Works and separate publications.
The Romolus myth is mentioned by Henderson in ” Der Mensch und seine Symbole, C.G. Jung, Jaffe Olten 1968, as the fourth stage of the hero myth. In Bly’s Iron John the wolf is represented by the wild man, the hunter and warrior.
C.G. Jung’s archetypes of transformation and the Wolf
The werewolf as bloodthirsty creature, once person, once wolf has been sold gladly by the film industry in “American Werewolf” or the classic silent movie Mr. Cecil and Hyde. During the Middle Ages, the belief was widely accepted, that men would transform into werewolves. The werewolf, a creature from the devil, obsessed, half human and half animal, roamed the streets at night and, “drank the still warm blood, gorged the bowels from its innocent victims during orgies of satanic cruelty”. The belief in werewolves already existed in the ancient world, but during the Middle Ages this belief grew to be much stronger. Mostly women and children became victims of werewolves, which, in reality were men, that felt and acted like wolves while under the influence of drugs and rituals. It was believed, that with the help of the Malleus Maleficarum (the hammer of the witches) in 1489, one could not only recognize witches, but also werewolves, which resulted in countless men being burned to death on bonfires as so-called werewolves. To contemporaries, it was clear, that one would turn into a werewolf through an evil spell or as a punishment for a serious sin.
Wolf archetypes and pagan myths (Edda)
There was even a a monstrous wolf who was a major threat to the gods who appears in both the ‘Poetic (or Elder) Edda’ and the ‘Prose Edda’ written down in Iceland during the 13th from earlier traditional sources, reaching into the Viking Age. The name Fenrir means “from the swamp.” Also known as the Fenriswolf, he was the offspring of the trickster fire god Loki. In Norse mythology, Loki is a god or jötunn/Jætt or both. Some of the jötnar (a mythological of giants and giantesses) have hideous appearances – claws, fangs, and deformed features. Fenrir’s sister was the goddess Hel and his brother the evil serpent Jormungand. The Vikings believed, that during Ragnarok, the battle that would take place at the end of the world. According to the myths, the evil Loki himself gave birth to Fenrir, after eating the heart of a giantess, the witch Angerbotha. After his birth, the gods received prophecies of disaster, but the gods could not kill Fenrir because it would have defiled their sanctuary. But they sought some way to tie up the beast, who grew noticeably larger each day. They attempted to restrain him, but after failed attempts they became even more afraid of the wolf’s power. Odin sent Skirnir, Frey’s messenger, down into the world of the dwarfs and had them fashion a magic restraint called Gleipnir, smooth and soft, like a silken ribbon. They called the wolf, showed him the silky band, and challenged him to test his strength again. Fenrir was suspicious because of the thinness of the band. The gods agreed to free him if he could not break out of the fetter himself. But Fenrir asked that, someone puts their hand into his mouth as a pledge, that the gods were acting in good faith. None of the gods was willing to take such a risk, knowing full well the deceit, but then Tyr stepped forward and put his right hand into the wolf’s mouth, making the sacrifice that would keep the gods safe. Fenrir was bound with Gleipnir, and he tried with all his might, but could not snap it. The gods laughed to see the wolf’s distress–except for Tyr, of course, his hand got bitten of at the wrist. Fenrir continued to howl horribly, but would remain until Ragnarok, when the gods and the giants would fight to the death. By the time of Ragnarok, the wolf would have grown so large, that when he opened his mouth, his lower jaw would be against the Earth and his upper jaw would scrape heaven. Flames would burn from his eyes and nostrils. At Ragnarok, the wolf would break loose and join the giants and other monsters in all-out war with the gods. Fenrir would kill Odin by swallowing him. Odin’s son Vidar would then come forward avenging Odin and, killing the beast at last.
Wolf archetypes – and the Egyptian Lord of the Necropolis
wepwawet
In late Egyptian mythology, Wepwawet (also rendered Upuaut) was originally a war deity. Wepwawet was called the son of Isis, and was one of several Egyptian deities to take the form of a canine, today identified as a wolf. Egyptologists now believe, that he was more likely associated with the jackal, though he is often depicted with a gray or white head. Wepwawet originally was seen as a wolf deity, thus the Greek name of Lycopolis, meaning city of wolves. Over time, the connection to war, and thus to death, led to Wepwawet also being seen as one who guarded the spirits of the dead. In later Egyptian art, Wepwawet was depicted as a wolf or a jackal, or as a man with the head of a wolf or a jackal.Reflecting his lupine origins, he was depicted dressed as a soldier, as well as carrying other military equipment – a mace and a bow. With the rise of the solar cult, particularly during the 12th Dynasty, Osiris was limited to the underworld and the local god and Wepwawet gained the titles, “Lord of Abydos” and Lord of the Necropolis”. The god is well established in New Kingdom funerary texts such as the Book of Going Forth by Day, Book of the Dead, and the Amduat (Book of That Which Is in the Underworld). Wepwawet was also thought of as the messenger and champion of royalty who accompanied the king while hunting as “the one with the sharp arrow who is more powerful than the gods.” Wepwawet is not to be confused with Anubis.
The story of Isis and Osiris is one of Egypt’s most ancient myths and base of the concept of death (and resurrection) which is so central to their religion. Osiris, Isis, Seth and Nepthys and the elder Horus were siblings born of Geb, the sky god, and Nut, the earth goddess, had five children. Osiris became king of Egypt, and he married his sister Isis. Seth was married loveless to Nepthys and always jealous of his oldest brother Osiris. On a feast of gods, he tricked Osiris into a coffin and drowned him. To prevent Isis from bringing Osiris back to live he cut him into pieces and distributed them throughout Egypt. Isis, who had great magical powers, decided, to collect the pieces of her husband’s body and re-assembling them. Once she completed this task, she breathed the breath of life into his body and resurrected him. Isis became pregnant soon after gave birth to the younger Horus, the hawk-god. The cult of Isis spread with Alexander the Great throughout Greece and became in Rome through Caligula a state religion. The image of Isis nursing the younger Horus found it way into Christianity, like the judgment after death and the hell and in Iris’ deed maybe even resurrection.
While over the time all of the many gods only “survived” as incarnations of Re, who became the most powerful, almost panteistic sun god, Osiris was able to descend into the underworld, where he became the only lord of that domain. Here the first time in history the concept of the judgement after death was introduced. There were 42 sins, you could by guilt of. Ages ago, before the birth of Younger Horus, Wepwawet’d situated himself as the god of war, aiding his followers before, during, and even after a battle. But under these new circumstances Wepwawet petitioned Osiris these days for a new role. The wolf-headed god was then assigned as guide to the dead leading the deceased through the Underworld (hence his name). Not long after Wepwawet appointed as guide did Osiris’ ability to communicate outside of the underworld began to wane. Wepwawet stepped in again and offered his help as a messenger (like the Greek Hermes and the Roman mercury). Some say Wepwawet’s still a scavenger at heart like his animal totem, groping for whatever task isn’t taken or is even partly available.
Here a list of the most important and mentioned gods:
GEB: the earth-god; husband of Nut; member of the ennead of Heliopolis; represented as a man.
NUT: the sky-goddess, wife of Geb, the earth-god; represented as a woman, her naked body curved to form the arch of heaven.
HORUS: the falcon-deity, originally the sky-god, identified with the king during his lifetime; also regarded as the son of Osiris and Isis, for the former of whom he became the avenger; cult-centers in many places, e.g. Behdet in the Delta, Hierakonpolis and Edfu in Upper Egypt. See also, Haroeris, Harpocrates, Harsiesis, Re-Harakhty.
ISIS: the divine mother, wife of Osiris and mother of Horus; one of the four ‘protector’-goddesses, guarding coffins and Canopic jars; sister of Nephthys with whom she acted as a divine mourner for the dead; in the Late Period Philae was her principal cult-centre. I have written about Isis imported to Roman culture in “Isis, Mithras and Jesus”: Clash of male and female Archetypes in classical Rome.
SETH (SET, SUTEKH): the god of storms and violence; identified with many animals, including the pig, ass, okapi, and hippopotamus; represented as an animal of unidentified type; brother of Osiris and his murderer; the rival of Horus; equated by the Greeks with Typhon.
WEPWAWET (UPUAUT): the wolf god of Asyut in Middle Egypt; a god of the necropolis and an avenger of Osiris. Wepwawet (Upuaut, Wep-wawet, and Ophois) was an ancient canine god whose worship originated in Upper Egypt. He was one of the earliest of the gods to be worshipped at Abydos, possibly predating (and absorbing) that of Khentyamentiu (another god of the Abydos necropolis). Not to be mistaken with Anubis, there is very little information about the family of Wepwawet, or parents, if he had any at all. He is sometimes the son of Set, or of Anubis. Most of the time he is said to be a son of Isis, which may further relate him to Anubis. Or he could be another foster-son adopted by Isis.
ANUBIS: protector and son of Osiris and Nephthys. As Osiris grew in popularity (absorbing both Khentyamentiu and Wepwawet) Anubis took on Wepwawet’s funerary role. During the New Kingdom his standard even preceded that of Osiris and the “procession of Wepwawet” initiated the mysteries of Osiris as a god of the dead.
NEPHTHYS is the river goddess and daughter of Nut.
AMUT, Ammut, or Ammit or Ahemait, is the crocodile goddess known as the “Devourer of the Dead” assists Anubis with carrying out the Judgements
AMON- RE (RA), Amun-Ra and Akmun-Rah: the sun-god of Heliopolis; head of the great ennead, supreme judge; often linked with other gods aspiring to universality, e.g. Amen-Re, Sobk-Re; represented as falcon-headed. Re is the god of the Sun and king of the gods until Osiris took over his throne.
OSIRIS (ASAR): the god of the underworld, identified as the dead king; also a god of the inundation and vegetation; represented as a mummified king; principal cult-center, Abydos.
ATON or ATEN is the new god of the sun, an incarnation of Re. It was a monotheistic supernova god in a cultural revolution lasting only on reign. I have written about Aton and Echnaton here.
ATON was the (monotheistic / pantheistic) religious revolution during the period of Echnaton which wanted to suppress Amon, Osiris and Re (or assimilate him). Not only Amon was dismissed (whom all the kings of the New Empire had worshipped at Thebes), but all the other gods had gone. Re became a spirit who returned life to each person after every incarnation and a new state religion, Aton (was Re) offered his mercy to all beings of every nation and color. There is a famous engraving of hands reaching to the sun representing an invitation of men towards the sky. Aton, the father of all the gods, also embodied them in his being, and became the one who could purify human beings, when they asked his aid to take them out of the darkness of their material life.
Wolf archetypes and Christianity
Early Christianity on the European continent employed the wolf, too, but instead of a symbol of nurturing or supernatural transition, the wolf became associated with evil and damnation as the agrarian way of life grew. The Bible describes Jesus as the shepherd protecting his herd of sheep from the wolf (The Bible, John 10:12). This would imply an intrinsic belief of the wolf as a symbol of sin and prurient influence. In Isaiah verse 11:16 of the old testament states “The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb.” This phrase is thought of as a metaphor of coming together of both the upper and lower under the Christian god (Religion 431), a stark contrast in comparison to the previous example and a throwback to an earlier time when the wolf represented more positive ideas. Another very prevalent notion in both the old and new testaments of the Christian Bible, is the wolf a tool of Satan and his henchmen. Wolves in this context are thought of as ravening or stealing away the souls of men.
There was an interesting sermon in St. Ottilien recently, talking about sheep. The Pater, a son of a veterinary, said he liked sheep, but to him they are dumb. When a wolf comes to them they cuddle together, neither fighting nor running away they when they get killed. They are powerless victims. He referred to the German philosopher Nietzsche, who divided us into masters and slaves, in those that are prey (sheep) and those that are predators (wolves). Nietzsche wrote psychologically and physically, this divides our human species. The master types live by strength, creativity, independence, assertiveness, and related traits. They respect power, courage, boldness, risk-taking, even recklessness. It is natural for them to follow their own path no matter what, to rebel against social pressure and conformity. The slave types live in conformity. They tend to passivity, dependence, meekness. It is natural for them to stick together for a sense of security, just as herd animals do. (Beyond Good and Evil 264).
The Pater reminded also to the claim the God is dead – but countered it with the resurrection of Jesus. Now, Nietzsche says, what we take to be moral depends on our biological nature—and different biological natures dictate different moral codes:
What will seem good to you as a sheep? Being able to graze peacefully, sticking close together with others just like you, being part of the herd and not straying off. What will seem bad to you? Well, wolves will seem bad, and anything wolf-like, predatory, aggressive. But what if you are a wolf? Then strength, viciousness, and contempt for the sheep will come naturally to you and seem good. There is nothing the wolves and the sheep can agree on morally—their natures are different, as are their needs and goals, as is what feels good to them. The same point holds for humans. The divide between strong and weak, assertive and timid, runs straight through the human species. Moral codes, Nietzsche is here suggesting, are part of a biological type’s life strategy of survival, and the more we look at the history of morality evolutionarily and biologically, the more we are struck by the diversity of circumstances and how dramatically beliefs about values have changed across time. (Beyond Good and Evil 199).
This is precisely our key problem culturally, the pater argued. This world shows, that we once prized excellence and power and looked down upon the humble and the lowly. Now the meek, the common man, the kindly neighbor are the “good guys” while the aggressive, the powerful, the strong, the proud are “evil.”
Jesus was warning the disciples in Matthew 10:16 when He says they are being, “sent out as sheep among wolves.” The image and idea here is intense, but so is being a Christ follower in a world where those who follow Christ continually are facing some level of persecution. Jesus knew this and instead of telling the disciples follow me it will be easy; He let them know it will be just as dangerous, as it is for the sheep among wolves. This is the same for those who follow Christ today. As a Christ follower, a Christian, you already have the way out through salvation in Jesus through His death on the cross and resurrection by choosing it. Christians have the cure, but Jesus tells us, that while we are on this earth, those who follow Him will have difficulties bc this is not heaven this is earth where some people chose to say no to Christ and others believe and chose to follow Jesus and to those Jesus says, “Look, I am sending you out as sheep among wolves. Be as weary as snakes and harmless as doves.” Matthew 10:16
Wolf archetypes and postmodern ideologies
The ruling archetype does not stay the same forever, as is evident from the temporal limitations, that have been set to the hoped-for reign of peace, and the irreversible Europe.The archetype of the just, fatherly, benevolent ruler and the nursing mother had been shattered over the whole of northern Europe, as the present fate of the Christian churches bears witness. Even the Catholic Church can no longer afford trials of strength. Nihilistic Gods have attacked Christianity on a broad front. In communism, he is called equality and science, in national-socialism, he is called leader, and in capitalism he is called globalism.
The wolf, seen as today’s financial predator, is naturally preying upon domesticated animals easily transforms into the metaphor of Satan seducing the innocents, drawing them away from their true nature into a state where they are compelled to acting against themselves and nature. This is perhaps the most frequent religious wolf related thought, which influenced Christianity and popular European culture. The sad fact though, is the image of the wolf in this context has little relation to anything based on reality and only serves not to enlighten thinking regarding this animal and its role in our world.
Wolf archetypes and masculinism
TheWolvesAintWhatTheyUsedtoBe – masculinism
Masculinism refers to advocacy of the rights or needs of men and the adherence to or promotion of opinions, values, regarded as typical of men. One of the most prominent men’s rights advocates, was Warren Farrell. Wolves are very good archetypes to define masculism and men. The wolf today still represents our “instinctive nature that is wild and natural” and suggests a wild and natural creature within every human, who is filled with good instincts, passionate creativity, and ageless knowing. This warrior within is seen as an archetype, that carries images, ideas, and unique behaviors for humankind. The gifts of wolfish nature come to man at birth, but society, in many instances, will attempt to civilize them into rigid roles, which will destroy the inner treasure and muffle the deep, messages of the soul. As a result, boys become trapped, over-domesticated, uncreative, and have fearful feelings. On a sociological level, societies become confused from kindergarten to the voting booth and bring Father or Mother figures against their interest in power, tangled and confused in narcistic gender issues. For men to find their soul, they will need to face their instinctive wild self so that they can become free, creative, and leading again. Of course the same can be true for females in unhealthy warrior culture, like German women who were hysterical Hitler believers or those today who proudly sacrifice their sons as suicide bombers.
Wolf archetypes and feminism
The Wolves ain’t what they used to be – feminism
The wolf is also a strong female archetype. They have insticts too. Interesting enough typical Feminist ideology divide Masculists in a) in male feminists who promote “gender equality”, a term which of course is shifting sand, and b) the others as form of misogyny promoting “male superiority or dominance” by being opposed to their definition of equality. Based on this “only dead Indians are good Indians logic”, wolves are very bad role models to define feminism, but still good ones to describe female archetypes. And there are good examples too. In her book, Women Who run With The Wolves: Myths and Stories of the Wild Woman Archetype, Clarissa Pinkola Estes (1992) suggests, that healthy wolves and healthy women in particular share certain psychic characteristics: keen sensing, playful spirit, and a heightened capacity for devotion. Female wolves and women by nature are relational, inquiring, and possess great endurance and strength. They are intuitive and concerned with their young, their mate and their pack and shamanic. There is the story of La Loba, the wolf woman. Her work was collecting bones of wolves and singing life into them. The story symbolizes the soul-voice. It conveys the truth of a woman’s healing power over anything, that is ailing or in need of restoration. Thus, the wolf is the representation of the Great Mother an archetype, which carries female images, ideas, and unique behaviors for humankind to help people to find their soul, and as warrior to help people to protect their survival. You might remember the two articles, Four archetypes of the (fe)male. The wolf combines the duality of the Great Mother and Great Warrior. The wolf can thus be seen as a symbol on an intra-psychic level for a successful individuation. The spiritual Self consoles and integrates his Anima (or her Animus) and their shadow, which was created to adjust to collective norms . Individuation suggests a commitment to inner growth and development.
Myth wolf – yesterday and today
A short summary of wolf features prominently in a number of stories everywhere.
Europe and Middle East:
Lycaon was the first king in Arcadia in Greece. He led a wicked life. The god Zeus came in disguise to a banquet at his palace and was disgusted to be served a child’s limbs. The god destroyed the palace and turned the king and his sons into wolves. Then he sent a flood to drown them all.
The Egyptians had a wolf god, Wepwawet, whose name meant “he who opens the road.” He led kings in battle, and his image was carried through the streets of his town, Assiut, during a great annual feast. The wolf counted later also as God of the underworld . He was sort of demoted together with Osiris to the underworld.
Early Biblical sources represented the wolf as destructive and associated with the evening (Jeremiah 5:6, and dishonest gain, bloodshed and destruction (Ezekiel 22:27, The Holy Bible). However, when the wolf and lamb were depicted lying down even though they were considered traditional enemies, together they represented peace and the coming Messianic rule (Isaiah 65:25 The Holy Bible). Many saints tamed wolves, just as St. Francis of Assisi did.
rome_shewolf_twins
The founding of Rome – and thus, an entire empire – was based on the story of Romulus and Remus, orphaned twins who were raised by a she-wolf . The association of the wolf with the female was seen in the primitive Roman cult of Lupa or Feronia, which was inherited from Sabine matriarchy. It is based on best known Western myth of Romulus and Remus: The wolf as a provider supposed to have nursed human infants. An ancient statue in the Lupercal grotto was later enhanced with images of the infants, Romulus and Remus were annually honored at the Lupercalia, the festival of the She-wolf, held every year in February, which was a multi-purpose event that celebrates the fertility of not only the livestock, but people as well. The “Jungle book” has a similar theme as the main character, “Mowgli”, is raised by wolves.The Romans thought it was lucky to see a wolf. The animal was sacred to Mars, god of war and protector of Rome. Julius Caesar’s victory over the Gauls at Sentinium, in 195 B.C., was attributed to a wolf, which was sent by Mars to frighten the enemy.The German Nibelungen legend tells how warriors used to eat roast wolf-meat to give themselves the courage of the wolf. Norse myths are all about valor, wolves have an important place, showing how they inspire fascination and fear in fighting men. When Wotan (Odin(, god of war and wisdom, sat on his throne at the palace of Valhalla, two great tame wolves lay at his feet,the symbol of his power and guarding the palace. The great wolves Geri and Freki, ate up the remains of the gods’ great feasts. In German fairy tales the big, bad wolf is referred to as being wild, tearing, snappish, grim and sanguinary. Grimm (German Romantic) even describes him as being the most evil creature of all animals in “The Wolf and the Seven Little Goats”.
In the stories of the Ulster cycle, the Celtic goddess Morrighan is sometimes shown as a wolf. The connection with the wolf, along with the cow, suggests that in some areas, she may have been linked to fertility and land. Prior to her role as a warrior goddess, she was linked to sovereignty and kingship. In Scotland, the goddess known as Cailleach is often associated with wolf folklore. She is an old woman who brings destruction and winter with her, and rules the dark half of the year.
Native America
amorok
The Inuit people of North America hold the great wolf Amarok in high regard. Amarok was a lone wolf, and did not travel with a pack. He was known for preying upon hunters foolish enough to go out at night. According to legend, Amarok came to the people when the caribou became so plentiful that the herd began to weaken and fall sick. Amarok came to prey upon the frail and ill caribou, thus allowing the herd to become healthy once more, so that man could hunt. There is a Lakota tale about a woman who was injured while traveling. She was found by a wolf pack, that took her in and nurtured her. During her time with them, she learned the ways of the wolves, and when she returned to her tribe, she used her newfound knowledge to help her people. In particular, she knew far before anyone else when a predator or enemy was approaching. A Cherokee tale tells the story of the dog and the wolf. Originally, Dog lived on the mountain, and Wolf lived beside the fire. When winter came, though, Dog got cold, so he came down and sent Wolf away from the fire. Wolf went to the mountains, and found that, he liked it there. Wolf prospered in the mountains, and formed a clan of his own, while Dog stayed by the fire with the people. Eventually, the people killed Wolf, but his brothers came down and took revenge.
Asia
Asian Wolves
The Turks and the fierce Mongols were enemies; but they both claimed to be descended from wolves. One young Turkish warrior, who alone survived after a Mongol raid, was rescued by a she-wolf and led by her to a secret earthly paradise in the mountains. They were married, and their children were led by a great grey wolf to the land which is now Turkey. The Mongol emperor Genghis Khan also claimed to be the son of a wolf. Besides Buddhism and Nestorians, Mongols have held mainly Shamanic beliefs before they converted to Islam.
In Turkey, the wolf is still held in high regard, and is seen in a similar light as to the Romans – the wolf Ashina Tuwu is the mother of the first of the great Khans. Also called Asena, she rescued an injured boy, nursed him back to health, and then bore him ten half-wolf half-human children. Today the wolf is still seen as a symbol of sovereignty and leadership and used from the PKK (Kurdish Separation Movement)..
The mountain people of Georgia, former part of the USSR, once thought, wolves had a society just like people. They were under the protection of a saint and were not thought of as wild animals. Hunters who killed a wolf wore mourning clothes as if they had killed a man.
In ancient China, the Wolf is prominent in the Sky. The people believed, that eclipses of the sun were caused by a great sky-wolf eating up the sun. People beat drums and shot arrows at the sun to drive the animal away. The Chinese saw the wolf also as a guardian of the heavenly palace. In Japan the wolf was admired for its ferocity, tenacity and swift attack. Also, they considered the wolf to be from heaven and to be venerated.
Conclusion
Myth is the foundation of life; it is the timeless pattern, the religious formula to which life shapes itself…Whereas in the life of mankind the mythical represents an early and primitive stage, in the life of an individual it represents a late and mature one. — Thomas Mann
The wolf archetype may seen as great bridge between gods and evil, male and female, patriarchy and matriarchy, humans and Nietzsches “Uebermensch”. However, it has to be noted, that wolves live a traditional, wild archetype adjusted to nature. The wolf clearly represents the instincts, so the full and positive wolf archetypes may be meaningless in today’s context. Or not? Can be the wolf a weak warrior or a devouring mother, can the wolf sleep with the lambs? Prefer to a be lamb or a lone wolf?
PRIMARY SOURCE APPARATUS TO BE USED
Jungian Core Texts
CW 8 — On the Nature of the Psyche
CW 9/I — The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious
CW 10 — Civilization in Transition (especially Wotan)
Jolande Jacobi Die Psychologie von C. G. Jung. Olten: Walter Verlag, 1971
Der Mensch und seine Symbole. By Carl Gustav Jung (Hg.) , Marie-Louise von Franz, Joseph L. Henderson, Aniela Jaffé, and Jolande Jacobi. Olten Walter Verlag AG,1968
Aniela Jaffe Die Einheitswirklichkeit und das Schöpferische Erich Neumann und C-G. Jung
Wes Nisker, 1990 Crazy Wisdom
Jolande Jacobi, Complex, Archetypes, Symbol in the Psychology of C.G. Jung, Bollingen Series Princton University Press, 1957
Wolf Ethology
Of Wolves and Men, Barry Lopez 1978 Paperback 2024
European wolf recolonization studies WWF Deutschland, Berlin
The International Wolf Center – science-based education
Farley Mowat Never Cry Wolf (1963) classic memoir of the Canadian naturalist
For visual de-demonization: Jim Brandenburg ‘White Wolf’, 1990 and ‘Bruder Wolf 1994
Mech, L. E. (1991). The way of the wolf. Stillwater: Voyageur Press.
Mythological/Comparative Sources
Prose Edda / Poetic Edda
Histora Mundi Band 2 Frühe Hochkulturen
Histora Mundi Band 4 Römische Weltgeschichte und Christentum
Roman foundation myth sources
Mythologyof the American Nations
Turkic Asena materials
The Druids
Die Kelten
Indo-European canine symbolism
Egyptian funerary religion (Wepwawet)
Medieval werewolf trials and folklore, “Mac Tíre” (Son of the Earth)
The Ossory Werewolves: The Helpful Shape-Shifters
References Symbols (philosophy, history )
Richard Wagner, Ring des Nibelungen und seine Symbole, Donnington (Transl)
Spaziergänge durch Nietzsches Sils-Maria, Raabe 1994
Nietzsche und Faschismus, Taureck Reclam, 2000
Nietzsche Philosophie als Kunst, Friedrich DTV, 1999
NietzscheSchriften
Die fröhliche Wissenschaft.
Also sprach Zarathustra (1883–1885)
Jenseits von Gut und Böse
Zur Genealogie der Moral
Der Antichrist
Acient Egypt, Silverman
Geschichte des Morgenlandes im Altertum, Berlin, Historischer Verlag Baumgärtel (ca. 1904)
Mythology Comte, 1988
Geschichte Ägyptens, Breasted 1954 (Translaion)
Neue Jerusalm Bibel, Herder 2011/The holy Bible. King James Translation. (1947). Cleveland: The World Publishing Company.BishopB
The Archetype of the Fool, the Clown, the Jester and the Trickster are universally recognized patterns of characters. Every of this four archetypes challenges conventional wisdom differently, offering different types of Crazy Wisdom. When I lived in California I listened often to the KFOG radio commentator Wes (“Scoop”) Nisker who happened to be also a comedian: “If you don’t like the news … go out and make some of your own”, was his frequent catchphrase. Very recently many European ( foolish) fools call an Italian comedian a clown. Because he did not like the news, and made them himself.
C.G. Jung stressed the point that archetypes are not inherited only collective patterns of potential representation. When they are touched by the light of the conscious mind they may become in the lower plane instincts and the higher realm images. That, while it is the core of the matter, can said simpler. First instincts transport in an instant information and trigger predefined reaction and save the soldier’s life. Second, symbols do the same as images – they convey a message and transport it instantly on many layers.
A picture is a fact. – Ludwig Wittgenstein
Lets face it, Archetypes are numerous and often ambiguous under the Jungian folk – worse the Fool, the Clown, the Jester and the Trickster are often interchanged in common language. So lets the sort them out.
Clown
BEPPE GRILLO, satirist, blogger and protester has staged one the greatest coups de theatre in Italian political history unison named as most dangerous Clown ever
The clown is the most lovable human and timeless. He tries hard and fails pathetically. Lets face it, he encourages us laugh at ourselves, because in a way we all are clowns. The clown does not need words, just by mime Charley Chaplin managed to get the awkwardness of modern times across. They even outsmart the philosopher Wittgenstein who wrote in Tractatus … Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent – Clown mainly are silent and are not. Like Max Frisch’s “Gantenbein” put on the blindman’s stick and glasses, the Clown puts his mask on to either laugh at the ridiculous masks of life, or to cut through the social shams and reveal our hypocrisy in an acceptable way. This makes clowns wise, because they can see through who we are and what people do. Their talent is to reveal such things to us. Take the mentioned Beppe Grillo, his storming finish in the Italian general election is not only turning Italy upside down, but threatens to do the same across the EU. The “Clowns” Five Star Movement, just a blogger’s favorite four years ago has now 150 members of parliament. Why? Because he showed the Italian emperors without clothes.
But the clown has another aspect as a man – usually the clown is male – of sorrows. He leads us to tears as often as he leads us to laughter and reveals our modern prehistoric tribal society. The clown mirrors the basic (and personal unconscious) functional complex Persona (literal mask) and shows us the wonderful and tragic human feelings under those masks we might wear and see in daily life. Stupidity, wisdom love, life, loss, success and failure, all have their deeply human side. The traditional circus is no longer in vogue. Once emblematic of optimism, fun and entertainment it now carries an air of shabbiness and decay. The 1960’s were probably the last heyday of fun and positivism. Since MacDonald’s Corporation launched its hamburger chain television commercials in 1963 with Ronald MacDonald, the world’s most recognizable clown, there has been a slow decline in the popularity of clowns. Thanks to the crisis and politicians the clown is back – if not even in charge.
C. G. Jung had a special Swiss sense of humor (on YouTube even in English) and impressive smile, but in his works one finds no clown. Apart from the essay on the “trickster”archetype, which is not a Clown at all and not particularly cheerful written. For the first and last time I give credit to Freud who took himself far too serious but handled the Clown in the still readable essays : his failures, his wit and sense of humour (“Die Antwort, warum wir über die Bewegungen der Clowns lachen, würde lauten, weil sie uns übermäßig und unzweckmäßig erscheinen”). Well, Freud’s cultural back ground provided not only many outstanding scientists, intellectuals but certainly the sharpest and legendary humor – Chuzpe. This one I took from Wikipedia. Two Rabbis argued late into the night about the existence of God, and, using strong arguments from the scriptures, ended up indisputably disproving His existence. The next day, one Rabbi was surprised to see the other walking into the Shul for morning services: “I thought we had agreed there was no God,” he said. “Yes, what does that have to do with it?” replied the other. That leads us to the cynical Jester.
Jester
We have all seen how an appropriate and well-timed joke can sometimes influence even grim tyrants. . . . The most violent tyrants put up with their clowns and fools, though these often made them the butt of open insults. —Desiderius Erasmus, Praise of Folly
Jesters use pen and words, and have the (social) context of a specific time. They operate with wit and criticize, even with cynicism, the weapon of the powerless. For instance, nowadays non-technical Consultants are Jesters. Like court jesters grew and flourished in the Middle Ages as well-paid attendants of Royal Courts. Power was highly consolidated in medieval times as it is today. The typical Jester is a Management Consultant. They, just temporarily, move up the social ladder with borrowed authority. They have come from a wide range of backgrounds — from monasteries to universities. The jester is the natural enemy of an overinflated ego (since a jester has one too), which drives on its own importance. They are born nay-sayers, even critical to what is holy to religions and business. Richard Quest in CNN is a funny Jester; one of the few journalist in the media crowd of mostly foolish fools. Having said that, be reminded, that a Jester will always act in public on behalf of the King he services )and pays for the show).
Resourceful jesters would gather an audience with clever attention-grabbing techniques before the invention of PowerPoint. Added to their wit, most had developed several additional performance skills — they played flutes, danced, juggled, told jokes, did acrobatics and pantomime, performed ropewalks and tongue twisters, sang and did vocal tricks. Since they have no stake in the power game, Jesters have told Kings and later Managers the truth. As kings and queens’ confidants, jesters often developed deep friendships with them. The royals often became tired of the false compliments and praise from their many lackeys and valued a connection with these offbeat performers, who, between witty wisecracks, would share very valuable insights. After all, many truths have been spoken in jest, and many lies have been spoken in earnest. It better be funny, though – otherwise the Jester loses his head. Perhaps more common was the jester’s role as healer. Medieval doctors believed that human health was controlled by four forces: Sanguine, Melancholia, Choleric and Phlegmatic, considered emotional states. Although these theories of human mind-body-spirit relationship fell into disrepute after the Renaissance, many have been reexamined in recent times by psychologist C.G. Jung . The idea that laughter aids recovery, long considered evident in Eastern philosophies, is steadily gaining traction in Western medicine so much so that it’s now considered mainstream. Few people would argue that a comedian can also help a group bond by sharing in deep laughter. Philosophers of the East and West were, dreamers, and unconventional wisdom seekers and Ego’s like Shaw, Wittgenstein, C.G. Jung and Nietzsche. The latter three deserve a few words more.
Many have interpreted that Nietzsche believed in a literal death or end of God. Instead, the line points to the western world’s reliance on religion as a moral compass and source of meaning. The true Jester explains in “The Gay Science – Die fröhliche Wissenschaft”:
“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? ”
Nietzsche’s works foresaw that the decline of religion, the rise of atheism, and the absence of a higher moral authority would plunge the world into chaos.
Another small tidbit: The philosopher Wittgenstein (a millionaire by inheritance) gave away all his money just like St. Francis from whom Pope Francis I took his name. The bulk of Wittgenstein’s work deals with logic and language. His view of religion and religious language was a by-product but had significant implications for the understanding of the God exists. In Tractatus he wrote:
“To understand a statement is to know what is the case if it is true.” But we do not know what is the case when someone says that “God sees.”
While theologians spent much time proving the existence of God, and while atheists have done their very best to show how incompatible religious claims are with the ´convential wisdom of common sense and science, both sides always took it for granted that basically religious statements are either true or false. Both Wittgenstein and C.G. Jung were religious, and both declared religious statements simply out of scope. Political theorists have long been frustrated with Jesters. Although they develops profound critiques of society, morality, culture, and religion, it is very difficult to (ab)use them for political implications of their insights. There is a reason for this: skepticism. Unsettling, that is what Jester do well.
The Fool
Jesus Agent of Change
The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions says that holy fools subvert prevailing orthodoxy and orthopraxis in order to point to the truth which lies beyond immediate conformity. Or as a monk said in his Sermon rethinking “metanoia” is the beginning of our journey with “authentic” faith in Jesus Christ, not as a U-Turn but as “think further”. In English the closest synonym is repentance, but it is not quite the same. The word repentance implies a “turning away from sin” or in German a form of turning around. This is an incorrect interpretation of biblical doctrine. One must first widen his thinking (metanoia) be critical of orthodoxy.
Let the fool lead the way. The wise and the sacred fool provide truth, balance, play, recreation, destruction, creation, change. Would Buddha live today his followers would be reprogrammed, Jesus would be in jail for subversion and the DEA wold breath down the neck of the Sufi poets. Lao-tse,well we all know the story of Gandhi a contemporary holy fool. I would even think the new pope comes across as a sacred fool in the media. They did not think, change comes from obeying rules. The sacred fool is the destroyer of our well-ordered world run by foolish fools. The wise fool is the creator of the new through play. It is by change that we are made new. We are all Phoenixes, capable of rising out of the ashes, if only the holy fool will bring us change.
The fool gets to tell the truth, the hard truths that might cause trouble if anyone else tells them. The fool can get (for while) away with telling the hardest truths just because he is a fool. He speaks in parables and paradoxes, we struggle to understand. He can speak harsh truths and we must listen because he is entertaining in his difference. We must listen because he is a misfit and cannot be held fully responsible . The fool plays and everybody believes that play is not serious so he can accomplish the difficult, controversial issues in play. In the middle ages there was an implicit understanding of this with the belief that joking could help shield one from misfortune and indeed we can understand the truth of this.
Jesus was a sacred fool. At the command of God he came to change the world. He sought to destroy the old structures and bring God’s kingdom, a change of great magnitude. His methods were subversive to the society where he lived. He was viewed as a dangerous fool but like all sacred fools, brought a message of change and hope crashing down empires. When Jesus was betrayed and arrested he said:
Luke 22-52: “Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? 53 Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour—when darkness reigns”.
Crazy visionaries as Jesus, the Sufi Poet Rumi, Buddha, Lao-Tse, Mahatma Gandhi travelled on a comedic course to enlightenment, representing the collective “Self” – that is the divine.
God has no religion ― Gandhi.
Tao called Tao is not Tao ― Lao-Tse.
“My soul is from elsewhere, I’m sure of that, and I intend to end up there.” ― Rumi.
Trickster
Coyote runs over the ground, warm in his thick fur, while Eagle soars over the wind, and Eagle does the wise thing and does not offer Coyote power anymore, and Coyote is crazy and cheers Eagle up with his tricks.
The Trickster, often represented as a coyote is no fool. It seems they come from a time, in which there was no good and evil. There is a duality here that often gets expressed in the trickster god being viewed both as hero and villain. Jung has assigned his collective shadows under the name ” Trickster”. According to Jung, the Trickster is a figure whose physical appetites and senses dominate his actions and decisions. His thinking does not rise above his belly or his genitals. Frequently the Trickster figure exhibits gender variability, changing gender roles and engaging in frequent sex practices. Not understanding finer feelings, his responses to other people seem crude, self-centered, cynical and unfeeling. In some of the stories however, the his exploits bring transformation and he becomes a man instead of an animal. In the Navajo worldview, coyote sickness arises out of activities that distort social relationships like the breaking of a taboo or self-indulgence. It comes from contact with a storm, lightning, a corpse, or a substance outside the natural order of harmony and beauty. Or it comes from losing sight of the Holy Way, contact with ghosts, sorcery, or the intrusion of an evil force.
The Trickster as collective Shadow mirrors the basic ( personal unconscious) archetypes of the shadow experienced in individuation. That denotes the process by which a person becomes a psychological unity connecting two fundamental psychic aspects, the conscious and the unconscious. The Shadow is the easiest of the archetypes for most persons to experience. We tend to see it in “others.” That is to say, we project our dark side onto others and thus interpret them as “enemies” or as “exotic” presences that fascinate. We see the Shadow everywhere in popular culture. We see it in popular prejudice as well. Of course, Satan is the great Shadow image of popular religion. The Shadow is the personification of that part of human, psychic possibility that we deny in ourselves and project onto others. The goal of personality integration is to integrate the rejected, inferior side of our life into our total experience and to take responsibility for it.
Trickster delights in all sorts of pranks mischief and jokes but is not by nature evil, even though the results of his activities are often unpleasant. These activities centre on bringing attention to our own or other people’s often hidden stupidity shams or lies. The Trickster is a shape shifter and so has the possibility of transformation an alchemist and shaman. In mythology, and in the study of folklore and religion, a trickster is a spirit, man, woman, or anthropomorphic animal. In many cultures, (as may be seen in Greek or Norse with Odin or Wotan), the trickster and the culture hero are often combined. Odin’s Germanic predecessor, Wotan, was associated with Mercury (Hermes) by the Romans. Odin and Mercury often deceive and trick. In Native American mythologies, the coyote (Southwestern United States) or raven (Pacific Northwest and coastal British Columbia) stole like the Greek Prometheus fire from the gods. The trickster is thus an important archetype in the history of man. He is a god, yet he is not. He points out the flaws in carefully constructed societies of man and rebels against authority. Sometimes he pays dearly. Jung said once, ” unfortunately that the so-called civilization has forgotten the trickster”.
Throughout human history the mythological trickster, has played an essential role, the role of change of a therapeutic effect. In many myths the trickster brings a treasure to man, but is it really a treasure? All change has mixed blessings. When the Raven trickster of the Northwest Indians brings fire to the people is he a destroyer or creator? Looking back we say he brought a valuable change. But fire is also dangerous, a change that can and does destroy.
Satan thought as trickster may serve a crucial role. What if instead our understanding of Satan was influenced by the concept of the “trickster” figure, which seems to be present in the Hebrew Bible? Learning to interpret Satan as the ultimate trickster, rather than the embodiment of dualistic Evil, could end blaming the present reality on the metaphysical reality of evil or on the moral depravity of humanity.
For example, Satan in the book of Job leads Job to insights. The Satan who confronted Jesus in the desert in a way helped Jesus, in all his humanity, to assert also his own divinity. Jahweh did listen to Satan, as God did in the case of Job. Viewing Satan as trickster is not without problems, specifically the ambiguity that exists between Satan and God—an ambiguity that can find its full expression in the trickster figure. Rather than being God’s antithesis, God’s opposite, a certain ambiguity, if not complimentary position, is held by Satan. If Satan has no power except that given by God, we are left wondering whether evil can come from God, a proposition that the early biblical writers and ancient Church Fathers like Augustine raised.
Conclusion
According to the psychological model of C. G. Jung the archetypes originate in the collective unconscious, described as a repository for all of mankind’s experience and knowledge and are therefore not available directly — only its images and created patterns can become manifest as symbols potentially unlimited in number and variety. Symbols of God are the core of our culture being the universal patterns of myth, religious symbols and ideas. They can be employed very beneficial in life. I am neither especially crazy, or especially wise. Sometimes my job was to communicate complex issues to those who shuns, even hate it. Ideally I could get the Crazy Wisdom across with the headline, with a simple picture. I was the Jester on the court. Senior Managers were the Kings. The picture is easy understandable, isn’t it? Why? Because I don’t need to explain what a good King or weak King is or enumerate his virtues or deficits. We know it since thousands of years, Plato has written a long book about virtues of leaders.
Clown and Jester are paid to entertain or present. Fools and Tricksters unsettle. Foolish fools claim they lead with conventual wisdom.
“silence is the language of god, all else is poor translation.” ― Rumi
Sources
Wes Nisker, 1990 Crazy Wisdom
C.G. Jung Four Archetypes (Routledge Classics)
C. G. Jung Archetypen (dtv, Bd. 11)
Jung, C. G. (Hg.) (1968). Der Mensch und seine Symbole. Olten: Walter
Jung, C. G., Jacobi, J. (1971 ): Mensch und Seele. Zitate von C. G. Jung aus dem Gesamtwerk 1905 bis 1961. Olten: Walter
Tractatus logico-philosophicus: Logisch-philosophische Abhandlung (edition suhrkamp) von Ludwig Wittgenstein von Suhrkamp Verlag (1963)
Wittgenstein: Eine Einführung von Joachim Schulte von Reclam, Philipp, jun. GmbH, Verlag (1989)
Vorlesungen und Gespräche über Ästhetik, Psychoanalyse und religiösen Glauben von Ludwig Wittgenstein von Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag (27. Juli 2005)
C. G. Jung Das Rote Buch, Patmos-Verlag Olten, 2010
C.G. Jung Speaking: Interviews and Encounters (Bollingen Series), 1993
The Essential Rumi – Edition von Coleman Barks, Jalal al-Din Rumi und John Moyne von HarperCollins e-books
Freud: Der Witz und seine Beziehung zum Unbewußten
This article explores Wittgenstein’s Tractatus as a mystical, metaphysical insight in the light of Eastern philosophy, Catholic mysticism and C. G Jung. Please be gentle and read this as an (intuitive) essay not as a scholarly article. There are methodological implications of Wittgenstein’s doctrine of silence for transcendental philosophy, Zen Buddhism, psychoanalysis and metaphysics. Or there is a line from Lao-Tse to Wittgenstein, connected by Jung and Watts.
Wittgenstein’s Tractatus-Logico-Philosophicus,(Logisch-Philosophische-Abhandlung,1921 translated by C.K. Ogden 1922) is much closer to me than his work Philosophical Investigations (Philosophische Untersuchungen,1953 translated by G.E.M. Anscombe). Simply because I understand the Tractatus largely transcendental (similar to Allan Watts). A fellow blog author (Recollecting Philosophy), who knows definitely more about philosophy and Wittgenstein than I do, objected slightly to Allan Watts rating the Tractatus higher than the Investigations,however.
In the eighties and early nineties during my time in California I picked up Allan Watts thoughts. Allan Watts knew C.G. Jung well and both were quite knowledgeable in Eastern Philosophy. Watts proposed that Buddhism could be thought of as a form of psychotherapy and not just a religion. Like Jung he was (to me) a bridge between the ancient and the modern, between East and West, and between culture and science. Both had considerable problems with the institution of the church, were mystics and in a way certainly religious. Both emphasized that we Westerners cannot and should not escape our Western cultural roots but value them. Both valued Catholicism although Watts view is more bizarre. It’s not difficult to see therefore, that Allan Watts, who became a kind of Guru in California and postmodern mystic, reads Tractatus as a product of mystic consciousness.
Wittgenstein’s Tractatus
Before I had read more of Wittgenstein and secondary literature, I regarded Wittgenstein’s writings as a kind of academic “Glass Bead Game”. I still think, that what he tried to achieve, could have done simpler by mathematical language (or computer science). Therefore I can relate to Allan Watt, classifying the writings of Wittgenstein “as a form of jnana-yoga, intellectual bending” and that he favors Wittgenstein’s Tractatus.
Logic without Mystic
The Tractatus is notorious for its interpretative challenges. In Europe we live in a post-metaphysic world. If you approach Tractatus, however, from C.G. Jung’s Symbols as representation of archetypes, which manifest themselves in language (as part of the cultural context which are those archetypes) you see it crystal clear.
The Tractatus’s structure contains seven basic propositions translated by Ogden and Pears/McGuinness. Here I stick with German:
The seven basic propositions are (in German):
1 Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
2 Was der Fall ist, die Tatsache, ist das Bestehen von Sachverhalten.
3 Das logische Bild der Tatsachen ist der Gedanke.
4 Der Gedanke ist der sinnvolle Satz.
5 Der Satz ist eine Wahrheitsfunktion der Elementarsätze. (Der Elementarsatz ist eine Wahrheitsfunktion seiner selbst.)
6 Die allgemeine Form der Wahrheitsfunktion ist: [ p, ξ, N(ξ)].Dies ist die allgemeine Form des Satzes.
7 Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen.
After three propositions Wittgenstein leaves metaphysics realm but comes back to it with the most elegant proposition seven, which again mirrors a sentence in the bible. For that reason only 1-3 and 7 will be discussed.
Proposition (1) The world is everything that is the case.
Starting with a metaphysics, Wittgenstein sees the world as consisting of facts, rather than of objects and reads to me like the beginning of the Gospel of John:
Tractatus 1 The world is everything that is the case.
Tractatus 1.1 The world is the totality of facts, not of things.
Tractatus 1.11 The world is determined by the facts, and by these being all the facts.
Jh 1.1 In the beginning was the Logos, the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jh 1.2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Jh 1.3. All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made.
Equally beautiful and pretty much the same statement except god is absent. Logos, originally a word meaning “word,” “speech,” or “reason was used by Heraclitus to describe the principle of order and knowledge. There are some remarkable implications here starting of a debate between Plato and Aristotle which I want to move in an area between Wittgenstein and Western (Catholicism) and Eastern Mystic (Taoism and Zen Buddhism) and the psychoanalytic model of C.G Jung.
The idea of Tao is always stated negatively. The same is true of all its major characteristics, of which I would distinguish three: nothingness, the formless, and the unconditioned. Again Lao-tse as starting point of our inquiry is strikingly similar:
The Tao (Way) that can be told of is not the eternal Tao;
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The Nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth;
The Named is the mother of all things.
Wittgenstein’s Tractatus – Seen from Eastern metaphysic
I understand Wittgenstein, who was from the personality type based on C.G. Jung (and like him) an innovative thinker from the mystic as well as a logic angle. As anybody knows, Wittgenstein was fond of Augustine and Kierkegaard, of Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky and wanted to become a monk on more than one occasion. Wittgenstein’s Tractatus support my religious views, which are based on Catholicism, C.G. Jung and some pantheistic Asian influence coming from Taoism and Buddhism. There is alignment between Buddhism and psychoanalysis, as Watts stated, although I see goal of alignment more in an integration of the Ego and the main archetypes than a dilution of the Ego. However, Watts followed Zen Buddhism or Zen, a 5th century line of Mahayana Buddhism, which was heavily influenced by Chinese Taoism in China. And Taoism is indeed much more compatible with Wittgenstein, Jung and Catholicism.
Crist and Buddha
Since I know Taoism and Zen Buddhism better I will focus on those. Both offer direct access to most deepest essence of our mind, exactly like Jung’s individuation.
There is good book about that particular topic from Russell Nieli, “From mysticism to ordinary language”, 1987. He claims, that Wittgenstein’s experience of language (and indeed the language game) was deeply influenced by his experience as rural school teacher, but got stuck there, staying in the uncritical childhood experience (page 244). Wittgenstein’s language analysis offers no differentiation of what is of value or absurd in a given society. Obviously he received a harsh criticism not only from the Marxist side: “When … Wittgenstein set up the actual use of language as a standard that was equivalent to accept a certain setup and belief of the society of the standard. And when he says philosophy “may not interfere”, that come to saying that it may not interfere with a currently accepted society and culture”. I think this may by a misunderstanding taking him as a positivist.
Proposition (2) What is the case (a fact) is the existence of states of affairs.
Mystics, such as Taoists or catholic mysticism, can be aligned to the West and especially Wittgenstein. Systematic inquiry through a logical analysis make its mystical elements clear and comprehensible to non intuitive audiences. But as C.G. Jung noted, its intuitive sensing is highly beneficial to the individuation in our Western culture. When for Wittgenstein, the logical structure of the picture is identical to the logical structure of the situation, in Taoism it is simpler: the inexpressible Tao is in everything, or alternatively, everything is a manifestation of the inexpressible Tao. That is pretty similar what catholic monk told me a few weeks ago: God is in us and above us or God does not exists. When one sees both statements to express the same thought, one can see Wittgenstein’s transcendental elements can be coupled with Eastern and Western religious and mystical elements.
Dreams
Wittgenstein’s Tractatus – Western metaphysic view
Plato put forth the idea that the metaphysical world is more knowable than the physical world. Following Socrates, Plato illustrates this idea through allegory of the cave. The idea is that this physical world we reside in is merely a shadow of a more real and more knowable world that is not physical but metaphysical. From here Plato posits the idea of the Forms. Plato would tell us that we know that it is a thing because there exists in our minds an abstract thing and the reason we know that the thing before us is this thing, is because of its resemblance to the archetype.
Archetypes
That archetype equals the collective known form and is a centerpiece in C.G.Jung psychoanalytic model. In short, we have knowledge of physical things here and now because of the resemblance of these physical things to their ideal metaphysical form. In contrast, Aristotle denies that the Forms exist way out there in the metaphysical realm. So, the lines are defined : Is knowledge of a thing transcendent (Plato) or is it immanent (Aristotle)? Is the nature of all things Being (Plato) or Becoming (Aristotle) or in Kant seeking a synthesise? In his Critique of Judgment, Kant says that “a final purpose is a purpose that requires no other purpose as a condition of its possibility:
The final purpose is unconditioned, and that nature would therefore be incapable of achieving it and producing it in accordance with the idea of this purpose. … But a thing that, on account of its objective character, is to exist necessarily as the final purpose of an intelligent cause must be of such a kind that in the order of purposes it depends on no condition other than just the idea of it.
Proposition (3) A logical picture of facts is a thought – Archetypes in Wittgenstein’s Tractatus
Tractatus, however, also with the conditions with Symbolism in which a sentence “means” something quite definite. In practice, language is always more or less vague, so that what we assert is never quite precise. And that’s the beauty of it – of Jung, Taoism and Christianity. Wittgenstein’s logic tries to overcome: (1) the conditions for non/sense combinations of symbols; (2) the conditions for uniqueness.
Tractatus: 3.32 The sign is the part of the symbol perceptible by the senses.
From Carl Jung’s “The Structure of the Psyche”, 1927:
The collective unconscious — so far as we can say anything about it at all — appears to consist of mythological motifs or primordial images, for which reason the myths of all nations are its real exponents. In fact, the whole of mythology could be taken as a sort of projection of the collective unconscious.
We can see this most clearly if we look at the heavenly constellations, which original chaotic forms were organized through the projection of images. This explains the influence of the stars as asserted by astrologers. These influences are nothing but unconscious, introspective perceptions of the activity of the collective unconscious. Just as the constellations were projected into the heavens, similar figures were projected into legends and fairy tales or upon historical persons.
So according to Jung, those archetypes, which Wittgenstein calls symbols, are models (abstract classes in computer science) which are innate, universal and hereditary. And that’s the point. Archetypes are unlearned (but some shared by some cultures and some by all cultures) and function to organize how we experience certain things. “All the most powerful ideas in history go back to archetypes,” Jung wrote:
“This is particularly true of religious ideas, but the central concepts of science, philosophy, and ethics are no exception to this rule. In their present form they are variants of archetypal ideas created by consciously applying and adapting these ideas to reality. For it is the function of consciousness, not only to recognize and assimilate the external world through the gateway of the senses, but to translate into visible reality the world within us.”
Conclusion
Wittgenstein’s deep understanding of the mystical dimension brings him close to Taoist and Jungian thoughts. Wittgenstein is almost a Taoist and certainly a sophisticated logician. And, both these qualities are spontaneously exhibited in Wittgenstein. No other Western philosopher is better than Wittgenstein for the representation of the synthesis of mystics and metaphysics with sophisticated logical analysis. As Wittgenstein said once, a deep thinker makes us see that there is something that cannot be said. In his transcendental philosophy, Wittgenstein shows that there is something that cannot be said. In contrast, Lao-tse says that there is something that cannot be named – this is the single difference to monotheistic views,
Proposition (7) Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent
There are methodological implications of Wittgenstein’s doctrine of silence for transcendental philosophy and metaphysics. There are two senses of “sense” which Wittgenstein uses in the Tractatus, the actual sense. and the logical sense. Wittgenstein explains that “every proposition is essentially true-false. Wittgenstein calls this “true-false” possibility bi-polarity an important concept, important to C.G. Jung, Taoism and C.G. Jung.
Philosophers should keep silent about the not speakable because “philosophy is not one of the natural sciences. The doctrine of silence is applicable to mysticism, however. Mysticism may be seen as equivalent to metaphysics, or as not too far away from metaphysics. Now we can see why the doctrine of silence is applicable to mysticism as well. Wittgenstein explains that
the urge towards the mystical comes of the non-satisfaction of our wishes by science. We feel that even if all possible scientific questions are answered our problem is still not touched at all. Of course in that case there are no questions any more; and that is the answer.
Transcendental mysticism seen in this light is the attempt to tell the same story: the inexpressible Tao and nonsense are the same story, a story that, technically and literally speaking, cannot be told. That story begins with the Lao-tzu’s inexpressibility covers Jung’s collective – not to be learned archetypes – and ends with the Tractatus’s silence.