Collected Works of C.G. Jung. Volume 13 Collected Works of C. G. Jung, Volume 13: Alchemical Studies [Course Book ed.] 9781400850990

Table of contents :
EDITORIAL NOTE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
I COMMENTARY ON “TH E SECRET OF THE GOLDEN FLOWER”
II. THE VISIONS OF ZOSIMOS
III. PARACELSUS AS A SPIRITUAL PHENOMENON
IV. THE SPIRIT MERCURIUS
V. THE PHILOSOPHICAL TREE
I. INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF THE TREE SYMBOL
II. ON THE HISTORY AND INTERPRETATION OF THE TREE SYMBOL
BIBLIOGRAPHY
INDEX

Citation preview

BOLLINGEN

SERIES

XX

T H E COLLECTED WORKS OF C .

G .

J

U

N

G

VOLUME13

E D I T O R S

' SIR HERBERT READ MICHAEL FORDHAM, M.D., M.R.C.P. GERHARD ADLER, PH.D. WILLIAM MCGUIRE,

executive

editor

PYTHON...:... ..

The spiritus mercurialiS and his transformations represented as a monstrous dragon. It is a quaternity, in which the fourth is at the same time the unity of the three, the unity being symbolized by the mystagogue Hermes. The three (above) are (left to right): Luna, Sol, and coniunctio Solis et Lunae in Taurus, the House of Venus. Together they form ~ = Mercurius. Illuminated drawing in a German alchemical ms., c. 1600

ALCHEMICAL STUDIES C. G. JUNG

T R A N SLA TE D BY R. F. C. H U L L 54 IL L U S T R A T IO N S

B O L L I N G E N

PRINCETON

S E R I E S

X X

U N I V E R S I T Y PRESS

C O P Y R IG H T ( g ) 1 9 6 7 B Y B O L L 1 N C E N F O U N D A T IO N , N E W Y O R K , N .Y . P U B L IS H E D BY P R IN C E T O N U N IV E R S IT Y P R E S S, P R IN C E T O N , N . J . A L L R IG H T S RESERVED

Second printing, 1970 Third printing, 1976 First Princeton / Bollingen Paperback printing, 1983

T H IS

E D IT IO N

IS B E IN G P U B L IS H E D

IN T H E

U N IT E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A B Y P R IN C E T O N U N IV E R S IT Y

PRESS

AND

IN

ENGLAND

ROUTLEDGE

& KEGAN

PAUL,

A M E R IC A N

E D IT IO N ,

ALL

C O M P R IS IN G

THE

LTD.

THE

COLLECTED

BY

IN

THE

VOLUM ES

WORKS

CON­

S T IT U T E N U M B E R X X IN B O L L IN G E N SER IE S. THE

PRESENT

VOLUM E

IS N U M B E R

13

OF

T H E COLLECTED W ORKS AND WAS T H E F IF ­ TEEN TH TO APPEAR.

L IB R A R Y

OF

CO N G RESS

CATALOGUE

IS B N

CARD N U M B E R :

0 -6 9 1 -0 9 7 6 0 -7

IS B N 0 -6 9 1 -0 1 8 4 9 -9 p b k . M A NUFACTURED

IN

THE

U .S .A .

7 5 -1 5 6

ED ITORIAL

NOTE

W h en we com pare the essays in the present volum e w ith J u n g ’s m onum ental M ysterium C oniunctianis, w ith Psychology and A lchem y and to a lesser ex ten t A i o n , we realize th e ir special value as an in tro d u ctio n to his researches in to alchemy. T h e three longer works, published earlier in this edition, have an im ­ pact w hich to the u n in itia te d is w ell-nigh overw helm ing. A fter them these shorter an d m ore m anageable works w ill b e tu rn e d to, if n o t for relax atio n — th eir e ru d itio n forbids th at— at least w ith a feeling of lively interest, as p relim in ary studies for the w eightier volumes which they now appear to sum m arize. M uch of the symbolic m a tte r has been referred to in o th er earlier p u b li­ cations: the visions of Zosimos in “T ran sfo rm atio n Symbolism in the Mass,” and M ercurius in all the above-m entioned works b u t m ore especially in “T h e Psychology of the T ran sferen ce,” w hile “T h e Philosophical T r e e ” develops the them e of the tree symbol discussed sporadically in Symbols of Transformation. T h e “C om m entary on T h e Secret of the Golden Flower” is of considerable historical interest. J u n g says in Memories, Dreams, Reflections (ch. 7): “L ight on the n a tu re of alchem y began to come to m e only after I had read the tex t of the Golden Flower, th at specim en of Chinese alchem y w hich R ich ard W il­ helm sent me in 1928, I was stirred by the desire to becom e m ore closely acquainted w ith the alchem ical texts.” “Paracelsus as a Spiritual P henom enon” stands o u t as a separate study w ith a pow erful appeal, perhaps because Ju n g could identify him self ra th e r closely an d sym pathetically w ith th a t dynam ic and explo­ sive personage, his own countrym an. Because of its em phasis on alchem ical sources, it is included in the present volum e ra th e r th an in V olum e 15 w ith two shorter essays on Paracelsus as a personality an d physician.

T h e Editors and the translator are greatly in d eb ted to the late M r. A. S. B. G lover for the translation of the L atin , G reek, and French passages in the text, as well as for his tireless w ork in checking the references and bibliographical data, w hich c o n tin ­ ued u n til shortly before his death in Jan u a ry 1966. F or assistance in explicating N oel P ie rre ’s poem , grateful acknow ledgm ent is m ade to Com te P ierre C rapon de C aprona (Noel Pierre), to Miss P aula Deitz, and to M r. Jackson M athews. F or help and co-operation in obtain in g the photographs for th e plates in this volum e the Editors are m uch in d eb ted to the late Mrs. M arianne N iehus-Jung, w ho m ade m aterials available from Professor J u n g ’s collection; to D r. Jo lan d e Jacobi and D r. R u d o lf M ichel, in charge of the p ictu re collection at the C. G. Ju n g In stitu te, Zurich; an d to M r. H e llm u t W ieser, of R ascher Verlag, Zurich. T h e frontispiece, an alm ost exact col­ oured replica of a w oodcut publish ed by the a u th o r in Paracelsica, was discovered fortuitously in a m an u scrip t in the M ellon C ollection of the A lchem ical an d O ccult. It is re p ro ­ duced by courtesy of M r. P aul M ellon and the Yale U niversity L ibrary. T h e Editors are indebted also to M r. L aurence W itten for his advice an d assistance in regard to it.

TABLE

E D IT O R IA L L IS T

OF

OF

CONTENTS

NOTE

V

IL L U S T R A T IO N S

X lii

I Commentary on “T h e Secret of the Golden Flower”

i

T ra n sla te d from the “E uropaischer K o m m en ta r” to Das G eheim nis der goldenen Bliiie: E in chinesisches L e b e n sb u ch j 5th edn. (Zurich: R ascher, 1957). F orew ord to the Second G erm an E d itio n

3

1. Difficulties E n c o u n tere d by a E u ro p e a n in T ry in g to U n d e rsta n d the East

6

2. M odern Psychology Offers a Possibility of U n d e rsta n d ­ ing

11

3. T h e F u n d a m e n ta l C oncepts

20

A. TAO B. T H E

20 C IR C U L A R

M OVEM ENT

AND

TH ECENTRE

4. P henom ena of th e W ay A. THE

D IS I N T E G R A T I O N

B . A N IM U S

AND

2 1

29 O F C O N S C IO U S N E S S

A N IM A

29

38

5. T h e D etach m en t of Consciousness from the O b ject

44

6. T h e F ulfilm ent

49

7. C onclusion

55

E xam ples of E u ro p e an M andalas v ii

56

CONTENTS

II T h e Visions of Zosimos

57

Translated from "Die Visionen des Zosimos," Von den Wurzeln Bewusstseins (Zurich: Rascher, 1954).

des

I. T h e Texts

59

II. Commentary

66

1. GENERAL REMARKS ON THE INTERPRETATION 2 . THE SACRIFICIAL

66

ACT

3 . T H E PERSONIFICATIONS

GO

4 . THE STONE SYMBOLISM

94

5 . T H E WATER SYMBOLISM

101

6 . T H E ORIGIN OF THE VISION

1O5

III Paracelsus as a Spiritual Phenomenon

109

Translated from "Paracelsus als geistige Erscheinung," Paracelsica: Zwei Vorlesungen iiber den Arzt und Philosophen Theophrastus (Zurich: Rascher, 1942). Foreword to Paracelsica

110

1. T h e T w o Sources of Knowledge: T h e Light of Nature and the Light of Revelation A. MAGIC

111 116

B. A L C H E M Y

122

C. T H E ARCANE TEACHING

124

D. THE PRIMORDIAL M A N

12G

2. "De vita longa": An Exposition of the Secret Doctrine A. T H E ILIASTER

133 134

B. THE AQUASTER C. ARES

140

D. MELUSINA

142

E. T H E

FILIUS

REGIUS

AS

( M I C H A E L MAIER)

THE

ARCANE

SUBSTANCE 145

viii

CONTENTS F . T H E P R O D U C T I O N O F T H E O N E , OR C E N T R E , B Y DISTILLATION G. T H E

148

CONIUNCTIO

IN T H E

SPRING

152

3. T h e Natural Transformation Mystery A. THE

LIGHT

OF THE

B. T H E

UNION

OF MAN'S TWO NATURES

C. T H E

QUATERNITY

157

DARKNESS

OF T H E H O M O

D. T H E R A P P R O C H E M E N T

WITH THE

l6o 163

MAXIMUS

167

UNCONSCIOUS

170

4. T h e Commentary of Gerard Dorn A. MELUSINA

A N D T H E PROCESS

B. T H E H I E R O S G A M O S

OF

173 INDIVIDUATION

O F T H E EVERLASTING

MAN

C. S P I R I T A N D N A T U R E D. T H E

ECCLESIASTICAL

176 180 183

SACRAMENT

AND

ALCHYMICUM

THE

OPUS 185

5. Epilogue

189

IV 191

T h e Spirit Mercurius Translated from "Der Geist Mercurius," Symbolik rich: Rascher, 1948).

des Geistes (Zu-

Part I 1. T h e Spirit in the Bottle

193

2. T h e Connection between Spirit and Tree

199

3. T h e Problem of Freeing Mercurius

202

Part

II

1. Introductory

204

2. Mercurius as Quicksilver and/or Water

207

3. Mercurius as Fire

209

ix

CONTENTS

4. Mercurius as Spirit and Soul A. MERCURIUS AS AN AERIAL SPIRIT B. MERCURIUS AS SOUL

211 212 2I3

C. MERCURIUS AS SPIRIT IN THE INCORPOREAL, METAPHYSICAL SENSE

215

5. T h e Dual Nature of Mercurius

217

6. T h e Unity and Trinity of Mercurius

221

7. T h e Relation of Mercurius to Astrology and the Doctrine of the Archons

225

8. Mercurius and Hermes

230

9. Mercurius as the Arcane Substance

235

10. Summary

237

V T h e Philosophical Tree

251

Translated from "Der philosophische Baum," Von den Wurzeln Bewusstseins (Zurich: Rascher, 1954).

des

I. Individual Representations of the Tree Symbol 11. On the History and Interpretation of the Tree Symbol 1 . THE TREE AS AN ARCHETYPAL IMAGE

253 272 272

2 . THE TREE IN THE TREATISE OF JODOCUS GREVERUS

274

3 . THE TETRASOMIA

278

4 . THE IMAGE OF WHOLENESS

283

5 . T H E NATURE AND ORIGIN OF T H E PHILOSOPHICAL TREE

286

6 . DORN'S INTERPRETATION OF THE TREE

289

7 . THE ROSE-COLOURED BLOOD AND THE ROSE

292

8 . THE ALCHEMICAL M I N D

297

9 . VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE TREE

302

1 0 . THE H A B I T A T OF T H E TREE

308

1 1 . THE INVERTED TREE

311

1 2 . BIRD AND SNAKE

315 X

CONTENTS 13. THE F E M I N I N E TREE-NUMEN 1 4 . THE TREE AS THE LAPIS

317 319

1 5 . THE DANGERS OF THE ART

322

1 6 . UNDERSTANDING AS A MEANS OF DEFENCE

327

1 7 . THE MOTIF OF TORTURE

328

1 8 . THE RELATION OF SUFFERING TO THE CONIUNCTIO

334

1 9 . THE TREE AS M A N

337

20.

THE INTERPRETATION AND INTEGRATION OF THE UNCONSCIOUS

341

BIBLIOGRAPHY

351

INDEX

381

xi

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

For “C om m entary on T h e Secret of th e G o ld e n F lo w e r ” Four stages o f m ed itation

3 0 -3 3

D raw ings from th e H u i M in g C hing, as re p ro d u ce d in the o rig in al Swiss ed itio n of Das G eheim nis der g o ld en e n B liite ( ! 9 2 9 )At-a

10. E xam ples of E uropean mandalas

D raw ings o r p a in tin g s by p a tie n ts in analysis. A u th o r’s collec­ tio n , except A4: C. G. J u n g In stitu te . all fo llo w in g page g g

For “Paracelsus as a Spiritual P h en o m en o n ” T h e s p iritu s m ercurialis represented as a m onstrous dragon frontispiece Illu m in a te d d raw in g fro m a G erm an alchem ical ms., c. 1600, in the collection o f P a u l M ellon (now In th e Yale U niversity L i­ brary). I t replaces an alm ost id en tical w oodcut from N azari, D ella tra m u ta tio n e m etallica sogni tre (Brescia, 1599), re p ro ­ d u ced in Paracelsica. p : Yale U niv. L ib rary . Bi.

A fish m eal, w ith statue of the herm aphrodite M in ia tu re from “L e livre des ansienes estoires,” in B ritish M useum MS. A dd. 1 5 2 6 8 (13th cent.), fol. 2 4 2 v. p : B ritish M u­ seum.

B2 -

T h e filius or rex in the form of a herm aphrodite W o o d cu t from R o sa riu m p h ilo so p h o ru m (second p a rt of D e alchim ia, 1550), fol. X , iiiv (copy in a u th o r’s collection).

B3. T h e R eb is P a in tin g from “Das B uch d e r hi. D re ifa ltig k eit . . . u n d Besch reib u n g d e r H eim lic h k e it v o n V e ra n d eru n g d er M etalle n ”

x iii

(1420), in th e C odex G erm anicus 5g8, S taatsbibliothek, M u ­ nich. p: S taatsb ib lio th ek .

B4. M elusina as the aqua perm anens W oodcut in R e u sn e r1 P andora (1588), p. 24g (copy in a u th o r’s collection).

B5. T h e anima as M elusina D raw ing from a v a ria n t of th e R ip ley Scrowle (1588), B ritish M useum MS. Sloane 5025. f : B ritish M useum . b6.

T h e K ing’s Son and Hermes on a m ountain E n g rav in g from L am b sp rin g k 1 “De Iapide philosophico," fig. X II, in M u sa eu m h erm eticu m (1678), p. 365. p : C. G . J u n g In ­ stitu te.

B7. T h e Pelican, in which the distillation takes place Page from R h e n a n u s, Solis e p u te o (1613), as re p ro d u c e d in Paracelsica. all fo llo w in g page 1 ^ 2

For “T h e Philosophical T r e e ” Figs. 1-32. Drawings, paintings, etc., by patients in analysis A u th o r’s collection, except Fig. g: from G e rh a rd A dler, Studies in A n a ly tic a l Psychology, pi. 12, re p ro d u c e d by courtesy o f D r. A d ler; Figs. 22, 25, 27, 30, a n d 31 (a design in em broidery): C. G. J u n g In stitu te . all fo llo w in g page

X lV

2

I COMMENTARY ON “T H E SECRET OF T H E GOLDEN FLOWER”

[In late 1929, in M u n ich , J u n g a n d the sinologist R ic h a rd W ilh elm p u b ­ lished Das G eheim nis der gold enen Bliite: E in chinesisches L e b e n sb u c h i con­ sisting o f W ilh e lm ’s tra n sla tio n o f an a n c ie n t Chinese text, T 'a i I Chin H u a T s u n g Chih (Secret of th e G olden Flower), w ith his notes a n d discussion of the text, a n d a “E u ro p e a n com m en tary ” by Ju n g . E arlier the same year, the two a u th o rs h a d p u b lish e d in th e Europdische R e v u e (B erlin), V: 2 /8 (Nov.), 530—42, a m uch ab b rev iated version e n title d “T sch an g Scheng Schu; D ie K u n st das m enschliche L eb en zu v e rla n g e rn ” (i.e., “C h ’ang Sheng Shu; T h e A rt of P ro lo n g in g L ife”), a n alte rn a tiv e title of th e "G o ld en Flow er.” [In 1931, J u n g ’s an d W ilh e lm ’s jo in t w ork a p p e are d in E nglish as T h e Se­ cret of the G olden Flower: A Chinese B o o k of L ife , tran sla ted by C ary F. Baynes (L o n d o n an d New York), c o n ta in in g as an a p p e n d ix J u n g ’s m em o­ ria l address fo r W ilhelm , w ho h a d d ied in 1930. (For " In M em ory of R ic h ­ a rd W ilh elm ,” see Vol. 15 of th e Collected Works.) [A second, revised ed itio n of th e G erm an o rig in al was p u b lish ed in 1938 (Zurich), w ith a special forew ord by J u n g a n d his W ilh e lm m em orial a d ­ dress. T w o m ore (essentially u n a lte re d ) editio ns follow ed, a n d in 1957 a p ­ p ea re d a fifth, entirely reset e d itio n (Zurich), w hich a d d ed a rela ted text, the H u i M i n g Ching, a n d a new forew ord by Salome W ilhelm , the tra n sla to r’s widow. [Mrs. Baynes p re p a re d a revision of h e r tra n slatio n , a n d this a p p e a re d in 1962 (N ew York a n d L on d o n ), in c lu d in g J u n g ’s forew ord a n d the ad d itio n a l W ilh elm m aterial. (H er revised tra n sla tio n of J u n g ’s com m entary alone h a d ap p e a re d in a n anthology, Psyche a n d Sym bol, ed ited by V iolet S. de Laszlo, A n ch o r Books, N ew York, 1958.) [T h e follow ing tra n sla tio n of J u n g ’s com m entary a n d his forew ord is based closely o n Mrs. B aynes’ version, from w hich some o f th e ed ito rial

notes have also been tak en over. F o u r pictu res of the stages of m ed ita tio n , from th e H u i M in g Cking, w hich accom panied the “G o ld en F low er” text, have b een re p ro d u c e d because of th e ir p e rtin en c e to J u n g ’s com m entary; a n d the exam ples of E u ro p e a n m an d alas have been retain ed , th o u g h m ost of th em w ere p u b lish ed , in a d ifferen t context, in “C o n cern in g M an d ala Sym bolism ,” Vol. g, p a rt i, of th e Collected Works. T h e chapters have been given num bers. — E d i t o r s .]

F O R E W O R D T O T H E SECO ND G E R M A N E D IT IO N M y deceased frien d , R ic h a rd W ilh e lm , co -au th o r of this book, sen t m e the te x t of T h e Secret of the G o ld en F low er a t a tim e th a t was cru cial fo r m y ow n w ork. T h is was in 1928. I h a d b een in v e stig atin g th e processes of th e collective u n co n scio u s since th e year 1913, an d h a d o b ta in e d resu lts th a t seem ed to m e q u es­ tio n a b le in m o re th a n o n e respect. T h e y n o t o n ly lay fa r b ey o n d ev ery th in g kn o w n to “acad em ic” psychology, b u t they also over­ step p ed th e b o u n d s o f any m ed ical, p u re ly p ersonal, psychology. T h e y c o n fro n te d m e w ith a n extensive p h en o m en o lo g y to w h ich h ith e rto k n o w n categories a n d m e th o d s co u ld n o lo n g er be a p p lied . My results, based o n fifteen years o f effort, seem ed inconclusive, because n o possib ility of co m p ariso n offered itself. I knew of n o re a lm of h u m a n ex p erien ce w ith w h ich I m ig h t have backed u p m y findings w ith som e degree of assurance. T h e on ly analogies— a n d these, I m u st say, w ere far rem o v ed in tim e — I fo u n d scattered am o n g th e re p o rts of th e heresiologists. T h is co n n ec tio n d id n o t in an y way ease m y task; o n th e co n trary , it m ad e it m o re difficult, because th e G nostic systems consist on ly in sm all p a rt of im m e d ia te psychic experiences, th e g re a te r p a rt b e in g speculative a n d system atizing recensions. Since we possess o n ly very few co m p lete texts, an d since m ost of w h at is k n o w n com es fro m th e re p o rts o f C h ristia n o p p o n en ts, we have, to say th e least, a n in a d e q u a te know ledge of th e h isto ry as w ell as th e c o n te n t of this strange an d co n fu sed lite ra tu re , w h ich is so diffi­ c u lt to evaluate. M oreover, co n sid erin g th e fact th a t a p e rio d of n o t less th a n seventeen to e ig h teen h u n d re d years separates us fro m th a t age, s u p p o rt fro m th a t q u a r te r seem ed to m e e x tra o r­ d in a rily risky. A g ain , th e co n n ectio n s w ere fo r th e m ost p a r t of a su b sid iary n a tu re a n d le ft gaps at ju s t th e m ost im p o rta n t poin ts, so th a t I fo u n d it im p o ssib le to m ak e use of th e G nostic m aterial.

T h e text th a t W ilhelm sent me helped me o u t of this diffi­ culty. It contained exactly those items I had long sought for in vain am ong the Gnostics. T h u s the tex t afforded m e a welcome o p p o rtu n ity to publish, at least in provisional form , some of the essential results of my investigations. A t that tim e it seemed to me a m atter of no im portance th at T h e Secret Qf the Golden Flower is n o t only a T ao ist text con­ cerned w ith Chinese yoga, b u t is also an alchem ical treatise. A deeper study of the L atin treatises has tau g h t m e b etter and has shown me th at the alchem ical character of the text is of prim e significance, though I shall n o t go into this p o in t m ore closely here. I w ould only like to emphasize th a t it was th e tex t of the Golden Flower th at first p u t m e on the rig h t track. For in m edi­ eval alchem y we have the long-sought connecting lin k betw een Gnosis and the processes of the collective unconscious th at can be observed in m odern m an .1 I w ould like to take this o p p o rtu n ity to draw atten tio n to certain m isunderstandings to w hich even w ell-inform ed readers of this book have succum bed. N ot infreq u en tly people th o u g h t th a t my purpose in publishing it was to p u t in to the hands of the public a recipe for achieving happiness. In total m isapprehen­ sion of all th at I say in my com m entary, these readers tried to im itate the “m eth o d ” described in the Chinese text. L et us hope these representatives of spiritual p ro fu n d ity were few in n u m ­ ber! A n o th er m isunderstanding gave rise to the o p in io n that, in my com m entary, I was to some extent describing my own th era­ peutic m ethod, w hich, it was said, consisted in my instilling Eastern ideas in to m y patients for therapeutic purposes. I do n o t believe there is anything in my com m entary th at lends itself to th a t sort of superstition. In any case such an o p in io n is alto­ gether erroneous, an d is based on the w idespread view th at psy­ chology was invented for a specific purpose and is n o t an em p iri­ cal science. T o this category belongs th e superficial as well as u n in te llig e n t op in io n th a t the idea of the collective unconscious is “m etaphysical.” O n the contrary, it is an empirical concept to I T h e reader w ill find more about this in two essays published by me in the Eranos Jahrbuch 1936 and /937. [This material is now contained in Psychology and Alchemy, Parts II and III.— E d i t o r s .]

CO M M ENTARY ON

“ THE

SEC R ET O F T H E G O LD EN

FLOW ER”

be p u t alongside the concept of instinct, as is obvious to anyone w ho will read w ith some attention. C. G. J. K usnachtJ Zurich, 1938

I. D IF F IC U L T IE S E N C O U N T E R E D BY A E U R O P E A N IN T R Y I N G T O U N D E R S T A N D T H E E A S T A th o ro u g h W e ste rn e r in feeling, I c a n n o t b u t be p ro ­ fo u n d ly im pressed by th e strangeness of th is C h in ese tex t. I t is tru e th a t som e k n o w led g e of E astern relig io n s a n d ph ilo so p h ies helps m y in te lle c t a n d m y in tu itio n to u n d e rs ta n d these th in g s u p to a p o in t, ju s t as I can u n d e rs ta n d th e p arad o x es o f p rim i­ tive beliefs in term s of “ eth n o lo g y ” o r “co m p arativ e re lig io n .” T h is is of course th e W este rn way of h id in g o n e ’s h e a rt u n d e r th e cloak of so-called scientific u n d e rsta n d in g . W e do it p artly because th e m iserable va n ite des savants fears a n d rejects w ith h o rro r any sign of liv in g sym pathy, an d p a rtly because sym pa­ th e tic u n d e rs ta n d in g m ig h t tran sfo rm co n tact w ith an alien s p irit in to an ex p erien ce th a t has to be tak en seriously. O u r socalled scientific o b je ctiv ity w o u ld have reserved this te x t fo r th e p h ilo lo g ical acu m en of sinologists, an d w o u ld have g u a rd e d it jealously from any o th e r in te rp re ta tio n . B u t R ic h a rd W ilh e lm p e n e tra te d to o deep ly in to th e secret a n d m ysterious v itality of C h in ese w isdom to allow su ch a p earl of in tu itiv e in sig h t to d is­ a p p e a r in to th e pigeon-holes of specialists. I am g reatly h o n ­ o u re d th a t his choice of a psychological c o m m e n ta to r has fallen u p o n m e. T h is, how ever, involves th e risk th a t th is p recio u s ex am p le of m ore-than-sp ecialist in sig h t w ill b e sw allow ed by still a n o th e r specialism . N ev erth eless, an yone w ho b elittles th e m e rits of W e ste rn science is u n d e rm in in g th e fo u n d a tio n s of th e W estern m in d . Science is n o t in d e e d a p erfect in s tru m e n t, b u t it is a su ­ p e rb a n d in v a lu a b le to o l th a t w orks h a rm on ly w h en it is tak en as a n e n d in itself. Science m u st serve; it errs w h en it u su rp s th e th ro n e . I t m u st be read y to serve all its b ran ch es, fo r each, b e ­ cause of its insufficiency, has n e e d of s u p p o rt fro m th e others. Science is th e to o l of th e W este rn m in d , an d w ith it o n e can o p e n m o re doors th a n w ith b are hands. I t is p a rt an d p arcel of 6

3

4

o u r understanding, an d it obscures o u r insight only w hen it claims th a t the u n derstanding it conveys is the only k in d there is. T h e East teaches us another, broader, m ore profound, and h ig h er understanding— understan d in g through life. W e know this only by hearsay, as a shadowy sentim ent expressing a vague religiosity, and we are fond of p u ttin g “O rien tal w isdom ” in q u o tatio n marks and banishing it to th e dim region of faith and superstition. B ut that is w holly to m isunderstand the realism of the East. T ex ts of this k ind do n o t consist of th e sentim ental, overw rought mystical in tu itio n s of pathological cranks an d re ­ cluses, b u t are based on the practical insights of highly evolved Chinese m inds, w hich we have n o t the slightest justification for undervaluing. T h is assertion may seem bold, perhaps, and is likely to cause a good deal of head-shaking. N o r is th a t surprising, considering how little people know ab o u t the m aterial. Its strangeness is in ­ deed so arresting th a t o u r puzzlem ent as to how an d w here the C hinese w orld of thought m ig h t be joined to ours is q u ite u n ­ derstandable. T h e usual m istake of W estern m an w hen faced w ith this problem of grasping the ideas of th e East is like th at of th e stu d en t in Faust. M isled by the devil, h e contem ptuously tu rn s his back on science and, carried away by Eastern occult­ ism, takes over yoga practices w ord for w ord and becomes a p iti­ able im itator. (Theosophy is o u r best exam ple of this.) T h u s he abandons the one sure fou n d atio n of the W estern m in d and loses him self in a m ist of words and ideas th a t could never have originated in E uropean brains an d can never be profitably grafted u p o n them . A n ancient adept has said: “If the w rong m an uses the rig h t means, the rig h t m eans w ork in the w rong way.” 1 T h is Chinese saying, un fo rtu n ately only too true, stands in sharp contrast to o u r belief in the “rig h t” m ethod irrespective of the m an who applies it. In reality, everything depends on the m an an d little or n o th in g on the m ethod. T h e m ethod is m erely the path, the direction taken by a m an; the way he acts is the tru e expression of his n ature. If it ceases to be this, the m ethod is n o th in g m ore than an affectation, som ething artificially pieced on, rootless and sapless, serving only the illegitim ate goal of self-deception. I t becomes a m eans of fooling oneself and of evading w hat may I [T h e Secret o f the G olden Flower (ig 6z edn.), p. 63.]

perhaps be the im placable law of o n e’s being. T h is is far re ­ m oved from the earthiness and self-reliance of Chinese thought. I t is a denial of one’s own n atu re, a self-betrayal to strange and unclean gods, a cowardly trick for the purpose of feigning m ental superiority, everything in fact th at is profoundly contrary to the spirit of the C hinese “m ethod.” For these insights spring from a way of life th a t is com plete, genuine, and tru e to itself; from that ancient, cultural life of C hina w hich grew logically and o r­ ganically from the deepest instincts, and which, for us, is forever inaccessible an d impossible to im itate. 5 W estern im itation is a tragic m isunderstanding of the psy­ chology of the East, every b it as sterile as the m odern escapades to New M exico, the blissful South Sea islands, and central Af­ rica, where “ the prim itive life” is played a t in deadly earnest w hile W estern m an secretly evades his m enacing duties, his H ic R h o d u s hie salta. I t is n o t for us to im itate w hat is foreign to o u r organism or to play the m issionary; o u r task is to b u ild u p o u r W estern civilization, which sickens w ith a thousand ills. T h is has to be done on the spot, and by the E uropean ju st as he is, w ith all his W estern ordinariness, his m arriage problem s, his neuroses, his social and political delusions, and his whole p h ilo ­ sophical disorientation. 6 W e should do well to confess at once that, fundam entally, we do n o t u n derstand the u tte r unw orldliness of a text like this— that actually we do n o t w ant to u n d erstan d it. H ave we, perhaps, a dim suspicion th a t a m ental a ttitu d e w hich can direct the glance inw ard to th a t extent is detached from the w orld only because these people have so com pletely fulfilled the instinctive dem ands of th eir natures th at there is n o th in g to prevent them from glim psing the invisible essence of things? C an it be th a t the precondition for such a vision is lib eratio n from the am bitions and passions th a t b in d us to the visible world, and does not this liberation come from the sensible fulfilm ent of instinctive de­ m ands ra th e r th an from the prem atu re and fear-ridden repres­ sion of them? A re our eyes opened to the sp irit only w hen the laws of the earth are obeyed? A nyone who knows the history of Chinese c u ltu re and has carefully studied the I Chingj th a t book of wisdom w hich for thousands of years has perm eated all C hi­ nese thought, will n o t lightly wave these doubts aside. H e will be aw are th a t the views set forth in o u r text are n o th in g extraor-

d in a ry to th e C hinese, b u t are actu ally in escap ab le psychological conclusions. 7 F o r a lo n g tim e th e sp irit, a n d th e sufferings of th e sp irit, w ere positive values a n d th e th in g s m o st w o rth striv in g fo r in o u r p e c u lia r C h ristian c u ltu re . O n ly in th e course of th e n in e ­ te e n th cen tu ry , w h en s p irit b eg an to d eg en e rate in to in tellect, d id a re a c tio n set in ag ain st th e u n b e a ra b le d o m in an ce of in tellectualism , a n d this led to th e u n p a rd o n a b le m istak e of co n fu s­ in g in te lle c t w ith s p irit a n d b la m in g th e la tte r fo r th e m isdeeds of th e form er. T h e in te lle c t does in d e e d do h a rm to th e soul w h en it dares to possess itself of th e h e rita g e of th e sp irit. I t is in n o way fitted to d o this, fo r s p irit is so m eth in g h ig h e r th a n in te l­ lect since it em braces th e la tte r a n d in clu d es th e feelings as w ell. I t is a g u id in g p rin c ip le of life th a t strives tow ards su p e rh u m a n , s h in in g heights. O p p o sed to th is ya n g p rin c ip le is th e d ark , fem ­ in in e , e a rth b o u n d y in , w hose e m o tio n a lity an d in stin c tu a lity reach back in to th e d ep th s of tim e an d dow n in to th e la b y rin th of th e physiological c o n tin u u m . N o d o u b t these are p u re ly in tu ­ itiv e ideas, b u t one can h a rd ly dispense w ith th e m if one is try ­ in g to u n d e rs ta n d th e n a tu re o f th e h u m a n psyche. T h e C hinese c o u ld n o t do w ith o u t th e m because, as th e h isto ry of C hinese p h ilo so p h y shows, they n e v e r stray ed so far from th e ce n tra l psychic facts as to lose them selves in a one-sided over-devel­ o p m e n t a n d o v er-v alu atio n of a single psychic fu n c tio n . T h e y n ev er failed to acknow ledge th e p arad o x icality a n d p o la rity of all life. T h e opposites always b alan ced o n e a n o th e r— a sign of h ig h c u ltu re . O ne-sidedness, th o u g h it lends m o m e n tu m , is a m a rk of b arb arism . T h e re a c tio n th a t is n o w b e g in n in g in th e W est against th e in te lle c t in fav o u r of feeling, o r in fav o u r of in tu itio n , seems to m e a sign of c u ltu ra l advance, a w id e n in g of consciousness b ey o n d th e n a rro w confines of a ty ran n ical in te l­ lect. 8 I have n o w ish to d e p rec iate th e tre m e n d o u s d iffe re n tia tio n of th e W e ste rn in tellect; co m p ared w ith it th e E astern in tellect m u st b e describ ed as ch ild ish . (N a tu ra lly th is has n o th in g to do w ith intelligen ce.) If w e sh o u ld succeed in elev atin g a n o th e r, a n d possibly even a th ird psychic fu n c tio n to th e d ig n ified posi­ tio n accorded to th e in tellect, th e n th e W e st m ig h t ex p ec t to surpass th e E ast by a very g re a t m a rg in . T h e re fo re it is sad in d e e d w h en th e E u ro p e a n d ep arts fro m his ow n n a tu re a n d

im itates the East o r “affects” it in any way. T h e possibilities open to him w ould be so m uch greater if he w ould rem ain tru e to h im ­ self and evolve o u t of his ow n n a tu re all th a t the East has b ro u g h t forth in the course of the m illennia. 9 In general, an d looked at from the in cu rab ly externalistic stan d p o in t of the intellect, it w ould seem as if the things the East values so highly w ere not w orth striving for. C ertainly the in tellect alone cannot com prehend the practical im portance Eastern ideas m ig h t have for us, an d th a t is why it can classify them as philosophical and ethnological curiosities an d n o th in g m ore. T h e lack of com prehension goes so far th at even learned sinologists have n o t understood the practical use of the I Chingj and consider the book to be no m ore th an a collection of ab ­ struse magic spells.

2. M O D E R N PSY CH O LO G Y O FFER S A P O S S IB IL IT Y O F U N D E R S T A N D IN G O bservations m ade in my practical w ork have opened o u t to me a q u ite new and unexpected approach to E astern wisdom. In saying this I should like to em phasize th a t I d id n o t have any knowledge, however inadequate, of Chinese philosophy as a starting point. O n the contrary, w hen I began my career as a psychiatrist and psychotherapist, I was com pletely ig n o ran t of Chinese philosophy, and only later d id m y professional experi­ ence show m e th a t in my technique I had been unconsciously follow ing th at secret way w hich for centuries h a d been the p re­ occupation of the best m inds of the East. T h is could be taken for a subjective fancy— w hich was one reason for m y previous relu c­ tance to publish anything on the subject— b u t R ich ard W ilhelm , th a t great in te rp re te r of the soul of C hina, enthusiastically con­ firm ed the parallel and thus gave m e the courage to w rite ab o u t a C hinese tex t th a t belongs entirely to th e m ysterious shadowIand of the Eastern m ind. A t the same tim e— an d this is the ex­ traordinary th in g — its co n ten t forms a liv in g parallel to w hat takes place in the psychic developm ent of m y patients, n o n e of w hom is Chinese. In o rd er to m ake this strange fact m ore in tellig ib le to the reader, it m ust be p o in ted o u t th a t ju st as the h u m an body shows a com m on anatom y over an d above all racial differences, so, too, the h u m an psyche possesses a com m on su b stratu m tra n ­ scending all differences in c u ltu re an d consciousness. I have called this su bstratum the collective unconscious. T h is u n co n ­ scious psyche, com m on to all m ankind, does n o t consist m erely of contents capable of becom ing conscious, b u t of laten t predis­ positions towards identical reactions. T h e collective unconscious is sim ply the psychic expression of the id en tity of b ra in stru ctu re irrespective of all racial differences. T h is explains the analogy, som etim es even identity, betw een the various m yth m otifs and

symbols, and the possibility of hum an com m unication in gen­ eral. T h e various lines of psychic developm ent start from one com m on stock ivhose roots reach back into the most d istan t past. T h is also accounts for the psychological parallelism s w ith ani­ mals. In purely psychological term s this m eans th a t m an k in d has com m on instincts of ideation and action. A ll conscious ideation an d action have developed on the basis of these unconscious archetypal patterns and always rem ain d ep en d en t on them . T h is is especially the case w hen consciousness has n o t attain ed any high degree of clarity, w hen in all its functions it is m ore d e­ pen d en t on the instincts th an on the conscious will, m ore gov­ erned by affect than by ratio n al judgm ent. T h is ensures a p rim i­ tive state of psychic health, b u t it im m ediately becomes lack of adaptation w hen circum stances arise th a t call for a h ig h er m oral effort. Instincts suffice only for a n a tu re th a t rem ains m ore or less constant. An individual who is guided m ore by the u n con­ scious th an by conscious choice therefore tends tow ards m arked psychic conservatism. T h is is the reason why the prim itive does n o t change in the course of thousands of years, and also why he fears anything strange an d unusual. I t m ig h t easily lead to maladaptation, and thus to the greatest psychic dangers— to a k in d of neurosis, in fact. A higher an d w ider consciousness resulting from the assim ilation of the unfam iliar tends, o n the oth er hand, towards autonom y, and rebels against the old gods who are n o th ­ ing o th e r than those m ighty, prim ord ial images th a t h ith e rto have held o u r consciousness in thrall. 1S T h e stronger and m ore in d ep en d en t o u r consciousness be­ comes, and w ith it th e conscious w ill, th e m ore th e unconscious is th ru st in to the background, and the easier it is for the evolv­ in g consciousness to em ancipate itself from the unconscious, archetypal p attern. G aining in freedom , it bursts the bonds of m ere instinctuality and finally reaches a condition of instinctual atrophy. T h is u p rooted consciousness can no longer appeal to the au thority of the prim ordial images; it has Prom ethean free­ dom , b u t it also suffers from godless hybris. I t soars above the earth an d above m ankind, b u t the danger of its sudden collapse is there, n o t of course in the case of every individual, b u t for the w eaker m em bers of the com m unity, w ho then, again like P ro ­ m etheus, are chained to the Caucasus of the unconscious. T h e 12

wise C hinese w o u ld say in th e w ords of th e I Ching: W h e n yan g has reach ed its g reatest stren g th , th e d a rk pow er of y in is b o rn w ith in its d ep th s, fo r n ig h t begins a t m id d ay w h en yang b reaks u p a n d begins to change in to yin. 14 T h e d o cto r is in a p o sitio n to see th is cycle of changes tra n s­ la ted lite ra lly in to life. H e sees, for instance, a successful b u si­ nessm an a tta in in g all his desires regardless o f d e a th a n d th e devil, a n d th en , h av in g re tire d at th e h eig h t of his success, speed­ ily fallin g in to a neurosis, w h ich tu rn s h im in to a q u e ru lo u s old w om an, fastens h im to his bed, a n d finally destroys h im . T h e p ic tu re is co m p lete even to th e change fro m m ascu lin e to fem i­ n in e . A n exact p arallel to this is th e story of N eb u ch ad n ezzar in th e B ook of D an iel, an d C aesarean m adness in gen eral. S im ilar cases of one-sided ex ag g eratio n o f th e conscious s ta n d p o in t, an d th e re s u lta n t y in -reactio n fro m th e unconscious, fo rm n o sm all p a rt of th e p sy ch iatrist’s c lien te le in o u r tim e, w hich so overval­ ues th e conscious w ill as to believe th a t “ w h ere th e re ’s a w ill th e re ’s a w ay.” N o t th a t I w ish to d e tra c t in th e least fro m th e h ig h m o ral v alu e of th e w ill. C onsciousness a n d th e w ill m ay w ell c o n tin u e to b e co n sid ered th e h ig h e st c u ltu ra l achieve­ m en ts of h u m a n ity . B u t of w h at use is a m o ra lity th a t destroys th e m an? T o b rin g th e w ill a n d th e capacity to achieve it in to h a rm o n y seems to m e to re q u ire m o re th a n m o rality . M o rality a to u t p r ix can be a sign of b a rb a rism — m o re o ften w isdom is b e t­ ter. B u t perh ap s I look a t th is w ith th e eyes of a p hysician w7ho has to m e n d th e ills fo llow ing in th e w ake of one-sided c u ltu ra l achievem ents. *5 Be th a t as it m ay, th e fact rem a in s th a t a consciousness h e ig h te n e d by an in e v ita b le one-sidedness gets so fa r o u t of to u c h w ith th e p rim o rd ia l im ages th a t a b reak d o w n ensues. L o n g before th e actu al catastro p h e, th e signs of e rro r an n o u n c e them selves in atro p h y of in stin ct, nervousness, d iso rie n ta tio n , e n ta n g le m e n t in im possible situ a tio n s a n d p ro b lem s. M edical in v estig atio n th e n discovers an u n co n scio u s th a t is in fu ll rev o lt against th e conscious values, a n d th a t th e re fo re ca n n o t possibly be assim ilated to consciousness, w h ile th e reverse is a lto g eth e r o u t of th e q u estio n . W e are c o n fro n te d w ith an a p p a re n tly ir ­ reco n c ilab le conflict befo re w h ich h u m a n reaso n stands helpless, w ith n o th in g to offer ex cep t sham so lu tio n s o r d u b io u s co m ­ prom ises. If these evasions are rejected , we are faced w ith th e

question as to what has become of the much needed unity of the personality, and w ith the necessity of seeking it. A t this point begins the path travelled by the East since the beginning of things. Q uite obviously, the Chinese were able to follow this path because they never succeeded in forcing the opposites in m an’s nature so far apart that all conscious connection between them was lost. T h e Chinese owe this all-inclusive consciousness to the fact that, as in the case of the prim itive mentality, the yea and the nay have rem ained in their original proximity. None­ theless, it was impossible not to feel the clash of opposites, so they sought a way of life in which they would be what the In­ dians call nirdvandva, free of opposites. 16 O ur text is concerned w ith this way, and the same problem comes up with my patients also. T h ere could be no greater mis­ take than for a W esterner to take u p the direct practice of Chi­ nese yoga, for that would merely strengthen his will and con­ sciousness against the unconscious and bring about the very effect to be avoided. T h e neurosis would then simply be inten­ sified. It cannot be emphasized enough that we are n o t Orientals, and that we have an entirely different point of departure in these matters. It would also be a great mistake to suppose that this is the path every neurotic m ust travel, or that it is the solu­ tion at every stage of the neurotic problem. It is appropriate only in those cases where consciousness has reached an abnorm al degree of development and has diverged too far from the uncon­ scious. T his is the sine qua non of the process. N othing would be more wrong than to open this way to neurotics who are ill on account of an excessive predom inance of the unconscious. For the same reason, this way of development has scarcely any mean­ ing before the m iddle of life (normally between the ages of thirty-five and forty), and if entered upon too soon can be de­ cidedly injurious. *7 As I have said, the essential reason which prom pted me to look for a new way was the fact that the fundam ental problem of the patient seemed to me insoluble unless violence was done to one or the other side of his nature. I had always worked with the tem peram ental conviction that at bottom there are no insoluble problems, and experience justified me in so far as I have often seen patients simply outgrow a problem that had destroyed others. T h is “outgrowing,” as I formerly called it, proved on 14

fu rth e r investigation to be a new level of consciousness. Some higher o r w ider interest appeared on the p a tie n t’s horizon, and th ro u g h this broadening of his outlook the insoluble problem lost its urgency. I t was n o t solved logically in its own term s, b u t faded o u t w hen confronted w ith a new and stronger life urge. It was n o t repressed and m ade unconscious, b u t m erely appeared in a different light, an d so really d id becom e different. W hat, on a low er level, had led to the wildest conflicts an d to panicky o u t­ bursts of em otion, from the higher level of personality now looked like a storm in the valley seen from the m o u n tain top. T h is does n o t m ean th a t the storm is ro b b ed of its reality, b u t instead of being in it one is above it. B ut since, in a psychic sense, we are b oth valley and m o u n tain , it m ig h t seem a vain illusion to deem oneself beyond w hat is hum an. O ne certainly does feel the affect an d is shaken and to rm en ted by it, yet at the same tim e one is aware of a higher consciousness looking on w hich prevents one from becom ing identical w ith the affect, a consciousness which regards the affect as an object, and can say, “I know th at I suffer.” W h at o u r tex t says of indolence, “ In d o ­ lence of w hich a m an is conscious, an d indolence of w hich he is unconscious, are a thousand m iles a p a rt,” 1 holds tru e in the highest degree of affect. N ow an d then it happened in my practice th at a p atien t grew beyond him self because of un k n o w n potentialities, and this becam e an experience of p rim e im portance to me. In the m eantim e, I had learned th a t all the greatest an d m ost im p o r­ ta n t problem s of life are fundam entally insoluble. T h e y m ust be so, for they express the necessary polarity in h e re n t in every self­ regu latin g system. T h ey can never be solved, b u t only o u t­ grow n. I therefore asked myself w hether this outgrow ing, this possibility of fu rth e r psychic developm ent, was n o t the n orm al thing, and w hether getting stuck in a conflict was pathological. Everyone m ust possess th a t h ig h er level, at least in em bryonic form , an d m ust u n d e r favourable circum stances be able to de­ velop this potentiality. W h en I exam ined the course of develop­ m en t in patients who quietly, an d as if unconsciously, outgrew themselves, I saw th a t th e ir fates h ad som ething in com m on. T h e new th in g came to them from obscure possibilities eith er outside o r inside themselves; they accepted it an d grew w ith its I [ T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r (1962 e d n .), p . 42.]

help. It seemed to m e typical th a t some took the new th in g from outside themselves, others from inside; or rath er, th a t it grew in to some persons from w ithout, and in to others from w ithin. B ut the new th in g never came exclusively eith er from w ith in or from w ithout. If it came from outside, it became a pro fo u n d in n e r experience; if it came from inside, it becam e an o u te r happening. In no case was it conjured in to existence in te n tio n ­ ally or by conscious w illing, b u t ra th e r seemed to be b o rn e along on the stream of tim e. »9 W e are so greatly tem pted to tu rn everything in to a purpose and a m ethod th a t I deliberately express myself in very abstract term s in order to avoid p rejudicing the read er in one way o r the other. T h e new th in g m ust n o t be pigeon-holed u n d e r any head­ ing, for then it becomes a recipe to be used m echanically, and it w ould again be a case of the “rig h t m eans in the hands of the w rong m an .” I have been deeply im pressed by th e fact th at the new th in g prepared by fate seldom o r never comes u p to con­ scious expectations. A nd still m ore rem arkable, though the new th in g goes against deeply rooted instincts as we have know n them , it is a strangely appropriate expression of the total person­ ality, an expression which one could n o t im agine in a m ore com ­ plete form . s° W h at did these people do in order to b rin g ab o u t the devel­ opm ent th at set them free? As far as I could see they did n o th in g (wu wei2) b u t let things happen. As M aster Lii-tsu teaches in o u r text, the light circulates according to its own law if one does n o t give u p one’s ordinary occupation. T h e a rt of lettin g things happen, action through non-action, lettin g go of oneself as tau g h t by M eister Eckhart, became for m e the key th a t opens the door to the way. W e m ust be able to let things h ap p en in the psyche. For us, this is an a rt of w hich m ost people know nothing. Consciousness is forever interfering, helping, correcting, and negating, never leaving the psychic processes to grow in peace. I t w ould be sim ple enough, if only sim plicity were n o t th e m ost difficult of all things. T o begin w ith, the task consists solely in observing objectively how a fragm ent of fantasy develops. N o th ­ in g could be sim pler, an d yet rig h t h ere the difficulties begin. A pparently one has no fantasy fragm ents— or yes, th e re ’s one, b u t it is too stupid! Dozens of good reasons are b ro u g h t against 2 [The Taoist idea of action through non-action.— C.F.B.]

16

it. O ne c a n n o t c o n cen trate on it— it is too b o rin g — w h at w o u ld com e o£ it anyw ay— it is “n o th in g b u t” this o r th at, a n d so on. T h e conscious m in d raises in n u m e ra b le objections, in fact it often seems b e n t on b lo ttin g o u t th e spon tan eo u s fantasy activ­ ity in spite of real in sig h t a n d in spite of the firm d e te rm in a tio n to allow the psychic process to go forw ard w ith o u t in te rfe re n c e. O ccasionally th ere is a v e rita b le cram p of consciousness. 21 If one is successful in overcom ing th e in itia l difficulties, c riti­ cism is still likely to sta rt in afterw ards in the a tte m p t to in te r­ p re t th e fantasy, to classify it, to aestheticize it, o r to devalue it. T h e te m p ta tio n to do this is alm ost irresistible. A fte r it has been fa ith fu lly observed, free re in can be given to th e im p atien ce of the conscious m in d ; in fact it m u st be given, o r o b stru ctiv e re ­ sistances w ill develop. B u t each tim e th e fantasy m a te ria l is to be p ro d u ced , th e activity of consciousness m u st be sw itched off again. 22 In m ost cases th e results of these efforts are n o t very e n co u r­ aging a t first. U sually they consist of te n u o u s webs of fantasy th a t give n o clear in d ic a tio n of th e ir o rig in o r th e ir goal. Also, th e way of g e ttin g a t th e fantasies varies w ith in d iv id u als. F o r m an y people, it is easiest to w rite th em dow n; others visualize them , an d o thers again d raw or p a in t th e m w ith o r w ith o u t vis­ u alizatio n . I f th e re is a h ig h degree of conscious cram p, often o nly th e h ands are capable of fantasy; th ey m o d el o r draw fig­ ures th a t are som etim es q u ite foreign to the conscious m in d . 23 T h e se exercises m u st be c o n tin u e d u n til th e cram p in th e conscious m in d is relax ed , in o th e r w ords, u n til one can le t th ings h ap p en , w hich is th e n e x t goal of th e exercise. I n this way a new a ttitu d e is created, an a ttitu d e th a t accepts the irra tio n a l a n d th e in co m p reh en sib le sim ply because it is h a p p en in g . T h is a ttitu d e w o uld be poison fo r a person w ho is alread y over­ w h elm ed by th e things th a t h a p p e n to him , b u t it is of th e g re a t­ est value for one w ho selects, from am o n g th e th in g s th a t h a p ­ p en , o n ly those th a t are acceptable to his conscious ju d g m e n t, a n d is g rad u ally d raw n o u t of the stream of life in to a stag n an t backw ater. 24 A t this p o in t, th e way trav elled by the tw o types m en tio n e d e a rlie r seems to divide. B o th have le arn ed to accept w h a t comes to them . (As M aster L ii-tsu teaches: “W h e n o ccu p atio n s com e to us, we m u st accept them ; w h en th ing s com e to us, w e m u st un-

derstand them from th e g ro u n d u p .” 3) O n e m an w ill now take chiefly w hat comes to h im from outside, a n d the o th e r w hat comes from inside. M oreover, th e law of life dem ands th a t w hat they take from o utside an d inside w ill be th e very things th a t w ere always excluded before. T h is reversal of o n e ’s n a tu re brings an enlargem ent, a h eig h te n in g a n d e n ric h m e n t of the personality, if th e previous values are re ta in e d alongside the change— p ro v id ed th a t these values are n o t m ere illusions. If they are n o t h e ld fast, the in d iv id u a l w ill sw ing too fa r to the o th e r side, slip p in g from fitness in to unfitness, fro m adaptedness in to unadaptedness, an d even from ra tio n a lity in to insanity. T h e way is n o t w ith o u t danger. E v ery th in g good is costly, an d the d ev elopm ent of personality is one of th e m ost costly of all things. I t is a m a tte r of saying yea to oneself, of tak in g oneself as th e m ost serious of tasks, of bein g conscious of ev ery th in g one does, a n d keeping it constantly before o n e ’s eyes in all its d u b i­ ous aspects— tru ly a task th a t taxes us to th e utm ost. 25 A C hinese can always fall back on th e a u th o rity of his w hole civilization. If he starts o n th e long way, he is d o in g w h a t is rec­ ognized as b ein g th e best th in g he co u ld possibly do. B u t th e W estern er w ho wishes to set o u t o n this way, if h e is really seri­ ous a b o u t it, has all a u th o rity against h im — in tellectu al, m oral, a n d religious. T h a t is w hy it is infinitely easier fo r h im to im i­ ta te th e C hinese way a n d leave the tro u b leso m e E u ro p ea n b e­ h in d him , o r else to seek the way back to th e m edievalism of the C h ristian C h u rch an d barricad e him self b e h in d th e w all separat­ in g tru e C hristians from th e p o o r h e a th e n an d o th e r e th n o ­ g rap h ic curiosities encam ped outside. A esthetic o r in telle ctu al flirtations w ith life a n d fate com e to an a b ru p t h a lt here: the step to h ig h e r consciousness leaves us w ith o u t a re a rg u a rd a n d w ith o u t shelter. T h e in d iv id u a l m u st devote him self to th e way w ith all his energy, for it is only by m eans of his in te g rity th a t he can go fu rth e r, a n d his in te g rity alone can g u aran tee th a t his way w ill n o t tu rn o u t to be an ab su rd m isad v en tu re. 26 W h e th e r his fate comes to h im from w ith o u t o r fro m w ith in , the experiences a n d h a p p en in g s on th e way re m a in th e same. T h e re fo re I n e ed say n o th in g a b o u t th e m an ifo ld o u te r a n d in ­ n e r events, th e endless variety o f w hich I co u ld n ev er ex h au st in an y case. N o r w o uld this be re le v a n t to th e te x t u n d e r discus3

[T h e G olden Flower (1962 edn.), p. 51.]

18

C O M M E N T A R Y O N “ T H E SECRET O F T H E GOLDEN F L O W E R ”

sion. O n th e o th e r h a n d , th e re is m u ch to be said a b o u t th e psychic states th a t accom pany th e process of d ev elo p m en t. T h e se states are expressed sym bolically in o u r tex t, a n d in th e very same sym bols th a t fo r m any years have b een fa m ilia r to m e fro m m y practice.

g. T H E F U N D A M E N T A L C O N C E P T S A . TAO

*7

T h e great difficulty in in te rp re tin g this an d sim ilar texts1 for the E u ro p ean is th a t th e a u th o r always starts from the central p o in t, from th e p o in t we w ould call the goal, the highest and u ltim a te insight he has attained. T h u s o u r C hinese a u th o r b e­ gins w ith ideas th a t d em an d such a com prehensive u n d e rsta n d ­ in g th at a person of d iscrim in atin g m in d has th e feeling he w ould be guilty of rid icu lo u s preten sio n , o r even of talk in g u tte r nonsense, if he should em bark on a n in telle ctu al discourse on the sub tle psychic experiences of th e greatest m inds of the East. O u r text, for exam ple, begins: “T h a t w hich exists th ro u g h itself is called the W ay.” T h e H u i M i n g Ch ing begins w ith the w ords: “T h e subtlest secret of the T a o is h u m a n n a tu re and life.” 28 I t is characteristic of th e W estern m in d th a t it has n o w ord for T a o . T h e C hinese character is m ade u p of the sign for “h e a d ” an d the sign for “going.” W ilh e lm translates T a o by Sinn (M eaning). O thers translate it as “ way,” “p ro v id en ce,” o r even as “ G od,” as the Jesuits do. T h is illustrates o u r difficulty. “ H e ad ” can be taken as consciousness,2 a n d “go in g ” as trav ellin g a way, an d the idea w ould th e n be: to go consciously, o r the conscious way. T h is is b o rn e o u t by the fact th a t th e “lig h t of h eaven” w hich “dwells betw een the eyes” as th e “ h e art of h eaven” is used synonym ously w ith T a o . H u m a n n a tu re a n d life are c o n tain ed in th e “lig h t of heaven” and, according to the H u i M i n g Ching, are the m ost im p o rta n t secrets of th e T a o . “ L ig h t” is th e sym bolical e q u iv alen t of consciousness, an d th e n a tu re of consciousness is expressed by analogies w ith light. T h e H u i M i n g Ch ing is in tro d u ce d w ith the verses: 1 Cf. th e H u i M i n g C h in g (B ook o f C onsciousness a n d L ife) in T h e Secret o f th e G o ld e n F lo w e r (1962 e d n .), p p . 6gff. 2 T h e h e a d is also th e “s e a t o f h e a v e n ly lig h t.”

20

If thou wouldst complete the diam ond body with no outflowing, Diligently heat the roots of consciousness3 and life. Kindle light in the blessed country ever close at hand, A nd there hidden, let thy true self always dwell. T h e se verses c o n tain a sort of alchem ical in stru c tio n as to th e m e th o d o r way of p ro d u c in g the ‘‘d ia m o n d body,” w hich is also m e n tio n e d in o u r text. “ H e a tin g ” is necessary; th a t is, th e re m u st be an in ten sificatio n of consciousness in o rd e r th a t lig h t m ay be k in d le d in the d w elling place of th e tru e self. N o t only consciousness, b u t life itself m u st be in tensified: the u n io n of these tw o produces conscious life. A cco rd in g to th e H u i M in g Ching, the an cie n t sages knew how to b rid g e th e gap betw een consciousness an d life because they cu ltiv a ted b o th . In this way th e sheli, th e im m o rtal body, is “ m e lted o u t” a n d the “g reat T a o is co m p leted .” 4 3° If we take th e T a o to be th e m e th o d o r conscious way by w hich to u n ite w h at is separated, we have p ro b a b ly com e close to th e psychological m e an in g of th e concept. A t all events, th e sep aratio n of consciousness a n d life c an n o t very w ell be u n d e r­ stood as a n y th in g else th a n w h at I describ ed e a rlie r as an a b e rra ­ tio n or u p ro o tin g of consciousness. T h e re can be n o d o u b t, eith er, th a t th e realizatio n of th e oppo site h id d e n in th e u n c o n ­ scious— the process of “ reversal”— signifies re u n io n w ith th e u n ­ conscious laws of o u r being, an d the p u rp o se of this re u n io n is the a tta in m e n t of conscious life or, expressed, in C hinese term s, th e realizatio n of th e T a o .

29

B. TH E

31

C IR C U L A R

M OVEM ENT

AND

THE

CENTRE

As I have p o in te d out, th e u n io n of opposites5 o n a h ig h e r level of consciousness is n o t a ra tio n a l th in g , n o r is it a m a tte r of w ill; it is a process of psychic d ev elo p m en t th a t expresses itself in symbols. H istorically, th is process has always b e en re p re se n te d in sym bols, an d today th e d e v elo p m en t of p erso n ality is still d e ­ p icted in sym bolic form . I discovered this fact in th e follow ­ ing way. T h e spontaneous fantasy p ro d u cts I discussed earlier 3 In th e H u i M i n g C h i n g , " h u m a n n a t u r e ” {h s in g ) a n d " c o n s c io u s n e ss” (h u t) are u s e d in te r c h a n g e a b ly . 4 T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r (ig 6 2 e d n .), p . 70. e C f. P s y c h o l o g i c a l T y p e s , ch . V .

becom e m ore p ro fo u n d a n d gradually co n cen trate in to abstract structures th a t a p p aren tly re p re se n t “ p rin cip les” in th e sense of G nostic archai. W h e n th e fantasies take th e fo rm chiefly of thoughts, in tu itiv e fo rm u latio n s of dim ly felt laws o r principles em erge, w hich a t first te n d to be d ram atized o r personified. (W e shall com e back to these again later.) If the fantasies are draw n, sym bols a p p ea r th a t are chiefly of the m andala6 type. M andala m eans “circle,” m ore especially a m agic circle. M andalas are fo u n d n o t only th ro u g h o u t th e E ast b u t also am ong us. T h e early M iddle Ages are especially ric h in C h ristian m andalas; m ost of th em show C hrist in th e centre, w ith the fo u r evangel­ ists, o r th e ir symbols, at th e card in al points. T h is conception m u st be a very an cie n t one, because H o ru s a n d his fo u r sons w ere rep resen ted in the same way by th e E gyptians.7 It is know n th a t H o ru s w ith his fo u r sons has close connections w ith C hrist a n d the fo u r evangelists. A n u n m istak ab le a n d very in terestin g m a n d ala can be fo u n d in Ja k o b B oh m e’s book X L Q uestions concerning the S o u le.8 I t is clear th a t this m an d ala represents a psychocosmic system strongly co lo u red by C h ristian ideas. B ohm e calls it th e “ Philosophical Eye” 9 o r th e “ M irro r of W is­ d o m ,” by w hich is obviously m e a n t a su m m a of secret know l­ edge. M ost m andalas take th e form of a flower, cross, o r wheel, a n d show a d istin ct tendency tow ards a q u a te rn a ry stru ctu re re m in isc en t of th e P ythagorean tetraktys, th e basic n u m b er. M andalas of this so rt also occur as sand p ain tin g s in th e religious cerem onies of th e P u eb lo a n d N avaho In d ia n s.10 B u t the m ost b e a u tifu l m andalas are, of course, those of the East, especially th e ones fo u n d in T ib e ta n B uddhism , w hich also co n tain th e sym bols m e n tio n e d in o u r text. M andala draw ings are often p ro ­ d u ced by th e m en tally ill, am ong th em persons w ho certainly e [For a fu ller discussion o f th e m a n d a la , see “A Study in th e Process o f In d iv id ­ u a tio n ” and "C oncerning M andala Sym bolism ” in T h e A rc h e ty p e s a n d th e C o l­ le ctive U nconscious. For exam p les o f E u rop ean m andalas, see b elow , after p .

56 .—

E d i t o r s .]

7 Cf. W allis B u d ge, T h e G o d s o f th e E g yp tia n s. 8 [T h e m an d ala is reprod u ced in “A Study in th e Process o f In d ivid u ation ," P- 297-3 8 Cf. the C hinese con cep t o f the h eaven ly lig h t b etw een th e eyes. 10 M atthew s, " T h e M ou n tain C hant: A N avajo C erem ony” (1887), and Stevenson, “C erem on ial o f H a sjelti D a iljis” (i8 g i).

d id n o t have the least idea of any of th e co n n ectio n s we have discussed.11 32 A m o n g m y p atien ts I have com e across cases of w om en w ho d id n o t draw m andalas b u t danced them instead. In In d ia th e re is a special n am e for this: m andala nrithya, th e m a n d ala dance. T h e dance figures express th e sam e m eanings as the draw ings. M y p a tien ts can say very little a b o u t th e m e an in g of th e sym bols b u t are fascinated by th e m an d find th a t they som ehow express a n d have an effect on th e ir subjective psychic state. 33 O u r te x t prom ises to “reveal th e secret of th e G o ld en F low er o f th e great O n e .’1 T h e golden flower is the lig h t, a n d th e lig h t of heaven is the T a o . T h e golden flow er is a m a n d ala sym bol I have o ften m e t w ith in th e m a te ria l b ro u g h t m e by m y p a tie n ts. I t is d raw n e ith e r seen from above as a re g u la r g eom etric p a t­ tern , o r in profile as a blossom grow ing fro m a p lan t. T h e p la n t is fre q u e n tly a stru c tu re in b rillia n t fiery colours g ro w in g o u t of a b e d of darkness, an d carry in g th e blossom of lig h t a t th e top, a sym bol recallin g th e C hristm as tree. Such draw ings also suggest th e o rig in of the g olden flower, fo r acco rd in g to th e H u i M in g C hing th e “germ in al vesicle” is the “d rag o n castle a t th e b o tto m of th e sea.” 12 O th e r synonym s are th e “ yellow castle,” th e “ heavenly h e a rt,” th e “ terrace of liv in g ,” the “sq u are in ch field o f the sq u are foot h o u se,” th e “p u rp le h all of th e city of ja d e ,” th e “ d a rk pass,” the “space of fo rm er h eav en .” 13 I t is also called th e “b o u n d a ry reg io n of th e snow m o u n ta in s,” th e “p rim o rd ia l pass,” th e “k in g d o m of greatest joy,” th e “ b o u n d less c o u n try ,” th e “a lta r u p o n w hich consciousness an d life are m a d e.” “ If a d y in g m an does n o t k n o w this g erm in al vesicle,” says th e H u i M in g C hingj “ he w ill n o t find th e u n ity of consciousness a n d life in a th o u san d b irth s, n o r in te n th o u san d aeons.” 14 34 T h e b eg in n in g , w here ev erything is still one, a n d w hich th erefore appears as th e h ighest goal, lies a t th e b o tto m of th e sea, in th e darkness o f th e unconscious. I n th e g e rm in a l vesicle, consciousness a n d life (or h u m a n n a tu re a n d life, hsing-m ing) are still a “u n ity, in sep arab ly m ix ed lik e th e sparks in th e 11 T h e m an d ala o f a so m n a m b u list is rep rod u ced in P sych ia tric Stu dies, p . 40. 12 T h e G o ld e n F lo w e r (1962 edn.), p. 70. 13 [Ibid., p. 22.] H [Ibid., p. 70.]

35

3®

refin in g fu rn ace.” “W ith in th e germ in al vesicle is th e fire of the ru le r.” “AU th e sages began th e ir w ork a t th e g erm in al vesi­ cle.” 15 N ote the fire analogies. I know a series of E u ro p ea n m andala draw ings in w hich som ething lik e a p la n t seed su rro u n d e d by m em branes is show n floating in the w ater. T h e n , from th e d epths below , fire p enetrates the seed an d m akes it grow, causing a great golden flower to u n fo ld from th e g erm in al vesicle. T h is sym bolism refers to a quasi-alchem ical process of refin­ ing an d ennobling. D arkness gives b irth to lig h t; o u t of the “ lead of th e w ater re g io n ” grows th e n o b le gold; w h at is u n c o n ­ scious becom es conscious in the form of a liv in g process of grow th. (In d ian K u n d a lin i yoga offers a p erfect analogy.16) In this way th e u n io n of consciousness a n d life takes place. W h e n my p atients produce these m an d ala pictures, it is n a t­ u rally n o t the resu lt of suggestion; sim ilar p ictu res w ere b ein g m ade lo n g before I knew th e ir m e an in g o r th e ir co n n ectio n w ith the practices of th e East, w hich, at th a t tim e, w ere w holly u n k n o w n to m e. T h e pictures arise q u ite spontaneously, an d from two sources. O ne source is the unconscious, w hich sponta­ neously produces fantasies of this k in d ; th e o th e r is life, w hich, if lived w ith u tte r devotion, brings an in tu itio n of th e self, of o n e ’s ow n in d iv id u a l being. W h e n th e self finds expression in such draw ings, th e unconscious reacts by en fo rcin g an a ttitu d e of devotion to life. F o r in com plete ag reem en t w ith th e E astern view, the m an d ala is n o t only a m eans of expression b u t also produces an effect. I t reacts u p o n its m aker. Age-old m agical ef­ fects lie h id d e n in this sym bol, fo r it is deriv ed fro m th e “p ro tec­ tive circle” o r “ charm ed circle,” whose m agic has been preserved in countless folk custom s.17 I t has the obvious purpose of draw ­ ing a sulcus p rim ig en iu s, a m agical fu rro w a ro u n d th e centre, th e tem ple or tem enos (sacred precinct), of th e in n erm o st p e r­ sonality, in o rd e r to p rev en t an "outflow ing” o r to g u a rd by apotropaic m eans against d istractin g influences from outside. M agical practices are n o th in g b u t projections of psychic events, w hich th e n ex ert a counter-influence o n th e psyche a n d p u t a 15 [Ibid., p . 7 1 .] ! 6 Cf. A valon, T h e S e rp en t P ow er. 17 Cf. th e ex cellen t co llectio n in K nuchel, D ie U m w a n d lu n g in K u lt, M a g ie u n d R ech tsb ra u ch .

k in d of spell u p o n th e personality. T h ro u g h th e ritu a l action, a tte n tio n an d in te re st are led back to th e in n e r, sacred p recinct, w hich is the source a n d goal of th e psyche an d co n tain s th e u n ity of life an d consciousness. T h e u n ity once possessed has b een lost, an d m ust now be fo u n d again. 37 T h e u n ity of th e two, life an d consciousness, is the T a o , whose sym bol w ould be th e c en tral w hite light, also m e n tio n e d in the Bardo T h o d o L is T h is lig h t dw ells in th e “sq u are in c h ” o r in the “face,” th a t is, betw een the eyes. I t is a visualization of th e “creative p o in t,” of th a t w hich has in ten sity w ith o u t e x te n ­ sion, in co n ju n ctio n w ith th e “ field of th e sq u are in c h ,” th e sym­ bol for th a t w hich has extension. T h e two to g eth er m ake the T a o . H u m a n n a tu re (hsing) an d consciousness (hui) are ex­ pressed in lig h t sym bolism , a n d therefo re have th e q u a lity of in ­ tensity, w hile life (m in g ) w o uld coincide w ith extensity. T h e one is yang-like, the o th e r yin-like. T h e afo re-m en tio n ed m andala of a so m n am b u list girl, aged fifteen an d a half, w hom I h ad u n d e r observation some th irty years ago, shows in its cen tre a sprin g of “ P rim ary Force,” o r life energy w ith o u t extension, whose em an atio n s clash w ith a c o n trary spatial p rin c ip le — in com plete analogy w ith the basic idea of o u r C hinese text. 38 T h e “enclosure,” o r c irc u m a m bu latio, is expressed in o u r te x t by th e idea of “c irc u latio n .” T h e circ u latio n is n o t m erely m ovem ent in a circle, b u t m eans, on the one hand, th e m a rk ­ ing off of the sacred p re c in ct a n d , o n th e o th e r, fixation an d con­ cen tratio n . T h e sun-w heel begins to tu rn ; the sun is activated an d begins its course— in o th e r words, th e T a o begins to w ork an d takes the lead. A ction is reversed in to non-action; every­ th in g p e rip h e ra l is su b o rd in a ted to th e com m and of the centre. T h e re fo re it is said: “ M ovem ent is only a n o th e r nam e fo r m as­ tery .” Psychologically, this c ircu latio n w o u ld be the “m ovem ent in a circle a ro u n d oneself,” so th a t all sides of th e personality becom e involved. “T h e poles of lig h t an d darkness are m ade to ro ta te ,” th a t is, th e re is an a lte rn a tio n of day a n d n ig h t, 39 T h e circu lar m o vem ent thus has th e m o ral significance of ac­ tiv atin g the lig h t a n d d ark forces of h u m a n n a tu re , an d to g eth er w ith th em all psychological opposites of w hatever k in d they m ay be. I t is n o th in g less th a n self-know ledge by m eans of self18 Evans-W entz, T h e T i b e t a n B o o k of the D ead .

b rood in g (Sanskrit tapas). A sim ilar archetypal con cep t o f a perfect b ein g is that o f the P latonic m an, ro u n d on all sides and u n itin g w ith in h im self the tw o sexes. 4° O n e o f the best m odern parallels is the description which Edward M aitland, the biographer o f A n n a K ingsford,19 gave o f his central exp erien ce. H e had discovered that w h en reflecting qn an idea, related ideas becam e visib le, so to speak, in a lo n g series apparently reachin g back to th eir source, w hich to him was the d iv in e spirit. By con cen trating o n this series, he tried to penetrate to th eir origin . H e writes: I was absolutely w ith ou t know ledge or expectation w hen I yielded to the im pulse to make the attem pt. I sim ply experim ented on a faculty . . . b eing seated at my w riting-table the w h ile in order to record the results as they came, and resolved to retain m y hold on my outer and circum ferential consciousness, n o m atter how far to­ wards my inner and central consciousness I m ight go. For I knew n ot w hether I should be able to regain the former if I once quitted m y h old of it, or to recollect the facts of the experience. A t length I achieved my object, though only by a strong effort, the tension occasioned by the endeavour to keep both extrem es of the conscious­ ness in view at once being very great. O nce w ell started on my quest, I found m yself traversing a suc­ cession of spheres or belts . . . the im pression produced being that o f m ou n tin g a vast ladder stretching from the circum ference to­ wards the centre of a system, w h ich was at once m y ow n system, the solar system, the universal system, the three systems b eing at once diverse and identical. . . , Presently, by a supreme, and w hat I felt m ust be a final effort . . . I succeeded in polarizing the whole of the convergent rays of m y consciousness in to the desired focus. A nd at the same instant, as if through the sudden ig n itio n of the rays thus fused in to a unity, I found m yself confronted w ith a glory of unspeakable w hiteness and brightness, and of a lustre so intense as w ell-nigh to beat m e back. . . . B ut though feelin g that I had to explore further, I resolved to m ake assurance doubly sure by pierc­ in g if I could the alm ost b lin d in g lustre, and seeing w hat it en­ shrined. W ith a great effort I succeeded, and the glance revealed to m e that w hich I had felt m ust be there. . . . It was the dual form of the Son . . . the unm anifest m ade m anifest, the unform ulate form ulate, the unindividuate individuate, G od as the Lord, proving through H is duality that G od is Substance as w ell as Force, Love re A n n a K in g sfo rd , H e r L ife, L e tte rs, D ia ry , a n d W o r k , pp. i2gf. I am indebted for this reference to my colleague, Dr. Beatrice Hinkle, N ew York.

26

as well as W ill, F em inine as well as M asculine, M o th er as w ell as Father. 41

H e fo u n d th a t G o d is tw o in o n e, lik e m a n . B esides th is h e n o tic e d so m e th in g th a t o u r te x t also em p h asizes, n a m e ly ‘‘su s­ p e n sio n of b r e a th in g .” H e says o r d in a r y b r e a th in g s to p p e d a n d was re p la c e d b y a n in te r n a l re s p ira tio n , ‘‘as if by b r e a th in g o f a d is tin c t p e rs o n a lity w ith in a n d o th e r th a n th e p h y sical o r g a n ­ ism .” H e to o k th is b e in g to b e th e “ e n te le c h y ” o f A ris to tle a n d th e ‘‘in n e r C h r is t” o f th e ap o stle P a u l, th e ‘‘s p ir itu a l a n d s u b ­ s ta n tia l in d iv id u a lity e n g e n d e re d w ith in th e p h y sical a n d p h e ­ n o m e n a l p e rs o n a lity , a n d re p re s e n tin g , th e re fo re , th e r e b ir t h o f m a n o n a p la n e tra n s c e n d in g th e m a te r ia l.” 42 T h i s g e n u in e 20 e x p e rie n c e c o n ta in s all th e essen tial sym bols o f o u r te x t. T h e p h e n o m e n o n itself, th e v isio n of lig h t, is a n e x p e rie n c e c o m m o n to m a n y m ystics, a n d o n e th a t is u n d o u b t­ ed ly o f th e g re a te s t sig n ifican ce, b eca u se a t all tim e s a n d places it p ro v es to b e s o m e th in g u n c o n d itio n e d a n d a b so lu te , a c o m b in a ­ tio n o f s u p re m e p o w e r a n d p r o f o u n d m e a n in g . H ild e g a r d o f B in g e n , a n o u ts ta n d in g p e rs o n a lity q u ite a p a r t fro m h e r m y sti­ cism , w rites in m u c h th e sam e w ay a b o u t h e r c e n tr a l v isio n : Since my childhood I have always seen a lig h t in my soul, b u t n o t w ith the o u te r eyes, n o r th ro u g h the th oughts of my h eart; n e ith e r do the five o u te r senses take p a rt in this vision. . . . T h e lig h t I perceive is n o t of a local k ind, b u t is m uch b rig h ter th a n the cloud w hich supports the sun. I can n o t d istinguish height, b read th , o r length in it. . . . W h a t I see or learn in such a vision stays long in my m em ory. I see, hear, an d know in the same m om ent. . . . I can­ n o t recognize any sort of form in this light, alth o u g h I som etim es see in it an o th er lig h t th a t is know n to m e as the living light. . . . W hile I am enjoying the spectacle of this light, all sadness an d sor­ row vanish from my m em ory.21 43

I m y self k n o w a few in d iv id u a ls w h o h a v e h a d p e rs o n a l e x ­ p e rie n c e o f th is p h e n o m e n o n . So fa r as I h av e b e e n a b le to u n ­ d e rs ta n d it, it seem s to h a v e to d o w ith a n a c u te sta te o f c o n ­ sciousness, as in te n s e as it is a b s tra c t, a ‘‘d e ta c h e d ” co n scio u sn ess so Such experiences are g e n u in e , b u t th e ir g en u in en ess does n o t p rove th a t a ll th e conclusions or co n v ictio n s form in g th eir c o n ten t are necessarily so u n d . E ven in cases of lu n acy o n e com es across p erfectly v a lid p sychic ex p eriences. [A u th o r’s n o te added in th e first (1931) E n g lish ed itio n .] 2 1 [Acta S. H ild e g a r d is , in M ig n e, P .L., v o l. 197, col. 18.]

(se e i n f r a , p a r s . 646?.), w h i c h , as H i l d e g a r d i m p li e s , b r i n g s i n t o a w a r e n e s s a r e a s o f p s y c h ic h a p p e n i n g s o r d i n a r i l y c o v e r e d i n d a r k n e s s . T h e fa c t t h a t t h e g e n e r a l b o d i l y s e n s a tio n s d i s a p p e a r d u r i n g t h e e x p e r i e n c e s u g g e s ts t h a t t h e i r s p e c if ic e n e r g y h a s b e e n w ith d ra w n a n d h a s a p p a r e n tly g o n e to w a rd s h e ig h te n in g t h e c l a r i t y o f c o n s c io u s n e s s . A s a r u l e , t h e p h e n o m e n o n is s p o n ­ ta n e o u s , c o m i n g a n d g o i n g o n its o w n i n i t i a t i v e . I t s e ffe c t is a s­ t o n i s h i n g i n t h a t i t a l m o s t a lw a y s b r i n g s a b o u t a s o l u t i o n o f p s y c h ic c o m p l i c a t i o n s a n d fre e s t h e i n n e r p e r s o n a l i t y f r o m e m o ­ tio n a l a n d in te lle c tu a l e n ta n g le m e n ts , th u s c r e a tin g a u n ity o f b e i n g w h ic h is u n i v e r s a l l y f e l t as “ l i b e r a t i o n . ” 44 S u c h a s y m b o lic u n i t y c a n n o t b e a t t a i n e d b y t h e c o n s c io u s w ill b e c a u s e c o n s c io u s n e s s is a lw a y s p a r t i s a n . I ts o p p o n e n t is t h e c o lle c tiv e u n c o n s c io u s , w h i c h d o e s n o t u n d e r s t a n d t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e c o n s c io u s m i n d . T h e r e f o r e i t is n e c e s s a r y to h a v e t h e m a g ic o f t h e s y m b o l w h i c h c o n t a i n s t h o s e p r i m i t i v e a n a lo g ie s t h a t s p e a k to t h e u n c o n s c io u s . T h e u n c o n s c io u s c a n b e r e a c h e d a n d e x p r e s s e d o n l y b y s y m b o ls , a n d f o r th is r e a s o n t h e p ro c e s s o f i n d i v i d u a t i o n c a n n e v e r d o w i t h o u t t h e s y m b o l. T h e s y m b o l is t h e p r i m i t i v e e x p o n e n t o f t h e u n c o n s c io u s , b u t a t t h e s a m e t i m e a n id e a t h a t c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e h i g h e s t i n t u i t i o n s o f t h e c o n ­ s c io u s m i n d . 45 T h e o l d e s t m a n d a l a d r a w i n g k n o w n to m e is a p a l a e o l i t h i c “ s u n - w h e e l ,” r e c e n t l y d is c o v e r e d i n R h o d e s i a . I t , to o , is b a s e d o n t h e q u a t e r n a r y p r i n c i p l e . T h i n g s r e a c h i n g so f a r b a c k i n t o h u m a n h i s t o r y n a t u r a l l y t o u c h u p o n t h e d e e p e s t la y e r s o f t h e u n c o n s c io u s , a n d c a n h a v e a p o w e r f u l e ffe c t o n i t e v e n w h e n o u r c o n s c io u s l a n g u a g e p r o v e s its e lf t o b e q u i t e i m p o t e n t . S u c h t h i n g s c a n n o t b e t h o u g h t u p b u t m u s t g r o w a g a in f r o m t h e f o r ­ g o t t e n d e p t h s if th e y a r e to e x p r e s s t h e s u p r e m e i n s ig h ts o f c o n ­ s c io u s n e s s a n d t h e l o f t i e s t i n t u i t i o n s o f t h e s p i r i t , a n d i n t h i s w a y f u s e t h e u n i q u e n e s s o f p r e s e n t - d a y c o n s c io u s n e s s w i t h t h e ag eo l d p a s t o f life .

4- PH EN O M EN A OF T H E WAY A.

THE

D IS IN T E G R A T IO N

O F C O N S C IO U S N E S S

T h e m eetin g betw een the n arrow ly d e lim ite d , b u t in ten sely clear, in d iv id u a l consciousness an d th e vast expanse of th e col­ lective unconscious is dangerous, because th e unconscious has a decidedly d isin te g ra tin g effect on consciousness. A cco rd in g to th e H u i M i n g C h in g j this effect belongs to th e p e c u lia r p h e ­ n o m e n a of C hinese yoga. I t says: “ Every separate th o u g h t takes shape an d becom es visible in c o lo u r a n d form . T h e to tal s p irit­ u al pow er unfolds its traces. . . 1 T h e re le v a n t illu stra tio n in th e te x t [stage 4] shows a sage su n k in c o n tem p latio n , his h ead s u rro u n d e d by tongues of fire, o u t of w hich five h u m a n figures em erge; these five again sp lit u p in to tw enty-five sm aller figures.2 T h is w ould b e a schizophrenic process if it w ere to becom e a p e rm a n e n t state. T h e re fo re th e H u i M i n g C hi ng j as th o u g h w a rn in g th e ad ep t, con tin u es: “T h e shapes fo rm ed by th e sp iritfire are only em pty colours a n d form s. T h e lig h t of h u m a n n a ­ tu re (hsing) shines back on the p rim o rd ia l, th e tru e .” 47 So we can u n d e rs ta n d w hy th e figure of th e p ro te c tin g circle was seized u p on. I t is in te n d e d to p re v e n t th e “ o u tflo w in g ” a n d to p ro tect the u n ity of consciousness fro m b e in g b u rst a su n d e r by the unconscious. T h e te x t seeks to m itig ate th e d isin te g ra tin g effect of th e unconscious by d escrib in g th e thought-figures as “em pty colours an d form s,” th u s d e p o te n tia tin g th e m as m u ch as possible. T h is idea ru n s th ro u g h th e w hole of B u d d h ism (es­ pecially the M ahayana form ) and, in th e in stru ctio n s to th e d ead in T h e T i b e t a n B o o k o f the D e ad , it is even p u sh ed to th e p o in t of e x p lain in g th e fav o u rab le as w ell as th e u n fa v o u ra b le gods as illusions still to be overcom e. I t is certain ly n o t w ith in th e com·

46

1 The

G o l d e n Fl ower (1962 edn.), p p . 76f. [For elu cid a tio n o f th e fo u r p ictu res from the H u i M i n g C h i n g reprod u ced h e r e , see ib id ., p p . 75 -7 7 .— E d i t o r s .] 2 T h e se are recollection s o f earlier in carn ation s th at arise d u r in g co n tem p la tio n .

ALCHEMICAL

STUDIES

S t a g e 1: G a t h e r i n g t h e l i g h t

Pages 30-33: F o u r stages of m e d i t a t i o n , w i t h i n s p i r a t i o n a l texts, f r o m t h e Hui Ming Ching

30

COMMENTARY

ON

"THE

SECRET O F T H E

GOLDEN

Stage a: O r i g i n of a n e w b e i n g i n t h e p l a c e of p o w e r

3*

FLOWER"

ALCHEMICAL

STUDIES

Stage 3: S e p a r a t i o n of t h e s p i r i t - b o d y f o r i n d e p e n d e n t existence

32

COM M ENTARY

ON

"T H E

SECRET

OF THE

GOLDEN

S ta g e 4: T h e c e n t r e i n t h e m id s t o f c o n d it i o n s

FLOW ER”

p eten ce of th e psychologist to estab lish th e m e tap h y sica l tr u th o r u n tr u th of th is id ea; h e m u s t b e c o n te n t to d e te rm in e so fa r as possible its psychic effect. H e n e e d n o t b o th e r h im se lf w h e th e r th e shape in q u e s tio n is a tra n s c e n d e n ta l illu sio n o r n o t, since faith , n o t science, has to d ecid e th is p o in t. I n a n y case w e are m o v in g o n g r o u n d th a t fo r a lo n g tim e has seem ed to b e o u tsid e th e d o m a in of science a n d was lo o k e d u p o n as w h o lly illusory. B u t th e re is n o scien tific ju stific a tio n fo r su ch a n a ssu m p tio n ; th e s u b s ta n tia lity o f these th in g s is n o t a scientific p ro b le m since it lies b e y o n d th e ra n g e o f h u m a n p e rc e p tio n a n d ju d g m e n t a n d th u s b e y o n d an y p o ssib ility o f p ro o f. T h e p sy ch o lo g ist is co n ­ c e rn e d n o t w ith th e s u b s ta n tia lity o f these co m p lex es b u t w ith psychic ex p e rie n c e . W ith o u t a d o u b t th e y a re psychic co n ten ts th a t can b e e x p e rie n c e d , a n d th e ir a u to n o m y is e q u a lly in d u b it­ able. T h e y a re fra g m e n ta ry psychic system s th a t e ith e r a p p e a r s p o n ta n e o u sly in ecstatic states a n d evoke p o w e rfu l im p ressio n s a n d effects, o r else, in m e n ta l d istu rb a n c e s, b eco m e fixed in th e fo rm of d e lu sio n s a n d h a llu c in a tio n s a n d c o n s e q u e n tly d estro y th e u n ity of th e p erso n ality . 48 P sy ch iatrists are alw ays read y to b eliev e in to x in s a n d th e like, a n d even to e x p la in s c h iz o p h re n ia in th ese term s, p u ttin g n e x t to n o em p h asis o n th e psychic c o n te n ts as such. O n th e o th e r h a n d , in psych o g en ic d istu rb a n c e s (hysteria, obsessio n al n e u r o ­ sis, etc.), w h ere to x ic effects a n d cell d e g e n e ra tio n a re o u t of th e q u e s tio n , split-off co m p lex es a re to b e fo u n d s im ila r to th o se oc­ c u rr in g in so m n a m b u lis tic states. F re u d w o u ld lik e to e x p la in th ese sp o n ta n e o u s split-offs as d u e to u n co n scio u s re p re ssio n of sex u ality , b u t th is e x p la n a tio n is by n o m ean s v alid in all cases, b ecau se c o n te n ts th a t th e conscious m in d c a n n o t assim ilate can e m e rg e ju s t as sp o n ta n e o u sly o u t o f th e u n co n scio u s, a n d in th ese cases th e re p re ssio n th e o ry is in a d e q u a te . M o reo v er, th e ir a u to n o m y can b e o b serv ed in d a ily life, in affects th a t o b sti­ n a te ly o b tru d e th em selv es a g a in st o u r w ill a n d , in sp ite of th e m o st s tre n u o u s efforts to rep ress th e m , o v erw h elm th e ego an d fo rce it u n d e r th e ir c o n tro l. N o w o n d e r th e p rim itiv e sees in th ese m oods a sta te of possession o r sets th e m d o w n to a loss of soul. O u r c o llo q u ia l speech reflects th e sam e th in g w h e n w e say: “ I d o n ’t k n o w w h a t has g o t in to h im to d a y ,” “ h e is possessed of th e d e v il,” ‘‘h e is b esid e h im se lf,” etc. E v e n leg al p ra c tic e reco g ­ nizes a d eg ree o f d im in is h e d re s p o n s ib ility in a state o f affect.

A u to n o m o u s psychic co n ten ts are thus q u ite co m m o n e x p e ri­ ences for us. Such contents have a d isin te g ra tin g effect u p o n consciousness. 49 B u t besides th e o rd in ary , fa m ilia r affects th e re are su b tle r, m ore com plex em o tio n al states th a t can n o lo n g e r be d escrib ed as affects p u re a n d sim ple b u t are frag m en tary psychic systems. T h e m ore com plicated they are, the m ore they have th e charac­ te r of personalities. As co n stitu en ts of th e psychic personality, they necessarily have the c h arac te r of “persons.” Such frag m e n ­ tary systems are to be fo u n d especially in m e n ta l diseases, in cases of psychogenic sp littin g of the perso n ality (d o u b le p erso n ­ ality), a n d of course in m e d iu m istic p h en o m en a. T h e y are also e n co u n te re d in th e pheno m en o lo g y of relig io n . M any of th e e a r­ lie r gods developed from “ persons” in to personified ideas, an d finally in to ab stract ideas. A ctivated unconscious co n ten ts always a p p e a r at first as p rojections u p o n th e o u tsid e w orld, b u t in the course of m e n ta l d e v elo p m en t they are g rad u ally assim ilated by consciousness a n d reshaped in to conscious ideas th a t th e n fo r­ feit th e ir orig in ally a u to n o m o u s an d personal ch aracter. As we know , som e of the old gods have becom e, via astrology, n o th in g m o re th a n descriptive a ttrib u te s (m artial, jovial, sa tu rn in e , erotic, logical, lu n atic, a n d so on). 5° T h e in stru ctio n s of T h e T ibetan B o o k of the D ead in p a rtic ­ u la r h e lp us to see how g reat is th e d an g er th a t consciousness w ill be d isin te g ra ted by these figures. A gain an d again th e d ead are in stru c te d n o t to take these shapes fo r tru th , n o t to confuse th e ir m u rk y ap p earan ce w ith th e p u re w h ite lig h t of D harm akaya (the d iv in e body of tru th ). T h a t is to say, they are n o t to p ro ject th e one lig h t of h ighest consciousness in to co ncretized figures an d dissolve it in to a p lu ra lity of a u to n o m o u s frag m en ­ tary systems. If th e re w ere no d an g er of this, a n d if these systems d id n o t re p re se n t m enacingly au to n o m o u s a n d d isin teg rativ e tendencies, such u rg e n t in stru c tio n s w o u ld n o t be necessary. A l­ low ing for the sim pler, polytheistic a ttitu d e o f th e E astern m in d , these in stru c tio n s w o u ld be alm ost th e e q u iv a le n t of w arn in g a C h ristian n o t to le t him self be b lin d e d b y th e illu sio n of a personal G od, le t alone by th e T r in ity a n d th e host of angels a n d saints. 51 If tendencies tow ards dissociation w ere n o t in h e re n t in th e h u m a n psyche, frag m en tary psychic systems w o u ld n e v er have

been sp lit off; in o th e r words, n e ith e r spirits n o r gods w ould ever have com e in to existence. T h a t is also the reason w hy o u r tim e has becom e so u tte rly godless an d profane: we lack all know ledge of th e unconscious psyche an d p u rsu e th e cu lt of con­ sciousness to the exclusion of all else. O u r tru e relig io n is a m on­ otheism of consciousness, a possession by it, coupled w ith a fanatical d en ial of th e existence of frag m en tary au to n o m o u s sys­ tems. B u t we differ from the B u d d h ist yoga do ctrin es in th a t we even deny th a t these systems are experienceable. T h is entails a great psychic danger, because the au to n o m o u s systems th e n b e­ have like any o th e r repressed contents: they necessarily induce w rong attitu d e s since the repressed m aterial reap p ears in con­ sciousness in a spurious form . T h is is strik in g ly ev id en t in every case of neurosis an d also holds tru e fo r th e collective psychic phenom ena. O u r tim e has co m m itted a fatal e rro r; we believe we can criticize the facts of relig io n in tellectu ally . L ik e Laplace, we th in k G od is a hypothesis th a t can be su b jected to intellec­ tu al tre a tm e n t, to be affirmed o r denied. W e co m pletely forget th a t th e reason m a n k in d believes in th e “d a e m o n ” has n o th in g tvhatever to do w ith ex tern al factors, b u t is sim ply d u e to a naive aw areness of the trem en d o u s in n e r effect of au tonom ous frag m en tary systems. T h is effect is n o t abo lish ed by criticizing it— or ra th e r, the nam e we have given it— o r by d escribing th e n am e as false. T h e effect is collectively p resen t all th e tim e; th e au to n o m o u s systems are always at w ork, fo r the fu n d am en tal stru c tu re o f the unconscious is n o t affected by the deviations of o u r ephem eral consciousness. 52 If we deny the existence of the auto n o m o u s systems, im agin­ in g th a t we have got rid of them by a m ere c ritiq u e of th e nam e, th e n the effect w hich they still co n tin u e to ex ert can n o longer be u n d erstood, n o r can they be assim ilated to consciousness. T h e y becom e an inexplicable source of d istu rb a n ce w hich we finally assum e m u st exist som ew here outside ourselves. T h e re ­ su lta n t p ro jectio n creates a dangerous situ a tio n in th a t the dis­ tu rb in g effects are now a ttrib u te d to a w icked w ill outside o u r­ selves, w hich is n a tu ra lly n o t to be fo u n d anyw here b u t w ith o u r n e ig h b o u r de Vautre cote de la riviere. T h is leads to collective delusions, “in cid en ts,” revolutions, w ar— in a w ord, to destruc­ tive mass psychoses. 53 In sa n ity is possession by an unconscious c o n ten t that, as

such, is n o t assim ilated to consciousness, n o r can it be assim i­ lated since the very existence of such co n ten ts is d en ied . T h is a ttitu d e is e q u iv alen t to saying: “W e n o lo n g er have any fear of G od a n d believe th a t ev ery th in g is to be ju d g e d by h u m a n stan d ard s.” T h is hyb ris o r narrow ness of consciousness is always th e shortest way to th e insane asylum . I re c o m m en d th e excel­ le n t a cco u n t of this p ro b le m in H . G. W ells’s novel Christina A lb erta ’s Father, a n d S c h re b e r’s M e m o irs of M y N erv o u s Illness. 54 I t m u st stir a sym pathetic c h o rd in th e e n lig h te n e d E u ro ­ pean w hen it is said in the H u i M in g C hing th a t th e “ shapes form ed by th e spirit-fire are only em p ty colours a n d fo rm s.” T h a t sounds th o ro u g h ly E u ro p ea n a n d seems to s u it o u r reason to a T . W e th in k we can co n g ra tu late ourselves o n h av in g al­ ready reach ed such a p in n acle of clarity, im ag in in g th a t we have left all these p h an tasm al gods far b e h in d . B u t w h at we have left b e h in d are only v e rb a l spectres, n o t th e psychic facts th a t w ere responsible fo r th e b irth of th e gods. W e are still as m u ch pos­ sessed by a u to n o m o u s psychic conten ts as if they w ere O lym ­ pians. T o d a y they are called phobias, obsessions, an d so fo rth ; in a w ord, n e u ro tic sym ptom s. T h e gods have becom e diseases; Zeus no longer rules O lym pus b u t ra th e r th e solar plexus, an d produces curious specim ens for the d o c to r’s co n su ltin g room , o r disorders the b ra in s of politician s a n d jo u rn a lists w ho u n w it­ tingly le t loose psychic epidem ics on the w orld. 55 So it is b e tte r for W estern m a n if he does n o t know too m u ch a b o u t the secret insights o f the O rie n ta l sages to b eg in w ith, for, as I have said, it w o u ld be a case of th e “rig h t m eans in th e h ands of th e w rong m a n .” In stead of allow in g him self to be convinced once m o re th a t th e d aem o n is an illu sio n , h e o u g h t to e x p eri­ ence once m ore th e re a lity of this illu sio n . H e sh o u ld le a rn to acknow ledge these psychic forces anew , a n d n o t w ait u n til his m oods, nervous states, a n d delusions m ake it clear in th e m ost p a in fu l way th a t he is n o t the only m aster in his house. H is dis­ sociative tendencies are actual psychic p erso n alities possessing a d ifferen tial reality. T h e y are “re a l” w h en they are n o t recog­ nized as real a n d co n seq u en tly projected ; they are relativ ely real w hen they are b ro u g h t in to re la tio n sh ip w ith consciousness (in religious term s, w hen a c u lt exists); b u t they are u n re a l to the e x te n t th a t consciousness detaches itself fro m its co n ten ts. T h is last stage, how ever, is re a ch e d on ly w h en life has b e en lived so

exhaustively a n d w ith such d ev otion th a t n o obligations rem ain unfulfilled, w hen no desires th a t can n o t safely be sacrificed stand in the way of in n e r d etach m en t from the w orld. I t is fu tile to lie to ourselves a b o u t this. W h erev er we are still attached, we are still possessed; an d w hen we are possessed, th e re is one stronger th a n us w ho possesses us. (“Verily I say u n to thee, th o u shalt by no m eans com e o u t thence, u n til th o u hast p a id th e u tterm o st fa rth in g .”) I t is n o t a m a tte r of indifference w h eth er one calls som ething a “m a n ia ” o r a “god.” T o serve a m an ia is detestable an d undignified, b u t to serve a god is fu ll of m ean in g and prom ise because it is an act of subm ission to a h ig h er, invisible, an d sp iritu a l being. T h e personification enables us to see the relative reality of the au tonom ous system, an d n o t only makes its assim ilation possible b u t also d epoten tiates th e daem onic forces of life. W h e n th e god is n o t acknow ledged, egom ania develops, a n d o u t of this m an ia comes sickness. 56 Yoga takes acknow ledgm ent of the gods as so m eth in g selfevident. Its secret in stru c tio n is in te n d e d only for those whose consciousness is strug g lin g to disentan g le itself from th e dae­ m onic forces of life in o rd e r to e n te r in to the u ltim a te u n d iv id ed u nity, th e “ centre of em ptiness,” w here “ dw ells th e god of u t ­ m ost em ptiness an d life,” as o u r te x t says.3 “T o h e a r such a teaching is difficult to a tta in in thousands of aeons.” E vidently th e veil of M aya c an n o t be lifted by a m erely ra tio n a l resolve; it re q u ire s a m ost tho ro u g h g o in g an d persevering p re p a ratio n consisting in th e full p ay m en t of all d eb ts to life. F o r as long as u n c o n d itio n a l atta ch m e n t th ro u g h cupiditas exists, the veil is n o t lifted an d the heights of a consciousness free of contents and free of illusion are n o t atta in ed ; n o r can any trick n o r any deceit b rin g this a b o u t. I t is a n ideal th a t can u ltim a te ly be realized only in death. U n til th e n th e re are th e real an d relativ ely real figures of the unconscious. B . A N IM U S A N D A N IM A

57

A ccording to o u r text, am ong th e figures of th e unconscious th e re are n o t only the gods b u t also th e an im u s an d an im a. T h e w ord h u n is tran slated by W ilh elm as anim us. A n d indeed, the te rm “an im u s” seems a p p ro p ria te fo r h u n , th e ch aracter for 3 [ T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r , p . 22.]

w hich is m ade u p of the sign fo r “clouds” an d th a t fo r “d e m o n .” T h u s h u n m eans “clo u d -d em o n ,” a h ig h e r b reath -so u l b elo n g ­ in g to th e yang p rin c ip le a n d th erefo re m asculine. A fte r d eath , h u n rises u p w ard a n d becom es shen, the “e x p a n d in g a n d selfrev ealin g ” s p irit o r god. “A n im a ,” called p ’o, an d w ritte n w ith th e characters for “w h ite ” an d “ d e m o n ,” th a t is, “w h ite g h o st,” belongs to th e low er, e a rth b o u n d , bodily soul, th e y in p rin c ip le , an d is th erefo re fem in in e. A fter death , it sinks d o w n w ard a n d becom es k u e i (dem on), often ex p lain ed as “ th e one w ho r e ­ tu rn s ” (i.e., to earth ), a rev en an t, a ghost. T h e fact th a t th e anim us an d an im a p a rt a fte r d e ath a n d go th e ir ways in d e p e n d ­ ently shows th a t, fo r the C hinese consciousness, they are d is tin ­ guishable psychic factors; o rig in ally they w ere u n ite d in “ th e one effective, tru e h u m a n n a tu re ,” b u t in th e “ house of th e C re­ ativ e” they are two. “T h e an im u s is in the heavenly h e a rt.” “ By day it lives in th e eyes [i.e., in consciousness]; a t n ig h t it houses in the liv er.” I t is “ th a t w hich we have received from th e g reat em ptiness, th a t w hich is id en tical in fo rm w ith th e p rim a l b e ­ g in n in g .” T h e anim a, on th e o th e r h an d , is th e “ energy of the heavy a n d th e tu r b id ” ; it clings to th e bodily, fleshly h e art. Its effects are “sensuous desires an d im pulses to a n g er.” “W h o ev er is som bre a n d m oody on w aking . . . is fe tte re d to th e a n im a .” 4 58 M any years ago, before W ilh e lm a c q u a in te d m e w ith this text, I used the te rm “a n im a ” 5 in a w ay q u ite analogous to th e C hinese d efin itio n of p ’o, a n d of course e n tire ly a p a rt from any m etaphysical prem ise. T o the psychologist, th e a n im a is n o t a tran scen d en tal b e in g b u t so m eth in g q u ite w ith in th e ran g e of experience, as th e C hinese d e fin itio n m akes clear: affective states are im m ediate experiences. W hy, th en , speak of th e an im a an d n o t sim ply of moods? T h e reason is th a t affects have a n a u to n o ­ m ous character, a n d th e re fo re m ost people are u n d e r th e ir pow er. B u t affects are d e lim ita b le co n ten ts o f consciousness, parts of the personality. As such, they p artak e of its ch aracter a n d can easily be personified— a process th a t still co n tin u e s to ­ day, as I have shown. T h e personification is n o t a n id le in v e n ­ tion, since a person ro u sed by affect does n o t show a n e u tra l character b u t a q u ite d istin c t one, e n tire ly d ifferen t fro m his o rd in a ry character. C areful in vestigatio n has show n th a t th e 4 [ T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r , p p . 26 a n d 28.] 5 Cf. T w o E ssays o n A n a l y t i c a l P s y c h o l o g y , p ars. 2g6ff.

affective character of a m an has fem in in e traits. F ro m this psy­ chological fact derives th e C hinese d o ctrin e of th e p ’o soul as well as my own concept of the anim a. D eep er in tro sp ectio n or ecstatic experience reveals the existence of a fem in in e figure in the unconscious, hence th e fem inin e nam e: anim a, psyche, Seele. T h e anim a can be defined as th e im age or archetype or deposit of all the experiences of m an w ith w om an. As we know, the poets have often sung th e a n im a ’s praises.6 T h e co n n ectio n of anim a w ith ghost in the C hinese concept is of in terest to para­ psychologists inasm uch as m edium istic “co n tro ls” are very often of the opposite sex. 59 A lth o u g h W ilh e lm ’s tra n slatio n of hun as “an im u s” seems justified to me, nonetheless I had im p o rta n t reasons for choosing th e te rm “ Logos” for a m a n ’s “s p irit,” for his clarity of con­ sciousness a n d his ratio n ality , ra th e r th an the otherw ise ap p ro ­ p ria te expression “an im u s.” C hinese philosophers are spared certain difficulties th a t aggravate th e task of th e W estern psy­ chologist. L ike all m e n tal an d sp iritu a l activity in a n cien t tim es, C hinese philosophy was exclusively a co m p o n en t of the m ascu­ lin e w orld. Its concepts w ere never un d ersto o d psychologically, an d therefore were never exam ined as to how far they also apply to the fem in in e psyche. B u t th e psychologist c an n o t possibly ig­ n o re the existence of w om an an d h e r special psychology. For these reasons I w ou ld p refer to tran slate hun as it appears in m an by “Logos.” W ilh elm in his tran slatio n uses Logos for hsing, w hich can also be tran slated as “essence of h u m a n n a tu re ” o r “creative consciousness.” A fter death, hun becomes shen, “sp irit,” w hich is very close, in the philosophical sense, to hsing. Since th e C hinese concepts are n o t logical in o u r sense of the w ord, b u t are in tu itiv e ideas, th e ir m eanings can only be elicited fro m the ways in w hich they are used an d fro m the co n stitu tio n of the w ritte n characters, o r from such relatio n sh ip s as o b tain betw een hun a n d shen. H u n , then, w o u ld be th e lig h t of con­ sciousness an d reason in m an, o riginally com ing from the logos spermatikos of hsing, a n d re tu rn in g a fte r d e ath th ro u g h shen to th e T a o . U sed in this sense th e expression “Logos” w ould be especially a p p ro p riate, since it includes th e idea of a universal being, an d thus covers the fact th a t m a n ’s clarity o f conscious­ ness an d ra tio n a lity are som ething universal ra th e r th a n indiβ Cf. P sych ological T y p e s, ch. V.

v idually u n iq u e . T h e Logos p rin c ip le is n o th in g personal, b u t is in the deepest sense im personal, a n d th u s in sh arp c o n tra st to the anim a, w hich is a personal d em o n expressing itself in th o r­ oughly personal m oods (“anim o sity ” !). 60 In view of these psychological facts, I have reserved th e te rm “a n im u s” strictly for w om en, because, to answ er a fam ous q u e s­ tion, m u lie r n o n habet anim arn} sed a n im u m . F e m in in e psy­ chology e x h ib its an e lem en t th a t is th e c o u n te rp a rt of a m a n ’s anim a. P rim arily , it is n o t of an affective n a tu re b u t is a q u a si­ in te lle ctu al facto r best described by th e w ord “ p re ju d ic e .” T h e conscious side of w om an corresponds to th e e m o tio n al side of m an, n o t to his “m in d .” M in d m akes u p th e “so u l,” o r b e tte r, the “an im u s” of w om an, an d ju st as th e an im a of a m a n consists of in fe rio r relatedness, fu ll of affect, so th e an im u s of w om an consists of in fe rio r ju d g m en ts, o r b e tte r, o p in io n s. As it is m ade u p of a p lu ra lity of preconceived opin io n s, th e an im u s is far less susceptible of personification by a single figure, b u t appears m ore o ften as a g ro u p o r crow d. (A good ex am p le of this from parapsychology is th e “ Im p e ra to r” g ro u p in the case of M rs. P ip e r.7) O n a low level th e an im u s is an in fe rio r Logos, a c ari­ catu re of th e d ifferen tia te d m asculine m in d , ju s t as o n a low level th e a n im a is a carica tu re of the fem in in e Eros. T o p u rsu e the parallel fu rth e r, we co u ld say th a t ju s t as h u n corresponds to hsing, tran slated by W ilh e lm as Logos, so th e Eros of w om an corresponds to m ing, “ fate” o r “d estin y ,” in te rp re te d by W il­ h elm as Eros. Eros is an in terw eaving ; Logos is d ifferen tia tin g know ledge, clarifying lig h t. Eros is relatedness, Logos is d iscrim ­ in a tio n an d d etach m en t. H en ce th e in fe rio r Logos of w o m an ’s anim us appears as so m eth in g q u ite u n re la te d , as an inaccessible p rejudice, o r as a n o p in io n w hich, irrita tin g ly en ough, has n o th ­ in g to do w ith th e essential n a tu re of th e object. 61 I have often b een accused of perso n ify in g th e an im a an d an im u s as m ythology does, b u t this accusation w o u ld be ju stified only if it co u ld be p roved th a t I concretize these concepts in a m ythological m a n n e r fo r psychological use. I m u st d eclare once a n d for all th a t th e personification is n o t a n in v e n tio n of m in e, 7 Cf. H y s lo p , S c ien ce a n d a F u tu r e L if e , p p . ii3fE . [M rs. L e o n o r a P ip e r , a n A m e r ­ ica n p sy c h ic m e d iu m a c tiv e a b o u t 1890—1910 in th e U .S . a n d E n g la n d , w a s s tu d ie d b y W illia m J a m e s, M rs. H e n r y S id g w ick , H y s lo p , a n d o th e r s. A g r o u p o f fiv e o f h e r p s y c h ic c o n tr o ls h a d th e c o lle c tiv e n a m e “ I m p e r a to r .”— E d i t o r s .]

b u t is in h e re n t in the n a tu re of the ph en o m en a. I t w o u ld be unscientific to overlook th e fact th a t the an im a is a psychic, and th erefore a personal, au to n o m o u s system. N o n e of th e people w ho m ake the charge against m e w ould hesitate for a second to say, “ I d ream ed of M r. X ,” w hereas, strictly speaking, he d ream ed only of a re p re se n ta tio n of M r. X . T h e a n im a is n o th ­ in g b u t a re p re se n ta tio n of the personal n a tu re of th e a u to n o ­ m ous system in question. W h at the n a tu re of this system is in a tran scen d en tal sense, th a t is, beyond th e b o u n d s of experience, we c an n o t know. 62 I have defined th e an im a as a personification of th e u n co n ­ scious in general, a n d have taken it as a b rid g e to the u n ­ conscious, in o th e r words, as a fu n ctio n of re la tio n sh ip to the unconscious. T h e re is an in terestin g p o in t in o u r tex t in this connection. T h e te x t says th a t consciousness (th at is, the personal consciousness) comes from th e anim a. Since th e W estern m in d is based w holly on the stan d p o in t of consciousness, it m u st de­ fine the anim a in the way I have done. B u t th e East, based as it is on the stan d p o in t of the unconscious, sees consciousness as a n ef­ fect of the anim a. A nd there can be n o d o u b t th a t consciousness does o rig in ate in the unconscious. T h is is so m eth in g we are apt to forget, an d th erefo re we are always a tte m p tin g to id en tify the psyche w ith consciousness, o r at least to re p re se n t th e u n c o n ­ scious as a derivative o r an effect of consciousness (as in the F re u d ia n repression theory). B ut, for th e reasons given above, it is essential th a t we do n o t d e tract from th e reality of th e u n co n ­ scious, an d th a t th e figures of the unconscious be u n d ersto o d as re a l a n d effective factors. T h e person w ho has u n d e rsto o d w hat is m e an t by psychic reality n eed have n o fe a r th a t h e has fallen back in to p rim itiv e dem onology. If the unconscious figures are n o t acknow ledged as spontaneous agents, we becom e victim s of a one-sided b elief in the pow er of consciousness, lead in g finally to acute tension. A catastrophe is th e n b o u n d to h ap p en because, for all o u r consciousness, the d ark pow ers of th e psyche have been overlooked. I t is n o t we w ho personify them ; they have a personal n a tu re from the very b egin n in g . O n ly w hen this is th oroughly recognized can we th in k of depersonalizing them , of “su b ju g atin g the an im a,” as o u r tex t expresses it. 63 H e re again we find an enorm ous difference betw een B u d ­ d hism an d th e W estern a ttitu d e of m in d , a n d again th e re is a 42

dangerous sem blance of agreem ent. Yoga teac h in g rejects all fantasy p roducts a n d we do th e same, b u t th e E ast does so fo r en tirely differen t reasons. In th e East th ere is an a b u n d a n c e of conceptions an d teachings th a t give fu ll expression to th e crea­ tive fantasy; in fact, p ro te c tio n is need ed against a n excess of it. W e, on the o th e r h an d , re g a rd fantasy as w orthless subjective day-dream ing. N a tu ra lly th e figures of th e unconscious do n o t appear in the form of abstractions strip p e d of all im ag in ativ e trappings; on the contrary, they are em b ed d ed in a w eb of fa n ta ­ sies o f e x tra o rd in a ry variety a n d b ew ild erin g p ro fu sio n . T h e East can re je ct these fantasies because it has lo n g since e x tra cte d th e ir essence a n d condensed it in p ro fo u n d teachings. B u t we have n ev er even ex p erien ced these fantasies, m u ch less e x tra cte d th e ir quintessence. W e still have a large stretch of ex p erien ce to catch u p w ith, an d o nly w hen we have fo u n d th e sense in a p p a r­ e n t nonsense can we separate th e v alu ab le from th e w orthless. W e can be sure th a t the essence we e x tract fro m o u r ex p erien ce w ill be q u ite d ifferen t from w hat th e East offers us today. T h e E ast cam e to its know ledge of in n e r things in ch ild lik e ig n o ­ rance of th e e x te rn a l w orld. W e, on the o th e r h a n d , shall ex­ p lo re th e psyche an d its d epths su p p o rte d by a n im m ense k n o w l­ edge of history a n d science. A t p resen t o u r know ledge of th e e x tern al w orld is th e greatest obstacle to in tro sp ectio n , b u t the psychological n e ed w ill overcom e all ob stru ctio n s. W e are al­ ready b u ild in g u p a psychology, a science th a t gives us th e key to th e very things th a t the East discovered— a n d discovered only th ro u g h ab n o rm a l psychic states.

5 - T H E D E T A C H M E N T O F C O N S C IO U S N E S S

F R O M T H E O B JE C T 64

By u n d e rs ta n d in g th e u n co n scio u s w e fre e o u rselv es fro m its d o m in a tio n . T h a t is re a lly also th e p u rp o s e of th e in s tru c tio n s in o u r text. T h e p u p il is ta u g h t to c o n c e n tra te o n th e lig h t of th e in n e rm o s t re g io n a n d , a t th e sam e tim e, to free h im se lf from all o u te r a n d in n e r e n ta n g le m e n ts . H is v ita l im p u lses are g u id e d tow ards a consciousness v o id of c o n te n t, w h ich n ev erth eless p e r­ m its all c o n te n ts to exist. T h e H u i M i n g C h in g 1 says of this d e ta c h m e n t: A halo of light surrounds the w orld of the law. W e forget one another, q u ie t an d pure, all-pow erful an d empty. T h e em ptiness is irrad iated by the lig h t of the h eart of heaven. T h e w ater of the sea is sm ooth an d m irrors the m oon in its surface. T h e clouds disappear in blue space; the m ou n tain s shine clear. Consciousness reverts to contem plation; the moon-disk rests alone.

T h i s d e s c rip tio n of fu lfilm e n t d ep icts a psychic state th a t can b est be ch a ra c te riz e d as a d e ta c h m e n t o f consciousness fro m th e w o rld a n d a w ith d ra w a l to a p o in t o u ts id e it, so to speak. T h u s consciousness is a t th e sam e tim e e m p ty a n d n o t e m p ty . I t is n o lo n g e r p re o c c u p ie d w ith th e im ages of th in g s b u t m e re ly c o n ta in s th e m . T h e fu lln ess of th e w o rld w h ich h ith e r to p ressed u p o n it has lo st n o n e o f its rich n ess a n d b eau ty , b u t it n o lo n g e r d o m in a te s. T h e m ag ical c la im of th in g s has ceased becau se th e in te rw e a v in g o f consciousness w ith w o rld has co m e to a n e n d . T h e u n co n scio u s is n o t p ro je c te d an y m o re, a n d so th e p r im o r ­ d ia l p a r tic ip a tio n m y s tiq u e w ith th in g s is ab o lish ed . C o n scio u s­ ness is n o lo n g e r p re o c c u p ie d w ith co m p u lsiv e p lan s b u t d is­ solves in c o n te m p la tiv e v isio n . 66 H o w d id th is effect co m e ab o u t? (W e assum e, of course, th a t th e C h in e se a u th o r was first o f all n o t a lia r; secondly, th a t h e w as o f so u n d m in d ; a n d th ird ly , th a t h e was a n u n u s u a lly in te l-

65

1 [T h e Golden Flower (196a edn.), pp. 77f.]

lig e n t m an.) T o u n d e rsta n d an d ex p lain this d e tac h m e n t, we m ust proceed by a ro u n d a b o u t way. I t is an effect th a t c a n n o t be sim u lated ; n o th in g w o uld be m ore childish th a n to m ake such a psychic state a n o b je ct of aesthetic e x p erim en t. I know this effect very well from m y practice; it is the th e ra p e u tic effect par excel­ lence, tor w hich I la b o u r w ith m y stu d en ts a n d p atien ts, a n d it consists in th e disso lu tio n of participation m ystiq ue. By a stro k e of genius, Levy-B ruhl singled o u t w h at he called participation m y stiq u e as b ein g th e h a llm a rk of th e p rim itiv e m e n ta lity .2 W h a t he m e a n t by it is sim ply th e ind efin itely large re m n a n t of n o n -d ifferen tiatio n betw een subject an d object, w h ich is still so g reat am ong p rim itives th a t it c an n o t fail to strik e o u r E u ro ­ pean consciousness very forcibly. W h e n th e re is no consciousness of the difference betw een subject an d object, an unconscious id e n tity prevails. T h e unconscious is th e n p ro je c ted in to th e o b ­ ject, an d the o b ject is in tro je c te d in to the subject, b eco m in g p a rt of his psychology. T h e n plan ts an d anim als b ehave like h u m a n beings, h u m a n beings are a t th e sam e tim e anim als, a n d every­ th in g is alive w ith ghosts an d gods. C ivilized m an n a tu ra lly thinks he is m iles above these things. In stead of th a t, h e is o ften id en tified w ith his p aren ts th ro u g h o u t his life, o r w ith his affects a n d prejudices, an d sham elessly accuses o th ers of th e things he w ill n o t see in him self. H e too has a re m n a n t of p rim itiv e u n ­ consciousness, of n o n -d ifferen tiatio n b etw een su b ject an d o b ­ ject. B ecause of this, he is m agically affected by all m a n n e r of people, things, an d circum stances, he is beset by d is tu rb in g in ­ fluences n early as m uch as the p rim itiv e an d th e re fo re needs ju s t as m any a p o tro p a ic charm s. H e no lo n g e r w orks m agic w ith m ed icin e bags, am ulets, a n d a n im al sacrifices, b u t w ith tra n q u il­ lizers, neuroses, ratio n alism , c u lt of th e w ill, etc. 67 B u t if th e unconscious can be recognized as a co -d eterm in in g factor alo n g w ith consciousness, a n d if we can live in such a way th a t conscious a n d unconscious dem an d s are ta k en in to acco u n t as far as possible, th e n th e cen tre of gravity of th e to ta l p erso n al­ ity shifts its position. I t is th e n no lo n g e r in th e ego, w h ich is m erely th e cen tre of consciousness, b u t in th e h y p o th e tic al p o in t b etw een conscious an d unconscious. T h is new c en tre m ig h t be called the self. If th e tra n sp o sitio n is successful, it does aw ay w ith th e participation m y stiq u e a n d resu lts in a p erso n ality th a t 2 L evy-B ruhl, P r i m i t i v e M e n t a li ty .

suffers only in the low er storeys, as it w ere, b u t in its u p p e r storeys is singularly detached from p a in fu l as w ell as from joyful happenings. 68 T h e p ro d u c tio n a n d b irth of this su p erio r personality is w hat is m ean t w hen o u r tex t speaks of th e “holy fru it,” the “ dia­ m o n d body,” o r any o th e r k in d of in c o rru p tib le body. Psycho­ logically, these expressions symbolize an a ttitu d e th a t is beyond the reach of em o tio n al entanglem ents an d v io len t shocks— a con­ sciousness detached from th e w orld. I have reasons for believing th a t this a ttitu d e sets in after m id d le life an d is a n a tu ra l p rep a­ ra tio n for death. D eath is psychologically as im p o rta n t as b irth and, like it, is an in teg ral p art of life. W h a t h ap p en s to th e de­ tached consciousness in the en d is a q u estio n the psychologist can n o t be expected to answ er. W h atev er his th eo retical position h e w ould hopelessly overstep the boun d s of his scientific com pe­ tence. H e can only p o in t o u t th a t the views of o u r tex t in regard to th e timelessness of th e detached consciousness are in h arm o n y w ith the religious th o u g h t of all ages a n d w ith th a t of th e over­ w helm ing m ajo rity of m an k in d . A nyone w ho th o u g h t differently w ould be stan d in g outside the h u m a n o rd e r an d w ould, th e re ­ fore, be suffering from a d istu rb e d psychic e q u ilib riu m . As a doctor, I m ake every effort to stre n g th en the b elief in im m o rtal­ ity, especially w ith o ld e r p atients w hen such questions com e th re a ten in g ly close. For, seen in co rrect psychological perspec­ tive, d eath is n o t an en d b u t a goal, an d life’s in c lin a tio n tow ards d e ath begins as soon as th e m e rid ia n is passed. 69 C hinese yoga philosophy is based u p o n this in stin ctiv e p re p ­ a ra tio n fo r death as a goal. In analogy w ith th e goal of th e first h alf of life— p ro creatio n an d re p ro d u c tio n , th e m eans of p e rp e t­ u a tin g o n e ’s physical existence— it takes as the goal of sp iritu al existence the sym bolic b e g ettin g an d b irth of a “ spirit-body,” o r “ breath-body,” w hich ensures the c o n tin u ity of d etach ed con­ sciousness. I t is th e b irth of th e p n eu m atic m an , k now n to the E u ro p ea n from a n tiq u ity , b u t w hich h e seeks to p ro d u ce by q u ite o th e r symbols an d m agical practices, b y faith an d a C h ris­ tia n way of life. H e re again w e stan d on a fo u n d a tio n q u ite d ifferen t from th a t of th e East. A gain th e te x t sounds as th o u g h it w ere n o t so very far from C hristian ascetic m orality, b u t n o th ­ in g could be m ore m istaken th a n to assum e th a t it actually m eans the same thing. B eh in d o u r te x t is a civilization th o u 46

sands of years old, one w hich is b u ilt u p organically o n p rim itiv e instincts a n d knows n o th in g of th a t b ru ta l m o rality so su ited to us as recen tly civilized T e u to n ic b a rb a ria n s. F o r this reaso n th e C hinese are w ith o u t th e im pulse tow ards v io le n t rep ressio n of the instincts th a t poisons o u r sp iritu a lity an d m akes it h y steri­ cally exaggerated. T h e m an w ho lives w ith his in stin cts can also detach from them , a n d in ju s t as n a tu ra l a way as h e liv ed w ith them . A ny idea of heroic self-conquest w o u ld be e n tire ly fo reig n to the sp irit of o u r text, b u t th a t is w h at it w o u ld in fallib ly a m o u n t to if we follow ed th e in stru c tio n s literally . 70 W e m u st n e v er forget o u r historical antecedents. O n ly a lit­ tle m ore th a n a th o u san d years ago we stu m b le d o u t of th e c ru d ­ est b eg innings of polytheism in to a hig h ly d eveloped O rie n ta l relig io n w hich lifted the im aginative m in d s of half-savages to a h e ig h t th a t in no way co rresp o n d ed to th e ir s p iritu a l develop­ m ent. In o rd e r to keep to this h e ig h t in som e fashion o r o th e r, it was in ev itab le th a t th e in stin c tu a l sphere sh o u ld be largely re ­ pressed. T h u s religious practice an d m o rality took o n a d ecid ­ edly b ru ta l, alm ost m a lig n a n t, character. T h e repressed ele­ m ents n a tu ra lly d id n o t develop, b u t w en t o n v eg etatin g in the unconscious, in th e ir o rig in al b arb arism . W e w o u ld like to scale th e heights of a p h ilosophical relig io n , b u t in fact are in cap ab le of it. To grow u p to it is the m ost we can h o p e for. T h e Amfortas w o u n d a n d th e F a u stia n sp lit in th e G e rm a n ic m a n are still n o t healed; his unconscious is still lo ad ed w ith co n ten ts th a t m u st first be m ade conscious before he can be free of them . R ecently I received a le tte r from a fo rm er p a tie n t w hich d e­ scribes th e necessary tra n sfo rm a tio n in sim ple b u t tre n c h a n t words. She w rites: O ut of evil, m uch good has come to me. By keeping quiet, repress­ ing nothing, rem aining attentive, and by accepting reality— taking things as they are, and not as I wanted them to be—by doing all this, unusual knowledge has come to me, and unusual powers as well, such as I could never have imagined before. I always thought that when we accepted things they overpowered us in some way or other. T his turns out not to be true at all, and it is only by accept­ ing them that one can assume an attitude towards them .3 So now I intend to play the game of life, being receptive to whatever comes to me, good and bad, sun and shadow forever alternating, and, in 3 D issolu tion o f p a r tic ip a tio n m y s tiq u e .

this way, also accepting my ow n n atu re w ith its positive an d nega­ tive sides. T h u s everything becomes m ore alive to me. W h at a fool I was! H ow I tried to force everything to go according to the way I th o u g h t it ou g h t to! 71

O n ly o n th e basis o f su ch a n a ttitu d e , w h ich re n o u n c e s n o n e of th e C h ris tia n v alu es w o n in th e co u rse of C h ris tia n d e v e lo p ­ m e n t, b u t w h ich , o n th e c o n tra ry , trie s w ith C h ris tia n c h a rity a n d fo rb e a ra n c e to acc ep t ev en th e h u m b le s t th in g s in o n e ’s o w n n a ­ tu re , w ill a h ig h e r lev el o f consciousness a n d c u ltu r e b eco m e possible. T h is a ttitu d e is re lig io u s in th e tr u e s t sense, a n d th e re ­ fo re th e ra p e u tic , fo r a ll re lig io n s a re th e ra p ie s fo r th e sorrow s a n d d iso rd ers of th e soul. T h e d e v e lo p m e n t of th e W e s te rn in ­ te lle c t a n d w ill has g iv en us a n alm o st fien d ish cap a city fo r a p in g such a n a ttitu d e , w ith a p p a r e n t success, d e sp ite th e p ro tests of th e u n co n scio u s. B u t it is o n ly a m a tte r of tim e b e fo re th e q o u n te rp o s itio n asserts itse lf all th e m o re h arsh ly . A p in g a n a tti­ tu d e alw ays p ro d u c e s a n u n s ta b le s itu a tio n th a t can b e o v e r­ th ro w n by th e u n co n scio u s a t an y tim e. A safe f o u n d a tio n is fo u n d o n ly w h en th e in s tin c tiv e p rem ises o f th e u n co n scio u s w in th e sam e re sp e c t as th e view s o f th e co n scio u s m in d . N o o n e s h o u ld b lin d h im se lf to th e fact th a t th is necessity of g iv in g d u e c o n s id e ra tio n to th e u n co n scio u s ru n s v io le n tly c o u n te r to o u r W e s te rn , a n d in p a r tic u la r th e P ro te s ta n t, c u lt o f consciousness. Y et, th o u g h th e n e w alw ays seem s to b e th e en e m y of th e o ld , an y o n e w ith a m o re th a n su p erficial d esire to u n d e r s ta n d c a n n o t fa il to d isco v er th a t w ith o u t th e m o st serio u s a p p lic a tio n o f th e C h ris tia n v alu es w e h av e a c q u ire d , th e n ew in te g ra tio n can n e v e r ta k e place.

6. T H E FULFILM ENT A grow ing fa m ilia rity w ith the sp irit of th e E ast sh o u ld be taken m erely as a sign th a t we are b e g in n in g to re la te to th e alien elem ents w ith in ourselves. D en ial of o u r historical fo u n d a ­ tions w o u ld be sheer folly an d w ould be th e best way to b rin g a b o u t a n o th e r u p ro o tin g of consciousness. O n ly by sta n d in g firm ly on o u r ow n soil can we assim ilate th e sp irit of the East. 73 S peaking of those w ho do n o t know w here th e tru e springs of secret pow er lie, an a n c ie n t a d ep t says, “ W o rld ly p eo p le lose th e ir roots a n d cling to the tre e to p s.’’ T h e s p irit of th e East has grow n o u t of th e yellow e arth , an d o u r sp irit can, a n d sho u ld , grow only o u t of o u r ow n e arth . T h a t is w hy I ap p ro ach these p roblem s in a way th a t has o ften been charged w ith “ psycholo­ gism .” If “ psychology” w ere m ean t, I sh o u ld in d e ed b e flattered, fo r m y aim as a psychologist is to dism iss w ith o u t m ercy th e m e t­ aphysical claim s of all esoteric teachings. T h e unavow ed p u r ­ pose of g a in in g pow er th ro u g h w ords, in h e re n t in all secret doc­ trines, ill accords w ith o u r p ro fo u n d ignorance, w hich we sh o u ld have th e m odesty to adm it. I q u ite d e lib e rately b rin g ev ery th in g th a t p u rp o rts to be m etaphysical in to th e d ay lig h t of psycho­ logical u n d e rsta n d in g , an d do m y best to p re v e n t p eo p le from b elieving in n e b u lo u s pow er-w ords. L e t th e convinced C h ristia n believe, by all m eans, fo r th a t is th e d u ty h e has ta k en u p o n him self; b u t w hoever is n o t a C h ristia n has fo rfeited th e cha­ rism a of faith. (P erhaps he was cursed from b irth w ith n o t b e in g able to believe, b u t m erely to know .) T h e re fo re , h e has n o rig h t to p u t his faith elsew here. O n e c an n o t grasp a n y th in g m etap h y s­ ically, o n e on ly can do so psychologically. T h e re fo re I strip things of th e ir m etaphysical w rappings in o rd e r to m ake th e m objects of psychology. In th a t way I can at least e x tra ct som e­ th in g u n d e rsta n d a b le from th em a n d avail m yself of it, a n d I also discover psychological facts a n d processes th a t b efo re w ere v eiled in sym bols an d beyond m y com p reh en sio n . I n d o in g so I

72

m a y p e rh a p s b e fo llo w in g in th e fo o tstep s of th e fa ith fu l, an d m ay possibly h av e s im ila r ex p e rie n c e s; a n d if in th e e n d th e re s h o u ld be s o m e th in g in effab ly m e ta p h y sic a l b e h in d it all, it w o u ld th e n h av e th e b e st o p p o r tu n ity of sh o w in g itself. 74 M y a d m ir a tio n fo r th e g re a t p h ilo so p h e rs o f th e E ast is as g e n u in e as m y a ttitu d e to w a rd s th e ir m e tap h y sics is ir r e v e r e n t.1 I su sp ect th e m of b e in g sy m b o lical psychologists, to w h o m no g re a te r w ro n g c o u ld b e d o n e th a n to ta k e th e m lite ra lly . I f it w ere re a lly m e tap h y sics th a t th e y m e a n , it w o u ld be useless to try to u n d e rs ta n d th e m . B u t if it is psychology, we can n o t on ly u n d e rs ta n d th e m b u t can p ro fit g re a tly by th e m , fo r th e n th e soc a lle d “ m e ta p h y s ic a l” com es w ith in th e ra n g e of e x p e rie n c e . If I assum e th a t G o d is a b s o lu te a n d b e y o n d all h u m a n e x p e rie n c e , h e leaves m e co ld . I d o n o t afEect h im , n o r does h e affect m e. B u t if I k n o w th a t h e is a p o w e rfu l im p u ls e of m y so u l, a t o n ce I m u s t c o n c e rn m y self w ith h im , fo r th e n h e can b e c o m e im p o r­ ta n t, ev en u n p le a s a n tly so, a n d c a n affect m e in p ra c tic a l ways— w h ic h so u n d s h o r r ib ly b a n a l, lik e e v e ry th in g else th a t is re a l. 75 T h e e p ith e t “ p sy ch o lo g ism ” a p p lie s o n ly to a fo o l w ho th in k s he has his so u l in h is p o ck et. T h e r e a re c e rta in ly m o re th a n e n o u g h su ch fools, fo r a lth o u g h w e k n o w h o w to ta lk b ig a b o u t th e “s o u l,” th e d e p re c ia tio n o f e v e ry th in g p sy ch ic is a ty p ­ ically W e s te rn p re ju d ic e . I f I m a k e u se o f th e c o n c e p t “ a u to n o ­ m o u s psychic c o m p le x ,” m y r e a d e r im m e d ia te ly com es u p w ith th e re a d y -m ad e p re ju d ic e th a t it is “ n o th in g b u t a psychic c o m ­ p le x .” H o w c a n w e b e so s u re th a t th e so u l is “n o th in g b u t ” ? I t is as if w e d id n o t k n o w , o r else c o n tin u a lly fo rg o t, th a t ev ery ­ th in g o f w h ic h w e a re co n scio u s is a n im ag e, a n d th a t im ag e is psyche. T h e sam e p e o p le w h o th in k th a t G o d is d e p re c ia te d if h e is u n d e rs to o d as s o m e th in g m o v e d in th e psyche, as w ell as th e m o v in g fo rce o f th e psyche— i.e., as a n a u to n o m o u s co m p le x — can b e so p la g u e d b y u n c o n tro lla b le affects a n d n e u r o tic states th a t th e ir w ills a n d th e ir w h o le p h ilo so p h y o f life fail th e m m is­ e rab ly . Is th a t a p ro o f o f th e im p o te n c e o f th e psyche? S h o u ld M e iste r E c k h a rt b e accu sed o f “ p sy ch o lo g ism ” w h e n h e says, “ G o d m u s t b e b o r n in th e so u l a g a in a n d a g a in ” ? I th in k th e a c c u sa tio n o f "p sy c h o lo g ism ” c a n b e le v e lle d o n ly a t a n in te lle c t I T h e C hin ese p h ilo so p h ers— in contrast to the d ogm atists o f the W est— are on ly gratefu l for such an a ttitu d e , because they also are m asters o f th eir gods. [N ote by R ich ard W ilh elm in o rig in a l edn.]

that denies the genuine nature of the autonom ous com plex and seeks to explain it rationalistically as the consequence of known causes, i.e., as som ething secondary and unreal. T h is is just as arrogant as the metaphysical assertion that seeks to make a God outside the range of our experience responsible for our psychic states. Psychologism is sim ply the counterpart of this m etaphysi­ cal presumption, and is just as childish. T herefore it seems to m e far more reasonable to accord the psyche the same validity as the empirical world, and to adm it that the former has just as m uch “reality” as the latter. As I see it, the psyche is a world in w hich the ego is contained. Maybe there are fishes who believe that they contain the sea. W e must rid ourselves of this habitual illu ­ sion of ours if we wish to consider metaphysical assertions from the standpoint of psychology. 76 A metaphysical assertion of this kind is the idea of the “dia­ m ond body,” the incorruptible breath-body w hich grows in the golden flower or in the “held of the square in ch .” 2 T h is body is 2 O u r te x t is so m e w h a t u n c le a r as to w h e th e r by ‘‘c o n tin u a tio n o f life ” a su rv iv a l a fte r d e a th o r a p ro lo n g a tio n of p h y sic al e x iste n c e is m e a n t. E x p re ssio n s su c h as ‘‘e lix ir o f life ” a n d th e lik e a re e x c e e d in g ly a m b ig u o u s . In th e la te r a d d itio n s to th e te x t i t is e v id e n t t h a t th e y oga in s tru c tio n s w ere also u n d e rs to o d in a p u re ly p h y sic a l sense. T o a p rim itiv e m in d , th e r e is n o th in g d is tu r b in g in th is o d d m ix ­ tu r e o f th e p h y sic a l a n d th e s p iritu a l, b ecau se life a n d d e a th a re by n o m e a n s th e c o m p le te o p p o site s th e y a re fcrr us. (P a r tic u la rly in te re s tin g in th is c o n n e c ­ tio n , a p a r t fro m th e e th n o lo g ic a l m a te ria l, a re th e c o m m u n ic a tio n s o f th e E n g lish “rescu e circles” w ith th e ir th o ro u g h ly a rc h a ic ideas.) T h e sa m e a m b ig u ity w ith re g a rd to su rv iv a l a fte r d e a th is fo u n d in e a rly C h ris tia n ity , w h e re im m o r ta lity d e p e n d s o n v ery s im ila r a ss u m p tio n s, i.e., o n th e id e a o f a b re a th -b o d y as th e c a rr ie r of life. (G eley ’s p a ra p h y s io lo g ic a l th e o ry w o u ld b e th e la te s t in c a r n a tio n o f th is a n c ie n t idea.) B u t sin ce in o u r te x t th e r e a re w a rn in g s a b o u t th e s u p e r ­ s titio u s use of it— w a rn in g s , fo r e x a m p le , a g a in s t th e m a k in g of g o ld — we can safely in sist o n th e s p ir itu a l p u r p o r t o f th e in s tru c tio n s w ith o u t c o n tr a d ic tin g th e ir m e a n in g . In th e sta te s w h ic h th e in s tru c tio n s seek to in d u c e th e p h y sic a l b o d y p la y s a n in c re a sin g ly u n im p o r t a n t p a r t an y w ay , sin ce it is re p la c e d by th e b re a th -b o d y (h en c e th e im p o rta n c e of b r e a th c o n tro l in all yoga exercises). T h e b re a th -b o d y is n o t s o m e th in g “ s p i r it u a l” in o u r sense o f th e w o rd . I t is c h a r a c te r ­ istic o f W e ste rn m a n t h a t h e h a s s p lit a p a r t th e p h y sic a l a n d th e s p i r it u a l fo r e p istem o lo g ical p u rp o se s. B u t th ese o p p o site s ex ist to g e th e r in th e p sy c h e a n d psychology m u s t reco g n ize th is fact. “ P sy ch ic” m e a n s p h y sic a l a n d s p ir itu a l. T h e id eas in o u r te x t all d e a l w ith th is “ in te r m e d ia te ” w o rld w h ic h seem s u n c le a r a n d co n fu sed b eca u se th e c o n c e p t o f p sy c h ic re a lity is n o t y et c u r r e n t a m o n g us, a lth o u g h it expresses life as i t a c tu a lly is. W ith o u t so u l, s p ir it is as d e a d as m a t­ te r, b ecau se b o th a re a rtific ia l a b stra c tio n s; w h e re a s m a n o rig in a lly re g a r d e d s p ir it as a v o la tile b o d y , a n d m a tte r as n o t la c k in g in so u l.

77

7s

a sym bol for a re m a rk a b le psychological fact w hich, precisely be­ cause it is objective, first appears in form s d ic ta ted by th e expe­ rien ce o f biological life— th a t is, as fru it, em bryo, child, living body, an d so on. T h is fact co u ld be best expressed by th e words “I t is n o t I w ho live, it lives m e.” T h e illu sio n of th e suprem acy o f consciousness m akes us say, “I live.” O nce this illu sio n is shat­ te re d by a re c o g n itio n of the unconscious, the unconscious will a p p ea r as so m eth in g objective in w hich th e ego is in clu d ed . T h e a ttitu d e tow ards the unconscious is th e n an alogous to the feeling of th e p rim itiv e to w hom th e existence of a son g u a ra n ­ tees c o n tin u a tio n of life— a feeling th a t can assum e g ro tesq u e form s, as w hen the old N egro, an g ered at his so n ’s disobedience, cried out, “T h e re he stands w ith my body, b u t does n o t even obey m e!” It is, in fact, a change of feeling sim ila r to th a t ex p erien ced by a fath er to w hom a son has been bo rn , a change k now n to us from th e testim ony of St, P au l: “ Yet n o t I, b u t C h rist liv eth in m e.” T h e sym bol “C h rist” as “son of m a n ” is an analogous psychic experience of a h ig h e r sp iritu a l b ein g w ho is invisibly b o rn in the in d iv id u a l, a p n e u m a tic body w hich is to serve us as a fu tu re dw elling, a body w hich, as P au l says, is p u t o n like a g a rm e n t (“ F o r as m an y of you as have b een b a p tized in to C hrist have p u t on C h rist”). I t is always a difficult th in g to express, in in te lle c tu a l term s, su b tle feelings th a t are nevertheless infinitely im p o rta n t for th e in d iv id u a l’s life an d w ell-being. I t is, in a sense, the feeling th a t we have b e en “re p la ce d ,” b u t w ith o u t th e c o n n o tatio n of h aving b e en “ deposed.” I t is as if th e g u id a n ce of life h ad passed over to an invisible cen tre. N ietzsche’s m etap h o r, “ in m ost lo v in g bondage, free,” w o u ld be a p p ro p ria te here. R e ­ ligious language is fu ll of im agery d e p ic tin g this feelin g of free d ep en d en ce, of calm acceptance. T h is re m a rk a b le ex p erien ce seems to m e a consequence of th e d e tac h m e n t of consciousness, thank s to w hich the su b jectiv e “I liv e” becom es th e ob jectiv e “ I t lives m e .” T h is state is felt to be h ig h e r th a n th e previous one; it is really like a sort of re ­ lease from th e co m pulsion a n d im possible resp o n sib ility th a t are th e in e v ita b le results of particip a tio n m ystiq u e. T h is feelin g of lib e ra tio n fills P a u l com pletely; th e consciousness of b e in g a ch ild o f G od delivers one from th e bondage of the b lo o d . I t is also a feelin g of re c o n ciliatio n w ith all th a t h ap p en s, fo r w hich

reason, a c c o rd in g to th e H u i M i n g C h i n g , th e gaze of o n e w h o has a t ta in e d f u lfilm e n t tu r n s back to th e b e a u ty of n a t u r e . 79 I n th e P a u li n e C h r is t sym bol th e s u p r e m e relig io u s e x p e r i­ ences of W e s t a n d E ast c o n f r o n t o n e a n o th e r : C h ris t th e s o rro w ­ la d e n h e ro , a n d th e G o ld e n F lo w e r th a t b lo o m s in th e p u r p l e hall of th e city o f jade. W h a t a contrast, w h a t a n u n f a th o m a b le difference, w h a t an abyss of history! A p r o b le m fit fo r th e c r o w n ­ in g w ork of a f u t u r e psychologist! 80 A m o n g th e g re a t relig io u s p r o b le m s o f th e p r e s e n t is o n e w h ich has rece iv ed scant a t te n ti o n , b u t w h ic h is in fact th e m a in p r o b le m of o u r day: th e e v o lu tio n of th e re lig io u s sp irit. I f we are to discuss it, we m u s t em phasize th e difference b e tw e e n E ast a n d W e s t in th e ir t r e a tm e n t of th e “je w el,” th e c e n tra l sym bol. T h e W est lays stress o n the h u m a n in c a r n a tio n , a n d even o n th e p erso n ality a n d h isto ricity of C h rist, w h ereas th e E ast says: “ W i t h o u t b e g in n in g , w i th o u t en d , w i t h o u t past, w i t h o u t f u ­ t u r e . ” 3 T h e C h r is tia n s u b o r d in a te s h im se lf to th e s u p e r io r d i ­ v in e p e rs o n in e x p e c ta tio n of his grace; b u t th e O r ie n ta l k no w s th a t r e d e m p tio n d e p e n d s o n th e w o rk h e does o n him self. T h e T a o grows o u t of th e in d iv id u a l. T h e im it a ti o Christi has this d isad van tage: in th e lo n g r u n we w o rsh ip as a d iv in e e x a m p le a m a n w h o e m b o d ie d th e d eep e st m e a n in g of life, a n d th e n , o u t of s h e e r im ita tio n , we fo rg et to m a k e re a l o u r ow n d e e p e st m e a n in g — self-realization. As a m a tte r of fact, it is n o t a lto g e th e r in c o n v e n ie n t to r e n o u n c e o n e ’s o w n m e a n in g . H a d Jesu s d o n e so, h e w o u ld p r o b a b ly h av e b eco m e a re s p e c ta b le c a r p e n te r a n d n o t a relig io u s r e b e l to w h o m th e sam e t h i n g w o u ld n a t u r a l l y h a p p e n to d a y as h a p p e n e d th e n . 81 T h e im ita tio n of C h ris t m i g h t w ell b e u n d e r s to o d in a d e e p e r sense. I t c o u ld b e ta k e n as th e d u ty to realize o n e ’s d e e p ­ est co n v ictio n w ith the sam e co u ra g e a n d th e sam e self-sacrifice show n b y Jesus. H a p p il y n o t e v e ry o n e has th e task of b e in g a le a d e r of h u m a n ity , o r a g reat re b e l; a n d so, a fte r all, it m i g h t b e possible for each to realize h im se lf in his ow n \vay. T h i s h o n e s ty m ig h t even b e c o m e a n ideal. Since g r e a t in n o v a tio n s always b e ­ gin in th e m o st u n lik e ly places, th e fact th a t p e o p le to day a re n o t n e a rly as ash am e d of th e ir n a k ed n e ss as they used to be m ig h t b e th e b e g i n n in g of a r e c o g n itio n of them selves as th e y really are. H a r d u p o n this w ill follow a n in c re a s in g re c o g n itio n 3 T h e G o l d e n F l o w e r (1962 e d n .), p . 77.

of m any things th a t fo rm erly w ere strictly taboo, fo r th e reality of th e e a rth w ill n o t fo rev er re m a in v eiled lik e th e virgines velandae of T e rtu llia n . M oral u n m a sk in g is b u t a step fu rth e r in th e sam e d ire c tio n , a n d b eh o ld , th e re stands m an as he is, and ad m its to him self th a t he is as he is. If he does th is in a m e an in g ­ less way he is ju s t a m u d d le d fool; b u t if h e know s th e signifi­ cance of w hat he is d o in g he co u ld b e lo n g to a h ig h e r o rd e r of m an w ho m akes re a l the C h rist sym bol, regardless of th e suffering involved. It has o ften been observed th a t p u re ly co n crete taboos o r m agical rites in a n early stage of a re lig io n becom e in the n e x t stage so m eth in g psychic, o r even p u re ly sp iritu a l symbols. A n o u tw a rd law becom es in th e course of tim e an in w a rd convic­ tio n . T h u s it m ig h t easily h a p p e n to co n tem p o rary m an , espe­ cially P rotestants, th a t th e person Jesus, n o w e x istin g o u tsid e in th e re a lm of history, m ig h t becom e th e h ig h e r m a n w ith in h im ­ self. T h e n we w o u ld have a tta in e d , in a E u ro p e a n way, th e psy­ chological state co rre sp o n d in g to E astern e n lig h te n m e n t. A ll this is a step in th e e v o lu tio n of a h ig h e r consciousness o n its way to u n k n o w n goals, a n d is n o t m etaphysics as o rd in a rily u n d ersto o d . T o th a t e x te n t it is o n ly “ psychology,” b u t to th at ex ten t, too, it is ex p erien ceab le, u n d e rsta n d a b le a n d — th a n k G od— real, a re a lity we can do so m eth in g w ith, a liv in g re a lity fu ll of possibilities. T h e fact th a t I am c o n te n t w ith w h at can be ex p erien ced psychically, an d re je ct the m etaphysical, does n o t a m o u n t, as any in te llig e n t person can see, to a gestu re of scep ti­ cism o r agnosticism aim ed at fa ith a n d tru s t in h ig h e r pow ers, b u t m eans a p p ro x im a te ly th e sam e as w h at K an t m e a n t w hen h e called th e thing-in-itself a “ m erely n eg ativ e b o rd e rlin e co n ­ c ep t.” Every sta te m e n t a b o u t th e tra n sce n d e n tal is to b e avoided because it is only a la u g h ab le p re su m p tio n o n th e p a rt of a h u ­ m a n m in d unconscious of its lim itatio n s. T h e re fo re , w h en G o d o r th e T a o is n a m e d a n im p u lse of th e soul, o r a psychic state, so m eth in g has b een said a b o u t th e kn o w ab le only, b u t n o th in g a b o u t th e u n k n o w ab le, a b o u t w hich n o th in g can be d e te r­ m in ed .

η. C O N C L U S IO N 83

84

T h e p u rp o s e o£ m y c o m m e n ta ry is to a tte m p t to b u ild a b rid g e o f p sy ch o lo g ical u n d e r s ta n d in g b e tw e e n E ast a n d W est. T h e basis o f ev ery r e a l u n d e r s ta n d in g is m a n , a n d th e re fo re I h a d to sp eak of h u m a n b ein g s. T h is m u s t b e m y ex cu se fo r h a v ­ in g d e a lt o n ly w ith g e n e ra l aspects, a n d fo r n o t h a v in g e n te r e d in to te c h n ic a l d e ta ils. T e c h n ic a l d ire c tio n s a re v a lu a b le fo r those w h o k n o w , fo r e x a m p le , w h a t a c a m e ra is, o r a c o m b u stio n e n g in e, b u t th e y a re useless fo r a n y o n e w h o has n o id e a o f su ch a p p a ra tu s . W e s te rn m a n fo r w h o m I w rite is in a n an alo g o u s p o sitio n . T h e r e f o r e it seem e d to m e im p o r ta n t ab o v e all to e m ­ phasize th e a g re e m e n t b e tw e e n th e psychic states a n d sy m b o l­ ism s o f E ast a n d W est. T h e s e an a lo g ie s o p e n a w ay to th e in n e r c h a m b e rs o f th e E a s te rn m in d , a w ay th a t does n o t r e q u ir e th e sacrih ce o f o u r o w n n a tu r e a n d does n o t c o n f r o n t us w ith th e th re a t of b e in g to r n fro m o u r ro o ts. N o r is it a n in te lle c tu a l te le ­ scope o r m icro sco p e o ffe rin g a view o f n o fu n d a m e n ta l c o n c e rn to us b ecau se it does n o t to u c h us. I t is th e w ay o f su fferin g , seek in g , a n d s triv in g c o m m o n to all civ ilized p eo p les; it is th e tre m e n d o u s e x p e r im e n t o f b e c o m in g co n scio u s, w h ic h n a tu r e has la id u p o n m a n k in d , a n d w h ic h u n ite s th e m o st d iv e rse c u l­ tu re s in a c o m m o n task. W e s te rn con scio u sn ess is b y n o m e a n s th e o n ly k in d o f c o n ­ sciousness th e re is; it is h isto ric a lly c o n d itio n e d a n d g e o g ra p h i­ cally lim ite d , a n d re p re s e n ta tiv e of o n ly o n e p a r t of m a n k in d . T h e w id e n in g o f o u r con scio u sn ess o u g h t n o t to p ro c e e d a t th e ex p en se o f o th e r k in d s o f consciousness; it s h o u ld co m e a b o u t th ro u g h th e d e v e lo p m e n t o f th o se e le m e n ts of o u r psyche w h ic h a re a n alo g o u s to th o se o f th e a lie n psyche, ju s t as th e E ast c a n n o t do w ith o u t o u r te ch n o lo g y , science, a n d in d u s try . T h e E u r o ­ p ean in v a sio n o f th e E ast was a n act of v io le n c e o n a g ra n d scale, a n d it has le ft us w ith th e d u ty — n oblesse o b lig e— o f u n d e r s ta n d ­ in g th e m in d o f th e E ast. T h is is p e rh a p s m o re n ecessary th a n we realize a t p re se n t.

EX A M PLES O F E U R O PE A N M ANDALAS T h e p ictu res th a t now follow w ere p ro d u c e d in th e way de­ scribed in th e text, by p a tie n ts d u rin g th e course of tre a t­ m e n t.1 T h e e arliest p ic tu re dates from 1916. A ll th e pictures w ere done in d e p e n d e n tly of any E astern influence. T h e I Ching hexagram s in p ic tu re N o. 4 com e from L egge’s tra n sla tio n in the Sacred Books of th e E ast series, b u t they w ere p u t in to th e pic­ tu re only because th e ir c o n te n t seem ed, to th e u n iv ersity -train ed p a tie n t, especially m e a n in g fu l for h e r life. N o E u ro p e a n m andalas k now n to m e (I have a fairly large collection) achieve the co n v en tio n ally a n d tra d itio n a lly established h a rm o n y an d p er­ fection of th e E astern m an d ala. I have m ad e a choice of ten pic­ tu res from am o n g an in fin ite variety of E u ro p e a n m andalas, and th ey o u g h t, as a w hole, to illu stra te clearly th e p arallelism be­ tw een E astern philo so p h y a n d th e unconscious m e n ta l processes in the W est. I [ T h e fo llo w in g m a n d a la s a re a lso p u b lis h e d , w ith m o re d e ta ile d c o m m e n ts, in “ C o n c e rn in g M a n d a la S y m b o lism ” : A i (fig. 9), Ag (fig. 6), A5 (fig. 25), AG (fig. 28), A 7 (fig. 38), A 8 (fig. 37), A g (fig. 26), A io (fig. 36); in “ A S tu d y o f th e P ro cess of I n d i v id u a t io n ” : A 4 (P ic tu re 9). A2 is n o t re p u b lis h e d . I n M e m o r ie s , D re a m s, R e ­ fle c tio n s, J u n g tells o f p a in t in g th e p ic tu re s r e p r o d u c e d in A 3 a n d A io (see th e N .Y . e d n ., p. 197 a n d P I. X I; L o n d o n e d n ., p p . i8 8 f. a n d fa c in g p . 241). C ross re f­ e re n c e in “ C o n c e rn in g M a n d a la S y m b o lism ” in d ic a te s t h a t h e also p a in te d th e p ic tu r e in A 6.— E d i t o r s .]

~ The Golden Flower represented as the most splendid of all flowers

Al

I n t h e c e n t r e , t h e G o l d e n F l o w e r ; r a d i a t i n g o u t f r o m it, fishes as f e r t i l i t y symbols ( c o r r e s p o n d i n g to t h e t h u n d e r b o l t s of L a m a i c m a n d a l a s )

A2

$ A lum inous flower in the centre, w ith stars ro ta tin g ab o u t it. A ro u n d th e flower, walls w ith eig h t gates. T h e w hole conceived as a tra n sp a re n t w indow

A3

~

Separation of the air-world and the earth-world. (Birds and serpents.) In tbe centre, a Hower with a golden star

A4

5 S e p a ra tio n of th e lig h t fro m th e d a r k w o rld ; th e h e a v e n ly fro m th e e a rth ly so u l. I n th e c e n tre , a r e p r e s e n ta tio n o f c o n te m p la tio n

A5

I n t h e c e n t r e , t h e w h i t e l i g h t , s h i n i n g in t h e f i r m a m e n t ; i n t h e first circle, protop l a s m i c life-seeds; in t h e second, r o t a t i n g cosmic p r i n c i p l e s w h i c h c o n t a i n t h e four p r i m a r y colours; i n t h e t h i r d a n d f o u r t h , creative forces w o r k i n g i n w a r d a n d outw a r d . A t t h e c a r d i n a l p o i n t s , t h e m a s c u l i n e a n d f e m i n i n e souls, b o t h a g a i n divided into light and d a r k

A6

9 R e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e te tr a k ty s in c ir c u la r m o v e m e n t

A7

A c h i l d in t h e g e r m i n a l vesicle w i t h t h e f o u r p r i m a r y c o l o u r s i n c l u d e d in the circular movement

A12

9 In th e centre, th e germ in al vesicle w ith a h u m a n figure n o u rish ed by b lo o d vessels w hich have th e ir origin in th e cosmos. T h e cosmos ro tates aro u n d th e cen tre, w hich a ttra c ts its em anations. A ro u n d th e o utside is spread nerve tissue in d ic atin g th a t th e process takes place in th e solar plexus

A9

$ A m an d ala as a fortified city w ith w all an d m oat. W ith in , a b ro ad m oat s u rro u n d in g a w all fortified w ith sixteen tow ers an d w ith a n o th e r in n e r m oat. T h is m oat encloses a ce n tral castle w ith golden roofs w hose cen tre is a golden tem ple

A lO

II T H E VISIONS OF ZOSIMOS

[O rig in ally g iv en as a le c tu re to th e E ra n o s C o n fe re n ce a t A scona, Sw itzer­ land, in A u g u st 1937, a n d p u b lis h e d u n d e r th e title “ E in ig e B em erk u n g e n zu d e n V isio n en des Z osim os," E ranos-Ja h rb uch 193J (Z urich, 1938). R e ­ vised a n d c o n sid e ra b ly e x p a n d e d , as “D ie V isio n en des Zosim os,” in V on den W u rze ln des B e w u sstse in s: S tu d ie n ilb er d e n A rc h e ty p u s (Psychologische A b h a n d lu n g e n , V ol. IX ; Z u rich , 1954), w h ich v ersio n is tra n s la te d h ere.— E d i t o r s ,]

TH E TEXTS I m u st m ake clear at o n ce that the fo llo w in g observations on the vision s o f Z osim os o f P an op olis, an im p ortan t alch em ist and G nostic o f the th ird cen tu ry a .d ., are n o t in ten d ed as a final e x ­ p lan ation o f this extraord in arily difficult m aterial. M y psycho­ logical co n trib u tio n is n o m ore than an attem p t to shed a little ligh t on it an d to answ er som e o f the q u estion s raised by th e visions. 86 T h e first v isio n occurs at the b eg in n in g o f “T h e T rea tise o f Zosimos th e D iv in e co n cern in g th e A rt.” 1 Zosim os in trod u ces the treatise w ith som e general rem arks on the processes o f n atu re and, in particular, o n th e “co m p o sitio n o f th e w aters” (d ea ts νδάτω ν ) and various oth er op erations, and closes w ith the words: “. . . an d u p o n this sim p le system of m any colours is based the m an ifold and in fin itely varied in v estig a tio n o f a ll th in g s.” T h e r e ­ upon th e tex t b e g in s :2 85

(III, I, 2.) And as I spoke thus I fell asleep, and I saw a sacrificer3 standing before me, high up on an altar, which was in the shape of a bowl. There were fifteen steps leading up to the altar. And the priest stood there, and I heard a voice from above saying to me: “I have performed the act of descending the fifteen steps into the darkness, and of ascending the steps into the light. And he who re­ news me is the sacrificer, by casting away the grossness of the body; 1 "Ζωσίμου τοϋ Oeiov Trepl bperijs.” ’Αρετή h e re sh o u ld n o t be tran slate d as “v irtu e ” or “pow er” ("v e rtu ” in B erthelot) b u t as “ th e A rt,” co rresp o n d in g to th e L a tin ars nostra. T h e treatise has n o th in g w hatever to do w ith v irtu e. 2 B e rth elo t, C ollection des anciens alchim istes grecs, w ith tran slatio n s in to F ren ch by C. E. R u elle. [T h e p rese n t tra n sla tio n is by A. S. B. G lover from th e G reek te x t in B erth elo t, w ith reference also to R u e lle ’s F ren ch a n d J u n g ’s G erm an . T h e section n u m e ra tio n is B e rth e lo t’s.— E d i t o r s .] 3 T h e Upovpybs is th e sacrificial p riest w ho p erfo rm s th e cerem onies. T h e Upeis is r a th e r th e Upoirn)s, th e p ro p h e t a n d revealer of th e m ysteries. N o diS eren ce is m ade betw een th e m in th e text.

a n d by co m p e llin g necessity I am sanctified as a p rie s t a n d now s ta n d in p e rfe c tio n as a s p irit.” A n d o n h e a rin g th e voice o f h im w h o sto o d u p o n th e a lta r, I in q u ire d of h im w ho he was. A n d he answ ered m e in a fine voice, saying: “ I am Io n ,4 th e p rie s t of th e in n e r san ctu aries, a n d I su b m it m yself to a n u n e n d u ra b le to rm e n t.6 F o r th e re cam e o n e in h aste a t early m o rn in g , w ho o v erp o w ered me, a n d p ie rc e d m e th ro u g h w ith th e sw ord, a n d d ism e m b e red m e in acco rd an ce w ith th e ru le of h a rm o n y .6 A n d h e d re w off th e skin of m y h e a d w ith th e sw ord, w h ic h h e w ie ld e d w ith s tre n g th , a n d m in g le d th e bones w ith th e pieces o f flesh, a n d caused th e m to be b u r n e d u p o n th e fire o f th e a rt, till I perceiv ed by th e tra n s fo rm a ­ tio n of th e b o d y th a t I h a d becom e sp irit. A n d th a t is m y u n e n d u r ­ a b le to rm e n t.” A n d even as he spoke thus, a n d I h e ld h im by force to converse w ith m e, his eyes becam e as b lo o d . A n d h e spew ed fo rth a ll h is ow n flesh. A n d I saw h o w h e ch an g ed in to the o p p o site of him self, in to a m u tila te d a n th r o p a rio n ,7 a n d h e to re his flesh w ith his ow n tee th , a n d sank in to him self. ( I l l , i, 3.) F u ll of fe a r I aw oke fro m sleep, a n d I th o u g h t to m y­ self: “ Is n o t th is th e c o m p o sitio n of th e w aters?” A n d I w as assu red th a t I h a d w ell u n d e rsto o d , a n d a g a in I fell asleep. I saw th e sam e b ow l-sh ap ed a lta r a n d , o n th e u p p e r p a rt, b o ilin g w a te r, a n d a n u m b erless m u ltitu d e of p e o p le in it. A n d th e re w as n o o n e n e a r th e a lta r w h o m I c o u ld q u e stio n . T h e n I w e n t u p to th e a lta r to see th is sight. A n d I perceiv ed a n a n th r o p a rio n , a b a rb e r 8 g ro w n grey 4 I o n o c cu rs in th e S a b a e a n tr a d itio n as J u n a n b e n M e rq tiliu s (son o f M e rc u ry ), th e a n c e sto r o f th e I o n ia n s (e l-Jd n d n ifin ). [Cf. E u ty c h iu s , A n n a le s , in M ig ne, P .G ., v o l. 111, co l. 922.] T h e S a b a e a n s c o n sid e r h im th e f o u n d e r o f th e ir r e ­ lig io n . C f. C h w o lso h n , D ie S sa b ier u n d d e r S sa b ism u sj I, p p . 205, 796, a n d II, p . 509. H e rm e s , to o , w as c o n sid e re d a f o u n d e r (I, p . 521). 5 Κ ό λα σ « , lite r a lly ‘p u n is h m e n t.’ H e r e i t m e a n s th e to r m e n t w h ic h th e p r im a m a te r ia h a s to u n d e rg o in o r d e r to b e tr a n s fo r m e d . T h is p ro c e d u r e is c a lle d m o r tific a tio . [F o r a n e x a m p le , see th e m o rtific a tio o f th e " E t h io p ia n ” in P sy c h o l­ ogy a n d A lc h e m y j p a r . 484. A lso in f ra , “T h e P h ilo s o p h ic a l T r e e ,” c h . 17.— E d i t o r s .]

6 Διασττάσας

κατά σύσ τα σιν αρμονίαs. B e rth e lo t h a s “ d e m e m b ra n t, s u iv a n t Ies reg ies d e la c o m b in a is o n .” I t re fe rs to th e d iv isio n in to f o u r b o d ies, n a tu r e s , o r e le ­ m e n ts. C f. B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, I I , iii, 11 a n d C h im ie a u n io y e n age, I I I , p . 92. A lso “ V isio A ris le i,” A r tis a u rife ra e , I, p . 151, a n d " E x e rc ita tio n e s in T u r b a m I X ,” ib id ., p . 170. ‘ 7 tZSov αύτάν i s roivavriov άνθρωπάριον κολοβόν. If I a m n o t m is ta k e n , th e c o n c e p t of t h e h o m u n c u lu s a p p e a rs h e r e fo r th e first tim e in a lc h e m ic a l lite r a tu r e . 81 re a d £vpovpy 6 s in s te a d o f th e m e a n in g le ss frp o v p y is in th e te x t. C f. I l l , v, 1, w h e re t h e b a r b e r d o es in fa c t a p p e a r as a n a n th r o p a r io n . (O r s h o u ld i t b e ta k e n a d je c tiv a lly : ζνρουργύν άνθρωττάριρν?) T h e a n th r o p a r io n is g re y b ec a u se , as w e s h a ll see, h e re p r e s e n ts th e le a d .

T H E VISIONS O F ZOSIMOS

w ith age, w h o said to m e: “W h a t are you lo o k in g at?” I re p lie d th a t I was a sto n ish e d to see th e se eth in g o f the w ater, a n d th e m e n b u rn in g a n d yet alive. H e a n sw ered m e thus: “T h e sig h t th a t you see is th e e n tra n c e , a n d th e e x it, a n d th e tra n s fo rm a tio n .” I asked him : “W h a t tra n s fo rm a tio n ? ” a n d he answ ered: “T h is is th e place of th e o p e ra tio n c a lled e m b a lm in g . T h o se w ho seek to o b ta in th e a rt9 e n te r h ere, a n d b ecom e sp irits by escaping fro m th e b o d y .” T h e n I said to h im : “A n d you, are you a sp irit? ” A n d he answ ered: "Yes, a s p irit a n d a g u a rd ia n o f s p irits .” As we spoke, w h ile th e b o ilin g c o n tin u e d a n d th e p e o p le u tte r e d distressful cries, I saw a brazen m a n h o ld in g a le a d e n ta b le t in his h a n d . A n d he spoke w ith a lo u d voice, lo o k in g u p o n th e tab le t: “I co m m an d all those w ho are u n d e rg o in g th e p u n is h m e n t to be calm , to take each of th e m a leaden ta b le t, to w rite w ith th e ir ow n h a n d , a n d to keep th e ir eyes u p ra is e d in th e a ir a n d th e ir m o u th s o pen, u n til th e ir u v u la sw ell.” 10 T h e d e e d fo llo w ed the w ord, a n d th e m a ste r o f th e h ouse said to m e: “ Y ou have b e h e ld , you have stre tc h e d y o u r neck u p w a rd a n d have seen w h a t is d o n e .” I re p lie d th a t I h a d seen, a n d he con­ tin u ed : “ T h is b ra z e n m a n w h o m you see is th e p rie st w ho sacrifices a n d is sacrificed, a n d spews fo rth his ow n flesh. P o w er is given h im over th is w a te r a n d over th e p e o p le w ho are p u n is h e d .” 11 ( III, v, i.) A t last I was overcom e w ith the desire to m o u n t th e seven steps a n d to see th e seven p u n ish m e n ts, a n d , as was su ita b le , » O r “m oral p erfec tio n .” 10E vidently a p a rtic u la rly convulsive o p en in g of th e m o u th is m ean t, coupled w ith a v iolent co n tra ctio n of th e p h ary n x . T h is co n tractio n was a k in d of re tc h ­ ing m ovem ent fo r b rin g in g u p th e in n e r contents. T h ese h a d to be W'ritten dow n on th e tablets. T h e y w ere in sp ira tio n s com ing from above th a t w ere caught, as it were, by th e u p raise d eyes. T h e p ro ce d u re m ig h t b e com pared w ith th e tech ­ nique of active im a g in a tio n . 11 [In th e Swiss e d itio n (Von den W u rzeln des Bew usstseins, p p . 141-45) th is section, th o u g h n u m b e re d III, i, 3 only, con tin u es in to III, i, 4, 5, a n d 6 w ith o u t a break, th e w hole bein g ru n to g eth er as a single section. I ll, i, r, th e n reap p ears a t th e en d of th e sequence of visions (par. 87), b u t in v a ria n t form , as a "rdsum e,” a n d th e reasons for its p lacem ent th e re are ex p lain ed in th e com ­ m entary (pars. 93, 111, 121). As no ex p lan a tio n is given for its d u p lic atio n u n d e r III, i, 3, an d th e v aria tio n s are in th e m ain m erely stylistic, we have o m itte d it a t this p o in t a n d rec o n stitu ted III, i. 4-G at the end of th e sequence. T h e w o rd ­ ing of J u n g ’s in te rp o la tio n a t p a r. 87 has been altered to account for this change. T h e sections are p resen ted in th e o rd er III, i, 5, III, i, 4, III, i, G on th e assu m p ­ tion th a t III, i, 4 is n o t m e a n t to form a p a rt of th e “ risu m d ” p ro p e r, b u t, as stated in th e E ranos version of “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass,” is ra th e r "Zosim os’ ow n com m entary on his visions” an d “a g en eral p h ilo so p h ica l conclusion” (T h e M ysteries, p p . 3 iif.).— E d i t o r s .]

i n a single day; so I w e n t b ack in o rd e r to c o m p lete th e ascent. Pass­ in g it several tim es, I a t le n g th cam e u p o n th e p a th . B u t as I was a b o u t to ascend, I lo st m y w ay ag ain ; greatly d isco u rag ed , a n d n o t seeing in w h ic h d ire c tio n I s h o u ld go, I fell asleep. A n d w h ile I was sleeping, I saw a n a n th ro p a rio n , a b a rb e r c la d in a ro b e o f royal p u rp le , w ho sto o d o u tsid e th e p lace of p u n ish m e n ts. H e said to m e: “ M an , w h a t a re y o u do in g ?” a n d I re p lie d : “I h a v e s to p p e d h e re because, h a v in g tu rn e d aside fro m th e ro a d , I h av e lost m y w ay.” A n d h e said: “ F ollow m e.” A n d I tu rn e d a n d follow ed h im . W h e n we cam e n e a r to th e p lace o f p u n ish m e n ts, I saw m y g u id e, this little b a rb e r, e n te r th a t p lace, a n d h is w h o le b o d y w as c o n su m ed by th e fire. ( I l l , v, 2.) O n seeing this, I s te p p e d aside, tre m b lin g w ith fear; th e n I aw oke, a n d sa id w ith in m yself: “W h a t m ean s th is vision?” A n d a g a in I clarified m y u n d e rs ta n d in g , a n d knew th a t th is b a rb e r was th e b raz e n m an , clad in a p u r p le g a rm e n t. A n d I said to m y­ self: “ I have w ell u n d e rs to o d , th is is th e b ra z e n m a n . I t is n e e d fu l th a t first h e m u st e n te r th e p lace of p u n ish m e n ts .” ( I l l, v, 3.) A g a in m y so u l d e sire d to m o u n t th e th ir d step also. A n d a g a in I follow ed th e ro a d alone, a n d w h e n I was n e a r th e place o f p u n ish m e n ts, I a g a in w e n t astray, n o t k n o w in g m y way, a n d I sto p p e d in d esp air. A n d ag ain , as it seem ed, I saw a n o ld m a n w h it­ e n e d by years, w ho h a d becom e w h o lly w h ite, w ith a b lin d in g w hiteness. H is n a m e was A g a th o d a im o n . T u r n in g h im se lf a b o u t, th e o ld m a n w ith w h ite h a ir gazed u p o n m e fo r a fu ll h o u r. A n d I u rg e d h im : “Show m e th e r ig h t w ay.” H e d id n o t com e tow ard s m e, b u t h a ste n e d on h is way. B u t I, r u n n in g h ith e r a n d th ith e r, a t le n g th cam e to th e a lta r. A n d w h e n I sto o d a t th e to p of th e a lta r, I saw th e w h ite -h a ire d o ld m a n e n te r th e p lace o f p u n ish m e n ts. O ye d e m iu rg es of celestial n a tu re ! Im m e d ia te ly he was tra n sfo rm e d by th e flam e in to a p illa r o f fire. W h a t a te rrib le story, m y b re th re n ! F or, o n a c c o u n t of th e vio len ce o f th e p u n is h m e n t, his eyes filled w ith b lo o d . I spoke to h im , a n d asked: “W h y a re you s tre tc h e d o u t th ere ? ” B u t h e c o u ld b a re ly o p e n h is m o u th , a n d g ro a n e d : “ I am th e le a d e n m a n , a n d I s u b m it m yself to a n u n e n d u ra b le to rm e n t.” T h e r e u p o n , seized w ith g re a t fear, I aw oke a n d so u g h t w ith in m y­ self th e rea so n fo r w h a t I h a d seen. A n d a g a in I c o n sid e red a n d said to m yself: “I have w ell u n d e rsto o d , fo r it m ean s th a t th e lea d is to b e re je cte d , a n d in tr u th th e v isio n refers to th e co m p o sitio n o f the liq u id s .”

(III, vblB.) A gain I beheld the divine and holy bow l-shaped altar, and I saw a priest clothed in a w hite robe reaching to his feet, w ho was celebrating these terrible m ysteries, and I said: “W h o is this?” And the answer came: “T h is is the priest of the inner sanctuaries. It is he w ho changes the bodies in to blood, makes the eyes clairvoy­ ant, and raises the dead." T h en , fallin g again to earth, I again fell asleep. A nd as I was ascending the fourth step, I saw, to the east, one approaching, h old in g a sword in his hand. A nd another [came] behind him , b ringin g on e adorned round about w ith signs, clad in white and com ely to see, w ho was nam ed the M eridian o f the S u n .12 And as they drew near to the place o f punishm ents, he w ho held the sword in his hand [said]: “Cut off his head, im m olate his body, and cut his flesh in to pieces, that it may first be b oiled according to the m ethod,13 and then delivered to the place o f pun ishm ents.” T h ereupon I awoke and said; "I have w ell understood, this con­ cerns the liquids in the art of the m etals.” A nd he wTho bore the sword in his hand said again: “You have com pleted the descent o f the seven steps.” A nd the other answered, as he caused the waters to gush forth from all the m oist places: “T h e procedure is com ­ pleted.” ( I ll, vi, i.) A nd I saw an altar w hich was in the shape of a bow l, and a fiery spirit stood upon the altar, and tended the fire for the seething and the b o ilin g and the burning o f the m en w ho rose up from it. A nd I inquired about the p eople w h o stood there, and I said: “I see w ith astonishm ent the seething and the b o ilin g of the water, and the m en burning and yet alivei” A nd he answered m e, saying: “T h is b o ilin g that you see is the place o f the operation 12 K ai aXXos ότίΐσω αύτοϋ φίρων TrepepKovισμίνον τινά. λευκοφόρο» καί ώραϊον τήν 5φιν, otj τό 5νομα Εκαλείτο μ^σουράνισμα ή\ίον. B erth eiot: “ U n autre, derriere lu i, p ortait un objet circulaire, d ’u n e b lan ch eu r ic la ta n te , et trfes beau 4 Voir appeld M 0ridien du C innabre." It is n o t clea r w h y μεσονράνισμα ηκίου is translated as “m erid ian of the cin n ab ar,” th u s m ak in g it a ch em ical analogy, ττεριρκοησμίνον τινά m ust refer to a person and n o t to a th in g . D r. M .-L . von Franz has draw n m y a tten tio n to the fo llo w in g pa ra llels in A p u leiu s. H e calls th e sto la o ly m p ia c a w ith w h ich the in itia te was clad a “ p recious scarf w ith sacred anim als worked in colou r on every part o f it; for instan ce, In d ia n serpents an d H yperborean griffins.” "I . . . wore a w h ite p alm -tree ch a p let w ith its leaves stick in g o u t all rou n d lik e rays of Kght.'' T h e in itia te w as show n to the p eo p le “ as w h en a sta tu e is u n veiled , dressed lik e th e su n .” T h e sun, w h ich h e now was, h e h ad seen th e previous night, after h is figurative d eath . “A t m id n ig h t I saw th e su n sh in in g as if it w ere n oon .” (T h e G o ld en Ass, trans. Graves, p . 2 8 6 .) 13 L iterally, opyavncSts·

6S

c a lle d e m b a lm in g . T h o s e w h o se e k to o b t a i n th e a r t e n t e r h e r e , a n d th e y c a st th e ir b o d ie s fro m th e m a n d b e c o m e s p irits . T h e p r a c tic e [ o f t h e a r t ] is e x p l a i n e d b y t h i s p r o c e d u r e ; f o r w h a t e v e r c a s ts o ff th e g ro ssn ess o f th e b o d y b ec o m e s s p ir it.” 87

T h e Z o s i m o s t e x t s a r e i n a d i s o r d e r e d s t a t e . A t I I I , i, 5 t h e r e is a m is p l a c e d b u t o b v io u s l y a u t h e n t i c r e s u m e o r a m p l i f i c a t i o n o f t h e v is i o n s , a n d a t I I I , i, 4 a p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e m . Z o s im o s c a lls th is w h o le p a s s a g e a n “ i n t r o d u c t i o n to t h e d i s c o u r s e t h a t is t o f o l l o w ” ( I I I , i, 6 ) . ( I l l , i, 5 .) I n s h o r t , m y f r i e n d , b u i l d a t e m p l e f r o m a s i n g l e s t o n e , l i k e t o w h i t e l e a d , t o a l a b a s t e r , t o P r o c o n n e s i a n m a r b l e , 14 w i t h n e i t h e r e n d n o r b e g i n n i n g i n i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n . 15 L e t i t h a v e w i t h i n i t a s p r in g o f th e p u r e s t w a te r, s p a rk lin g lik e th e s u n . N o te c a re ­ f u l l y o n w h a t s i d e is t h e e n t r a n c e t o t h e t e m p l e , a n d t a k e a s w o r d i n y o u r h a n d ; t h e n s e e k t h e e n t r a n c e , f o r n a r r o w is t h e p l a c e w h e r e t h e o p e n i n g is. A d r a g o n lie s a t t h e e n t r a n c e , g u a r d i n g t h e t e m p l e . L a y h o l d u p o n h i m ; i m m o l a t e h i m f ir s t; s t r i p h i m o f h i s s k i n , a n d t a k i n g h i s f le s h w i t h t h e b o n e s , s e p a r a t e t h e l i m b s ; t h e n , l a y i n g [ t h e f le s h o f ] t h e l i m b s 16 t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e b o n e s a t t h e e n t r a n c e o f t h e te m p le , m a k e a s te p o f th e m , m o u n t th e re o n , a n d e n te r , a n d y o u w i l l f i n d w h a t y o u s e e k .17 T h e p r i e s t , t h a t b r a z e n m a n , w h o m y o u se e s e a t e d i n t h e s p r i n g a n d c o m p o s i n g t h e s u b s t a n c e , [ l o o k o n ] h i m n o t as th e b r a z e n m a n , f o r h e h a s c h a n g e d th e c o lo u r o f h is n a t u r e a n d h a s b e c o m e th e s ilv e r m a n ; a n d if y o u w ill, y o u w ill s o o n h a v e h i m [a s] t h e g o l d e n m a n . ( I l l , i, 4 .) A n d a f t e r I h a d s e e n t h i s a p p a r i t i o n , I a w o k e , a n d I s a i d t o m y s e lf : “ W h a t is t h e c a u s e o f t h i s v is i o n ? I s n o t t h a t b o i l i n g w h ite a n d y e llo w w a te r th e d iv in e w a te r ? ” A n d I f o u n d t h a t I h a d w e l l u n d e r s t o o d . A n d I s a i d : “ B e a u t i f u l i t is t o s p e a k a n d b e a u t i f u l t o h e a r , b e a u t i f u l t o g iv e a n d b e a u t i f u l t o r e c e i v e , b e a u t i f u l t o b e p o o r a n d b e a u tif u l to b e r ic h . H o w d o e s n a t u r e te a c h g iv in g a n d r e c e i v i n g ? T h e b r a z e n m a n g iv e s a n d t h e h y d r o l i t h r e c e iv e s ; t h e m e t a l g iv e s a n d t h e p l a n t r e c e iv e s ; t h e s t a r s g i v e a n d t h e f lo w ­ e r s r e c e i v e ; t h e h e a v e n s g iv e a n d t h e e a r t h r e c e iv e s ; t h e t h u n d e r ­ c l a p s g iv e f o r t h d a r t i n g f ire . A n d a l l t h i n g s a r e w o v e n t o g e t h e r a n d a ll th in g s a re u n d o n e a g a in ; a ll th in g s a r e m in g le d to g e th e r a n d a ll 14 T h e island of Prokonnesos was the site of the famous Greek m arble quarry, now called Marmara (Turkey), i s T h at is, circular. 1 6 T h e Greek has only μέλοϊ. I follow the reading of codex Gr. 225a (Paris). i t T h e res quaesita or quaerenda is a standing expression in Latin alchemy. 64

things com b in e; a n d a ll th in g s u n ite a n d all things se p ara te ; all things a re m o iste n e d a n d a ll th in g s are d rie d ; a n d a ll th in g s flourish and all th in g s fad e in th e bow l o f th e alta r. F or each th in g comes to pass w ith m e th o d a n d in fixed m easu re a n d by e x act18 w eig h in g of the fo u r elem ents. T h e w eaving to g eth e r of all th in g s a n d the u n d o in g of a ll th in g s a n d th e w hole fab ric of things c a n n o t com e to pass w ith o u t m e th o d . T h e m e th o d is a n a tu ra l one, p rese rv in g due o rd e r in its in h a lin g a n d its ex h alin g ; it b rin g s increase a n d it brings decrease. A n d to sum u p : th ro u g h th e h arm o n ies of sepa­ ra tin g a n d c o m b in in g , a n d if n o th in g of th e m e th o d be neglected, all th in g s b rin g fo rth n a tu re . F o r n a tu re a p p lie d to n a tu re tra n s­ form s n a tu re . Such is th e o rd e r of n a tu ra l law th ro u g h o u t th e w hole cosmos, a n d th u s a ll th in g s h a n g to g eth e r.” ( I ll, i, 6.) T h is in tro d u c tio n is th e key w hich sh all o p e n to you the flowers of th e discourse th a t is to follow , nam ely, th e in v estig atio n of the a rts, of w isdom , of reason a n d u n d e rsta n d in g , th e efficacious m ethods a n d rev e latio n s w hich th ro w lig h t u p o n th e secret words. 18 O i y Ύ ία σ μ ψ .

COM M ENTARY I . G EN ERA L REM ARKS ON T H E

IN T E R P R E T A T IO N

A lth o u g h it looks as if this w ere a series of visions follow ing one a fte r th e o th e r, th e fre q u e n t re p e titio n s an d strik in g sim i­ larities suggest ra th e r th a t it was essentially a single vision w hich is p resen ted as a set of variations on the them es it contains. Psy­ chologically a t least, th e re is n o g ro u n d fo r su p p o sin g th a t it is an allegorical in v en tio n . Its salient featu res seem to in d icate th a t fo r Zosimos it was a hig h ly significant ex p erien ce w hich he w ished to co m m u n icate to others. A lth o u g h alchem ical lite ra ­ tu re contains a n u m b e r of allegories w hich w ith o u t d o u b t are m erely d idactic fables a n d are n o t based o n d ire c t e x p erien ce,1 th e vision of Zosimos m ay w ell have b een a n actu al h a p p en in g . T h is seems to be b o rn e o u t by the m a n n e r in w hich Zosimos him self in te rp re ts it as a co n firm ation of his ow n p reo ccu p atio n : “ Is n o t this th e com position of th e w aters?” Such a n in te rp re ta ­ tio n seems— to us a t any ra te — to leave o u t of acco u n t th e m ost im pressive im ages in th e vision, a n d to re d u c e a fa r m o re signifi­ c an t com plex of facts to an all too sim ple com m on d e n o m in a to r. If th e vision w ere an allegory, th e m ost conspicuous images w o u ld also be the ones th a t have th e greatest significance. B u t it is characteristic of any subjective d ream in te rp re ta tio n th a t it is satisfied w ith p o in tin g o u t superficial relatio n sh ip s w hich take n o acco u n t of th e essentials. A n o th e r th in g to b e considered is th a t th e alchem ists them selves testify to th e o ccu rren ce of dream s a n d visions d u rin g th e o p u s.2 I am in c lin e d to th in k th a t th e vision o r visions of Zosimos w ere experiences of this k in d , 1 F o r e x a m p le , th e “V isio A ris le i” (A r t . a u rif., I, p p . 1 46ft) a n d th e v isio n s in th e “ B o o k o f K ra te s ” (B e rth e lo t, C h im ie a u m o y e n dge, I I I , p p . 4 4-75). 2 C f. P sych o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , p a rs . 347ff.

66

w hich took place d u rin g th e w ork and revealed the n atu re o f the psychic processes in th e back grou n d.3 In these vision s all those contents em erge w h ich the alchem ists u n con sciou sly p rojected in to the ch em ical process and w hich w ere then p erceived there, as th ou gh they w ere q u a lities of m atter. T h e ex ten t to w h ich this p rojection was fostered by the conscious a ttitu d e is sh ow n by the som ew hat overhasty in terp retation g iv en by Z osim os him self. 89 E ven th ou g h his in terp retation strikes us at first as som ew hat forced, in d eed as far-fetched and arbitrary, w e sh o u ld n ev erth e­ less n ot forget that w h ile the co n cep tio n o f the “w aters” is a strange on e to us, for Z osim os and for th e alchem ists in gen eral it had a significance w e w o u ld never suspect. It is also p ossible that th e m e n t io n o f the “w a te r ” o p e n e d o u t perspectives in w hich the ideas o f d ism em b erm en t, k illin g , torture, an d trans­ form ation all had th eir place. For, b eg in n in g w ith the treatises o f D em ocritu s and K om arios, w h ich are assigned to the first cen ­ tury a . d ., alchem y, u n til w ell in to the eig h teen th century, was very largely con cern ed w ith the m iraculou s water, the aqu a div in a or perm a n en s, w h ich was extracted from the lapis, or prim a m ateria, th rough th e torm en t of the fire. T h e w ater was the h u m id u m radicale (radical m oisture), w hich stood for the anima m e d ia n atu ra or a n im a m u n d i im p rison ed in m atter,4 the 3 T h e o p u s e x te n d e d o v e r a p e r io d w ith n o fix e d lim its . D u r in g

th is tim e th e a r tife x h a d to d e v o te h im s e lf “r e lig io u s ly ” to th e p r o c ess o f tr a n sfo r m a tio n . S in ce th e p r o c ess w a s s u b je c tiv e as w e ll as o b je c tiv e , i t is n o t s u r p r isin g th a t it in c lu d e d d r e a m -e x p e r ie n c e s . G . B a ttista N a z a r i (D e l l a t r a m u t a t i o n e m e t a l l i c a s o g n i t r e , 1599) a c tu a lly r e p r e se n te d th e o p u s in th e fo r m o f (a lle g o r ic a l) d rea m s. “T h e p h ilo s o p h ic w a te r is s o m e tim e s m a n ife s te d to th e e in s le e p ,” says th e " P a r a b o la ” o f S e n d iv o g iu s (B i b l i o t h e c a c h e m i c a , I I , p . 47 5 ). W e c a n n o t s u p p o se th a t th e a u th o r h a d a n y k n o w le d g e o f th e v is io n s o f Z osim os; th e r e fe r e n c e is p r o b a b ly t o t h e “V isio A r is le i,” as su g g e s te d b y th e fo llo w in g (p. 475 b): " S o lu m fr u c tu m a r b o r is S o la r is v id i in s o m n iis S a tu r n u m M e r c u r io n o s tr o im p o n e r e ” (I sa w in d r e a m s t h e s o le fr u it o f t h e tr ee o f th e su n im p o s e S a tu r n o n o u r M er cu riu s). C f. th e e n d o f th e “V is io A r is le i” : “V id im u s te m a g istr u m in so m n iis. P e tiim u s u t n o b is su b s id iu m H o r f o lto d is c ip u lo tu o offeras, q u i n u t r i­ m e n t! a u c to r e s t” (W e sa w th e e , th e m a ste r, in d r e a m s. W e b e s o u g h t th a t th o u w o u ld st o ffer u s fo r o u r h e lp th y d is c ip le H o r fo ltu s , w h o is th e a u th o r o f n o u r ­ ish m e n t).— C o d e x Q . 584 (B e r lin ), fo l 2 i T. R u sk a , e d ., T u r b a P h i l o s o p h o r u m , p p . 387f. T h e b e g in n in g o f th e “ V is io ” sh o w s h o w th e fr u it o f " th a t im m o r ta l tr e e ” m a y b e g a th e r e d . 4 I n o u r t e x t (II I, v . 3) i t is th e A g a th o d a im o n it s e lf th a t su ffers tr a n sfo r m a tio n .

67

soul of the stone or m etal, also called th e a n im a aquina. T h is an im a was set free n o t only by m eans of the “co o k in g ,” b u t also by the sw ord d iv id in g th e “ egg,” o r by th e separatio, o r by disso­ lu tio n in to th e fo u r “ro o ts” o r elem ents.5 T h e separatio was of­ te n re p re se n te d as th e d ism e m b erm en t of a h u m a n b ody.6 O f th e aqua p e rm a n e n s it was said th a t it dissolved th e bodies in to th e fo u r elem ents. A lto g eth er, th e d iv in e w ater possessed th e p ow er of tra n sfo rm a tio n . I t tran sfo rm ed th e nigredo in to th e albedo th ro u g h th e m iracu lo u s “w ashing” (a b lu tio ); it a n i­ m a te d in e rt m a tte r, m ade th e d ead to rise ag ain ,7 an d th erefo re possessed th e v irtu e of th e b aptism al w ater in th e ecclesiastical rite .8 J u st as, in th e benedictio fontis, th e p riest m akes th e sign of th e cross over th e w ater a n d so divides it in to fo u r p arts,0 so th e m e rc u ria l serpent, sym bolizing th e aqua perm anens, u n d e r­ goes d ism e m b erm en t, a n o th e r p a ra llel to th e div isio n of the body.10 9° I shall n o t elab o rate any fu rth e r this w eb of in te rc o n n ec te d m eanings in w hich alchem y is so rich . W h a t I have said m ay suffice to show th a t the idea of th e “w a ter” a n d th e o p eratio n s connected w ith it co u ld easily open o u t to th e alch em ist a vista in w hich p ractically all th e them es of th e vision fall in to place. F ro m the s ta n d p o in t of Zosim os’ conscious psychology, thereD iv isio n in to fo u r e le m e n ts a f te r th e m o rtific a tio o ccu rs in “ E x e rc ita tio n e s in T u r b a m I C ” (A r t . a u r if., I, p . 170), also in " A e n ig m a ” V I (ib id ., p . 151). F o r d iv i­ sion o f th e egg in to fo u r, see th e B o o k o f E l-H a b ib (B e rth e lo t, M o y e n dge, III, p . 92). T h e d iv isio n in to f o u r w as k n o w n as τετρ α μ ΐρ έϊν τη ν φιλοσοφίαν (B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, I I I , x liv , 5). β F o r e x a m p le , in T ris m o s in , S p le n d o r solis (A u r e u m v e llu s, p . 27). T h e sam e in S p le n d o r Solis (L o n d o n , 1920, re p r.), P I. X , a n d L a c in iu s , P retio sa m a rg a rita n o v e lla (V enice, 1546), fo l. * * * x ii. 7 " I t is th e w a te r th a t k ills a n d vivifies” (R o s a r iu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m , in A r l . a u rif., II, p . 2 J 4 ) . S J u s t as b a p tis m is a p re - C h r is tia n rite , a c c o rd in g to th e te s tim o n y o f th e gospels, so, to o , th e d iv in e w a te r is o f p a g a n a n d p re - C h r is tia n o rig in . T h e P ra e f a tio o f th e B e n e d ic tio F o n tis o n E a s te r E ve says: “ M ay th is w a te r, p re p a r e d fo r th e r e b i r t h o f m e n , b e r e n d e r e d f r u itf u l b y th e se c re t in p o u r in g o f h is d iv in e p o w e r; m a y a h e a v e n ly o ffe rin g , c o n ce iv e d in h o lin e ss a n d re b o r n in t o a n e w c re a tio n , co m e f o r th fro m th e sta in le ss w o m b o f th is d iv in e fo n t; a n d m ay a ll, h o w e v e r d is tin g u is h e d b y ag e in tim e o r sex in b o d y , b e b r o u g h t fo r th in to o n e in fa n c y by th e m o th e rh o o d o f g ra c e ” (T h e M issa l in L a ti n a n d E n g lish , 5

P- 429)·

“T h e p rie s t d iv id e s th e w a te r crossw ise w ith h is h a n d ” (ib id .). 10 Cf. P sych o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y ; p a rs . 354, 530.

9

fore, his in te rp re ta tio n seems ra th e r less forced an d a rb itra ry . A L a tin p ro v e rb says: canis p a n e m som niat, piscator pisces (the dog dream s of bread, th e fisherm an of fish). T h e alchem ist, too, dream s in his ow n specific language. T h is enjoins u p o n us th e greatest circu m sp ectio n , all th e m ore so as th a t language is ex ­ ceedingly obscure. I n o rd e r to u n d e rsta n d it, we have to le arn the psychological secrets of alchem y. I t is p ro b a b ly tru e w h at th e old M asters said, th a t only he w ho knows the secret of th e stone u n d erstan d s th e ir w ords.11 I t has lo n g b een asserted th a t this secret is sh eer nonsense, a n d n o t w o rth the tro u b le of in v estig at­ in g seriously. B u t this frivolous a ttitu d e ill befits th e psycholo­ gist, for any “n o n sen se” th a t fascinated m e n ’s m inds for close on two th o u sa n d years— am ong th em som e of th e greatest, e.g., N ew ton a n d G o e th e 12— m u st have som eth in g a b o u t it w hich it w ould be u seful for th e psychologist to know . M oreover, th e sym bolism of alchem y has a great deal to do w ith th e s tru c tu re of the unconscious, as I have show n in m y book Psychology and A lch e m y. T h e se things are n o t ju s t ra re curiosities, a n d anyone w ho wishes to u n d e rs ta n d th e sym bolism of dream s c an n o t close his eyes to th e fact th a t th e dream s of m o d e m m en a n d w om en often c o n ta in th e very im ages an d m etap h o rs th a t we find in the m edieval treatises.13 A n d since an u n d e rsta n d in g of the b io lo g i­ cal com pensation p ro d u c e d by dream s is of im p o rtan c e in the tre a tm e n t of neurosis as w ell as in th e d ev elo p m en t of conscious­ ness, a know ledge of these facts has also a p ractical v alu e w hich should n o t be u n d erestim ated . 11 Cf. “H o rtu la n u s su p e r E pisto lu m H erm e tis” in R o sa riu m , A rt. a u rif., II, p. 270. A urora C onsurgens (ed. von Franz), p p . 39-41: “F o r she [this science] is clear to them th a t have u n d e rsta n d in g . . . she seem eth easy to th e m th a t have know ledge of h e r.” M aier, Sym bola aureae m ensae, p. 146: “ . . . th a t they sh o u ld n o t u n d e rsta n d h is w ords, save those w ho are ju d g e d w o rth y of th is very g rea t m agistery.” 12 Cf. G ray, G oethe th e A lc h em ist. is i t has often been objected th a t symbols of this sort do n o t occur in dream s at all. N a tu ra lly they do n o t occur in all dream s o r in ju st any dream s, b u t only in special ones. T h e differences betw een dream s are as g rea t as those betw een in dividuals. A p a rtic u la r constellation of th e unconscious is n eed ed to p ro d u ce such dream s, i.e., arch ety p al dream s co n tain in g m ythological m otifs. (Exam ples in Psychology and A lch em y, P a rt II.) B u t they ca n n o t be recognized w ith o u t a know ledge of m ythology, w hich n o t a ll psychologists possess.

2 . T H E SA C R IFIC IA L A CT

T h e c e n tra l im ag e in o u r d ream -v isio n show s u s a k in d of sacrificial a c t u n d e r ta k e n fo r th e p u rp o s e of a lc h e m ic a l tr a n s ­ fo rm a tio n . I t is c h a ra c te ristic o f th is r ite th a t th e p rie s t is a t o n ce th e sacrificer a n d th e sacrificed. T h is im p o r ta n t id e a re a c h e d Zosim os in th e fo rm o f th e te a c h in g s o f th e “ H e b re w s ” (i.e., C h ris tia n s ).1 C h ris t w as a g o d w h o sacrificed h im self. A n .essen­ tia l p a r t o f th e sacrificial a c t is d is m e m b e rm e n t. Z osim os m u s t h av e b e e n fa m ilia r w ith th is m o tif fro m th e D io n y s ia n m ysterytr a d itio n . T h e r e , to o , th e g o d is th e v ic tim , w h o was t o m to pieces b y th e T ita n s a n d th ro w n in to a co o k in g p o t,2 b u t w hose h e a rt w as saved a t th e la st m o m e n t b y H e ra . O u r te x t show s th a t th e b o w l-sh ap ed a lta r w as a c o o k in g vessel in w h ic h a m u ltitu d e o f p e o p le w ere b o ile d a n d b u r n e d . As w e k n o w fro m th e le g e n d a n d fro m a fra g m e n t o f E u r ip id e s ,3 a n o u tb u r s t of b e s tia l g re e d a n d th e te a rin g o f liv in g a n im a ls w ith th e te e th w ere p a r t of th e D io n y s ia n o rg y .4 D io n y siu s w as a c tu a lly c a lle d ό αμέριστοχ καί μεμ ερισ μ έζΌ ϊ νόϋs (th e u n d iv id e d a n d d iv id e d s p ir it).5 92 Z osim os m u s t also h av e b e e n f a m ilia r w ith th e flay in g m o tif. A w ell-k n o w n p a ra lle l o f th e d y in g a n d r e s u r g e n t g o d A ttis e is th e flayed a n d h a n g e d M arsyas. A lso, le g e n d a ttr ib u te s d e a th b y flaying to th e re lig io u s te a c h e r M a n i, w h o was a n e a r-c o n te m p o ­ ra r y o f Z o sim o s.7 T h e s u b s e q u e n t stuffing o f th e sk in w ith straw is a r e m in d e r o f th e A ttic f e r tility a n d r e b ir t h c ere m o n ies. E v ery y e a r in A th e n s a n o x was s la u g h te re d a n d s k in n e d , a n d its p e lt 91

1 P rovided, of course, th a t th e passages in q u e s tio n are n o t in te rp o la tio n s by copyists, w ho w ere m ostly m onks. 2 P re lle r, G riechische M yth o lo g iej I, p . 437. 3 F rag m en t 472 N2, “T h e C retans.” C ited in D ieterich , M ith ra slitu rg ie, p . 105. 4 Cf. “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass,” p p . 23 if. F or dism em b erm en t, tran sfo rm atio n , a n d recom position in a case of schizophrenia, see S pielrein, “ U eber d en psychologischen I n h a lt eines Falles von S chizophrenic,” p p . 358ff. D ism em b erm en t is a practically univ ersal m o tif of p rim itiv e sh am an istic psy­ chology. I t form s th e m a in experience in th e in itia tio n of a sh am an . Cf. E liade, S ham anism , p p . 53!?. 5 F irm icus M aternus, L ib e r de errore p ro fa n a ru m re lig io n u m (ed. H alm ), ch. 7, p . 89. e A ttis has close affinities w ith C hrist. A ccording to tra d itio n , th e b irth p la c e at B eth leh em was once an A ttis sanctuary. T h is tra d itio n h as been confirm ed by rec en t excavations. I F razer, T h e G olden B o u g h , P a r t IV : A d o n is, A ttis , Osiris, p p . 242s.

70

93

94

stuffed w ith straw . T h e stuffed d um m y was th e n fasten ed to a plough, obviously fo r th e p u rp o se of resto rin g th e fe rtility of the lan d .8 S im ilar flaying cerem onies are re p o rte d of th e Aztecs, Scythians, C hinese, a n d P atag o n ian s.9 In th e vision, th e sk in n in g is confined to the head. I t is a scalping as d istin c t fro m th e total άποδερμ,άτω σ is (skinning) d e ­ scribed in I I I , i, 5. I t is one of th e actions w hich d istin g u ish th e o rig in al vision from th e d escrip tio n of th e process given in this resum e. J u s t as c u ttin g o u t a n d eatin g th e h e a rt o r b ra in of an enem y is supposed to endow one w ith his vital pow ers o r v irtu es, so scalping is a pars pro toto in c o rp o ra tio n of the life p rin c ip le or soul.10 F laying is a tra n sfo rm a tio n sym bol w hich I have dis­ cussed at g re a te r le n g th in m y essay “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass.” H e re I n e ed only m e n tio n th e special m o tif of to rtu re o r p u n is h m e n t (κόλασή), w hich is p a rtic u la rly ev id en t in the d escrip tio n of th e d ism e m b erm en t a n d scalping. F o r th is th ere is a re m a rk a b le p ara llel in th e A k h m im m a n u sc rip t of the A pocalypse of E lijah , p u b lish e d by G eorg Steindorff.11 In the vision it is said of th e lead en h o m u n c u lu s th a t “his eyes filled w ith b lo o d ” as a re su lt of th e to rtu re . T h e A pocalypse of E lijah says of those w ho are cast “in to e te rn a l p u n is h m e n t” : “ th e ir eyes are m ix e d w ith b lo o d ” ;12 a n d of th e saints w ho w ere persecuted by th e A nti-M essiah: “h e w ill draw off th e ir skins fro m th e ir heads.” 13 T h e se p arallels suggest th a t th e κόλασκ is n o t ju st a p u n is h ­ m e n t b u t th e to rm e n t of hell. A lth o u g h κ ό λ α σ ή w o u ld have to be tra n slated as poena , this w o rd now h ere occurs in th e V ulgate, for in a ll th e places w here th e to rm en ts of h ell are m e n tio n e d the w o rd u sed is cruciare o r cruciatus, as in R ev elatio n 14 : 10, “to rm e n te d w ith fire a n d b rim sto n e ,” o r R ev elatio n 9 : 5, “ th e to rm e n t of a sco rp io n .” T h e c o rresp o n d in g G reek w o rd is β α σ α ν ίζ β ιν o r β α σ α ν ισ μ ό ς , ‘to r tu r e ’. F o r th e alchem ists it h a d a 8 Ibid., p. 249. 9 Ib id ., p. 246. 19 A m ong th e T h o m p so n a n d Shusw ap In d ia n s in B ritish C o lu m b ia th e scalp signifies a h e lp fu l g u a rd ia n sp irit. Frazer, T o te m ism and E xo g a m y, III, p p . 417, 427. u D ie A poka lyp se des Elias. ! 2 Ibid., p. 43, 5, lin e 1. 18 P. 95, 36, lin e 8.

95

d o u b le m e a n in g : β α σ α ν ίζω iv also m e a n t ‘te stin g o n th e to u c h ­ s to n e ’ (β ά σ α ν ο ή . T h e lapis L y d i a s (to u c h sto n e ) was u se d as a sy n o n y m fo r th e lapis p h ilo s o p h o r u m . T h e g e n u in e n e s s o r in ­ c o r r u p tib ility o f th e sto n e is p ro v e d by th e to r m e n t of fire a n d c a n n o t b e a tta in e d w ith o u t it. T h is le itm o ti v r u n s all th r o u g h alchem y. I n o u r te x t th e s k in n in g re fe rs esp ecially to th e h e a d , as th o u g h sig n ify in g a n e x tra c tio n of th e so u l (if th e p rim itiv e e q u a tio n s k in = so u l is still v a lid h ere). T h e h e a d plays a c o n ­ s id e ra b le ro le in alch em y , a n d has d o n e so since a n c ie n t tim es. T h u s Z osim os n am es h is p h ilo so p h e rs th e “sons of th e G o ld e n H e a d .” I have d e a lt w ith th is th e m e e lse w h e re ,14 a n d n e e d n o t go in to it a g a in n o w . F o r Z osim os a n d th e la te r a lch em ists th e h e a d h a d th e m e a n in g o f th e “o m eg a e le m e n t” o r “ r o u n d e le ­ m e n t” (σ τ ο ιχ ε ϊο ν σ τ ρ ο γ γ υ λ ό ν ) , a sy n o n y m fo r th e a rc a n e o r tra n s ­ fo rm a tiv e su b sta n c e .15 T h e d e c a p ita tio n in sec tio n I I I , Vbis th e re fo re signifies th e o b ta in in g of th e a rc a n e su b sta n c e . A c­ c o rd in g to th e te x t, th e fig u re fo llo w in g b e h in d th e sacrificer is n a m e d th e “ M e rid ia n o f th e S u n ,” a n d his h e a d is to b e c u t off. T h is s trik in g off o f th e g o ld e n h e a d is also fo u n d in th e m a n u ­ sc rip ts o f S p le n d o r solis as w ell as in th e R o rsc h a c h p r in t in g of 1 5 9 8 . T h e sacrifice in th e v isio n is o f a n in itia te w h o h as u n d e r ­ g o n e th e e x p e rie n c e o f th e solificatio. I n alchemy;" su n is sy n o n y ­ m o u s w ith g old . G o ld , as M ic h a e l M a ie r says, is th e “c irc u la to ry w o rk of th e s u n ,” “s h in in g clay m o u ld e d in to th e m o st b e a u te o u s su b stan ce, w h e re in th e so la r rays a re g a th e re d to g e th e r a n d sh in e f o r th .” 10 M y liu s says th a t th e “ w a te r com es fro m th e rays of th e s u n a n d m o o n .” 17 A c c o rd in g to th e “A u re lia o c c u lta ,” th e s u n ’s rays a re g a th e re d to g e th e r in th e q u ic k s ilv e r.18 D o rn d eriv e s all m e ta ls fro m th e “ in v isib le ray s” of h e a v e n ,19 w hose sp h e ric a l sh ap e is a p ro to ty p e o f th e H e rm e tic vessel. I n v iew o f all th is, w e sh all h a rd ly go w ro n g in su p p o sin g th a t th e in itia te n a m e d th e “ M e rid ia n o f th e S u n ” h im se lf re p re s e n ts th e a rc a n e s u b ­ stance. W e sh all co m e b ack to th is id e a la ter. 14

“T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in

th e

Mass,”

pp.

24off.

15 Ib id . 16

D e circulo physico q uadrate, p p . 15L

17 P hilosophia reform ata, p. 313. 18 T h e a tru m cheinicum , IV (1659), p. 496.

ie "S peculative p h ilo so p h ia,” ibid., I {1659), p. 247.

72

L et us tu r n n ow to o th e r details of th e vision. T h e m ost strik ­ ing fe a tu re is th e “bow l-shaped a lta r.” I t is u n q u e stio n a b ly re ­ lated to th e krater o f P oim andres. T h is was the vessel w hich th e d em iu rg e sen t do w n to e a rth filled w ith N ous, so th a t those w ho w ere striv in g fo r h ig h e r consciousness co u ld bap tize them selves in it. I t is m e n tio n e d in th a t im p o rta n t passage w here Zosimos tells his frie n d a n d soror mystica, T heo seb eia: “ H asten do w n to the sh ep h e rd a n d b a th e yourself in th e krater, a n d h asten u p to your ow n k in d (yevos).” 20 She h ad to go dow n to th e place of d e ath a n d r e b irth , a n d th e n u p to h e r “ow n k in d ,” i.e., th e twiceb o rn , or, in th e language of th e gospels, th e k in g d o m of heaven. 97 T h e krater is obviously a w onder-w orking vessel, a fo n t o r piscina, in w hich th e im m ersio n takes place a n d tra n sfo rm a tio n in to a sp iritu a l b e in g is effected. I t is th e vas H e rm e tis of la te r alchem y. I do n o t th in k th e re can be any d o u b t th a t th e krater of Zosimos is closely re la te d to th e vessel of P o im an d res in the Corpus H e r m e tic u m .21 T h e H e rm e tic vessel, too, is a u te ru s of s p iritu a l ren ew al or re b irth . T h is idea corresponds exactly to the te x t of th e benedictio fontis, w hich I q u o te d e a rlie r in a fo o tn o te.22 I n “ Isis to H o ru s ,” 23 the an g el brin g s Isis a sm all vessel filled w ith tra n slu c e n t o r “sh in in g ” w ater. C o n sid erin g th e alchem ical n a tu re of th e treatise, we co u ld take this w ater as th e d iv in e w a ter of the a rt,24 since after th e p rim a m a te ria this is the real arcan u m . T h e w ater, o r w ater of the N ile, h a d a spe­ cial significance in a n cie n t Egypt: i t was O siris, th e dism em ­ b ered god par e xcellence .25 A te x t from E d fu says: “ I b rin g you the vessels w ith th e go d ’s lim bs [i.e., the N ile] th a t you m ay d rin k of them ; I refresh y o u r h e a rt th a t you m ay be satisfied.” 26 T h e g o d ’s lim bs w ere the fo u rte e n p arts in to w hich O siris was

96

20 B erth elo t, A lch . grecs, III, li, 8. 21 Scott, H e rm e tic a j I, B ook IV , and R eitzen stein , P o im a n d re s, p p . 8ff. 22 See supra, par. 89, n. 8. 23 B erth elot, A lch . grecs, I, x iii, if . 24 T h e arcanum is h ere sym b olized by th e sow in g o f th e grain and the b eg e ttin g o f m an, lio n , an d dog. In ch em ica l u sage it refers to th e fix a tio n o f q u ick silver (ib id ., I, x iii, 6-9). Q uick silver w as o n e of th e o ld er sym bols for th e d iv in e w ater on accou n t o f its silv ery -w h ite sh een . In R o sa riu m it is ca lled “aq u a clarissim a” (A rt. au rif., II, p. 213). 2 5 B u d ge, T h e G ods o f th e E g y p tia n s, II, p p . i22ff. 26 Jacobsohn , D ie d o g m a tisc h e S te llu n g d es K o n ig s in d e r T h e o lo g ie d e r a lie n A e g y p te r, p . 50.

IS

d ivided. T h e re are n u m e ro u s references to th e h id d e n , d iv in e n a tu re of th e arcan e substance in th e alchem ical texts.27 A c­ c o rd in g to th is a n c ie n t tra d itio n , th e w ater possessed th e pow er of resuscitation; for it was O siris, w ho rose fro m th e dead. In the “D ictio n ary of G o ld m a k in g ,” 28 O siris is th e nam e fo r lead a n d su lp h u r, b o th of w hich a re synonym s for th e arcan e substance. T h u s lead, w hich was th e p rin c ip a l n am e fo r th e arcane su b ­ stance for a lo n g tim e, is called “ the sealed to m b of O siris, con­ ta in in g all th e lim bs of th e god.” 29 A ccording to legend, Set (T y p h o n ) covered the coffin of O siris w ith lead. Petasios tells us th a t the “sp h ere of th e fire is re stra in e d a n d enclosed by le a d .” O lym piodorus, w ho q uotes this saying, rem ark s th a t Petasios a d d e d by way of e x p lan a tio n : “T h e lead is th e w ater w hich is­ sues fro m th e m ascu lin e e lem en t.” 30 B u t th e m ascu lin e ele­ m e n t, he said, is th e “sphere of fire.” 98 T h is tra in of th o u g h t indicates th a t th e s p irit w hich is a w ater, o r th e w ater w hich is a sp irit, is essentially a p aradox, a p a ir of opposites lik e w ater a n d fire. I n th e aqua nostra of the alchem ists, th e concepts of w ater, fire, a n d sp irit coalesce as they do in relig io u s usage.31 99 Besides th e m o tif of w ater, th e story th a t form s th e settin g of th e Isis treatise also contains th e m o tif of v io latio n . T h e te x t says:32 Isis the Prophetess to her son Horus: My child, you should go forth to battle against the faithless T yphon for the sake of your father’s kingdom, while I retire to H orm anuthi, Egypt’s [city] of the sacred art, where I sojourned for a while. According to the circumstances of the tim e and the necessary consequences of the movement of the 27 Cf. the id en tifica tio n o f th e A g a th o d a im o n w ith th e tran sform ative substance, supra, II I, v, 3 . 28 B erth elo t, A lc h . grecs, I, ii. 29 Ώ σιρίϊ ίσ τιν ή ταφή ίσφί-γμένη, κρύπτουσα πάντα τά ’iltripiSos μίΧη: T rea tise of O lym p iod oru s o f A lex a n d ria (ib id ., II, iv, 4 2 ). H ere O siris is the “ p rin c ip le o f a ll m o istu re” in agreem en t w ith P lu ta rch . T h is refers to th e relatively lo w m e ltin g p o in t o f lead. so Ib id., II, iv, 4 3 . 31 Cf. th e h ym n o f St. R o m a n u s on th e th eop h an y: “ . . . h im w h o w as seen o f o ld in th e m id st o f th ree c h ild ren as d ew in th e fire, n o w a fire flick erin g and sh in in g in th e Jord an , h im se lf th e lig h t in a ccessib le” (P itra, A n a le c ta sacra, I, 21 ).

32 B erth elo t, A lc h . grecs, I , x iii, 1 - 4 .

spheres,33 it cam e to pass th a t a certain one am ong th e angels, dw ell­ ing in the first firm am ent, w atched m e from above and w ished to have intercourse w ith me. Q uickly he determ ined to b rin g this about. I d id n o t yield, as I w ished to in q u ire in to the p rep aratio n of the gold an d silver. B u t w hen I dem anded it of him , he to ld me he was n o t p e rm itted to speak of it, on account of th e suprem e im portance of the mysteries; b u t on the follow ing day an angel, A m nael, greater th a n he, w ould come, and he could give m e the solution of the problem . H e also spoke of the sign of this angel— he bore it on his head an d w ould show me a small, u n p itch ed vessel filled w ith a tran slu cen t w ater. H e w ould tell m e the tru th . O n th e follow ing day, as the sun was crossing th e m id p o in t of its course, A m nael appeared, w ho was g reater th a n the first angel, and, seized w ith the same desire, he d id n o t hesitate, b u t hastened to w here I was. B ut I was n o less d eterm in ed to in q u ire in to the m a tte r.34 IOO

101

She d id n o t y ie ld to h im , a n d th e an g el re v e a le d th e secret, w h ich she m ig h t pass o n ly to h e r so n H o ru s. T h e n fo llo w a n u m b e r o f re c ip e s w h ic h are o f n o in te re s t h ere. T h e an g el, as a w in g e d o r s p ir itu a l b e in g , re p re s e n ts, lik e M e rc u riu s , th e v o la tile su b stan ce, th e p n e u m a , th e ά σ ώ μ α τ ο ν (dis­ e m b o d ie d ). S p irit in a lch em y a lm o st in v a ria b ly has a r e la tio n to w a te r o r to th e ra d ic a l m o istu re , a fact th a t m ay b e e x p la in e d sim p ly b y th e e m p iric a l n a t u r e o f th e o ld e st fo rm o f “c h e m is try ,” n a m e ly th e a r t of co o k in g . T h e ste a m a ris in g fro m b o ilin g w a te r conveys th e first v iv id im p re ssio n of “ m e ta so m a to sis,” th e tr a n s ­ fo rm a tio n o f th e c o rp o re a l in to th e in c o rp o re a l, in to s p ir it o r p n e u m a . T h e r e la tio n o f s p ir it to w a te r resid es in th e fa c t th a t th e s p ir it is h id d e n in th e w ater, lik e a fish. I n th e “A lle g o ria e s u p e r lib r u m T u r b a e ” 35 th is fish is d e s c rib e d as “ r o u n d ” a n d e n d o w e d w ith “ a w o n d e r-w o rk in g v ir tu e .” As is e v id e n t fro m th e te x t,36 it re p re s e n ts th e a rc a n e su b stan ce. F ro m th e alc h e m ic a l tra n s fo rm a tio n , th e te x t says, is p ro d u c e d a c o lly riu m (eyew ash) 33 Instead o f φΐυρίκής in th e text. 34 T h e secrets o f th e art. 33 A r t. au rif., I, p p . 14if. 36 “T h ere is in the sea a ro u n d fish, la ck in g b on es an d scales [?], an d it h as in itself a fatness, a w on d er-w ork in g virtu e, w h ich i f it b e choked on a slow fire u n til its fatness an d m oistu re h a v e w h o lly disap p eared , and th en be th o ro u g h ly cleansed, is steep ed in sea w ater u n til it b eg in s to sh in e. . . .” T h is is a d escrip ­ tion o f the transform ation process. [Cf. A io n , pars. 195S.]

w h ic h w ill e n a b le th e p h ilo s o p h e r to see th e secrets b e t te r .37 T h e “ r o u n d fish” seem s to b e a re la tiv e o f th e “ r o u n d w h ite s to n e ” m e n tio n e d in th e T u r b a .38 O f th is it is said: “I t has w ith in itself th e th re e co lo u rs a n d th e f o u r n a tu re s a n d is b o r n of a liv in g _ th in g .” T h e “ r o u n d ” th in g o r e le m e n t is a w ell-k n o w n c o n c e p t in alch em y . I n th e T u r b a w e e n c o u n te r th e r o tu n d u m : “ F o r th e sake o f p o s te rity I call a tte n tio n to th e r o tu n d u m , w h ic h ch an g es th e m e ta l in to f o u r .” 89 As is c le a r fro m th e c o n te x t, th e r o tu n ­ d u m is id e n tic a l w ith th e a qu a perm an en s. W e m e e t th e sam e tr a in o f th o u g h t in Zosim os. H e says o f th e r o u n d o r o m eg a ele­ m e n t: “ I t consists o f tw o p a rts. I t b elo n g s to th e s e v e n th zone, th a t o f K ro n o s,40 in th e la n g u a g e of th e c o rp o re a l ( κατά την ΐνσωμον φράσιν) ; b u t in th e la n g u a g e o f th e in c o rp o re a l it is s o m e th in g d iffe re n t, th a t m a y n o t b e re v e a le d . O n ly N ik o th e o s k n o w s it, a n d h e is n o t to b e f o u n d .41 I n th e la n g u a g e o f th e c o rp o re a l it is n a m e d O k ean o s, th e o rig in a n d seed, so th e y say, of all th e g o d s.” 42 H e n c e th e r o tu n d u m is o u tw a rd ly w a te r, b u t in w a rd ly th e a rc a n u m . F o r th e P eratics, K ro n o s was a “ p o w e r h a v in g th e c o lo u r of w a te r,” 43 “ fo r th e w a te r, th e y say, is d e s tr u c tio n .” W a te r a n d s p ir it a re o fte n id e n tic a l. T h u s H e rm o la u s B arb a r u s 44 says: “ T h e r e is also a h e a v e n ly o r d iv in e w a te r o f th e a lch em ists, w h ic h was k n o w n b o th to D e m o c ritu s a n d to H e r ­ m es T rism e g is tu s . S o m etim e s th e y call it th e d iv in e w a te r, a n d so m etim es th e S cy th ian ju ic e , so m etim e s p n e u m a , th a t is s p irit, o f th e n a tu r e o f a e th e r, a n d th e q u in te s se n c e o f th in g s .” 45 R u Ia n d calls th e w a te r th e “s p ir itu a l p o w er, a s p ir it o f h ea v e n ly n a tu r e .” 46 C h ris to p h e r S teeb gives a n in te r e s tin g e x p la n a tio n o f th e o rig in o f th is id e a: “ T h e b ro o d in g of th e H o ly S p irit 37 “ · . . w hose a n o in te d eyes could easily look u p o n th e secrets o f th e p h ilo so ­ p h e rs.” 38 Codex V adiensis 390 (St. G all), 15th cent, (m en tio n ed by R uska, T u rb a , p . 93). C o ncerning th e fish, see A io n , ch. X. 38 Serm o X L I. 40 T h a t is, S atu rn , w ho was reg a rd e d as th e d a rk “co u n ter-su n .” M ercu riu s is th e ch ild of S atu rn , an d also of th e sun a n d m oon. 41 Cf. P sychology a nd A lc h em y, p ar. 456, §6. 42 B e rth elo t, A lc h . grecs, III, xix, 1. 43 Α ύν α μ ις y&p φ η σ ίν ύδα τό χρο υ I , η ρ τίνα δϋναμιν, φ η σ ί, T o v r ia n τ&ρ Kpivov. H i p p o l y t U S ,

E lenchos, V, 16, 2 (trans. Legge, P h ilo so p h u m e n a , I, ρ . 1 5 4 )· 44 ΐ 4 5 4 - Ι 4 9 3 · C a rd in al arch b ish o p o f A quileia, a n d a g re a t h u m a n ist. 43 C orollarium in D ioscoridem . C ited in M aier, S ym b . a u r. m ens., p . 174. 43 L exico n alchem iae, p p . 46f.

u p o n th e w aters above th e firm am en t b ro u g h t fo rth a p o w er w hich perm eates all things in th e m ost su b tle way, w arm s th em , and, in c o n ju n c tio n w ith th e light, generates in th e m in e ra l k ingdom of th e low er w o rld th e m e rc u ria l serp en t, in the p la n t k ingdom the blessed greenness, an d in the an im al k in g d o m th e form ative pow er; so th a t th e supracelestial sp irit of th e w aters, u n ite d w ith th e lig h t, m ay fitly be called th e soul of th e w o rld .” 47 Steeb goes on to say th a t w hen th e celestial w aters w ere a n im a ted by th e sp irit, they im m ed iately fell in to a c irc u ­ la r m o tio n , from w hich arose the perfect spherical form of th e anim a m u n d i. T h e r o tu n d u m is th erefo re a b it of th e w o rld soul, an d this m ay w ell have been the secret th a t was g u ard ed by Zosimos. AU these ideas re fe r expressly to P la to ’s T im aeus. In th e T u r b a , P arm en id es praises the w ater as follows: “O ye celes­ tial n atures, w ho at a sign from G od m u ltip ly the n a tu re s of the tru th ! O m ighty n a tu re , w ho conquers the n a tu re s an d causes the n a tu re s to rejoice an d be glad! 48 F o r she it is in p a rtic u la r, w hom G od has endow ed w ith a pow er w hich th e fire does n o t possess. . . . She is herself th e tru th , all ye seekers of w isdom , for, liquefied w ith h e r substances, she brings a b o u t the highest of w orks.” 49 103 Socrates in th e T u r b a says m uch th e same: “O how this n a ­ tu re changes body in to spirit! . . . She is the sharpest vinegar, w hich causes gold to becom e p u re s p irit.” 50 “V in e g ar” is syn­ onym ous w ith “w a ter,” as th e te x t shows, an d also w ith th e “red sp irit.” 51 T h e T u r b a says o f the la tte r: “ From th e co m p o u n d th a t is tran sfo rm ed in to re d sp irit arises th e p rin c ip le of th e w o rld ,” w hich again m eans the w orld soul.52 A u ro ra consurgens C o e lu m S e p h ir o tic u m , p . 33. 48 A n a llu s io n to th e a x io m o f p se u d o -D e m o c ritu s. 49 R u sk a , p . 1go. 59 P. 197. 5 1 P p . 2oof. A q u a n o stra is “ fire, b e cau se it b u rn s all th in g s a n d re d u c e s th e m to p o w d e r; q u ic k s ilv e r is v in e g a r" (Q u o ta tio n fro m C a lid in R o s a r iu m , p . 218). " O u r w a te r is m ig h tie r th a n fire. . . . A n d fire in re sp e c t th e r e to is lik e w a te r in re s p e c t to co m m o n fire. T h e r e f o r e th e p h ilo s o p h e rs say: B u rn o u r m e ta l in th e m ig h tie s t fire ” (ib id ., p . 250). H e n c e th e “ w a te r ” is a k in d o f su p e rfire , a n ig n is coelestis. 52 C o n tra ry to R u s k a ( T u r b a , p . 201, n . 3), I a d h e re to th e re a d in g in th e MSS. b ecau se it is sim p ly a sy n o n y m fo r th e m o ist so u l o f th e p rim a m a te ria , th e r a d i ­ cal m o is tu re . A n o th e r sy n o n y m fo r th e w a te r is " s p ir itu a l b lo o d ” (ib id ., p . 129), w h ich R u s k a r ig h tly c o lla te s w ith irvpphv α ϊμ α (fire-co lo u red b lo o d ) in th e G reek

47

says: “ S en d fo r th th y S p irit, th a t is w a te r . . . a n d th o u w ilt re n e w th e face of th e e a r th .” A n d ag ain : “ T h e r a in of th e H o ly S p irit m e lte th . H e sh a ll sen d o u t his w o rd . . . his w in d sh all b lo w a n d th e w aters sh all r u n . ” 53 A rn a ld u s d e V illa n o v a (1235—1313) says in h is “ F los F lo r u m ” : “T h e y h av e c a lle d w a te r s p irit, a n d i t is in t r u t h s p ir it.” 54 T h e R o s a r iu m philosop h o r u m says categ o rica lly : “ W a te r is s p ir it.” 55 I n th e tre a tis e of K o m ario s (1st c en t. a .D .), th e w a te r is d e s c rib e d as a n e lix ir of life w h ic h w ak en s th e d e a d sle e p in g in H a d e s to a n e w s p r in g ­ tim e .56 A p o llo n iu s says in th e T u r b a :57 “ B u t th e n , ye sons o f th e d o c trin e , th a t th in g n e e d s th e fire, u n ti l th e s p ir it o f th a t b o d y is tra n s fo rm e d a n d le ft to s ta n d th r o u g h th e n ig h ts, a n d tu r n s to d u s t lik e a m a n in h is g rav e. A fte r th is has h a p p e n e d , G o d w ill give it b ack its so u l a n d its s p irit, an d , th e in firm ity b e in g r e ­ m o v e d , th a t th in g w ill b e s tro n g e r a n d b e tte r a fte r its d e s tru c ­ tio n , e v e n as a m a n beco m es s tro n g e r a n d y o u n g e r a fte r th e res­ u r r e c tio n th a n h e w as in th e w o rld .” T h e w a te r acts u p o n th e su b stan ces as G o d acts u p o n th e b o d y . I t is c o e q u a l w ith G o d a n d is itse lf o f d iv in e n a tu re . 104 As w e h av e seen, th e s p ir itu a l n a tu r e of th e w a te r com es fro m th e “ b ro o d in g ” of th e H o ly S p irit u p o n th e chaos (G enesis 1 : 3). T h e r e is a s im ila r v iew in th e C o r p u s H e r m e t i c u m : “T h e r e w as d a rk n e ss in th e d e e p a n d w a te r w ith o u t fo rm ; a n d th e re w as a s u b tle b re a th , in te llig e n t, w h ic h p e rm e a te d th e th in g s in C h ao s w ith d iv in e p o w e r.” 58 T h is v iew is s u p p o rte d i n th e first p la ce b y th e N e w T e s ta m e n t m o tif o f b a p tis m by “ w a te r a n d s p ir it,” a n d in th e seco n d p la ce b y th e r ite of th e b e n e d ic tio fo n t is , w h ic h is p e rfo rm e d o n E a ste r E v e.59 B u t th e sources. T h e eq u a tio n fire == sp irit is co m m o n in alchem y. T h u s, as R uska h im self rem arks (p. 271), M ercurius (a freq u en t synonym fo r the a q u a p e rm a n e n s, cf. R u la n d ’s L e x i c o n ) is called φ ά ρ μ α κ ο υ π ύ ρ ιν ο υ (fiery m ed icin e). 53 Cf. A u ro ra C on su rg en s (ed. vo n Franz), p p . 85, 91. 54 A r t. a u rif.j II, p. 482. 55 Ib id ., II, p. 239. 5 6 B erth elot, A lch . grecs, IV , x x , 8: “ M ake k n ow n to us h ow th e blessed w aters com e dow n from ab ove to aw aken th e dead, w h o lie ro u n d a b o u t in th e m id st o f H ades, ch ain ed in th e darkness; h ow th e e lix ir o f life com es to th em an d aw akens th em , rou sin g th em o u t o f th eir sleep . . . .” 57 P. 1 3 9 . 5 8 Scott, H e r m e tic a , I, p . 147. 59 P raefatio: “M ay th e p ow er o f th e H o ly G host descend in to th is b rim m in g fon t, an d m ay it m ake th e w h o le substance o f th e w ater fr u itfu l in regen erative p ow er” (M issal, p . 431).

T H E V ISIO NS O F ZOSIMOS

idea o f the w ond er-w ork ing w ater derived orig in a lly from H e l­ len istic natu re p h ilosop h y, probably w ith an ad m ixtu re o f E gyptian influences, and n o t from C hristian or b ib lica l sources. Because o f its m ystical pow er, the w ater anim ates and fertilizes b u t also kills. 105 In the d iv in e water, w hose dyophysite natu re (τό σ το ιχ ε Ζ ο ν τ ό διμβρεs)G0 is con stantly em phasized, tw o prin ciples balan ce on e another, active and passive, m ascu lin e and fem in in e, w h ich co n ­ stitu te the essence o f creative pow er in th e eternal cycle of b irth and d ea th .81 T h is cycle was represented in a n cien t alchem y by the sym bol o f the uroboros, the dragon that b ites its ow n ta il.82 S elf-d evou ring is the sam e as self-d estru ction ,63 b u t the u n io n o f the d ragon ’s tail and m o u th was also th ou gh t of as self-fertiliza­ tion. H en ce the texts say: “T h e dragon slays itself, w eds itself, im pregnates itself.” 84 I t shares th is q u a lity w ith M ercurius d u p lex . “ In th e floods of life, in th e storm of work, In eb b an d flow, In w arp an d weft, C radle an d grave, A n etern al sea, A ch an g in g patchw ork, A glow ing life, A t th e w h irrin g loom of T im e I weave T h e living clothes of th e D eity .” T h u s th e E a rth S pirit, th e sp iritu s m ercurialis, to F aust. (T ran s, by M acNeice, P- 23·) β2 In E gypt th e darkness of th e soul was rep rese n ted as a crocodile (Budge, T h e Gods o f th e E gyptians, I, p. 286). 63 In th e B ook o f O stanes (B erthelot, C him ie a u m o yen age, I II , p . 120) th e re is a descrip tio n of a m o n ster w ith w ings of a v u ltu re , an e le p h a n t’s h ead , a n d a d rag o n ’s tail. T h e se p a rts m u tu a lly devour one a n o th er. 64 O f th e quicksilver (aqua vitae, perennis) it is said: “T h is is th e se rp e n t w hich rejoices in itself, im p reg n ates itself, a n d brin g s itself fo rth in a single day: it slays all things w ith its venom , an d w ill becom e fire from th e fire (ei ab igne ignis fu e rit)." (“T ra c ta tu lu s A vicennae,” A rt. a u rif., I, p. 406.) " T h e d rag o n is born in th e nigredo an d feeds u p o n its M ercurius an d slays itself” (R o sa riu m , ibid., II, p. 230). “T h e living M ercurius is called th e scorpion, th a t is, venom ; for it slays itself an d brings itself back to life” (ibid., p p . 27if.). T h e oft-cited saying, “T h e d rag o n d ie th n o t save w ith its b ro th e r an d sister,” is ex p lain ed by M aier (S y m b . aur. m ens., p. 466) as follows: “F o r w h en ev er th e heavenly sun an d m oon m eet in co n ju n ctio n , th is m u st take place in th e h e a d an d ta il of th e dragon; in this com es a b o u t th e conju n ctio n an d u n itin g of su n an d m oon, w hen an eclipse takes place.” ei

T h i s a n c ie n t a lc h e m ic a l id e a re a p p e a r s d r a m a tic a lly in th e v is io n o f Z o sim o s, m u c h as it m ig h t in a r e a l d r e a m . I n I I I , i, 2 th e p r ie s t I o n s u b m it s h im s e lf to a n “ u n e n d u r a b le t o r m e n t .” T h e “s a c r ific e r ” p e r fo r m s th e a c t o f sa c r ific e b y p ie r c in g I o n th r o u g h w it h a s w o r d . I o n th u s fo r e sh a d o w s th a t d a z z lin g w h ite c la d fig u r e n a m e d th e “ M e r id ia n o f th e S u n ” (I I I , v bl8), w h o is d e c a p ita te d , a n d w h o m w e h a v e c o n n e c t e d w ith th e s o l i f i c a t i o o f th e in it ia t e in th e Isis m y s te r ie s. T h i s fig u r e c o r r e s p o n d s to th e k in g ly m y s ta g o g u e o r p s y c h o p o m p w h o a p p e a r s i n a v is io n r e ­ p o r te d in a la te m e d ie v a l a lc h e m ic a l te x t, th e “ D e c la r a tio e t E x p lic a t io A d o l p h i ,” w h ic h fo r m s p a r t o f th e “ A u r e lia o c c u lt a .” 65 S o fa r as o n e c a n ju d g e , th e v is io n h as n o c o n n e c t io n w h a te v e r w it h th e Z o s im o s te x t, a n d I a lso d o u b t v e r y m u c h w h e t h e r o n e s h o u ld a t t r ib u t e to i t th e c h a r a c te r o f a m e r e p a r a b le . I t c o n ta in s c e r ta in fe a tu r e s th a t a r e n o t tr a d itio n a l b u t a re e n t ir e ly o r ig in a l, a n d fo r th is r e a so n it se e m s lik e ly th a t it w as a g e n u in e d r e a m e x p e r ie n c e . A t a ll e v e n ts , I k n o w fr o m m y p r o fe s s io n a l e x p e r i­ e n c e th a t s im ila r d r e a m -v is io n s o c c u r to d a y a m o n g p e o p le w h o h a v e n o k n o w le d g e o f a lc h e m ic a l s y m b o lis m . T h e v is io n is c o n ­ c e r n e d w ith a s h in in g m a le fig u r e w e a r in g a c r o w n o f stars. H is r o b e is o f w h it e l in e n , d o t t e d w it h m a n y -c o lo u r e d flo w e r s, th o s e o f g r e e n p r e d o m in a t in g . H e a ssu a g es t h e a n x io u s d o u b ts o f th e a d e p t, sa y in g : “A d o lp h u s , f o llo w m e . I s h a ll s h o w t h e e w h a t is p r e p a r e d fo r th e e , so th a t th o u c a n s t p ass o u t o f th e d a r k n e ss i n t o th e l i g h t .” T h i s fig u r e , th e r e fo r e , is a tr u e H e r m e s P sy c h o p o m p o s a n d in it ia t o r , w h o d ir e c ts th e s p ir itu a l t r a n s i t u s o f th e a d e p t. T h i s is c o n fir m e d i n th e c o u r s e o f th e la t t e r ’s a d v e n tu r e s , w h e n h e r e c e iv e s a b o o k s h o w in g a “ p a r a b o lic fig u r e ” o f th e O ld A d a m . W e m a y ta k e th is as i n d ic a t in g th a t th e p s y c h o p o m p is t h e s e c o n d A d a m , a p a r a lle l fig u r e to C h r ist. T h e r e is n o ta lk o f s a c r ific e , b u t, i f o u r c o n je c tu r e is r ig h t, th is t h o u g h t w o u ld b e w a r r a n te d b y th e a p p e a r a n c e o f th e s e c o n d A d a m . G e n e r a lly s p e a k in g , t h e fig u r e o f th e k in g is a s s o c ia te d w it h t h e m o t if o f th e m ortifica tio . 107 T h u s in o u r te x t th e p e r s o n ific a tio n o f th e s u n o r g o ld is to b e sa c r ific e d ,66 a n d h is h e a d , w h ic h w a s c r o w n e d w it h t h e a u re-

106

T h e a t r . c h e m . , IV (1659), p p . 50gff. 66 T h e k illin g { m o r t i f ic a ti o ) o f th e k in g o c c u r s in la te r a lc h e m y (cf. P s y c h o l o g y a n d A l c h e m y , F ig . 173). T h e k in g ’s c ro w n m a k es h im a k in d o f su n . T h e m o t if b e lo n g s to th e w id e r c o n te x t o f th e sacrifice o f th e g o d , w h ic h d e v e lo p e d n o t

65

80

ole of th e sun, struck off, fo r this contains, o r is, th e a rc a n u m .67 H e re we have an in d ic a tio n of th e psychic n a tu re of th e a r­ canum , for the head of a m an signifies above all th e seat o f co n ­ sciousness.68 A gain, in the vision of Isis, th e angel w ho bears th e secret is co n n ected w ith th e m e rid ia n of th e sun, for th e te x t says th a t he a p p ea re d as “ th e su n was crossing th e m id p o in t of its course.” T h e angel bears th e m ysterious e lix ir on his h ead an d , by his re la tio n sh ip to the m e rid ia n , m akes it clear th a t he is a k in d of solar genius o r m essenger of the sun w ho b rings “illu m i­ n a tio n ,” th a t is, a n e n h a n c e m e n t a n d expansion o f conscious­ ness. H is indecorous b e h a v io u r m ay be e x p lain ed by th e fact th a t angels have always enjoyed a d u b io u s re p u ta tio n as far as th e ir m orals are concerned. I t is still th e ru le for w om en to cover th e ir h a ir in church. U n til w ell in to th e n in e te e n th cen tu ry , es­ pecially in P ro te sta n t regions, they h ad to w ear a special h o o d 69 w hen they w e n t to c h u rc h on Sundays. T h is was n o t because of the m en in the cong reg atio n , b u t because of th e possible p res­ ence of angels, w ho m ig h t be th ro w n in to ra p tu re s a t th e sight of a fe m in in e coiffure. T h e ir su sceptibility in these m atters goes back to G enesis 6 : 2 , w here th e “sons of G o d ” displayed a p a rtic ­ u la r p e n c h a n t for th e “d au g h ters of m e n ,” a n d b rid le d th e ir e n ­ thusiasm as little as d id th e tw o angels in th e Isis treatise. T h is treatise is assigned to th e first c e n tu ry a . d . Its views reflect th e Ju d ae o -H e lle n istic angelology70 of Egypt, a n d it m ig h t easily have been k now n to Zosimos th e E gyptian. Such o p in io n s a b o u t angels fit in a d m ira b ly w ith m asculine on ly in th e W est b u t also in th e East, and p articu larly in a n cien t M exico. T h e r e the personifier o f T ezca tlip o ca ("fiery m irror”) was sacrificed ac th e festival of T o x c a tl (Spence, T h e G o d s o f M e x i c o , p p . 97ff.). T h e sam e th in g h a p p en ed in the c u lt o f U itz ilo p o ch tli, th e su n -god (ib id ., p. 73), w h o also figured in the eu ch aristic rite o f the t eoqual o, " g o d -ea tin g ” (cf. “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in the M ass,” p p . 223L). 67 T h e solar n atu re of th e v ictim is confirm ed b y th e tra d itio n th a t th e m an d estin ed to be b eh ea d ed by th e priests o f H arran h ad to h ave fair h a ir an d b lu e eyes (ibid., p. 340). ®s Cf. m y remarks on th e H a rra n ite h ea d m ystery an d th e leg en d a ry h ea d oracle o f P op e Sylvester II (ib id ., p p . 24of.). 69 Its form can still be seen in th e d ea co n ’s h ood . 70 A ccord in g to R a b b in ic tra d itio n th e an g els (in clu d in g Satan) w ere created on the second day o f C reation (the day o f the m oon ). T h e y w ere im m ed ia tely d iv id ed on th e q u estio n of crea tin g m an . T h e r efo r e G od created A d am in secret, to avoid in cu rrin g th e d isp leasu re o f th e angels.

8l

as w e ll as w ith fe m in in e psychology. If an g els a re a n y th in g a t all, th e y a re p e rso n ifie d tra n s m itte rs o f u n c o n sc io u s c o n te n ts th a t a re seek in g ex p ressio n . B u t if th e co n scio u s m in d is n o t re a d y to a ssim ila te th e se c o n te n ts , th e ir en erg y flows off in to th e affective a n d in s tin c tu a l sp h e re . T h is p ro d u c e s o u tb u rs ts o f affect, ir r i ta ­ tio n , b a d m oo d s, a n d se x u a l e x c ite m e n t, as a re s u lt of w h ic h c o n ­ sciousness gets th o ro u g h ly d is o rie n te d . I f th is c o n d itio n beco m es c h ro n ic , a d isso c ia tio n d ev elo p s, d e s c rib e d b y F r e u d as re p re s ­ sion, w ith all its w ell-k n o w n co n seq u en c es. I t is, th e re fo re , o f th e g re a te st th e ra p e u tic im p o rta n c e to a c q u a in t o n e se lf w ith th e c o n te n ts th a t u n d e r lie th e d isso ciatio n . 109 J u s t as th e an g el A m n a e l b rin g s th e a rc a n e s u b sta n c e w ith h im , so th e " M e r id ia n o f th e S u n ” is h im se lf a re p r e s e n ta tio n of it. I n a lc h e m ic a l lite r a tu r e , th e p ro c e d u re o f tra n s fix in g o r c u t­ tin g u p w ith th e sw o rd takes th e sp ecial fo rm o f d iv id in g th e p h ilo so p h ic a l egg. I t, to o , is d iv id e d w ith th e sw o rd , i.e., b ro k e n d o w n in to th e f o u r n a tu re s o r ele m e n ts. As a n a rc a n u m , th e egg is a sy n o n y m fo r th e w a te r .71 I t is also a sy n o n y m fo r th e d ra g o n (m e rc u ria l s e r p e n t)72 a n d h e n c e fo r th e w a te r in th e sp ecial sense o f th e m icro co sm o r m o n a d . S ince w a te r a n d egg a re syn­ o n y m o u s, th e d iv isio n o f th e egg w ith th e sw o rd is also a p p lie d to th e w ater. “ T a k e th e vessel, c u t it th r o u g h w ith th e sw o rd , ta k e its so u l . . . th u s is th is w a te r o f o u rs o u r vessel.” 73 T h e vessel lik ew ise is a sy n o n y m fo r th e egg, h e n c e th e re c ip e : " P o u r in to a r o u n d glass vessel, s h a p e d lik e a p h ia l o r eg g .” 74 T h e egg is a copy o f th e W o rld -E g g , th e eg g -w h ite c o rre s p o n d in g to th e " w a te rs ab o v e th e firm a m e n t,” th e “ s h in in g liq u o r ,” a n d th e y o lk to th e p h y sical w o r ld .75 T h e egg c o n ta in s th e f o u r ele ­ m e n ts .76 71 “T h e y com pared th e w ate r to an egg, because it su rro u n d s ev ery th in g th a t is w ith in it, a n d h as in itself a ll th a t is necessary” (“C onsilium co n iu g ii,” A rs chem ica, p. 140). “H av in g a ll th a t is necessary” is on e of th e a ttrib u te s of God. 7 2 M aier, Sym b. aur. m ens., p. 466. Cf. Senior, D e chem ia, p . 108: " T h e d rag o n is th e d ivine w ater." 7 3 U lus, herm ., p. 785. 7 4 Ib id ., p. 90. 75 Steeb, C oelum S ep h iro ticu m , p. 33. 7 β T u rb a , Serm o IV, p. 112. Cf. also th e “n o m e n cla tu re o f th e egg” in B erth elo t, A lc h . grecs, I, iv, an d O lym piodorus on th e egg, th e tetraso m ia, a n d th e spherical p h ia l (II, iv, 44). C oncerning th e id e n tity of uro b o ro s a n d egg, a n d th e division in to fo u r, see th e B ook o f E l-H a b ib (B erthelo t, M o yen age, I II , p p . g2, 104). T h e re is a p ic tu re of th e egg bein g divided w ith th e sw ord in E m blem V III of

8g

110

T h e d iv id in g sw ord seems to have a special significance in a d d itio n to those we have no ted . T h e “ C onsilium c o n iu g ii” says th a t th e m a rria g e p air, su n a n d m oon , “m u st b o th b e slain by th e ir ow n sword, im b ib in g im m o rtal souls u n til th e m ost h id ­ den in te rio r [i.e., th e previous] soul is e x tin g u ish e d .” 77 I n a poem of 1620, M ercu riu s com plains th a t he is “sore to rm e n te d w ith a fiery sw ord.” 78 A ccording to th e alchem ists, M ercurius is th e o ld se rp en t w ho already in paradise possessed “k n o w l­ edge,” since he was closely re la te d to th e devil. I t is the fiery sw ord b ra n d ish e d by th e angel a t th e gates of parad ise th a t to r­ m ents h im ,79 a n d yet he him self is this sword. T h e re is a p ic­ tu re in th e “ S peculum v e rita tis” 80 of M ercu riu s k illin g th e king an d th e snake w ith th e sw ord— “glad io p ro p rio se ip su m in terficiens.” S a tu rn , too, is show n p ierced by a sw ord.81 T h e sword is w ell su ite d to M ercu riu s as a v a ria n t of th e telurn passionis, C u p id ’s a rro w .82 D o rn , in his “S peculativa philosophia,” 83 gives a lo n g an d in te re stin g in te rp re ta tio n of th e sw ord: it is th e “ sw ord of G o d ’s w ra th ,” w hich, in th e fo rm of C h rist th e Logos, was h u n g u p o n th e tree o f life. T h u s th e w rath of G od was chan g ed to love, a n d “ th e w ater of G race now bathes th e w hole w o rld .” H e re again, as in Zosimos, th e w ater is co nnected w ith the sacrificial act. Since th e Logos, th e W o rd of G od, is “sh arp er th a n any tw o-edged sw ord” (H ebrew s 4 : 12), th e w ords M aier’s S c ru tin iu m c h y m ic u m (p. 22), w ith th e in scrip tion : “T a k e th e egg and pierce it w ith a fiery sw ord.’’ E m b lem X X V show s th e k illin g o f th e dragon. K illin g w ith the sw ord is also sh ow n in L am b sp rin gk ’s Sym bol II (M u saeu tn h e rm e tic u m , p . 345), title d " P u trefa ctio .’’ K illin g an d d iv isio n in to fou r go together. “ M ortificatio (scl. L ap id is) sep aratio elem en to r u m ” (“E xercit. in T u rb . I X ”). Cf. th e dram atic fights w ith th e dragon in th e visio n s o f K rates (B erth elot, M o yen dge, III, pp . 73ff.). t t A rs ch em ica, p . 359. 78 V erus H e rm e s, p. 16. [Cf. infra, par. 276.] T ST his m o tif also occurs in the A d am p arab le in "A urelia o c c u lta ” (T h e a tr . chem ., IV, 1659, PP- 5 11^)- w h ich describes h o w th e a n g el had to deal A dam sev­ eral b lood y w o u n d s w ith h is sw ord because h e refu sed to m ove o u t o f P aradise. A dam is th e arcane substance, w hose “e x tra ctio n fro m th e g a r d e n ” o f E ve is finally accom p lish ed by m eans o f b lo o d m agic. 80 C odex V at. L at. 7286 (17th cent.). Fig. 150 in P sych o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y . 81 C odex V ossianus 29 (L eiden), fol, 73. 82 R ip le y ’s “C a n tilen a ,” verse 17. [Cf. M y s te riu m C o n iu n c tio n is, p . 285.— E d i t o r s .] 83 T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), p . 254. Cf. “T ra n sfo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass,” pp. 234f. [A lso cf. infra, pars. 447L]

111

o f th e C o n s e c ra tio n in th e M ass w ere in te r p r e te d as th e sacrifi­ cial k n ife w ith w h ic h th e o ffe rin g is sla in .84 O n e finds in C h ristia n sy m b o lism th e sam e “c irc u la r ” G n o stic th in k in g as in a l­ ch em y . I n b o th th e sacrificer is th e sacrificed, a n d th e sw o rd th a t k ills is th e sam e as th a t w h ic h is k ille d . I n Zosim os th is c irc u la r th in k in g a p p e a rs in th e sacrificial p rie s t’s id e n tity w ith his v ic tim a n d in th e re m a rk a b le id e a th a t th e h o m u n c u lu s in to w h o m Io n is c h a n g e d d e v o u rs h im se lf.83 H e spew s fo rth h is o w n flesh a n d re n d s h im se lf w ith h is o w n te eth . T h e h o m u n c u lu s th e re fo re stan d s fo r th e u ro b o ro s , w h ich d ev o u rs itse lf a n d gives b ir th to itse lf (as th o u g h sp ew in g itse lf fo rth ). S in ce th e h o m u n c u lu s re p re s e n ts th e tra n s f o r m a tio n of Io n , it follow s th a t Io n , th e u ro b o ro s , a n d th e sacrificer a re es­ s e n tia lly th e sam e. T h e y a re th r e e d iffe re n t aspects o f th e sam e p rin c ip le . T h is e q u a tio n is c o n firm e d by th e sy m b o lism o f th a t p a r t o f th e te x t w h ic h I h av e ca lle d th e “ re s u m e ” a n d h av e p la c e d a t th e e n d o f th e visions. T h e sacrificed is in d e e d th e u ro b o ro s s e rp e n t, w hose c irc u la r fo rm is su g g ested b y th e sh ap e o f th e te m p le , w h ic h h as “ n e ith e r b e g in n in g n o r e n d in its c o n ­ s tru c tio n .” D is m e m b e rin g th e v ic tim c o rre sp o n d s to th e id e a of d iv id in g th e ch ao s in to fo u r e le m e n ts o r th e b a p tis m a l w a te r in to fo u r p a rts. T h e p u rp o s e o f th e o p e r a tio n is to c re a te th e b e g in n in g s o f o r d e r in th e massa co n fusa, as is su g g ested in I I I , i, 2: “ in a c c o rd an ce w ith th e r u le o f h a rm o n y .” T h e p sycho­ lo g ical p a ra lle l to th is is th e r e d u c tio n to o rd e r, th r o u g h reflec­ tio n , o f a p p a r e n tly c h a o tic fra g m e n ts o f th e u n c o n sc io u s w h ic h h av e b ro k e n th r o u g h in to consciousness. W i th o u t k n o w in g an y ­ th in g o f a lc h e m y o r its o p e ra tio n s , I w o rk e d o u t m a n y years ago a psycholo g ical ty p o lo g y b ased o n th e fo u r fu n c tio n s o f consciousness as th e o r d e r in g p rin c ip le s o f psychic processes in g e n e ra l. U n co n scio u sly , I w as m a k in g use o f th e sam e a rc h e ty p e w h ic h h a d le d S c h o p e n h a u e r to g iv e h is “ p r in c ip le o f sufficient re a s o n ” a fo u rfo ld r o o t.86 T h e te m p le b u i l t o f a “ sin g le s to n e ” is a n o b v io u s p a r a ­ p h ra se o f th e lapis. T h e “ s p rin g o f p u re s t w a te r” in th e te m p le is a f o u n ta in o f life, a n d th is is a h in t th a t th e p r o d u c tio n o f th e 84 Ib id ., p. 215. 85 T h e p a ra llel to th is is th e o ld view th a t C hrist drank h is ow n b lo o d (ib id ., P- 21 O88 Cf. m y “A P sych ological A p p roach to th e D ogm a of the T r in ity ,” p . 167.

84

ro u n d w holeness, th e stone, is a g u a ra n tee of vitality. Sim ilarly, the lig h t th a t shines w ith in it can be u n d ersto o d as th e illu m in a ­ tio n w hich w holeness b rin g s.87 E n lig h te n m e n t is a n increase of consciousness. T h e tem p le of Zosimos appears in la te r al­ chem y as th e d o m u s th esaurorum or gazophylacium (treasurehouse).88 us A lth o u g h th e sh in in g w h ite “m o n o lith ” u n d o u b te d ly stands for th e stone, it clearly signifies at the sam e tim e th e H e rm e tic vessel. T h e R o sa riu m says: “ O n e is th e stone, one th e m ed icin e, one the vessel, o n e th e p ro ced u re, an d one th e d isp o sitio n .” 89 T h e scholia to th e “ T ra c ta tu s au reu s H e rm e tis” p u t it even m ore p lainly: “ L e t all be one in o n e circle o r vessel.” 90 M i­ chael M aier ascribes to M aria th e Jewess (“sister of M oses”) th e view th a t th e w hole secret of th e a rt lay in know ledge of th e H e r ­ m etic vessel. I t was d iv in e, a n d h a d b e e n h id d e n fro m m a n by th e w isdom of th e L o rd .91 A u ro ra consurgens I I 92 says th a t th e n a tu ra l vessel is th e aqua p erm anens a n d th e “v in eg ar of th e p hilo so p h ers,” w hich obviously m eans th a t it is th e arcan e su b ­ stance itself. W e sh o u ld u n d e rs ta n d th e “ P ractica M a ria e ” 9S in this sense w hen it says th a t th e H e rm e tic vessel is “ th e m easu re of y o u r fire” a n d th a t it h a d b e en “h id d e n by th e Stoics” ;94 it is the “ toxic b o d y ” w hich transform s M ercu riu s a n d is th e re fo re the w ater of th e p h ilo so p h e rs.95 As th e arcan e substance th e ves­ sel is n o t o n ly w ater b u t also fire, as th e “A llegoriae s a p ie n tu m ” m akes clear: “T h u s o u r stone, th a t is th e flask of fire, is cre­ ated fro m fire.” 96 W e can th erefo re u n d e rs ta n d w hy M ylius97 calls th e vessel th e “ro o t a n d p rin c ip le of o u r a rt.” L a u re n tiu s Si T h e sh in in g o f th e vessel is o ften m en tio n ed , as in " A llegoriae su p er Iibrum T u r b a e ” (A r t . aurif., I, p. 143): “ . . . u n til y o u see th e vessel g leam a n d sh in e like a ja c in th .” 88 Ars ch em ica , p. g. 89 1550 edn., fol. A III. 90 B ibl. chem ., I, p. 442. 91 Sym b. aur. m ens., p . 63. 92 A rt. aurif., I,'p . 203. 93 Ibid., p . 323. 9^ T h e “S toics” are also m en tio n ed in “ L iber q u a rto ru m ,” T h e a t r . chem ., V (1660), p . 128. 95 H o g h ela n d e, "D e difficult, a lch .,” T h e a tr . chem ., I (1659), P- *7 7 · 0S T h e a tr , chem·,, V (1660), p . 60. 0I P h il, ref., p . 32.

V e n tu ra 98 calls it “ L u n a ,” th e fo e m in a alba a n d m o th e r of th e stone. T h e vessel th a t is “n o t dissolved by w ater a n d n o t m e lted by fire” is, according to th e “ L ib e r q u a rto ru m ,” 99 “like th e w ork of G od in the vessel of the d iv in e seed (g e rm in is divi), for it has received th e clay, m o u ld e d it, an d m ix ed it w ith w ater an d fire.” T h is is an allu sio n to the c re atio n of m an, b u t o n th e o th e r h a n d it seems to re fe r to the creatio n of souls, since im m ed iately afterw ards the te x t speaks of the p ro d u c tio n of souls from the “seeds of h eaven.” In o rd e r to catch th e soul G od created th e vas cerebri} the c ran iu m . H e re the sym bolism of th e vessel coincides w ith th a t of th e head, w hich I have discussed in my “T ra n s fo r­ m a tio n Sym bolism in th e M ass.” 100 1J4 T h e p rim a m a te ria , as th e radical m o istu re, has to d o w ith th e soul because the la tte r is also m oist by n a tu re 101 a n d is som e­ tim es sym bolized by dew .102 In this way th e sym bol of th e vessel gets tra n sfe rre d to th e soul. T h e re is a n ex cellen t exam ple of this in C aesarius of H e iste rb a c h :103 th e soul is a sp iritu a l su b ­ stance of spherical n a tu re , like th e globe of th e m oon, o r lik e a glass vessel th a t is “fu rn ish e d before an d b e h in d w ith eyes” an d “sees th e w hole u n iv erse.” T h is recalls th e m any-eyed d rag o n of alchem y a n d th e snake vision of Ig n a tiu s L oyola.104 In this con­ n e ctio n th e re m a rk o f M ylius105 th a t th e vessel causes “ the w hole firm am en t to ro ta te in its course” is of special in terest because, as I have show n, th e sym bolism of th e starry heaven coincides w ith the m o tif of p o ly o p h th a lm ia .106 “5 A fte r all this we sh o u ld be able to u n d e rs ta n d D o rn ’s view th a t th e vessel m u st be m ade “ by a k in d of sq u a rin g of th e c ir­ cle.” 107 I t is essentially a psychic o p e ra tio n , th e c re atio n of an 88 T h e a tr. ch etn ., II (1659), p. 246. Ib id ., V (1660), p . 132. 100 P p. 239!!. I O lT h e m oistu re is “reten tiv e o f sou ls” ("Lib. q u a rt.,” T h e a tr . ch em ., V , 1660, p· 139)102 Cf. the d escen t o f th e so u l in m y "Psychology o f th e T ra n sferen ce,” pars. 483 an d 497. 103 D ia lo g u s m ira c u lo ru m , D ist. IV , ch . x x x ix (Eng. ed n ., p. 42). 104 Cf. m y “O n the N a tu r e o f th e P sych e,” p . 198. 105 P h il, ref., p . 33. io e “O n th e N a tu re o f th e P sych e,” p p . 198L 107 T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), PP- 5°6f.: “ O u r vessel . . . sh o u ld b e m ad e accord­ in g to true geom etrical p ro p o rtio n an d m easure, and by a k in d of sq u arin g o f the circle." 98

T H E V IS IO N S O F Z O SIM O S

in n er readiness to accept th e archetype o f the self in w hatever su bjective form it appears. D orn calls the vessel the vas pellicanic u m , and says that w ith its h elp the q u in ta essentia can be e x ­ tracted from th e prim a m ateria.108 T h e an onym ous au th or of the scholia to th e “T ractatu s aureus H erm etis” says: “T h is ves­ sel is th e true p h ilo so p h ica l P elican , and there is n o n e oth er to be sou gh t for in a ll the w o rld .” 109 It is the lapis itself and at the same tim e con tain s it; that is to say, the self is its ow n container. T h is fo rm u la tio n is b orn e o u t by the freq u en t com p arison of the lapis to the egg or to the dragon w hich devours itself and gives b irth to itself. u6 T h e th o u g h t and lan gu age o f alchem y lean h eavily o n m ys­ ticism : in th e E p istle o f Barnabas110 C hrist’s bod y is called the “vessel o f the sp irit.” C hrist h im self is th e p elica n w h o plucks o u t his breast feathers for his yo u n g .111 A ccord in g to the teach ­ ings o f H erak leon , the d yin g m an sh o u ld address the d em iu rgic powers thus: “I am a vessel m ore precious than th e fem in in e b ein g w ho m ad e you. W hereas your m oth er k new n o t her ow n roots, I k n ow of m yself, and I k now w hence I have com e, and I call u p on the im p erish ab le w isd om w hich is in the F ather112 108 Ib id ., p . 44a. 10s Ib id ., IV (1G59), P- s 98 · [Cf. in fra , F ig. B7.] HO L ak e, A p o s to lic F a th ers, I, p . 383. i n H o n o riiis o f A u tu n , S p e c u lu m d e m y s t. eccl. (M ig n e, P .L ., v o l. 172, col. 936). C h ris t’s te a r in g of th e b re a s t, th e w o u n d in h is sid e, a n d h is m a r ty r ’s d e a th a re p a ra lle ls o f th e a lc h e m ic a l m o r tific a tio , d is m e m b e rm e n t, flay in g , etc., a n d p e rta in like th ese to th e b i r t h a n d re v e la tio n o f th e in n e r m a n . C f. th e r e p o r t in H ip p o ly tu s (E le n c h o s, V, g, 1-6) o f th e P h ry g ia n system . T h e P h ry g ia n s ta u g h t th a t th e F a th e r of a ll th in g s w as c a lle d A m y g d alo s (a lm o n d -tre e ), w as p re -e x is te n t, a n d b o re in h im s e lf th e “ p e rfe c t f r u i t p u ls a tin g a n d s tir r in g in th e d e p th s .” H e “ to re h is b re a s t a n d gave b i r t h to h is in v isib le , n a m e le ss a n d u n n a m e a b le c h ild .” T h a t w as th e “ In v isib le O n e , th r o u g h w h o m a ll th in g s w e re m a d e , a n d w ith o u t w h o m n o th in g w as m a d e ” (a n a llu s io n to J o h n 1 : 3). H e w as “ S y rik tes, th e p ip e r ,” i.e., th e w in d (p n e u m a ). H e w as " th o u s a n d -e y e d , n o t to b e c o m p re ­ h e n d e d ,” th e W o rd (ρ ή μ α ) o f G o d , th e W o rd o f a n n u n c ia tio n a n d g re a t p o w e r.” H e w as " h id d e n in th e d w e llin g w h e re th e ro o ts o f a ll th in g s a re e s ta b lis h e d .” H e w as th e “ k in g d o m o f H e a v e n , th e g ra in o f m u s ta rd -s e e d , th e in d iv is ib le p o in t . . . w h ic h n o n e k n o w save th e s p ir itu a l a lo n e .” (Cf. L eg g e tra n s., P h ilo s o p h u m e n a , I, p p . 140L) 112 H e ra k le o n ta u g h t t h a t th e G r o u n d o f th e w o rld w as a P r im o r d ia l M a n n a m e d B y th o s (d e p th s o f th e sea), w h o w as n e ith e r m a le n o r fe m a le . F ro m th is b e in g was p ro d u c e d th e in n e r m a n , h is c o u n te r p a r t, w h o “ c a m e d o w n fro m th e P le ro m a o n h ig h .”

a n d is the M o th er of y o u r m o th er, w hich has n o m o th e r, b u t also has no m ale c o m p an io n .” 113 ”7 In the ab stru se sym bolism of alchem y we h e a r a d ista n t echo of this k in d of th in k in g , w hich, w ith o u t h o p e of fu rth e r d e ­ v elo p m en t, was doom ed to d estru ctio n u n d e r the censorship of th e C h u rch . B u t we also find in it a g ro p in g tow ards th e fu tu re , a p re m o n itio n of th e tim e w hen th e p ro je c tio n w o u ld be tak en back in to m an , from w hom it h a d arisen in th e first place. I t is in te re stin g to see th e strangely clum sy ways in w hich this te n d ­ ency seeks to express itself in th e ph an tasm ag o ria of alchem ical sym bolism . T h e follow ing in stru ctio n s are given in Jo h an n e s de Rupescissa: “ C ause a vessel to be m ad e in th e fashion of a C h eru b , w hich is th e face of G od, an d le t it have six wings, like to six arm s fo ld in g back u p o n them selves; a n d above, a ro u n d head. . . .” 114 F ro m this it appears th a t a lth o u g h th e ideal dis­ tillin g vessel sh o u ld resem ble som e m o n stro u s k in d of deity, it nevertheless h a d a n ap p ro x im a te ly h u m a n shape. R upescissa calls th e quintessence th e “ciel h u m a in ” a n d says it is “com m e Ie ciel et Ies etoiles.” T h e B ook of E l-H a b ib 115 says: “ M an ’s h ead likew ise resem bles a co n d en sin g a p p a ra tu s.” Speaking of th e fo u r keys for u n lo c k in g th e treasure-house, th e “ C o n siliu m coniu g ii” 110 explains th a t one of th e m is “ th e ascent of th e w ater th ro u g h th e neck to th e h ead of the vessel, th a t is like a liv in g m a n .” T h e re is a sim ilar idea in th e “ L ib e r q u a rto ru m ” : “T h e vessel . . . m u st be ro u n d in shape, th a t th e a rtife x m ay be the tra n sfo rm e r of th e firm am en t a n d th e b rain -p an , ju s t as th e th in g w hich we n e ed is a sim ple th in g .” 117 T h e se ideas go back to th e h ead sym bolism in Zosimos, b u t a t th e sam e tim e they are an in tim a tio n th a t th e tra n sfo rm a tio n takes place in th e h ead a n d is a psychic process. T h is realizatio n was n o t so m eth in g th a t 113 E p ip h a n iu s, P a n a riu m (ed. H oIl), II, p p . 46!:. 114 L a V ertu e t p r o p r ie te d e la q u in te essence, p . 26.

115 B erth elot, M o y e n age, III, p . 80. l i e A rs ch em ica , p . 110. 117 T h e a tr. ch em ., V (1660), p . 134. T h e res sim p le x refers, u ltim a tely , to G od. I t is “insensible." T h e so u l is sim p le, an d th e “o p u s is n o t p erfected u n less th e m atter is tu rn ed in to th e sim p le" (p. 116). “T h e u n d ersta n d in g is th e sim p le so u l,” a n d “kn ow s a lso w h at is h ig h er than it, a n d th e O ne G od su rrou n d s it, w hose natu re it ca n n o t com p reh en d " (p. 129). “T h a t fro m w h ich th in g s h ave th eir b ein g is th e in v isib le an d im m o v ea b le G od, by w h o se w ill th e u n d ersta n d ­ in g is created" (p. 129).

was clum sily disguised afterw ards; th e lab o rio u s way in w hich it was fo rm u la te d proves h ow o b stin ately it was p ro je c ted in to m atter. Psychological know ledge th ro u g h w ith d raw al of p ro je c ­ tions seems to have b een a n ex trem ely difficult affair fro m the very b e g in n in g . u8 T h e dragon, o r serp en t, rep resen ts the in itia l state of u n c o n ­ sciousness, for this a n im a l loves, as the alchem ists say, to dw ell “in caverns a n d d a rk places.” U nconsciousness has to b e sacri­ ficed; only th e n can o n e find th e en tra n ce in to th e head, a n d the way to conscious know ledge a n d u n d e rstan d in g . O nce again the u n iv ersal struggle of th e h ero w ith th e d rag o n is enacted, arid each tim e a t its victorious conclusion the sun rises: consciousness dawns, a n d it is perceived th a t th e tra n sfo rm a tio n process is tak ­ in g place inside th e tem ple, th a t is, in th e head. I t is in tru th the in n e r m an, p re sen te d h e re as a h o m u n cu lu s, w ho passes th ro u g h th e stages th a t tra n sfo rm th e c o p p er in to silver an d th e silver into gold, a n d w ho thus undergoes a gradual enhancem ent of value. n9 I t sounds very strange to m o d e rn ears th a t th e in n e r m an a n d his s p iritu a l grow th sh o u ld be sym bolized by m etals. B u t th e histo rical facts c a n n o t be d o u b te d , n o r is th e idea p e c u lia r to alchem y. I t is said, for instance, th a t a fte r Z a ra th u stra h a d r e ­ ceived th e d rin k of om niscience fro m A h u ram azd a, h e b e h eld in a d ream a tre e w ith fo u r branches of gold, silver, steel, an d m ixed iro n .118 T h is tree corresponds to th e m etallic tree of al­ chem y, th e arbor philosophica, w hich, if it has any m e an in g at all, sym bolizes s p iritu a l g ro w th a n d th e h ighest illu m in a tio n . C old, in e rt m etal certain ly seems to b e the d ire c t op p o site of sp irit— b u t w hat if th e sp irit is as dead an d as heavy as lead? A d ream m ig h t th e n easily te ll us to loo k fo r it in lead o r q u ic k ­ silver! I t seems th a t n a tu re is o u t to p ro d m a n ’s consciousness tow ards g re a te r expansion an d g re a te r clarity, a n d fo r this re a ­ son c o n tin u a lly exploits his g reed fo r m etals, especially th e p re ­ cious ones, a n d m akes h im seek th e m o u t a n d investigate th e ir pro p erties. W h ile so engaged it m ay p erh ap s daw n o n h im th a t n o t only veins of ore are to be fo u n d in th e m ines, b u t also kobolds a n d little m e ta l m en , a n d th a t th e re m ay be h id d e n in lead e ith e r a deadly dem on o r th e dove of th e H o ly G host.119 118 R e itz e n s te in a n d S c h a e d e r, S tu d ie n z u m a n tik e n S y n k r e tis m u s aus Ir a n u n d G rie c h e n la n d , p. 45. l i e [ C f . P sy ch o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , p a r. 4 4 3 . ]

It is e v id e n t th a t som e alchem ists passed th ro u g h th is process of re a liza tio n to th e p o in t w here only a th in w all sep arated th e m from psychological self-awareness. C h ristia n R o sen creu tz is still th is side of th e d iv id in g lin e, b u t w ith Faust G o eth e cam e o u t on th e o th e r side a n d was able to describe th e psychological p ro b ­ lem w hich arises w h en th e in n e r m an , o r g re a te r p erso n ality th a t b efore h a d la in h id d e n in th e h o m u n c u lu s, em erges in to th e lig h t of consciousness a n d co n fro n ts th e erstw h ile ego, th e a n i­ m al m an. M o re th a n once F au st h ad in k lin g s of th e m etallic coldness of M ep h isto p h eles, w ho h a d first circled ro u n d h im in th e shape of a dog (u ro b o ro s m otif). F au st used h im as a fa m il­ ia r s p irit a n d finally got r id of h im by m eans of th e m o tif of th e ch eated devil; b u t all th e sam e he claim ed th e c re d it fo r th e fam e M ephistopheles b ro u g h t h im as w ell as fo r th e p o w er to w ork m agic. G o e th e ’s so lu tio n o f th e p ro b le m was still m edieval, b u t it nevertheless reflected a psychic a ttitu d e th a t co u ld get on w ith o u t th e p ro te c tio n of th e C h u rc h . T h a t was n o t th e case w ith R o sen creu tz: he was wise en o u g h to stay o u tsid e th e m agic circle, liv in g as he d id w ith in th e confines of tra d itio n . G o eth e was m o re m o d e rn an d th e re fo re m o re in cau tio u s. H e n ev er really u n d e rsto o d how d re a d fu l was th e W a lp u rg isn a c h t of th e m in d against w hich C h ristia n dogm a offered p ro te c tio n , even th o u g h his ow n m asterpiece sp re ad o u t this u n d e rw o rld b efo re his eyes in tw o versions. B u t th en , a n e x tra o rd in a ry n u m b e r of th ings can h a p p e n to a p o et w ith o u t h a v in g serious conse­ quences. T h e se a p p ea re d w ith a vengeance o n ly a h u n d re d years la te r. T h e psychology of th e unconscio u s has to reck o n w ith lo n g periods of tim e lik e this, for it is c o n cern ed less w ith th e e p h em e ra l p erso n ality th a n w ith age-old processes, c o m p ared w ith w h ich th e in d iv id u a l is n o m o re th a n th e passing blossom a n d f r u it of th e rh izo m e u n d e rg ro u n d . 3.

THE

P E R SO N IF IC A T IO N S

W h a t I have ta k en as a resum e, n am ely th e piece w e have b een discussing, Zosim os calls a προοίμιον, a n in tro d u c tio n .1 I t is th e re fo re n o t a dream -vision; Zosim os is sp eak in g h e re in th e conscious language of his art, an d expresses h im self in term s th a t are obviously fa m ilia r to his re a d er. T h e d rag o n , its sacrifice 1 [S u p ra, p a r . 87 (III, i, 6).]

and d ism e m b erm en t, th e te m p le b u ilt of a single stone, th e m ir­ acle of gold m ak in g , th e tra n sm u ta tio n of the a n th ro p a ria , are all c u rre n t conceptions in th e alchem y of his day. T h a t is w hy this piece seem s to us a conscious allegory, co n trastin g w ith th e a u ­ th e n tic visions, w hich tre a t the them e of tra n sm u ta tio n in an u n o rth o d o x a n d o rig in al way, ju s t as a d ream m ig h t do. T h e a b ­ stract spirits of th e m etals are p ic tu re d h ere as suffering h u m a n beings; the w hole process becom es lik e a m ystic in itia tio n a n d has b e en very co n sid erab ly psychologized. B u t Zosim os’ co n ­ sciousness is still so m u ch u n d e r th e spell of the p ro je c tio n th a t he can see in th e vision n o th in g m o re than the “co m p o sitio n of the w aters.” O ne sees how in those days consciousness tu rn e d away from th e m ystic process a n d fastened its a tte n tio n u p o n th e m a te ria l one, a n d how th e p ro je c tio n drew th e m in d tow ards th e physical. F o r th e physical w o rld h a d n o t yet b een discovered. H a d Zosim os recognized the p ro jectio n , h e w o u ld have fallen back in to th e fog of m ystic speculation , a n d th e d e v elo p m en t of th e scientific s p irit w o u ld have b e en delayed fo r an even lo n g e r tim e. F o r us, m a tte rs are different. I t is ju s t th e m ystic c o n te n t of his visions th a t is of special im p o rtan c e fo r us, because we are fa m ilia r e n o u g h w ith th e chem ical processes w hich Zosimos was o u t to investigate. W e are th e re fo re in a p o sitio n to separate them from th e p ro je c tio n an d to recognize th e psychic e lem en t they c o n tain . T h e resu m e also offers us a sta n d a rd of co m p ariso n w hich enables us to discern th e difference b etw een its style of ex p osition a n d th a t of th e visions. T h is difference su p p o rts o u r assu m p tio n th a t th e visions are m o re like a d ream th a n a n alle­ gory, th o u g h th e re is little p ossibility of o u r re c o n stru c tin g th e d ream fro m th e defective te x t th a t has com e do w n to us. T h e re p re se n ta tio n of th e ‘‘alchem ystical” process by persons needs a little ex p lan a tio n . T h e person ificatio n of lifeless things is a re m n a n t of p rim itiv e a n d archaic psychology. I t is caused by unconscious id e n tity ,2 o r w h at L evy-B ruhl called p a rticip a tio n m ystiq u e. T h e unconscious id e n tity , in tu rn , is caused by th e p ro je c tio n of unconscious co n ten ts in to an o b ject, so th a t these contents th e n becom e accessible to consciousness as q u alities a p ­ p a re n tly b e lo n g in g to the object. A ny o b je ct th a t is a t all in te r­ esting provokes a co n sid erab le n u m b e r of p ro jectio n s. T h e difference betw een p rim itiv e a n d m o d e rn psychology in th is 2 C f.

P sych o lo g ica l T y p e s,

D e f. 25.

r e s p e c t is i n th e first p la c e q u a lita tiv e , a n d in th e s e c o n d p la c e o n e o f d e g re e . C o n s c io u s n e s s d e v e lo p s i n c iv iliz e d m a n b y th e ac­ q u i s i t io n o f k n o w le d g e a n d b y th e w ith d r a w a l o f p r o je c tio n s . T h e s e a r e r e c o g n iz e d as p sy c h ic c o n te n ts a n d a re r e i n t e g r a te d w ith th e p sy c h e. T h e a lc h e m is ts c o n c r e tiz e d o r p e r s o n if ie d p r a c ­ tic a lly a ll t h e i r m o s t i m p o r t a n t id e a s— th e f o u r e le m e n ts , th e v es­ sel, th e s to n e , th e p r im a m a te r ia , th e t i n c tu r e , e tc . T h e id e a o f m a n as a m ic ro c o s m , r e p r e s e n t in g in a ll h is p a r ts th e e a r t h o r th e u n iv e r s e ,3 is a r e m n a n t o f a n o r ig in a l p sy c h ic i d e n t i t y w h ic h r e ­ fle c te d a tw ilig h t s ta te o f c o n sc io u sn e ss. A n a lc h e m ic a l t e x t 4 e x ­ p resse s th is as fo llo w s: M a n is to be esteem ed a little w o rld , a n d in a ll respects h e is to be c o m p a re d to a w orld. T h e bones u n d e r his sk in are lik e n e d to m o u n ta in s , for by th e m is th e body s tre n g th e n e d , even as th e e a rth is by rocks, a n d th e flesh is ta k e n fo r e a rth , a n d th e g re a t b lo o d vessels for g re a t rivers, a n d th e little ones fo r sm all stream s th a t p o u r in to th e g re a t rivers. T h e b la d d e r is th e sea, w h e re in th e g re a t as w ell as th e sm all stream s congregate. T h e h a ir is c o m p a re d to s p ro u tin g herbs, th e n ails on th e h a n d s a n d feet, a n d w h a te v er else m ay b e discovered in sid e a n d o u tsid e a m an , a ll a c co rd in g to its k in d is c o m p a re d to th e w o rld . 123

A lc h e m ic a l p r o je c tio n s a re o n ly a s p e c ia l in s ta n c e o f th e m o d e o f t h i n k i n g ty p if ie d b y t h e id e a o f th e m ic ro c o s m . H e r e is a n o t h e r e x a m p le o f p e r s o n if ic a tio n :5 N o w m a rk fu rth e r B est B eloved / how you sh o u ld do / you s h o u ld go to th e h ouse / th e re y o u w ill find tw o d o o rs / th a t a re s h u t / you s h o u ld sta n d a w hile b efo re th e m / u n til o n e com es / a n d o pens th e d o o r / a n d goes o u t to y o u / th a t w ill b e a Y ellow M a n / a n d is n o t p re tty to lo o k u p o n / b u t you s h o u ld n o t fe a r h im / because h e is u n sh a p e ly / b u t h e is sw eet o f w o rd / a n d w ill ask y o u / m y d e a r w h a t seekest th o u h ere / w h e n tru ly I h av e lo n g seen n o m a n / so n e a r th is h ouse / th e n you s h o u ld answ er h im / I h a v e com e h e re a n d seek th e L a p id e m P h ilo s o p h o ru m / th e sam e Y ellow M an w ill answ er y o u a n d speak th u s / m y d e a r frie n d since you now h av e Cf. th e m e d ie v a l m e lo th e s ia e . [F o r a d e fin itio n , n . 5 . — E d i t o r s .] 4 ‘‘G lo ria m u n d i,” M u s . h e r m ., p . 270. R “E in P h ilo so p h isc h e s W e rc k u n d G e sp ra c h , v o n R e v e re n d issim i D o m in i M e lc h io ris C a rd in a lis e t in A u r e u m v e llu s , p p . 177L A fte r th e R e d M a n fro m th is com es th e W h ite D ove. 3

see ‘‘P sy ch o lo g y a n d R e lig io n ,”

p . 67,

d e m G e lb e n u n d R o tte n M a n n E p isc o p i B rix ie n s is ,” r e p r in te d h e fin d s th e B la c k R a v e n , a n d

c o m e so f a r / I w i l l s h o w y o u f u r t h e r / y o u s h o u l d g o i n t o t h e h o u s e / u n til y o u c o m e to a r u n n i n g f o u n ta in / a n d th e n go o n a lit tle w h ile / a n d t h e r e w i l l c o m e t o y o u a R e d M a n / h e is F i e r y R e d a n d h a s R e d ey es / y o u s h o u ld n o t f e a r h im o n a c c o u n t o f h is u g l i ­ n e s s / f o r h e is g e n t l e o f w o r d / a n d h e a l s o w i l l a s k y o u / m y d e a r f r i e n d / w h a t is y o u r d e s i r e h e r e / w h e n to m e y o u a r e a s t r a n g e g u e s t / a n d y o u s h o u ld a n s w e r h im / I se ek th e L a p id e m P h ilo s o p h o ru m . . . . 124

P e r s o n if ic a tio n s o f m e ta ls a r e e s p e c ia lly c o m m o n in th e f o lk ­ ta l e s o f i m p s a n d g o b l i n s , w h o w e r e o f t e n s e e n i n t h e m i n e s .6 W e m e e t t h e m e t a l m e n s e v e r a l t i m e s i n Z o s i m o s ,7 a l s o a b r a z e n e a g l e .8 T h e “ w h i t e m a n ” a p p e a r s i n L a t i n a l c h e m y : “ A c c i p e i l ­ i u m a l b u m h o m i n e m d e v a s e . ” H e is t h e p r o d u c t o f t h e c o n ­ j u n c t i o n o f t h e b r i d e g r o o m a n d b r i d e ,9 a n d b e l o n g s t o t h e s a m e c o n te x t o f th o u g h t as th e o ft-c ite d “ w h ite w o m a n ” a n d “ r e d s la v e ,” w h o a r e s y n o n y m o u s w i t h B e y a a n d G a b r i c u s i n t h e “V is io A r i s l e i .” T h e s e tw o f ig u r e s s e e m to h a v e b e e n t a k e n o v e r b y C h a u c e r :10 T h e s ta tu e o f M a rs u p o n a c a r te s to o d , A rm e d , a n d lo o k e d g ry m as h e w e re w o o d ; A n d o v e r h i s h e e d t h e r s h y n e n tw o f ig u r e s • O f s te rre s , t h a t b e e n c le p e d in s c r ip tu r e s , T h a t o o n P u e lla , th a t o o th e r R u b e u s .

125

N o t h i n g w o u ld h a v e b e e n e a s ie r th a n to e q u a te th e lo v e s to ry o f M a r s a n d V e n u s w ith t h a t o f G a b r ic u s a n d B e y a ( w h o w e r e a l s o p e r s o n i f i e d a s d o g a n d b i t c h ) , a n d i t is l i k e l y t h a t a s tro lo g ic a l in f lu e n c e s a ls o p la y e d a p a r t. T h a n k s to h is u n c o n ­ s c io u s i d e n t i t y w i t h it, m a n a n d c o s m o s i n t e r a c t . T h e f o l l o w i n g p a ssa g e , o f th e u tm o s t im p o r ta n c e f o r th e p s y c h o lo g y o f a lc h e m y , s h o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d i n t h i s s e n s e : “ A n d a s m a n is c o m p o s e d o f t h e f o u r e l e m e n t s , s o a l s o is t h e s t o n e , a n d s o i t is [ d u g ] o u t o f m a n , a n d y o u a r e i t s o r e , n a m e l y b y w o r k i n g ; a n d f r o m y o u i t is e x tra c te d , n a m e ly b y d iv is io n ; a n d in y o u it r e m a in s in s e p a ra b ly , 6 Cf. th e in te re stin g · e x a m p le s in A g rico la, D e a n im a n tib u s s u b te r r a n e is , a n d K irch er, M u n d u s s u b te r r a n e u s , lib . V III, c a p . IV . 7 A lc h . g recs, I I I , x x x v . 8 Ib id ., I l l , x x ix , i8f. 9 “A e n ig m a ” V I, in A r t. a u r if., I, p . 151. 10 T h e C a n te r b u r y T a le s (ed. R o b in so n ), p . 43 ( T h e K n ig h t’s T a le , 3041-45).

nam ely th ro u g h the science.” 11 N o t only do things a p p e a r p e r­ sonified as h u m a n beings, b u t the m acrocosm personifies itself as a m an too. ‘‘T h e w hole of n a tu re converges in m a n as in a cem re, an d one p articip ates in the other, a n d m an has n o t u n ­ ju stly co n clu d ed th a t th e m a te ria l of th e p h ilo so p h ical stone m ay be fo u n d everyw here.” 12 T h e ‘‘C o n siliu m c o n iu g ii” 13 says: ‘‘F o u r are th e n a tu re s w hich com pose th e p h ilo so p h ical m a n .” ‘‘T h e elem ents of th e stone are four, w hich, w h en w ell p ro p o r­ tio n e d to one a n o th e r, co n stitu te the p h ilosophical m an, th a t is, the perfect h u m a n e lix ir.” “T h e y say th a t th e stone is a m an , b e ­ cause one c an n o t a tta in to i t 14 save by reason a n d h u m a n k n o w l­ edge.” T h e above statem e n t “you are its o re ” has a p a ra llel in the treatise of K om arios:15 “I n thee [C leopatra] is h id d e n th e w hole te rrib le a n d m arvellous secret.” T h e same is said of th e “b odies” ( σ ώ μ α τ α , i.e., ‘substances’): “I n th em th e w hole secret is concealed.” 16 4- TH E is 6

S T O N E S Y M B O L IS M

Zosimos contrasts th e body ( σ ά ρ ξ in th e sense of ‘flesh’) w ith th e sp iritu a l m an (π ν β υ μ α τ ικ ό ς) . 1 T h e d istin g u ish in g m ark of th e sp iritu a l m an is th a t he seeks self-know ledge a n d know ledge of G o d .2 T h e earthly, fleshly m an is called T h o th o r A dam . H e b ears w ith in him th e sp iritu a l m an, w hose n am e is lig h t (ws). T h is first m an, T h o th -A d am , is sym bolized by th e fo u r elem ents. T h e s p iritu a l a n d th e fleshly m a n are also n a m ed P ro m eth eu s a n d E p im eth eu s. B u t “ in allegorical lan g u ag e” they “ are b u t one m an , nam ely soul a n d b ody.” T h e sp iritu a l m an was seduced in to p u ttin g o n th e body, a n d was b o u n d to it by “P an d o ra, H “R o sin u s ad Sarrat.,” A r t. a u rif., I, p. 311. 12 “O rth elii e p ilo g u s,” T h e a tr. ch em ., V I (1661), p . 438. 13 A rs ch em ica , p p . 247, 253, 254. 14 T h e te x t has “a d D e u m ” (in stead o f “ad e u m ”), w h ich is m ea n in g less. S tate­ m en ts lik e “o u r b od y is our S ton e” (“A u th o ris ig n o ti o p u scu lu m ," A r t. a u rif., I, p . 392) are d o u b tfu l, because “corpus n o stru m ” can ju st as w e ll m ea n the arcane substance. 15 A lch . grecs, IV, x x , 8. ie IV , x x , 16. 1 III, x lix , 4. 2 T h e im p ortan ce o f self-k n ow led ge is stressed in th e alch em ica l texts. Cf. A io n , p p . i62ff.

»27

w hom th e H ebrew s call Eve.” 3 She played the p art, th erefo re, of the anim a, w ho functions as th e lin k betw een body an d sp irit, ju st as S hakti o r M aya entangles m a n ’s consciousness w ith the w orld. In th e "B ook of K rates” th e sp iritu a l m an says: "A re you capable of k n o w in g y o u r soul com pletely? If you knew it as you should, an d if you knew w h a t co u ld m ake it b etter, you w ould be capable of k n o w in g th a t the nam es w hich the philosophers gave it of old are n o t its tru e nam es.” 4 T h is last sentence is a stan d in g phrase w hich is a p p lie d to the nam es of th e lapis. T h e lapis signifies the in n e r m an , th e άνθρωποί πνευματικός, th e natura abscondita w hich th e alchem ists sought to set free. In this sense the A u ro ra consurgens says th a t th ro u g h b ap tism by fire “m an, who before was dead, is m ade a living soul.” 5 T h e a ttrib u te s of the stone— in c o rru p tib ility , perm anence, divinity, triu n ity , etc.— are so insistently em phasized th a t one cannot h elp ta k in g it as th e deus absconditus in m atter. T h is is p ro b ab ly the basis of th e Iapis-C hrist p arallel, w hich occurs as early as Zosimos6 (unless th e passage in q u estio n is a la te r in te r­ polation). Inasm uch as C h rist p u t on a "h u m a n body capable of suffering” an d clo th ed him self in m a tte r, he form s a p arallel to the lapis, the c o rp o reality of w hich is co n stan tly stressed. Its u b iq u ity corresponds to th e om nipresence of C hrist. Its "ch eap ­ ness,” how ever, goes against th e d o ctrin al view. T h e d iv in ity of C hrist has n o th in g to do w ith m an, b u t th e h e alin g stone is “ ex­ tracted ” from m an, an d every m an is its p o te n tia l c arrie r an d creator. I t is n o t difficult to see w h at k in d of conscious situ a tio n the lapis philosophy com pensates: far fro m sig n ifyin g C h rist, th e lapis c o m p lem e n ts th e com m on conception of the C hrist figure a t th a t tim e.7 W h a t unconscious n a tu re was u ltim a te ly aim in g at w hen she p ro d u ced th e im age of th e lapis can be seen m ost clearly in the n o tio n th a t it o rig in ate d in m a tte r a n d in m an, th a t it was to be fo u n d everyw here, an d th a t its fab ricatio n lay at least p o ten tially w ith in m a n ’s reach. T h e se q u alities all reveal w hat w ere felt to be the defects in th e C h rist im age a t th a t tim e: an a ir too rarefied for h u m a n needs, too g reat a rem oteness, a S F or a translation o f th e en tire text, see P sych o lo g y a n d A lch em y , par. 456. 4 B erth elot, M o yen dge, III, p . 50. δ Cf. A u ro ra C onsurgens (ed. M .-L. von Franz), p . 87. e A lch . g recs, III, x lix , 4. I Cf. infra, “T h e Sp irit M ercurius,” pars. 28gff.

place left vacant in the h u m a n h e art. M en fe lt th e absence of th e “ in n e r” C hrist w ho belonged to every m an. C h rist’s s p iritu a lity was too h ig h a n d m a n ’s n atu raln ess was too low. I n th e im age of M ercu riu s a n d th e lapis th e “flesh” glorified itself in its ow n way; it w o uld n o t tran sfo rm itself in to s p irit b u t, o n th e con­ trary , “ fixed” the s p irit in stone, a n d endow ed th e stone w ith all the a ttrib u te s of the th re e Persons. T h e lapis m ay th e re fo re be u n d e rsto o d as a sym bol of the in n e r C hrist, of G o d in m an . I use th e expression “sym bol” o n purpose, for th o u g h th e lapis is a p ara llel of C hrist, it is n o t m e a n t to replace h im . O n th e con­ trary, in th e course of the cen tu ries the alchem ists te n d ed m o re a n d m o re to re g a rd th e lapis as th e c u lm in a tio n of C h rist’s w ork of re d e m p tio n . T h is was an a tte m p t to assim ilate th e C h rist fig­ u re in to the philo so p h y of th e “science of G o d .” I n th e six te en th c e n tu ry K h u n ra th fo rm u la te d for the first tim e th e “ th eo lo g i­ c a l” p o sition of th e lapis: it was the filin s m acrocosm i as opposed to th e “ son of m a n ,” w ho was th e filiu s m icrocosm i. T h is im age of the “Son of th e G re at W o rld ” tells us fro m w h a t source it was d eriv ed : it cam e n o t fro m th e conscious m in d of th e in d iv id u a l m an , b u t from those b o rd e r regions of th e psyche th a t o p e n o u t in to th e m ystery of cosm ic m a tte r. C o rrectly reco g n izin g the s p iritu a l one-sidedness of the C h rist im age, th eological specula­ tio n h a d b e g u n very early to concern itself w ith C h ris t’s body, th a t is, w ith his m a te riality , a n d h a d tem p o ra rily solved the p ro b le m w ith th e hypothesis of th e re su rre c te d body. B u t b e ­ cause this was only a provisional a n d th e re fo re n o t a n en tirely satisfactory answ er, the p ro b le m logically p re sen te d itself again in th e A ssu m p tio n of th e Blessed V irg in , le ad in g first to th e d ogm a o f th e Im m ac u la te C o n cep tio n a n d finally to th a t of th e A ssum ption. T h o u g h this o n ly postpones th e re a l answ er, th e way to it is nevertheless p re p a red . T h e assu m p tio n a n d co ro n a­ tio n of M ary, as d ep icted in th e m edieval illu stratio n s, a d d a fo u rth , fe m in in e p rin c ip le to th e m ascu lin e T rin ity . T h e re su lt is a q u a te rn ity , w hich form s a re a l a n d n o t m erely p o stu la ted sym bol of to tality. T h e to ta lity of th e T r in ity is a m e re p o stu ­ late, for o utside it stands th e au to n o m o u s a n d e te rn a l adversary w ith his choirs of fallen angels a n d th e denizens of h ell. N a tu ra l sym bols of to ta lity such as o ccu r in o u r dream s an d visions, an d in th e East take the fo rm of m andalas, are q u a te rn itie s o r m u lti­ ples of fo u r, o r else sq u ared circles.

128

,29

T h e a cc e n tu atio n of m a tte r is above all ev id en t in th e choice of th e stone as a G od-im age. W e m e et this sym bol in th e very earliest G reek alchem y, b u t th ere are good reasons fo r th in k in g th a t the stone sym bol is very m u ch o ld e r th a n its alchem ical usage. T h e stone as th e b irth p la c e of the gods (e.g., th e b irth of M ithras from a stone) is attested by p rim itiv e legends of stoneb irth s w hich go back to ideas th a t are even m o re a n c ie n t— fo r instance, th e view of th e A u stra lian aborigines th a t c h ild re n ’s souls live in a special stone called th e “child-stone.” T h e y can be m ade to m ig rate in to a u te ru s by ru b b in g the “ch ild -sto n e” w ith a churinga. C huringas m ay be boulders, o r o b lo n g stones a rtifi­ cially sh ap ed an d decorated, o r oblong, flattened pieces of w ood o rn a m e n te d in the sam e way. T h e y are used as c u lt in stru m e n ts. T h e A u stralian s an d the M elanesians m a in ta in th a t churingas com e from th e to tem ancestor, th a t they are relics of his body o r of his activity, an d are fu ll of a ru n q u ilth a o r m ana. T h e y are u n ite d w ith th e a n ce sto r’s soul a n d w ith th e spirits of all those w ho afterw ards possess them . T h e y are taboo, are b u rie d in caches o r h id d e n in clefts in the rocks. I n o rd e r to “ch arg e” them , they are b u rie d am o n g the graves so th a t they can soak u p the m a n a of th e dead. T h e y p ro m o te th e g ro w th of fieldproduce, increase th e fe rtility of m en an d anim als, heal w ounds, an d cu re sicknesses of the body a n d th e soul. T h u s , w hen a m a n ’s vitals are all k n o tte d u p w ith em o tio n , th e A u stralian a b ­ origines give h im a blow in th e ab d o m en w ith a stone ch u r­ inga.8 T h e churingas used for cerem o n ial purposes are d a u b ed w ith re d ochre, a n o in te d w ith fat, b e d d ed o r w rap p ed in leaves, an d copiously spat on (spittle = mana).® T h e se ideas of m agic stones are fo u n d n o t only in A u stralia an d M elanesia b u t also in In d ia a n d B u rm a, a n d in E u ro p e it­ self. F o r exam ple, the m adness of O restes was cu red by a sto n e in L aco n ia.10 Zeus fo u n d resp ite from th e sorrow s of love by sit­ tin g on a stone in L eu k ad ia. In In d ia , a y o u n g m an w ill tre a d u p o n a stone in o rd e r to o b ta in firm ness of ch aracter, an d a b rid e w ill do th e sam e to en su re h e r ow n faithfulness. A ccording 8 Spencer and G illen , T h e N o r th e r n T r ib e s o f C en tra l A u str a lia , p p . 257ft. 8 H astings, E n c y clo p a ed ia of R e lig io n a n d Eth ics, X I, p . 874b, an d Frazer, M ag ic A r t , I, pp . 160ft. Sim ilar och re-p a in ted stones can still b e seen in In d ia today, tor instance in th e K aligh at at C alcutta. 1OPausanias, D e sc rip tio Graeciae (ed. Spiro), I, p. 300.

to Saxo G ram m aticu s, th e electors of th e k in g sto o d o n stones in o rd e r to give th e ir vote p e rm a n e n c e .11 T h e g reen stone of A rra n was used b o th fo r h e alin g an d for ta k in g oaths o n .12 A cache of “ soul stones,” sim ila r to churingas, was fo u n d in a cave on th e riv e r Birs n e a r Basel, a n d d u rin g re c e n t excavations of th e pole-dw ellings on th e little lake a t B urgaeschi, in C a n to n S o lo th u rn , a g ro u p of b o u ld e rs was discovered w ra p p ed in th e b ark of b irch trees. T h is very a n c ie n t c o n cep tio n of th e m agical pow er of stones led on a h ig h e r level of c u ltu re to th e sim ilar im p o rtan c e a ttach ed to gems, to w hich all k in d s of m agical a n d m ed icin al p ro p e rtie s w ere a ttrib u te d . T h e gem s th a t are the m ost fam ous in h isto ry are even supposed to have b een resp o n si­ ble for th e tragedies th a t befell th e ir ow ners. 1So A m yth of the N avaho In d ia n s of A rizo n a gives a p a rtic u la rly g rap h ic a cco u n t of the p rim itiv e fantasies th a t clu ster ro u n d th e sto n e .13 In th e days of th e g re a t darkness,14 th e ancestors of th e h ero saw the Sky F a th e r descending an d th e E a rth M o th er risin g u p to m eet him . T h e y u n ite d , a n d on th e to p of th e m o u n ta in w here th e u n io n took place th e ancestors fo u n d a little figure m ade of tu rq u o is e .15 T h is tu rn e d in to (or in a n o th e r version gave b irth to) E stsanatlehi, “ the w om an w ho re ju v e n ate s o r transform s herself.” She was th e m o th e r of th e tw in gods w ho slew th e p rim o rd ia l m onsters, a n d was called th e m o th e r o r g ra n d m o th e r of th e gods (yei). E stsan atleh i is th e m ost im p o r­ ta n t figure in th e m a tria rc h a l p a n th e o n of th e N avaho. N o t only is she th e “w om an w ho transform s herself,” b u t she also has tw o shapes, fo r h e r tw in sister, Y olkaiestsan, is en d o w ed w ith sim ilar pow ers. E stsanatlehi is im m o rtal, for th o u g h she grows in to a w ith e re d o ld w om an she rises u p again as a y o u n g g irl— a tru e D ea N a tu ra . F ro m d ifferen t p arts of h e r b o d y fo u r d au g h ters w ere b o rn to h er, a n d a fifth from h e r sp irit. T h e su n cam e from th e tu rq u o ise beads h id d e n in h e r rig h t breast, a n d fro m w h ite shell beads in h e r left b reast th e m oon. She issues re b o rn by rollSo d id th e a rc h o n s in A th e n s w h e n ta k in g th e ir o a th . 12 F ra z e r, M a g ic A r t, I, p . 161. 13 S chevill, B e a u tifu l o n th e E a r th , p p . 24ft. a n d g8ff. 14 F o r th e A u s tr a lia n a b o rig in e s, th is w o u ld b e th e p rim e v a l w h ic h m e a n s b o th th e w o rld o f th e a n c e sto rs a n d th e w o rld o f 15 C f. th e tre a tis e o f K o m ario s (B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, IV , x x , 2): h ig h e s t cave o n th e th ic k -w o o d e d m o u n ta in , a n d b e h o ld th e r e m o u n ta in to p . A n d ta k e fro m th e s to n e th e m a le . . . ." 11

a lc h e rin g a tim e , d re a m s. “ G o u p in to th e a s to n e o n th e

in g a p ie ce o f sk in fro m u n d e r h e r le ft b reast. She lives in th e w est, o n a n isla n d in th e sea. H e r lo v e r is th e w ild a n d c ru e l S u n B eare r, w h o has a n o th e r w ife; b u t h e has to stay a t h o m e w ith h e r o n ly w h e n it ra in s . T h e tu rq u o is e goddess is so sacred th a t n o im ag e m a y b e m a d e o f h e r, a n d ev en th e gods m ay n o t lo o k o n h e r faqe. W h e n h e r tw in sons ask ed h e r w h o th e ir f a th e r was, she gave th e m a w ro n g an sw er, e v id e n tly to p ro te c t th e m fro m th e d a n g e ro u s fa te o f th e h e ro . 131 T h is m a tria rc h a l goddess is o b v io u sly a n a n im a fig u re w h o a t th e sam e tim e sym bolizes th e self. H e n c e h e r sto n e -n a tu re , h e r im m o rta lity , h e r fo u r d a u g h te rs b o r n fro m th e b o d y , p lu s o n e fro m th e s p irit, h e r d u a lity as s u n a n d m o o n , h e r ro le as p a ra ­ m o u r, a n d h e r a b ility to c h a n g e h e r s h a p e .16 T h e self o f a m a n liv in g in a m a tria rc h a l so ciety is s till im m e rse d in h is u n c o n ­ scious fe m in in ity , as can b e o b serv ed ev en to d a y in a ll cases of m a sc u lin e m o th e r-c o m p le x e s. B u t th e tu rq u o is e goddess also e x ­ em plifies th e psychology o f th e m a tria rc h a l w o m an , w ho, as a n a n im a fig u re, a ttra c ts th e m o th e r-c o m p le x e s o f a ll th e m e n in h e r v ic in ity a n d ro b s th e m o f th e ir in d e p e n d e n c e , ju s t as O m p h a le h e ld H e ra k le s in th r a ll, o r C irc e re d u c e d h e r cap tiv es to a s ta te o f b e s tia l u n co n scio u sn ess— n o t to m e n tio n B e n o it’s A tla n tid a , w h o m a d e a c o lle c tio n o f h e r m u m m ifie d lovers. AU th is h a p p e n s b ecau se th e a n im a c o n ta in s th e se c re t o f th e p r e ­ cious sto n e, fo r, as N ietzsc h e says, “a ll jo y w an ts e te r n ity .” T h u s th e le g e n d a ry O stan es, s p e a k in g o f th e secret o f th e “ p h ilo so ­ p h y ,” says to h is p u p il C le o p a tra : “ I n y o u is h id d e n th e w h o le te r r ib le a n d m a rv e llo u s secret. . . . M ak e k n o w n to us h o w th e h ig h e st descen d s to th e low est, a n d h o w th e low est ascends to th e h ig h est, a n d h o w th e m id m o s t d raw s n e a r to th e h ig h e st, a n d is m a d e o n e w ith it.” 17 T h i s “m id m o s t” is th e sto n e, th e m e d ia to r w h ich u n ite s th e o p p o sites. S u ch sayings hav e n o m e a n in g u n less th e y a re u n d e rs to o d in a p ro fo u n d ly p sy ch o lo g ical sense. >32 W id e s p re a d as is th e m o tif of th e s to n e -b irth (cf. th e c re a ­ tio n m y th of D e u c a lio n a n d P y rrh a ), th e A m e ric a n cycle o f leg ­ ends seem s to lay sp ecial em p h asis o n th e m o tif of th e sto n ebody, o r a n im a te d s to n e .18 W e m e e t th is m o tif in th e Iro q u o is ta le o f th e tw in b ro th e rs . B e g o tte n in a m ira c u lo u s m a n n e r in !6 Cf. R id er H a g g a rd ’s She. u A lch. grecs, IV, xx, 8. !81 am in d e b ted to D r. M.-JL. von F ranz fo r this m aterial.

th e body of a v irg in , a p a ir of twins w ere b o rn , one of w hom cam e fo rth in th e n o rm a l way, w hile the o th e r so u g h t an a b ­ n o rm a l ex it a n d em erged from th e a rm p it, th ereb y k illin g his m o th er. T h is tw in h a d a body m ade of flint. H e was w icked an d cruel, u n lik e his n o rm a lly b o rn b ro th e r.19 In th e Sioux version th e m o th e r was a tortoise. A m o n g the W ich ita, th e sav io u r was th e great star in th e south, a n d he p e rfo rm ed his w ork of salva­ tio n on earth as th e “flint m a n .” H is son was called th e “ y o ung flin t.” A fte r c o n jp le tin g th e ir w ork, b o th of th e m w en t back in to the sky.20 In this m yth, ju s t as in m edieval alchem y, th e saviour coincides w ith th e stone, th e star, th e “so n ,” w ho is “su p er o m nia lu m in a .” T h e c u ltu re h ero of the N atchez In d ia n s cam e dow n to e a rth from th e sun, a n d shone w ith u n e n d u ra b le brightness. H is glance was death-dealing. I n o rd e r to m itig a te this, a n d to p re v e n t his body from c o rru p tin g in th e earth , he chan g ed him self in to a stone statue, from w hich the priestly ch ieftain s of th e N atchez w ere descen d ed .21 A m o n g th e T a o s P ueblos, a virg in was m ad e p re g n a n t by b e a u tifu l stones an d b ore a h e ro son,22 w ho, ow ing to Spanish influence, assum ed the aspect of the C h rist c h ild .23 T h e stone plays a sim ilar ro le in the Aztec cycle of legends. F o r instance, th e m o th e r of Q uetzalcoatl was m ad e p re g n a n t by a precious green sto n e .24 H e h im self h a d the cognom en “ p riest of th e precious sto n e ” a n d w ore a m ask m ade of tu rq u o ise .25 T h e precious g reen stone was an a n im a t­ ing p rin c ip le a n d was p laced in th e m o u th of th e d e a d .26 M an ’s o rig in al hom e was th e “bow l of precious sto n e.” 27 T h e m o tif of tra n sfo rm a tio n in to stone, o r p e trifa c tio n , is co m m o n in th e P e ru v ia n a n d C o lo m b ian legends a n d is p ro b a b ly co n n ected w ith a m eg alith ic sto n e-cult,28 a n d p erh ap s also w ith th e p alaeo­ lith ic c u lt of churinga -like soul-stones. T h e p arallels h e re w o u ld be the m e n h irs of m eg alith ic c u ltu re , w hich reach ed as far as th e K rickeberg, In d ia n e rm a rc h e n au s N o rd a m e r ik a 1 pp. g2fi. V an D eu rsen, D e r H e ilb r in g e r, p . 227. 21 Ib id., p. 238. 22 Cf. th e fertility sign ifican ce o f th e ch u rin gas. 23 Van D eursen, p . 286. 24 K rickeberg, M a rch en d e r A zte k e n , In k a j M a y a u n d M u isk a, p. 36. 25 Ib id., p. 65. 10

20

26 p . 330.

27 P- 317. 28 p . 382.

IOO

133

Pacific archipelago. T h e civilization of th e N ile valley, w hich o rig in ated in m eg alith ic tim es, tu rn e d its div in e kings in to stone statues for the express purpose of m ak in g th e k in g ’s ka everlast­ ing. In sham anism , m u ch im p o rtan ce is attach ed to crystals, w hich play the p a rt of m in iste rin g spirits.29 T h e y com e from the crystal th ro n e of th e su p rem e b ein g o r from th e v a u lt of the sky. T h e y show w hat is going on in the w o rld an d w h at is h a p ­ p en in g to th e souls of the sick, an d they also give m an th e pow er to fly.30 T h e c o n n ectio n of the lapis w ith im m o rtality is attested from very early tim es. O stanes (possibly 4 th cent. B .C .) speaks of “ the N ile stone th a t has a s p irit.” 31 T h e lapis is th e panacea, th e universal m edicine, the alex ip h arm ic, th e tin c tu re th a t transm utes base m etals in to gold an d gravel in to precious stones. It brings riches, pow er, a n d h ealth ; it cures m elancholy an d , as the vivu s lapis p h ilo so p h icu s, is a sym bol of th e saviour, th e Anthropos, a n d im m o rtality . Its in c o rru p tib ility is also show n in the a n c ie n t idea th a t th e body of a sain t becom es stone. T h u s the A pocalypse of E lijah says of those w ho escape p ersecu tio n by the A nti-M essiah:32 “ T h e L o rd shall take u n to h im th e ir sp irit an d th e ir souls, th e ir flesh shall be m ade stone, n o w ild b east shall d evour th em till th e last day of the g re a t ju d g m e n t.” In a Basuto legend re p o rte d by F ro b en iu s,83 th e h ero is left stra n d ed by his pursuers on th e b a n k of a river. H e changes him self in to a stone, an d his pursuers th ro w h im across to the o th e r side. T h is is the m o tif of the transitus: th e “o th e r sid e” is th e sam e as etern ity . 5.

*34

T H E W A TE R SY M BO LISM

Psychological research has show n th a t th e h isto rical o r e th ­ nological symbols are id e n tic al w ith those spontaneously p ro ­ duced by th e unconscious, an d th a t th e lapis rep resen ts th e idea of a tra n sce n d e n t to tality w hich coincides w ith w h at analytical psychology calls the self. F rom this p o in t of view we can u n d e r­ stand w ith o u t difficulty th e a p p aren tly ab su rd statem en t of th e 29 E liade, Sh am an ism , p. 5a. 30 Ibid., pp. 363(:. 31 A lch . grecs, III, vi, 5, i2ff. 32 Steindorff, A p o k a ly p se d e s E lias, 36, 17-37, *> P- 9733 D as Z e ita lte r des S o n n en g o ttesi p. 106. IOl

alchem ists that the lapis consists of body, soul, and spirit, is a liv in g b eing, a h o m u n cu lu s or “h o m o .” It sym bolizes m an, or rather, the in n er m an, and the paradoxical statem ents ab ou t it are really descrip tions and d efin ition s of this in n er m an. U p o n this con n otatio n o f th e lapis is based its p arallelism w ith Christ. B eh in d th e cou n tless ecclesiastical and alchem ical m etaphors m ay b e fo u n d th e lan gu age o f H e llen istic syncretism , w h ich was origin ally com m o n to b oth. Passages lik e the fo llo w in g o n e from P riscillian , a G n ostic-M anichaean heretic o f the fou rth century, m u st have b een ex trem ely suggestive for the alchem ists: “O neh orn ed is G od, C hrist a rock to us, Jesus a cornerstone, C hrist the m an of m e n ” 1— u nless the m atter was the oth er way round, and m etaphors taken from natural p h ilosop h y fou n d th eir way in to th e lan gu age o f the C hurch via the G ospel o f St. Joh n . *35 T h e p rin cip le that is personified in the visions o f Zosim os is the w onder-w orking water, w hich is b oth w ater and spirit, and k ills and vivifies. If Zosim os, w aking from his dream , im m ed i­ ately thinks o f the “co m p o sitio n o f th e w aters,” this is th e o b v i­ ous con clu sion from the alchem ical p o in t o f view . Since the longsou gh t w ater, as w e have sh ow n ,2 represents a cycle o f b irth and death, every process that consists o f death and reb irth is n a tu ­ rally a sym bol o f the d iv in e water. >3 6 It is con ceivab le that w e have in Zosim os a p arallel w ith the N ico d em u s d ia lo g u e in J o h n 3. A t th e tim e w h en J o h n ’s gospel was w ritten , the idea o f th e d iv in e w ater was fam iliar to every alchem ist. W h en Jesus said: “E x cep t a m an be b orn o f w ater and o f the sp irit . . . ,” an alchem ist o f that tim e w o u ld at on ce h ave u n derstood w hat he m eant. Jesus m arvelled at the ig n o ­ rance o f N icod em u s and asked him : “A rt th o u a m aster in Israel, an d k n ow est n o t these things?” H e o b v io u sly took it for granted th at a teach er (διδάσκαλο?) w o u ld k n ow th e secret o f w ater and spirit, that is, o f death and reb irth. W h ereu p o n h e w en t o n to u tter a saying w h ich is ech oed m any tim es in the alchem ical treatises: “W e speak that w e do k n ow , and testify that w e have seen .” N o t th at the alchem ists actu ally cited this passage, b u t they th ou gh t in a sim ilar way. T h e y talk as if they had tou ch ed th e arcanum or g ift o f th e H o ly S p irit w ith th eir ow n hands, 1 T r a c t a tu s I, C orp. S c rip t. E ccl. L a t., X V III, p . *4. See s u p r a , p a r . 105.

2

and seen the w orkings o f the d iv in e w ater w ith th eir ow n eyes.3 E ven th ou gh these statem ents com e from a later period, the spirit o f alchem y rem ain ed m ore or less the sam e from the earliest tim es to th e late M id d le Ages. J37 T h e co n clu d in g words o f th e N icod em u s d ialogu e, con cern ­ in g “earthly and h eaven ly th in g s,” had likew ise b een the com ­ m on property o f alchem y ever since D em ocritus had w ritten of the “physika and m ystika,” also called “som ata and asom ata,” “corporalia and sp iritu alia.” 4 T h ese words o f Jesus are im m ed i­ ately fo llo w ed by the m o tif o f th e ascent to heaven and descen t to earth.5 In alchem y this w o u ld be the ascent o f the soul from the m ortified body and its d escen t in the form of rean im atin g dew .6 A n d w hen, in the n ex t verse, Jesus speaks o f the serpent lifted u p in the w ilderness and equates it w ith his ow n selfsacrifice, a “M aster” w o u ld b e b o u n d to th in k o f th e uroboros, “ . . . w h ic h I h a v e se e n w ith m y o w n eyes a n d to u c h e d w ith m y h a n d s ” (R o s a r iu m , in A r t. a u r if., II, p . 205). 4 I t m u s t b e re m e m b e re d , h o w e v e r, t h a t J o h n uses o th e r te rm s th a n th o se fo u n d in th e a lc h e m y of th e tim e : τ α kwiyeia a n d τ α kwiovpavia (te rre n a a n d co elestia in th e V u lg a te ). S T h e so u rce fo r th is is H e rm e s T ris m e g is tu s in th e “ T a b u la s m a ra g d in a ” : “ I t ascends fro m e a r t h to h e a v e n a n d d e scen d s a g a in to e a rth . . . . T h e w in d h a th b o rn e i t in h is b e lly .” T h is te x t w as alw ay s in te r p r e te d as r e f e rrin g to th e sto n e (cf. H o r tu la n u s , " C o m m e n ta r io lu m ,” A rs ch em ic a ). B u t th e sto n e com es fro m th e " w a te r.” A p e rfe c t a lc h e m ic a l p a r a lle l to th e C h ris tia n m y stery is th e fo llo w in g passage fro m th e “ C o n siliu m c o n iu g .” (ib id ., p . 128): “ A n d if I a sc en d n a k e d in to h eav en , th e n w ill I com e c lo th e d to e a r th a n d p e rfe c t a ll m in e ra ls. A n d if w e a re b a p tiz e d in th e f o u n ta in o f g o ld a n d silv er, a n d th e s p ir it o f o u r b o d y ascen d s to h e a v e n w ith th e f a th e r a n d th e son, a n d d escen d s a g a in , o u r so u ls w ill rev iv e, a n d m y a n im a l b o d y w ill re m a in w h ite .” T h e a n o n y m o u s a u th o r o f “ L ib e r d e a rte c h y m ic a ” (A r t. a u rif., I, p p . 6 i2 f.) sp eak s in th e sa m e w ay: “ I t is c e rta in th a t th e e a r th c a n n o t ascen d , e x c e p t first th e h e a v e n d e sc e n d , fo r th e e a r t h is said to b e ra is e d u p to h e a v e n , w h e n , d isso lv ed in its o w n s p irit, i t is a t la st u n ite d th e r e w ith . I w ill satisfy th e e w ith th is p a ra b le : T h e S o n o f G o d d e sc e n d ­ in g in to th e V irg in , a n d th e r e c lo th e d w ith flesh, is b o rn as m a n , w h o h a v in g sho w n u s th e w ay o f t r u t h fo r o u r sa lv a tio n , su ffe re d a n d d ie d fo r u s, a n d a fte r h is re s u rre c tio n . re t u r n e d in to h e a v e n , w h e re th e e a r th , t h a t is m a n k in d , is e x a lte d ab ove a ll th e circles o f th e w o rld , a n d is p la c e d in th e in te lle c tu a l h e a v e n of th e m o s t h o ly T r in i ty . I n lik e m a n n e r , w h e n I d ie , m y so u l, h e lp e d b y th e g ra c e a n d th e m e rits o f C h ris t, w ill r e t u r n to th e f o u n t o f life w h e n c e i t d e ­ scended. T h e b o d y r e tu r n s to e a r th , a n d a t th e la s t ju d g m e n t o f th e w o rld th e so u l, d e sc e n d in g fro m h e a v e n , w ill c a rry it w ith h e r, p u rifie d , to g lo ry .” 6 T h e m o tif o f a sc e n t a n d d e sc e n t is b a se d p a r tly o n th e m o tio n of w a te r a s a n a tu r a l p h e n o m e n o n (clouds, r a in , etc.). 3

103

J 38

w h ic h slays itse lf a n d b rin g s itself to life ag ain . T h i s is fo llo w ed by th e m o tif o f “ e v e rla s tin g life ” a n d th e p a n a c e a (b e lie f in C h rist). In d e e d , th e w h o le p u rp o se o f th e o p u s was to p ro d u c e th e in c o rru p tib le b o d y , “ th e th in g th a t d ie th n o t,” th e in v isib le , s p iritu a l sto n e, o r lapis a eth ereu s. I n th e verse, “ F o r G o d so lo v ed th e w o rld th a t h e gave h is o n ly b e g o tte n S on . . . ,’’ Jesu s id e n tifies h im se lf w ith th e h e a lin g sn ak e o f M oses; fo r th e M o ­ n o g en es is sy n o n y m o u s w ith th e N o u s, a n d th is w ith th e s e rp e n ts a v io u r o r A g a th o d a im o n . T h e s e rp e n t is also a sy n o n y m fo r th e d iv in e w ater. T h e d ia lo g u e m ay b e c o m p a re d w ith J e s u s ’ w o rd s to th e w o m an o f S a m a ria in J o h n 4 : 14: “ . . . a w ell o f w a te r s p rin g in g u p in to e v e rla s tin g life .” 7 S ig n ifican tly e n o u g h , th e c o n v e rs a tio n b y th e w ell fo rm s th e c o n te x t fo r th e te a c h in g th a t “ G o d is S p irit” (J o h n 4 : 24).8 I n sp ite o f th e n o t alw ays u n in te n tio n a l o b s c u rity o f a lc h e m ­ ical la n g u ag e, it is n o t difficu lt to see th a t th e d iv in e w a te r o r its sym bol, th e u ro b o ro s , m e an s n o th in g o th e r th a n th e d eu s abs c o n d itu s, th e g o d h id d e n in m a tte r, th e d iv in e N o u s th a t cam e d o w n to Physis a n d was lo st in h e r embrace.® T h is m y stery of th e “g o d b eco m e p h y sical” u n d e rlie s n o t o n ly classical a lc h e m y b u t also m a n y o th e r s p ir itu a l m a n ife sta tio n s o f H e lle n is tic sy n ­ c re tis m .10 I J u s tin M a rty r says: "A s a f o u n t o f liv in g w a te r fro m G o d . . . th is C h ris t g u s h e d f o r th ” (cited in P re u s c h e n , A n tile g o m e n a , p . 129). G a u d e n tiu s (S erm o X IX ) c o m p a re s C h r is t’s h u m a n ity to w a te r (M ig n e, P .L ., vol. 20, co l. 983). E u c h e riu s o f L yon s (L ib e r fo r m u la r u m sp irita lis in te llig e n tia e ) says th a t C h ris t “c a rrie d u p to h e a v e n th e flesh h e a ssu m e d fo r u s ” (ib id ., v o l. 50, col. 734). T h is id e a c o in cid es w ith th e say in g in th e " T a b . s m a ra g ,” t h a t th e a rc a n u m " a sc e n d s fro m e a r th to h e a v e n , a n d d esce n d s a g a in to e a r th , a n d receiv es th e p o w e r of A bove a n d B elow .” 8 “S p ir it” in a lc h e m y m e a n s a n y th in g v o la tile , a ll e v a p o ra b le su b sta n c e s, o x id es, etc., b u t also, as a p ro je c te d p sy ch ic c o n te n t, a co rp u s m y s tic u m in th e sen se o f a " s u b tle b o d y .” (Cf. M e a d , T h e D o c tr in e o f th e S u b tle B o d y in W e s te rn T r a d i­ tio n .) I t is in th is sense th a t th e d e fin itio n o f th e la p is as a s p ir itu s h u m id u s e t a e reu s s h o u ld b e u n d e rs to o d . T h e r e a re a lso in d ic a tio n s t h a t s p ir it w as u n d e r ­ sto o d as " m in d ,” w h ic h c o u ld b e re fin e d b y " s u b lim a tio n .” » C f. th e fa te o f th e “m a n o f li g h t” in Z osim os (P syc h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , p a r .

45 8 )· 10 I n th e o ld e st so u rces th is m y stery is ex p re sse d in sy m b o lic a l te rm s. B u t fro m th e 13th c e n t, o n th e r e a re m o re a n d m o re te x ts w h ic h re v e a l th e m y stica l sid e o f th e a rc a n u m . O n e o f th e b e st e x a m p le s is th e G e rm a n tr e a tis e D e r W assers te in d e r W e y se n , “ A C h y m ic a l T r a c t, w h e re in th e W a y is S h o w n , th e M a te ria N a m e d , a n d th e P ro cess D e sc rib e d .”

6.

THE

O R IG IN

OF

T H E V IS IO N

Since alchem y is con cern ed w ith a m ystery b o th physical a n d sp iritu al, it n eed com e as no surprise th a t th e “co m p o sitio n of the w aters” was revealed to Zosimos in a dream . H is sleep was the sleep of in c u b a tio n , his d ream “a d ream sent by G o d .” T h e d ivine w ater was th e a lp h a an d om ega of th e process, desperately sought fo r by th e alchem ists as th e goal of th e ir desire. T h e d ream th erefo re cam e as a d ra m a tic ex p lan a tio n of the n a tu re of this w ater. T h e d ra m a tiz atio n sets fo rth in p o w erfu l im agery th e v io len t a n d agonizing process of tran sfo rm atio n w hich is itself both th e p ro d u c e r a n d th e p ro d u c t of the w ater, an d in d e ed co n ­ stitutes its very essence. T h e d ram a shows how th e d iv in e process of change m anifests itself to o u r h u m a n u n d e rsta n d in g a n d how m an experiences it— as p u n ish m e n t, to rm e n t,1 death, a n d tra n s­ figuration. T h e d re a m e r describes how a m an w o u ld act an d w hat he w o u ld have to suffer if he w ere d raw n in to the cycle of the death a n d re b irth of th e gods, an d w hat effect th e deus absconditus w o u ld have if a m o rtal m a n sh o u ld succeed by his “a rt” in settin g free the “g u a rd ia n of sp irits” fro m his d ark dw elling. T h e r e are in d icatio n s in th e lite ra tu re th a t this is n o t w ith o u t its dangers.2 *4° T h e m ystical side of alchem y, as d istin ct fro m its h isto rical aspect, is essentially a psychological p ro b lem . T o all a p p ea r­ ances, it is a co ncretization, in p ro jected an d sym bolic form , of the process of in d iv id u a tio n . E ven today this process produces 139

1 T h e elem en t o f tortu re, so co n sp icu o u s in Zosim os, is n o t u n co m m o n in a l­ chem ical literature. "Slay th e m o th er, cu ttin g off h er h ands a n d feet" (" A en igm a” VI, A r t. aurif., I, p. 151). Cf. T u r b a , Serm ones X V III, X L V II, L X IX . “T a k e a m an, shave h im , a n d d rag h im over a sto n e . . . u n til h is body d ies.” "T ak e a cock, p lu ck it alive, th e n p u t its h ea d in a glass vessel” (“A lleg . su p . lib . T u r b .,” A rt. aurif., I, p p . i3gff.), In m ed iev a l alchem y th e tortu rin g o f th e m ateria was an allegory o f C hrist’s passion (cf. D e r Wasserstein d e r W eysen , p . 97). 2 “T h e fo u n d a tio n o f th is art, for w hose sake m any have p erish e d ” ( T u r b a , Sermo X V ). Zosim os m en tio n s A n tim im o s, th e d em o n o f error (A l c h . grecs, III, x lix , 9). O lym p iod oru s q u o tes th e sayin g o f P etasios that lead (prim a m ateria) was so "sham eless an d b e d e v ille d ” th at it drove th e ad ep ts m ad (ib id ., II, iv, 43). T h e d ev il caused im p a tien ce, d o u b t, and d esp air d u r in g th e work (M u s . h e r m ., p. 461). H o g h ela n d e describes h ow th e d ev il deceived h im an d h is frien d w ith d elu sio n s (“D e difficult, alchern.,” T h e a tr . chem ., I, 1659, pp. 152!!.). T h e dangers th at th reaten ed th e alch em ists w ere o b viou sly psychic, Cf. in fra, pars. 4 2 g ff.

s y m b o ls th a t h a v e th e c lo s e s t c o n n e c t io n s w it h a lc h e m y . O n th is p o in t I m u s t r e fe r th e r e a d e r to m y e a r lie r w o r k s, w h e r e I h a v e d is c u s s e d t h e q u e s t io n f r o m a p s y c h o lo g ic a l a n g le a n d illu s t r a t e d i t w it h p r a c tic a l e x a m p le s . !41 T h e c a u se s th a t s e t s u c h a p r o c e ss in m o t io n m a y b e c e r ta in p a th o lo g ic a l sta te s (fo r th e m o s t p a r t s c h iz o p h r e n ic ) w h ic h p r o ­ d u c e v e r y s im ila r sy m b o ls . B u t th e b e st a n d c le a r e s t m a te r ia l c o m e s fr o m p e r s o n s o f s o u n d m in d w h o , d r iv e n b y s o m e k in d o f s p ir it u a l d is tr e s s , o r f o r r e lig i o u s , p h il o s o p h ic a l , o r p s y c h o lo g ic a l r e a so n s, d e v o te p a r tic u la r a t te n t io n to th e ir u n c o n s c io u s . I n th e p e r io d e x t e n d in g fr o m th e M id d le A g e s b a c k to R o m a n tim e s , a n a tu r a l e m p h a sis w a s la id o n th e in n e r m a n , a n d s in c e p sy c h o ­ lo g ic a l c r itic is m b e c a m e p o s s ib le o n ly w it h t h e r is e o f s c ie n c e , t h e in n e r fa c to r s w e r e a b le to r e a c h c o n s c io u s n e s s in th e fo r m o f p r o j e c tio n s m u c h m o r e e a s ily th a n th e y c a n to d a y . T h e f o llo w ­ i n g t e x t 3 m a y s e r v e to illu s t r a t e t h e m e d ie v a l p o i n t o f v ie w : F o r a s C h r is t sa y s i n L u k e 11: T h e l i g h t o f t h e b o d y is t h e e y e , b u t i f y o u r e y e is e v i l o r b e c o m e s s o , t h e n y o u r b o d y is f u l l o f d a r k ­ n e s s a n d t h e l i g h t w i t h i n y o u b e c o m e s d a r k n e s s . M o r e o v e r , in t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c h a p t e r h e sa y s a ls o : B e h o l d , t h e k i n g d o m o f G o d is w i t h i n y o u — f r o m w h i c h i t is c le a r ly s e e n t h a t k n o w le d g e o f t h e l i g h t i n m a n m u s t e m e r g e i n t h e fir st p la c e f r o m w i t h i n a n d c a n n o t b e p la c e d t h e r e f r o m w i t h o u t , a n d m a n y p a s s a g e s i n t h e B i b l e b e a r w it n e s s t o t h is , n a m e ly , t h a t t h e e x t e r n a l o b j e c t (a s i t is u s u a l l y c a l le d ) , o r t h e s ig n w r i t t e n to h e l p u s i n o u r w e a k n e s s , is i n M a t t h e w 2 4 m e r e ly a t e s t im o n y o f t h e i n n e r l i g h t o f g r a c e p l a n t e d i n a n d im p a r t e d t o u s b y G o d . S o , t o o , t h e s p o k e n w o r d is to b e h e e d e d a n d c o n s id e r e d o n l y a s a n i n d i c a t i o n , a n a id a n d a g u i d e t o th is . T o t a k e a n e x a m p le : a w h i t e a n d a b la c k b o a r d a r e p la c e d i n f r o n t o f y o u a n d y o u a r e a s k e d w h i c h is b la c k a n d w h i c h is w h i t e . I f t h e k n o w l e d g e o f t h e t w o d if f e r e n t c o l o u r s w e r e n o t p r e v i o u s l y w i t h i n y o u , y o u w o u l d n e v e r b e a b le t o a n s w e r f r o m t h e s e m e r e m u t e o b ­ j e c t s o r b o a r d s t h e q u e s t i o n p u t to y o u , s in c e t h is k n o w le d g e d o e s n o t c o m e f r o m t h e b o a r d s t h e m s e lv e s ( f o r t h e y a r e m u t e a n d i n ­ a n im a t e ) , b u t o r i g in a t e s i n a n d f lo w s f o r t h f r o m y o u r i n n a t e f a c u l ­ t ie s w h i c h y o u e x e r c is e d a ily . T h e o b j e c t s (a s s t a t e d e a r lie r ) i n d e e d s tim u la te th e sen se s a n d ca u se th e m to a p p r e h e n d , b u t in n o w a y d o t h e y g iv e k n o w le d g e . T h i s m u s t c o m e f r o m w i t h i n , f r o m t h e a p p r e h e n d e r , a n d t h e k n o w l e d g e o f s u c h c o lo u r s m u s t e m e r g e i n 3 D e r W asserstein d e r W eysen, p p . 73ft. [For th is tra n sla tio n I am in d e b te d to D r. R . T . Llew ellyn.— T r a n s l a t o r .]

an act of apprehension. Sim ilarly, w hen someone asks you for a m aterial and external fire or lig h t from a Hint (in w hich the fire or light is hidden) you cannot p u t this hidden and secret lig h t in to the stone, b u t ra th e r you m ust arouse, awaken, and draw fo rth the hidden fire from the stone and reveal it by m eans of th e requisite steel striker which m ust be necessarily at hand. A nd this fire m ust be caught and vigorously fanned u p in good tin d er well prep ared for this purpose, if it is n o t to be extinguished and disappear again. T h en , afterw ards, you will o b tain a truly ra d ia n t light, sh in in g like fire, and as long as it is tended and preserved, you w ill be able to create, work, and do w ith it as you please. And, likewise h id d en in m an, there exists such a heavenly an d divine lig h t which, as previ­ ously stated, cannot be placed in m an from w ithout, b u t m ust emerge from w ithin. F or n o t in vain an d w ith o u t reason has God bestowed on and given to m an in the highest p a rt of his body two eyes and ears in order to indicate th a t m an has to learn an d heed w ith in him self a tw ofold seeing and hearing, an inw ard and an outw ard, so th at he may judge sp iritu al things w ith th e inw ard p a rt and allo t sp irit­ ual things to the sp iritu al (I C orinthians 2), b u t also give to the outw ard its portion. F o r Zosim os a n d th o se o f lik e m in d th e d iv in e w a te r was a corpus m y s tic u m .4 A p erso n a listic psychology w ill n a tu ra lly ask: h ow d id Zosim os co m e to b e lo o k in g fo r a co rp u s m ysticu m ? T h e an sw er w o u ld p o in t to th e h isto ric a l c o n d itio n s: it was a p ro b le m of th e tim es. B u t in so fa r as th e corpus m y s tic u m w as co n ceiv ed by th e alch em ists to b e a g ift o f th e H o ly S p irit, it c a n b e u n d e rs to o d in a q u ite g e n e ra l sense as a v isib le g ift o f g race c o n fe rrin g re d e m p tio n . M a n ’s lo n g in g fo r re d e m p tio n is u n iv e r ­ sal a n d can th e re fo re h av e a n u lte rio r, p e rso n a listic m o tiv e o n ly in e x c e p tio n a l cases, w h e n it is n o t a g e n u in e p h e n o m e n o n b u t a n a b n o rm a l m isu se o f it. H y sterica l self-deceivers, a n d o rd in a ry ones too, h av e a t all tim es u n d e rs to o d th e a r t o f m isu sin g ev ery ­ th in g so as to av o id th e d e m a n d s a n d d u tie s o f life, a n d ab o v e all to s h irk th e d u ty of c o n fro n tin g them selves. T h e y p re te n d to b e seekers a fte r G o d in o r d e r n o t to h av e to face th e tr u t h th a t they are o rd in a ry egoists. In su ch cases it is w ell w o rth ask in g : W h y are y ou seek in g th e d iv in e w ater? Hs W e have n o re a so n to su p p o se th a t a ll th e alch em ists w ere H2

4 T his term occurs in alchemy, e.g.: ‘‘Congeal [the quicksilver] w ith its m ystic body” (“Consilium coniug.,” T h e a tr. chem ,, I, 1659, p. 137). 107

self-deceivers of this sort. T h e d e ep e r we p e n e tra te in to th e o b ­ scurities of th e ir th in k in g , th e m ore we m u st a d m it th e ir rig h t to style them selves “ p h ilo so p h ers.” T h r o u g h o u t th e ages, al­ chem y was o n e of th e g re a t h u m a n quests fo r th e u n a tta in a b le . So, a t least, we w o u ld describe it if we gave re in to o u r ra tio n a l­ istic prejudices. B u t th e religious experien ce of grace is an irra ­ tio n a l p h e n o m e n o n , a n d c a n n o t be discussed any m o re th a n can th e “b e a u tifu l” o r th e “g o o d .” Since th a t is so, n o serious q u est is w ith o u t hope. I t is so m eth in g instin ctiv e, th a t c a n n o t b e r e ­ d u ced to a personal aetiology any m ore th a n can in te llig e n c e o r m usicality o r any o th e r in b o rn propen sity . I am th e re fo re of the o p in io n th a t o u r analysis a n d in te rp re ta tio n have d o n e ju stice to th e vision of Zosimos if we have succeeded in u n d e rs ta n d in g its essential co m p o n en ts in th e lig h t of how m en th o u g h t th e n , an d in e lu c id a tin g th e m e a n in g an d p u rp o se of its m ise en scene. W h e n K ekule h a d his d re a m of th e d a n cin g pairs an d d ed u ced from it th e s tru c tu re of th e benzol rin g , he accom plished som e­ th in g th a t Zosimos strove fo r in vain. H is “ co m p o sitio n of th e w aters” d id n o t fall in to as n e a t a p a tte rn as d id th e carb o n an d h y d ro g en atom s of th e benzol rin g . A lchem y p ro je c te d an in n e r, psychic ex p erien ce in to chem ical substances th a t seem ed to h o ld o u t m ysterious possibilities b u t nevertheless p ro v ed re fracto ry to th e in te n tio n s of th e alchem ist. »44 A lth o u g h chem istry has n o th in g to le arn from th e vision of Zosimos, it is a m in e of discovery fo r m o d e rn psychology, w hich w o u ld com e to a sorry pass if it co u ld n o t tu rn to these testim o ­ nies of psychic ex p erien ce from a n cie n t tim es. Its statem en ts w o u ld th e n be w ith o u t su p p o rt, like novelties th a t c a n n o t be c o m p ared w ith an y th in g , a n d whose v alu e it is alm ost im p o s­ sible to assess. B u t such d o cu m en ts give th e in v estig ato r an A r­ ch im e d ea n p o in t o u tsid e his ow n n a rro w field of w ork, a n d th e re w ith a n in v a lu a b le o p p o rtu n ity to find his b earin g s in th e seem in g chaos o f in d iv id u a l events.

Ill PARACELSUS AS A SPIR IT U A L PHENOM ENON

[O rig in a lly a le c tu re , “P aracelsu s als geistige E rsc h e in u n g ,’’ w hich, revised a n d e x p a n d e d , was p u b lis h e d in Paracelsica: Ziuei V orlesu ng en iiber den A r z t u n d P h i l o s o p h e n T h e o p h r a s tu s (Z urich, 1942). [In th e p re s e n t tra n s la tio n , c h a p te r a n d section h ea d in g s have b e e n a d d e d to e lu c id a te th e s tru c tu re of th e m o n o g ra p h . T w o b rie f sta te m e n ts fo u n d a m o n g J u n g ’s p o sth u m o u s p a p e rs have, because o f th e ir relev an ce to th e su b je c t-m a tte r, b e e n a d d e d as fo o tn o te s o n p p . 136 a n d 144.— E d i t o r s .]

FO REW ORD T O

“ P A R A C E L S IC A ”

T h is little b o o k com prises tw o lectu res d e liv e re d this y e a r o n th e oc­ casion o£ th e f o u r-h u n d re d th a n n iv e rsary of th e d e a th of P a ra c e l­ sus.1 T h e first, “ P aracelsu s th e P h y sicia n ,” 2 was d e liv e re d to th e Swiss Society fo r th e H isto ry of M e d ic in e a n d th e N a tu ra l Sciences a t th e a n n u a l m e e tin g o f th e Society fo r N a tu re R esearch , Basel, Sep­ te m b e r 7, 1941; th e second, “ P aracelsu s as a S p iritu a l P h e n o m e n o n ,” was given a t th e P aracelsu s c e le b ra tio n s in E in sie d e ln , O c to b e r 5, 1941. T h e first le c tu re goes in to p r in t u n a lte re d e x c e p t fo r a few m in o r changes. B u t th e sp ecial n a tu r e of th e th em e has o b lig e d m e to tak e th e second le c tu re o u t of its o rig in a l fra m ew o rk a n d to e x p a n d it in to a p ro p e r treatise. T h e stylistic fo rm a n d scope of a le c tu re a re n o t su ite d to p o rtra y th e u n k n o w n a n d e n ig m a tic P aracelsu s w ho sta n d s b esid e o r b e h in d th e figure we m e e t in h is pro lific m ed ical, scientific, a n d th eo lo g ic a l w ritin g s. O n ly w h e n th ey a re ta k e n to ­ g e th e r d o th ey give a p ic tu re of this c o n tra d ic to ry a n d yet so signifi­ c a n t p e rso n a lity . I am aw are th a t th e title of this le c tu re is so m e w h at p re s u m p tu ­ ous. T h e re a d e r s h o u ld tak e it sim ply as a c o n trib u tio n to o u r k n o w l­ edge of th e a rc a n e p h ilo so p h y o f P aracelsus. I d o n o t claim to h av e sa id a n y th in g final o r conclusive o n th is difficult su b je c t, a n d am o n ly too p a in fu lly aw are of gaps a n d in ad e q u a c ie s. M y p u rp o se was c o n fin ed to p ro v id in g clues th a t m ig h t p o in t th e w ay to th e roots a n d psychic b a c k g ro u n d o f his p h ilo so p h y , if such it can b e called. B esides a ll th e o th e r th in g s h e was, P aracelsus was, p e rh a p s m ost d e e p ly o f all, a n a lc h e m ic a l “ p h ilo s o p h e r” w hose relig io u s view s in ­ volved h im in a n u n co n scio u s conflict w ith th e C h ris tia n beliefs of h is age in a w ay t h a t seem s to us in e x tric a b ly confused. N evertheless, in this co n fu sio n are to be fo u n d th e b e g in n in g s o f p h ilo so p h ic a l, psychological, a n d relig io u s p ro b le m s w h ich a re ta k in g c le a re r shape in o u r ow n epoch. B ecause of this, I h a v e fe lt it a lm o st a n h isto ric a l d u ty to c o n trib u te w h a t I m ay in a p p re c ia tio n of p re sc ie n t ideas w h ic h h e le ft b e h in d fo r us in h is tre a tise D e v ita longa. O cto b er 1941

C. G. J.

1 [P h ilip p u s A u reolu s T h e o p h r a stu s B om b astu s v o n H o h e n h e im , k n ow n as P ara­ celsus, b orn 1 4 9 3 , in E in sied eln , d ie d Sept. 2 1 , 1541, in Salzburg.—- E d i t o r s .] 2 [In C oll. W o r k s , V ol. 15.— E d i t o r s .] I 10

I. T H E T W O SO U R C E S O F K N O W L E D G E : T H E L IG H T OF N A T U R E AND T H E L I G H T O F R E V E L A T IO N >45

T h e m an whose d e ath fo u r h u n d re d years ago we com m em o­ ra te today ex erted a p ow erful influence on all su b se q u e n t g en er­ ations, as m uch by sheer force of his p erso n ality as by his p ro d i­ gious lite ra ry activity. H is influence m ade itself felt chiefly in the field of m edicine an d n a tu ra l science. In philosophy, n o t only was m ystical sp ecu latio n stim u la te d in a fru itfu l way, b u t philosophical alchem y, th e n on th e p o in t of e x tin c tio n , received a new lease of life an d enjoyed a renaissance. I t is n o secret th a t G oethe, as is ev id en t from th e second p a rt of Faust, still felt the im pact of th e p ow erful sp irit of Paracelsus. >46 I t is n o t easy to see this sp iritu a l p h e n o m en o n in th e ro u n d an d to give a really com prehensive acco u n t of it. Paracelsus was too c o n trad icto ry o r too chaotically m any-sided, fo r all his o b v i­ ous one-sidedness in o th e r ways. F irst an d forem ost, h e was a physician w ith all th e stren g th of his sp irit a n d soul, an d his fo u n d a tio n was a firm religious belief. T h u s he says in his Parag ra n u m :1 “Y ou m u st be of an honest, sincere, strong, tru e faith in G od, w ith all y o u r soul, heart, m in d , a n d th o u g h t, in all love a n d tru st. O n th e fo u n d a tio n of such fa ith an d love, G od w ill n o t w ith d raw his»truth from you, an d w ill m ake his w orks m a n i­ fest to you, believable, visible, a n d com forting. B u t if, n o t hav­ in g such faith, you are against G od, th e n you w ill go astray in y o u r w ork an d w ill have failures, a n d in consequence people w ill have no faith in y o u .” T h e a rt of h e alin g a n d its dem ands w ere the suprem e c rite rio n for Paracelsus. E v ery th in g in his life was devoted to this goal of h e lp in g a n d h ealing. A ro u n d this card in al p rin c ip le w ere g ro u p e d all his experiences, all his I Ed. Strunz, p. 97. [For th e tran slation o f th e d irect q u o ta tio n s from P aracelsus in the tex t an d fo o tn o tes o f th is section I am in d eb ted to D r. R . T . L lew ellyn . — T

ra n sla to r

.]

Ill

k n o w le d g e , all h is efforts. T h i s h a p p e n s o n ly w h e n a m a n is ac­ tu a te d b y som e p o w e rfu l e m o tio n a l d r iv in g fo rce, by a g re a t pas­ sio n w h ic h , u n d e te r r e d b y re fle c tio n a n d c ritic ism , o v ersh ad o w s h is w h o le life . T h e d r iv in g fo rce b e h in d P arace lsu s w as h is com p assio n . “ C o m p a ss io n ,” h e ex claim s, “ is th e p h y s ic ia n ’s sch o o l­ m a s te r.” 2 I t m u s t b e in b o r n in h im . C o m p a ssio n , w h ic h has d riv e n m a n y a n o th e r g re a t m a n a n d in s p ir e d h is w o rk , was also th e s u p re m e a r b ite r of P a ra c e lsu s’s fate. >47 T h e in s tr u m e n t w h ic h h e p u t a t th e serv ice o f h is g re a t c o m ­ p assio n w as h is scien c e a n d his a rt, w h ic h h e to o k o v e r fro m h is fa th e r. B u t th e d y n a m is m a t th e b ack o f h is w o rk , th e co m p as­ sio n itself, m u s t h a v e co m e to h im fro m th e p r im e so u rc e of e v e ry th in g e m o tio n a l, th a t is, fro m his m o th e r, o f w h o m h e n e v e r spoke. S he d ie d y o u n g , a n d she p r o b a b ly le ft b e h in d a g r e a t d e a l o f u n sa tisfie d lo n g in g in h e r so n — so m u c h th a t, so fa r as w e k n o w , n o o th e r w o m a n w as a b le to c o m p e te w ith th a t fard is ta n t m o th e r-im a g o , w h ic h f o r th a t re a so n was all th e m o re fo rm id a b le . T h e m o re re m o te a n d u n r e a l th e p e rs o n a l m o th e r is, th e m o re d e e p ly w ill th e s o n ’s y e a rn in g fo r h e r c lu tc h a t h is so u l, a w a k e n in g th a t p r im o r d ia l a n d e te r n a l im a g e o f th e m o th e r fo r w hose sak e e v e ry th in g th a t em b ra ces, p ro te c ts , n o u r ­ ishes, a n d h e lp s assum es m a te r n a l fo rm , fro m th e A lm a M a te r of th e u n iv e rs ity to th e p e rs o n ific a tio n o f cities, c o u n trie s , sciences, a n d id eals. W h e n P arace lsu s says th a t th e m o th e r o f th e c h ild is th e p la n e t a n d star, th is is in th e h ig h e s t d e g re e tr u e o f h im se lf. T o th e m o th e r in h e r h ig h e st fo rm , M a te r E cclesia, h e r e m a in e d f a ith f u l a ll h is life, d e s p ite th e v e ry fre e c ritic is m h e le v e lle d a t th e ills o f C h ris te n d o m in th a t ep o ch . N o r d id h e su c c u m b to th e g r e a t te m p ta tio n o f th a t age, th e P r o te s ta n t schism , th o u g h h e m a y w e ll h av e h a d it in h im to go o v e r to th e o th e r cam p . C o n flic t w as d e e p ly r o o te d in P a ra c e lsu s’s n a tu r e ; in d e e d , it h a d to b e so, fo r w ith o u t a te n s io n o f o p p o site s th e re is n o en erg y , a n d w h e n e v e r a v o lc a n o , su c h as h e was, e ru p ts , w e s h a ll n o t go w ro n g in s u p p o s in g th a t w a te r a n d fire h av e cla sh e d to g e th e r. »48 B u t a lth o u g h th e C h u r c h r e m a in e d a m o th e r fo r P arace lsu s a ll h is life, h e n e v e rth e le ss h a d tw o m o th e rs : th e o th e r was M a te r N a tu r a . A n d if th e fo rm e r was a n a b s o lu te a u th o rity , so to o w as th e la tte r . E v e n th o u g h h e e n d e a v o u re d to co n ce al th e co n flict b e tw e e n th e tw o m a te r n a l sp h e re s o f in flu e n c e , h e w as 2 "D e cad ucis,” ed . H u ser, I, p . 589.

h onest en o u g h to ad m it its existen ce; in d eed , h e seem s to have had a very good id ea o f w hat such a d ilem m a m eant. T h u s he says: “I also confess that I w rite lik e a pagan and y et am a C hris­ tian .” 3 A ccord in gly he nam ed the first five sections o f his Param iru m de q u in q u e e n tib u s m o r b o r u m “Pagoya.” “P agoyu m ” is one o f his favou rite n eologism s, co m p o u n d ed o f “p agan u m ” and the H eb rew w ord ‘'goyim .” H e h eld that k n ow led ge of the na­ ture of diseases was pagan, since this know led ge cam e from the “lig h t o f n atu re” and n o t from rev ela tio n .4 “M agic,” he says, is “the preceptor and teacher o f the p hysician,” 5 w h o derives h is k now led ge from the lu m e n naturae. T h ere can be n o d o u b t the “lig h t of n atu re” was a second, in d ep en d en t source o f k n ow led ge for Paracelsus. H is closest p u p il, A dam von B od en stein , puts it like this: “T h e Spagyric has the things o f nature n o t by au th or­ ity, b u t by his ow n ex p erien ce.” 0 T h e con cep t o f the lu m e n 3 “T h e r e f o r e

C h ris tia n k n o w le d g e is b e tte r th a n n a tu r a l k n o w le d g e , a n d a p r o p h e t o r a n a p o s tle b e tte r th a n a n a s tro n o m e r o r a p h y sic ia n . . . b u t I am c o m p e lle d to a d d t h a t th e sick n e e d a p h y sic ia n n o t a p o stles, ju s t as p ro g n o s tic a ­ tio n s r e q u ir e a n a s tro n o m e r n o t a p r o p h e t ” (“V o n E rk a n tn u s d es G e stirn s,” ed . S udhoff, X II, p p . 496f.). 4 H e says in th e f o u r th tre a tis e o f P a r a m i r u m p r i m u m (ed. S u d h o if, I, p . 215), sp e a k in g o f th e “ e n s s p i r it u a le ” o f diseases: “ If w e a re to ta lk o f th e E n s S p ir itu ale, w e a d m o n is h y o u to p u t a sid e th e style w h ic h you call th e o lo g ic a l. F o r n o t e v e ry th in g w h ic h is c a lle d T h e o lo g i a is h o ly a n d also n o t e v e ry th in g it tre a ts o f is h o ly . A n d , m o re o v e r, n o t e v e ry th in g is tr u e w h ic h th e u n c o m p r e h e n d in g d e a l w ith in th eo lo g y . N o w a lth o u g h it is tr u e th a t th e o lo g y d e sc rib e s th is E n s m o st p o w e rfu lly , i t d o es n o t d o so u n d e r th e n a m e a n d te x t o f o u r f o u r th P a g o y u m . A n d , in a d d itio n , th e y d e n y w h a t w e a re p ro v in g . B u t th e r e is o n e th i n g w h ic h you m u s t u n d e r s ta n d fro m us, n a m e ly , th a t th e a b ility to reco g n ize th is E n s does n o t co m e fro m C h ris tia n b e lie f, fo r it is a P a g o y u m to us. I t is, h o w ev e r, n o t c o n ­ tr a ry to th e b e lie f in w h ic h w e s h a ll d e p a r t fro m th is life. A cc o rd in g ly , y o u m u s t reco g n ize t h a t in n o w ay a re y o u to u n d e r s ta n d a n E n s as b e in g o f th e sp irits, by sa y in g th e y a re a ll dev ils, fo r th e n you a re ta lk in g n o n se n sic a lly a n d fo o lish ly lik e th e D e v il.” B C f. “ L a b y r in th u s m e d ic o ru m ,” ed . S u d h o ff, X I, p p . 207!.: “ A n d as th e M ag i fro m th e E a st f o u n d C h ris t in th e s ta r b y m e a n s o f th is sign, so is fire fo u n d in th e flin t. T h u s a re th e a rts fo u n d in n a tu r e , a n d it is e a sie r to see th e la t t e r th a n it w as to lo o k f o r C h ris t." 3 D e v it a lon ga (1562), p . 56. In “ C a p u t d e m o rb is s o m n ii” (ed. S u d h o ff, IX , p . 360), P a ra c e lsu s says o f th e l u m e n n a tu r a e : “ L o o k a t A d a m a n d M oses a n d o th e rs. T h e y s o u g h t in th em selv es w h a t w as in m a n a n d h a v e re v e a le d it a n d a ll k a b b a lis tic a r ts a n d th e y k n e w n o th in g a lie n to m a n n e ith e r fro m th e D e v il n o r fro m th e s p irits , b u t d e riv e d th e i r k n o w le d g e fro m th e L ig h t o f N a tu r e . T h is th e y n u r t u r e d in th em selv es . . . i t com es fro m n a tu r e w h ic h c o n ta in s its m a n -

n a tu r a e m a y d e r iv e f r o m th e O c c u lta p h ilo s o p h ia o f A g r ip p a v o n N e tte s h e im (1 5 3 3 ), w h o s p e a k s o f a lu m in o s ita s s e n su s n a tu r a e t h a t e x te n d s e v e n to th e f o u r - f o o te d b e a sts a n d e n a b le s t h e m to f o re te ll th e f u t u r e .7 P a r a c e ls u s says a c c o r d in g ly : I t is, th erefo re, also to b e k n o w n th a t th e a u g u rie s o f th e b ird s are caused by these in n a te sp irits, as w h e n cocks fo re te ll f u tu r e w e a th e r a n d peacocks th e d e a th o f th e ir m a ste r a n d o th e r such th in g s w ith th e ir crow ing. A ll th is com es fro m th e in n a te s p irit a n d is th e L ig h t of N a tu re . J u s t as i t is p re se n t in an im a ls a n d is n a tu r a l, so also it dw ells w ith in m a n a n d he b ro u g h t it in to th e w o rld w ith him self. H e w ho is chaste is a g o o d p ro p h e t, n a tu r a l as th e b ird s, a n d th e p ro p h ec ies of b ird s a re n o t c o n tra ry to n a tu r e b u t a re of n a tu re . E ach, th e n , a c co rd in g to his ow n state. T h e se th in g s w h ich th e b ird s a n n o u n c e can also be fo re to ld in sleep, fo r it is th e a stra l s p irit w h ich is th e in v isib le b o d y of n a tu r e .8 A n d i t s h o u ld be k n o w n th a t w h e n a m a n p ro p h esies, h e does n o t speak fro m th e D evil, n o t from S a tan , a n d n o t fro m th e H o ly S p irit, b u t he speaks fro m th e in n a te s p irit of th e in v isib le b o d y w h ic h teaches M a g ia m a n d in w h ic h th e M a g u s has his o rig in .9 T h e lig h t of n a tu r e com es fro m th e A s tr u m : “ N o th in g c a n b e in m a n u n le s s i t h a s b e e n g iv e n to h i m b y th e L i g h t o f N a t u r e , a n d w h a t is i n t h e L i g h t o f N a t u r e h a s b e e n b r o u g h t b y t h e s ta r s .” 10 T h e p a g a n s still p o ssesse d th e l ig h t o f n a t u r e , “ f o r to n er o£ activity w ith in itse lf. I t is a ctive d u rin g sleep a n d h en ce th in g s m u st be used w h en d orm a n t and n o t aw ake— sleep is w ak in g for such arts— for th in g s h ave a sp irit w h ich is a ctiv e for th em in sleep . N o w it is true th a t Satan in h is w isd om is a K abbaIist a n d a p o w erfu l o n e. So, too, are th ese in n a te sp irits in m an . . . for it is th e L ig h t o f N a tu r e w h ich is at w ork d u r in g sleep an d is th e in v isib le body and was n everth eless born lik e th e v isib le and n a tu ra l body. B u t there is m ore to be k n ow n than th e m ere flesh, for from th is very in n a te sp irit com es th at w h ich is v isib le . . . th e L ig h t o f N a tu r e w h ich is m a n ’s m en to r d w ells in th is in n a te sp ir it.” P aracelsus also says th a t th o u g h m en d ie, th e m en to r goes on tea ch in g (A str o n o m ia m a g n a , ed. Sudhoff, X II, p, 23; “D e pod agricis,” ed. H u ser, I, p. 566). t O ccu lta p h ilo s o p h ia , p . lx v iii. T h e lu m e n n a tu r a e also plays a con sid erab le ro le in M eister Eckhart. 8 Cf. th e fine sayin g in ‘‘F ragm enta m e d ica ” (ed. H u ser, I, p . 141): "G reat is h e w hose dream s are righ t, th a t is, w h o lives and m o v es h a rm o n io u sly in th is kab balistic, in n a te sp ir it.” 8 “C ap ut de m orb is so m n ii,” ed. Sudhoff, IX , p . 361. 10 A str o n o m ia m a g n a, ed . Sudhoff, X II, p . 23; also “L ab. m ed .,” ed. Sudhoff, ch. II. an d “D e p estilita te," T ra ct. I (ed. H u ser, I, p . 327). T h e a stru m th eory

*49

act in the L ig h t o f N a tu re an d to rejoice in it is d iv in e d esp ite b ein g m o rta l.” B efore C h rist cam e in to th e w orld, th e w o rld was still endow ed w ith the lig h t of n a tu re , b u t in com parison w ith C h rist this was a “ lesser lig h t.” “ T h e re fo re we sh o u ld know th a t we have to in te rp re t n a tu re according to th e sp irit of n a tu re , th e W o rd of G od according to th e sp irit of G od, a n d the D evil ac­ cording to his sp irit also.” “ H e w ho knows n o th in g of these things is a gorged pig a n d w ill n o t leave ro o m for in stru c tio n a n d ex p erien ce.” T h e lig h t of n a tu re is th e q u in ta essentia, ex­ tracted by G od him self from th e fo u r elem ents, an d d w ellin g “ in o u r h e arts.” 11 I t is e n k in d le d by th e H oly S p irit.12 T h e lig h t of n a tu re is an in tu itiv e ap p reh en sio n of th e facts, a k in d of illu m in a tio n .13 I t has tw o sources: a m o rtal an d an im m o rtal, w hich Paracelsus calls “angels.” 14 “ M an ,” he says, “ is also an angel a n d has all th e la tte r’s q u a litie s.” H e has a n a tu ra l light, b u t also a lig h t outside th e lig h t of n a tu re by w hich he can search o u t s u p e rn a tu ra l th in g s.13 T h e rela tio n sh ip of this su­ p e rn a tu ra l lig h t to th e lig h t of rev elatio n rem ain s, how ever, o b ­ scure. Paracelsus seems to have h eld a p e cu liar trich o to m o u s view in this respect. T h e a u th e n tic ity of o n e ’s ow n exp erien ce of n a tu re against the a u th o rity of tra d itio n is a basic th em e of P aracelsan th in k ­ ing. O n this p rin c ip le he based his attack on th e m edical schools, a n d his p u p ils16 c arrie d th e re v o lu tio n even fu rth e r by attack ­ in g A risto te lia n philosophy. I t was an a ttitu d e th a t o p en ed th e way for th e scientific in vestigation of n a tu re a n d h elp ed to em an cip ate n a tu ra l science from the a u th o rity of tra d itio n . T h o u g h this lib e ra tin g act h ad th e m ost fru itfu l consequences, it also led to th a t conflict betw een know ledge an d fa ith w hich poisoned th e sp iritu a l atm osphere of the n in e te e n th cen tu ry in p a rtic u la r. Paracelsus n a tu ra lly h a d n o in k lin g of th e possibility of these late repercussions. As a m edieval C h ristian , he still lived h a d b e e n fo r e sh a d o w e d in th e O c c u lta p h ilo s o p h ia o f A g r ip p a , to w h o m P a r a ­ c e lsu s w a s m u c h in d e b te d . 1 1 A s tr o n o m ia m a g n a , e d . S u d h o ff, X I I , p p . 36 a n d 304. 12 P a r a m ir u m , p p . 35L i s “ L ab . m e d „ ” e d . S u d h o ff, ch . V III. 14 " D e p o d a g r ic is ,” e d . H u se r , I, p . 566. i s " D e n y m p h is ,” p r o lo g u e (ed. S u d h o ff, X I V , p . 115). i e A d a m v o n B o d e n s te in a n d G erard D o r n , for in sta n c e .

1*5

in a u n ita ry w o rld a n d d id n o t feel the tw o sources of k n o w l­ edge, th e d iv in e a n d th e n a tu ra l, as th e conflict it la te r tu rn e d o u t to be. As he says in his “ P h ilo so p h ia sagax” : “ T h e r e are, th erefo re, tw o kinds of know ledge in this w orld: an e te rn a l a n d a tem poral. T h e e te rn a l springs directly from th e lig h t of the H o ly S pirit, b u t th e o th e r directly from th e L ig h t of N a tu re .’’ I n his view th e la tte r k in d is am b iv alen t: b o th good a n d bad. T h is know ledge, he says, “ is n o t from flesh an d b lo o d , b u t fro m th e stars in th e flesh a n d blctod. T h a t is th e treasu re, th e n a tu ra l S u m m u m B o n u m .” M an is tw ofold, “ one p a rt te m p o ra l, the o th e r p a rt e tern al, a n d each p a rt takes its lig h t fro m G od, b o th th e te m p o ra l a n d th e e tern al, a n d th e re is n o th in g th a t does n o t have its o rig in in G od. W hy, th en , sh o u ld the F a th e r’s lig h t be c o nsidered pagan, a n d I be recognized a n d co n d em n e d as a pagan?” G od the F a th e r c reated m an “ fro m b elow u p w a rd s,” b u t G od the Son “from above dow nw ards.” T h e re fo re P aracel­ sus asks: “I f F a th e r an d Son are one, how th e n can I h o n o u r tw o lights? I w o uld be c o n d em n e d as an id o la te r: b u t th e n u m ­ b e r o n e preserves m e. A n d if I love tw o a n d accord to each its lig h t, as G od has o rd a in e d for everyone, how th e n can I b e a p agan?” 1S0 I t is clear en o u g h fro m this w h at his a ttitu d e was to th e p ro b le m of th e two sources of know ledge: b o th lig h ts d erive from th e u n ity of G od. A n d yet— w hy d id h e give th e n a m e “ Pag o y u m ” to w h a t he w ro te in th e lig h t of n a tu re ? W as h e p lay in g w ith w ords, o r was it an in v o lu n ta ry avow al, a d im p re se n tim e n t of a d u a lity in th e w o rld an d th e soul? W as Paracelsus really u naffected by th e schism atic sp irit of the age, a n d was his a ttack o n a u th o rity really confined only to G alen, A vicenna, R hazes, an d A rn a ld u s de V illanova? A.

*5»

M A G IC

P aracelsus’s scepticism a n d rebellio u sn ess stop sh o rt a t th e C h u rc h , b u t he also re in e d th e m in b efo re alchem y, astrology, a n d m agic, w hich he believed in as ferv en tly as h e d id in d iv in e re v e latio n , since in his view they p ro ceed ed fro m th e a u th o rity of th e lu m en naturae. A n d w hen he speaks of th e d iv in e office of th e physician, he exclaim s: “ I u n d e r th e L o rd , th e L o rd u n d e r m e, I u n d e r h im o u tsid e m y office, a n d h e u n d e r m e o u tsid e his 1 16

office.” 17 W h a t k in d o f s p ir it addresses us in th ese w ords? D o th e y n o t re c a ll th o se o f th e la te r A n g elu s Silesius? I am as great as God, A nd he is sm all like me; H e can n o t be above, N o r I below him be. i52

T h e r e is n o d e n y in g th a t th e h u m a n eg o ’s affinity w ith G o d h e re raises a d is tin c t c la im to b e h e a rd a n d also to b e reco g n ized as su ch . T h a t is th e s p ir it of th e R en aissan c e— to give m a n in his m ig h tin e ss, in te lle c tu a l p o w er, a n d b e a u ty a v isib le p lace b esid e G o d . D e u s et H o m o in a n ew a n d u n p re c e d e n te d sense! A g rip p a v o n N e tte sh e im , P a ra c e lsu s’s o ld e r c o n te m p o ra ry a n d a n a u th o r ­ ity o n th e C a b ala, d eclares in h is scep tical a n d c o n tu m a c io u s b o o k D e in c e rt itu d in e et vanitate scien tiar um:ls A grippa spares no m an. H e contem ns, knows, knows not, weeps, laughs, waxes w roth, reviles, carps a t all things; being him self philosopher, dem on, hero, God, an d all things.

P arace lsu s to b e su re d id n o t rise to su ch u n f o r tu n a te h eig h ts o f m o d e rn ity . H e fe lt a t o n e w ith G o d a n d w ith h im se lf. W h o lly a n d u n r e m ittin g ly en g ag e d in th e p ra c tic a l a r t o f h e a lin g , his bu sy m in d w asted n o tim e o n a b s tra c t p ro b le m s, a n d h is ir r a ­ tio n a l, in tu itiv e n a tu r e n e v e r p u rs u e d lo gical reflectio n s so far th a t th e y re s u lte d in d e s tru c tiv e in sig hts. *53 P aracelsu s h a d o n e fa th e r, w h o m h e h e ld in lo v e a n d resp ect, b u t, as w e h av e said, lik e every tr u e h e ro h e h a d ttvo m o th e rs, a h e a v e n ly o n e a n d a n e a rth ly o n e — M o th e r C h u rc h a n d M o th e r N a tu re . C a n o n e serve tw o m o th ers? A n d ev en if, lik e P a ra c e l­ sus, o n e feels o n e se lf a p h y sician c re a te d b y G o d , is th e re n o t s o m e th in g su sp icio u s a b o u t p ressin g G o d in to o n e ’s service in ­ side th e p h y s ic ia n ’s office, so to speak? O n e can easily o b je c t th a t P arace lsu s said th is, lik e so m u c h else, o n ly in p assin g a n d th a t it is n o t to b e ta k e n all th a t serio u sly . H e h im se lf w o u ld p ro b a b ly h av e b e e n a s to n ish e d a n d in d ig n a n t if h e h a d b e e n ta k e n a t his w o rd . T h e w ords th a t flow ed in to h is p e n cam e less fro m d e e p re fle c tio n th a n fro m th e s p ir it o f th e age in w h ic h h e liv ed . N o IT "D e caducis,” ed. Sudhoff, V III, p. 267. 18 I used th e ed itio n of 1584, “as finally revised by th e a u th o r.” 117

one can claim to be im m u n e to the sp irit of his ow n epoch o r to possess a n y th in g like a com plete know ledge of it. R egardless of o u r conscious convictions, we are all w ith o u t ex cep tio n , in so far as we are p articles in the mass, gnaw ed a t a n d u n d e rm in e d by th e s p irit th a t ru n s th ro u g h the masses. O u r freed o m ex ten d s o nly as far as o u r consciousness reaches. B eyond th a t, we succum b to th e unconscious influences of o u r en v iro n m e n t. T h o u g h we m ay n o t be clear in a logical sense a b o u t th e deepest m eanings of o u r w ords a n d actions, these m eanings nevertheless exist a n d they have a psychological effect. W h e th e r we know it o r n o t, th e re rem ain s in each of us th e tre m e n d o u s ten sio n be­ tw een th e m an w ho serves G od an d th e m an w ho com m ands G od to do his b id d in g . !54 B u t th e g re a ter the tension, th e g re a ter th e p o te n tia l. G re a t energy springs from a corresp o n d in g ly g reat tension o f o p p o ­ sites. I t was to th e c o n stellatio n of th e m ost p o w erfu l opposites w ith in h im th a t Paracelsus ow ed his alm ost d aem o n ic energy, w hich was n o t a n u n allo y ed gift of G o d b u t w e n t h a n d in h a n d w ith his im p e tu o u s an d q u arrelso m e te m p e ram en t, his h asti­ ness, im p atien ce, discontentedness, a n d his arrogance. N o t for n o th in g was Paracelsus th e p ro to ty p e of Faust, w hom Jaco b B u rc k h a rd t once called “a g reat p rim o rd ia l im age” in th e soul of every G erm an . F ro m F aust th e lin e leads d ire c t to N ietzsche, w ho was a F austian m a n if ever th ere was one. W h a t still m a in ­ ta in e d th e balance in th e case of Paracelsus a n d A ngelus Silesius— “ I u n d e r G od an d G od u n d e r m e”— was lost in th e tw en ­ tie th cen tu ry , a n d th e scale sinks low er an d low er u n d e r the w eight o f a n ego th a t fancies itself m o re a n d m o re godlike. P a ra ­ celsus shared w ith A ngelus Silesius his in n e r piety a n d the to u c h in g b u t d an g ero u s sim plicity of his re la tio n sh ip to G od. B u t alongside th is sp iritu a lity a c o u n terv ailin g c h th o n ic s p irit m ade itself felt to a n alm ost frig h te n in g degree: th e re was n o fo rm of m an ticism an d m agic th a t Paracelsus d id n o t practise h im self o r re c o m m en d to others. D a b b lin g in these arts— no m a tte r how e n lig h te n e d o n e th in k s o n e is— is n o t w ith o u t its psychological dangers. M agic always was a n d still is a source of fascination. A t th e tim e of Paracelsus, certain ly , th e w o rld teem ed w ith m arvels: everyone was conscious of the im m ed iate presence of th e d a rk forces of n a tu re . A stronom y a n d astrology w ere n o t y et separated. K epler still cast horoscopes. In ste a d of 1 18

chem istry th e re was only alchem y. A m ulets, talism ans, spells for healin g w ounds an d diseases w ere taken as a m a tte r of course. A m an so avid for know ledge as Paracelsus could n o t avoid a th o r­ ough in vestigation of a ll these things, only to discover th a t strange a n d re m a rk a b le effects re su lted from th e ir use. B u t so far as I know he n ev er u tte re d a clear w arn in g a b o u t the psychic dangers of m agic fo r th e a d e p t.19 H e even scoffed at the doctors because they u n d e rsto o d n o th in g of m agic. B u t h e does n o t m e n tio n th a t they k ep t away from it o u t of a q u ite ju stifiab le fear. A n d yet we know from th e testim ony of C o n rad G essner, of Z urich, th a t th e very doctors w hom Paracelsus attack ed s h u n n e d m agic on religious g ro u n d s an d accused h im an d his p u p ils of sorcery. W ritin g to C rato von C raffth eim 20 a b o u t P aracelsus’s p u p il A dam von B o d en stein 1 G essner says: “I know th a t m ost p eople of this k in d are A rians a n d deny th e d iv in ity of C h rist . . . O p o rin in Basel, once a p u p il of T h e o p h ra stu s a n d his p riv ate assistant [familiaris], re p o rte d strange tales co n cern in g th e la tte r’s in terco u rse w ith dem ons. T h e y are given to senseless astrology, geom ancy, necrom ancy, a n d o th e r fo rb id d en arts. I m yself suspect th a t they axe the last of the D ru id s, those of the an cie n t Celts w ho w ere in stru c te d fo r several years in u n d e r­ g ro u n d places by dem ons. I t is also c ertain th a t such things are d one to this very day a t Salam anca in Spain. F ro m this school also arose th e w an d erin g scholars, as they are com m only called. T h e m ost fam ous of these was Faust, w ho d ie d n o t so long ago.” E lsew here in the sam e le tte r G essner w rites: “ T h e o p h ra stu s has assuredly b een an im pious m a n a n d a sorcerer [magus], a n d has h a d in terco u rse w ith d em o n s.” 21 *55 A lth o u g h this ju d g m e n t is based in p a rt on th e u n re lia b le testim ony of O p o rin a n d is essentially u n fa ir o r actu ally false, it nevertheless shows how unseem ly, in th e o p in io n of co n tem p o ­ ra ry doctors of re p u te , was Paracelsus’s p re o c cu p a tio n w ith m agic. H e him self, as we have said, h ad n o such scruples. H e drew m agic, like ev erything else w o rth know ing, in to his o rb it an d trie d to ex p lo it it m edically for th e b enefit of th e sick, 19 H e d id , how ever, o n ce rem ark th at h e h ad fou n d th e ston e w h ich others sou gh t “to th eir ow n h u r t.” B u t m any o th er alch em ists say the sam e. 29 [P ersonal p h ysician to F erd in an d I. Cf. J u n g, "Paracelsus th e P h ysician ,” pars, a i f . — E d i t o r s .]

21 E p isto la ru m m e d ic in a liu m C o n ra d i G essneri, fol. i c

u n p e rtu rb e d by w h a t it m ig h t do to h im p erso n ally o r w h a t the im p licatio n s m ig h t be fro m the religio u s p o in t o f view. F o r him m agic an d th e w isdom of n a tu re h a d th e ir place w ith in th e di­ vinely o rd a in e d o rd e r as a m y ste riu m et magnate D ei, a n d so it was n o t difficult fo r h im to b rid g e th e gulf in to w hich h a lf the w o rld h a d p lu n g e d .22 In ste ad of ex p erien cin g any conflict in him self, he fo u n d his arch-enem y outside in the g reat m ed ical au­ th o rities o f th e past, as w ell as in th e host of academ ic physicians against w hom he le t fly like the p ro p e r Swiss m ercen ary h e was. H e was in fu ria te d bey o n d m easure by the resistance of his op­ p o n e n ts a n d h e m ade enem ies everyw here. H is w ritin g s are as tu rb u le n t as his life a n d his w anderings. H is style is vio len tly rh e to ric a l. H e always seems to be speaking im p o rtu n a te ly in to som eone’s ear— som eone w ho listens u n w illin g ly , o r against w hose th ick skin even th e best arg u m en ts re b o u n d . H is exposi­ tio n o f a su b jec t is seldom system atic o r even c o h eren t; i t is co n stan tly in te rru p te d by ad m o n itio n s, addressed in a su b tle o r coarse vein to a n in v isible a u d ito r afflicted w ith m o ra l deafness. Paracelsus was a little too sure th a t he h a d his en em y in fro n t of h im , a n d d id n o t n o tic e th a t it was lodged in his ow n bosom . H e consisted of tw o persons w ho n ev er really co n fro n te d o n e a n ­ o th er. H e n o w h ere betrays th e least susp icio n th a t he m ig h t n o t be at one w ith him self. H e felt him self to b e u n d iv id e d ly one, an d all th e th ings th a t constantly th w a rte d h im h a d of course to be his e x te rn a l enem ies. H e h a d to c o n q u e r th e m a n d p ro v e to them th a t h e was the “ M o n arch a,” th e sovereign ru le r, w hich secretly a n d u n k n o w n to him self was th e very th in g h e was n o t. H e was so unconscious o f th e conflict w ith in h im th a t h e n ev er n o tic e d th e re was a second ru le r in his ow n house w ho w orked against h im a n d opposed e v ery th in g he w an ted . B u t every u n ­ conscious conflict w orks o u t like th a t: one o b stru cts a n d u n d e r­ m ines oneself. Paracelsus d id n o t see th a t th e tru th of th e C h u rc h a n d th e C h ristia n sta n d p o in t c o u ld n ev er g et alo n g w ith 22

"I’m left to struggle still towards the light: Could I but break, the spell, all magic spurning, A nd clear my path, all sorceries unlearning, Free then, in N ature’s sight, from evil ban, I ’d know at last the worth o f being m an.’’ (Faust: P art T w o, trans. Wayne, pp. 263k) Faust’s belated insight never dawned on Paracelsus.

the th o u g h t im p licit in all alchemy, “ G od u n d e r m e.” A nd w hen one unconsciously works against oneself, the resu lt is im ­ patience, irrita b ility , and an im p o te n t longing to get o n e’s o p ­ p o n e n t dow n w hatever the means. G enerally certain symptoms appear, am ong them a peculiar use of language: one wants to speak forcefully in o rd er to impress o n e’s opponent, so one em ­ ploys a special, “ bom bastic” style full of neologisms which m ight be described as “power-words.” 23 T h is sym ptom is ob­ servable n o t only in the psychiatric clinic b u t also am ong certain m odern philosophers, and, above all, w henever an y th in g u n ­ w orthy of belief has to be insisted on in the teeth of in n e r resist­ ance: the language swells up, overreaches itself, sprouts gro­ tesque words distinguished only by th eir needless com plexity. T h e w ord is charged w ith the task of achieving w hat cannot be done by honest means. It is the old w ord magic, and som etim es it can degenerate into a regular disease. Paracelsus was afflicted O O w ith this m alady to such a degree th a t even his closest pupils were obliged to com pile “oncm astica” (word-lists) and to p u b ­ lish com m entaries. T h e unw ary read er continually stum bles over these neologisms and is com pletely baffled at first, for P ara­ celsus never b othered to give any explanations even w hen, as often happens, the w ord was a hapax legomenon (one th a t occurs only once). O ften it is only by com paring a n u m b e r of passages th a t one can approxim ately m ake o u t the sense. T h e re are, how ­ ever, m itigating circum stances: doctors have always loved using m agically incom prehensible jargon fo r even th e m ost ord in ary things. I t is p a rt of the m edical persona. B ut it is odd indeed th a t Paracelsus, who p rid ed him self on teaching an d w ritin g in G erm an, should have been the very one to concoct the m ost intricate neologisms o u t of L atin, G reek, Italian , H ebrew , and possibly even Arabic. *56 Magic is insidious, and therein lies its danger. A t one point, w here Paracelsus is discussing w itchcraft, he actually falls, into using a magical w itch-language w ith o u t giving the least explanation. For instance, instead of “Z w irnfaden” (twine) he says “ Sw indafnerz,” instead of "N ad el” (needle) “D allen ,” instead of “L eiche” (corpse) “ C hely,” instead of 23 T h i s e x p r e s s i o n n e o lo g is m s . i t o r s .]

w a s in

[S e e “ T h e

fa c t u sed

P s y c h o lo g y

by an

in s a n e p a t ie n t

o f D e m e n tia

to d e s c r ib e h e r

P r a e c o x ,' ' p a r s .

155,

ow n

2 0 8 .— E

d­

“F ad en ” (thread) “D ap h n e,” an d so o n .24 In m agical rites the inversion of letters serves th e diabolical purpose of tu rn in g the divine o rd er in to an infernal disorder. I t is rem ark ab le how cas­ ually and u n th in k in g ly Paracelsus takes over these magically distorted words and sim ply leaves the read er to m ake w hat he can of them . T h is shows th a t Paracelsus m ust have been th o r­ oughly steeped in the lowest folk beliefs and p o p u lar supersti­ tions, and one looks in vain for any trace of disgust at such squ alid things, th o u g h in his case its absence was certainly not d u e to lack of feeling b u t ra th e r to a k in d of n a tu ra l innocence a n d naivete. T h u s he him self recom m ends the m agical use of w ax m anikins in cases of sickness,25 and seems to have designed an d used am ulets an d seals.28 H e was convinced th a t physicians sho u ld have an u n d erstan d in g of the m agic arts a n d should not eschew sorcery if this m ig h t help th e ir patients. B u t this k in d of folk m agic is n o t C hristian, it is dem onstrably pagan— in a word, a “P agoyum .” B. ALCHEM Y *57

Besides his m anifold contacts w ith folk su perstition there was an o th er, m ore respectable source of “pagan” lore th a t h ad a g reat influence on Paracelsus. T h is was his know ledge of and intense preo ccu p atio n w ith alchemy, w hich he used n o t only in his pharm acology an d pharm aceutics b u t also for “philosophi­ cal” purposes. Since earliest tim es alchem y contained, o r actu­ ally was, a secret doctrine. W ith th e triu m p h of C h ristian ity u n ­ d er C onstan tin e the old pagan ideas d id n o t vanish b u t lived on in the strange arcane term inology of philosophical alchem y. Its chief figure was H erm es o r M ercurius, in his d u al significance as quicksilver a n d the w orld soul, w ith his com panion figures Sol ( = gold) an d L u n a ( = silver). T h e alchem ical o peration con­ sisted essentially in separating th e p rim a m ateria, th e so-called chaos, in to th e active p rinciple, th e soul, a n d the passive p rin ­ ciple, the body, w hich were th en re u n ite d in personified form in H e calls th is p ro ce d u re likew ise a “pago y u m .” “D e p e s d lita te ,” T ra c t. IV, ch. I I (ed. H u ser, I, p. 353). 2 3 F or instance, th e v io le n t fo rm of St. V itu s’s D ance is cu re d by “ a w ax m a n ik in in to w hich o a th s a re stu ck .” "D e m o rb is a m e n tiu m ," T ra c t. I I , ch. I l l (ed. H u se r, I, p. 501); also P aram irum , ch. V. 2 6 "A rch id o x is m agicae,” ed . H u ser, I I , p. 546. 24

1¾¾

the coniunctio o r “chym ical m arriage.” In o th er words, the coniunctio was allegorized as the hierosgamos, the ritu a l cohabi­ tation of Sol and L una. From this u n io n sprang the ftIius sapientiae or filius philosophorum , the transform ed M ercurius, w ho was tho u g h t of as h erm ap h ro d itic in token of his ro u n d e d p er­ fection. [Cf. fig. B2.] 158 T h e opus alchymicum, in spite of its chem ical aspects, was always understood as a k ind of rite after th e m an n er of an opus divinum. For this reason M elchior C ibinensis, at th e b eg in n in g of the sixteenth century, could still represent it in th e form of a Mass,27 since long before this the filius or lapis philosophorum had been reg arded as an allegory of C h rist.28 M any things in Paracelsus th a t w ould otherw ise rem ain incom prehensible m ust be u n derstood in term s of this traditio n . In it are to be fo u n d the origins of practically the whole of his philosophy in so far as it is n o t Cabalistic. I t is evident from his w ritings th at h e h ad a considerable know ledge of H erm etic lite ra tu re .29 Like all m e­ dieval alchem ists he seems n o t to have been aw are of th e tru e n atu re of alchem y, although the refusal of th e Basel p rin te r C onrad W aldkirch, at the end of the sixteenth century, to p rin t the first p a rt of Aurora consurgens (a treatise falsely ascribed to St. T hom as A quinas) on account of its ‘‘blasphem ous charac­ te r” 30 shows th a t the dubio u s n a tu re of alchem y was ap p aren t even to a laym an. T o m e it seems certain th a t Paracelsus was com pletely naive in these m atters and, in te n t only on th e wel­ fare of the sick, used alchem y prim arily for its practical value regardless of its m urky background. Consciously, alchem y for him m eant a know ledge of the materia medica an d a chem ical procedure fo r p rep arin g m edicam ents, above all the well-loved arcana, the secret rem edies. H e also believed th at one could make gold an d engender h o m u n c u li.31 T h is aspect of it was so p red o m in an t th at one is inclined to forget th a t alchem y m eant very m uch m ore to him th an that. W e know this from a b rief 2I T h e a tr u m c h e m ic u m , III (1659), PP- 7 5 8 ®· C f. P sy c h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , pars. 4 8 0 ft; A u r o r a C o n su rg en s (ed. v o n F ranz), p . 43: “ F or [th e scien ce] is a g ift an d sacram en t o f G od a n d a d iv in e m a tte r .” 28 Cf. P sy c h o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , P a rt III, ch . 5: “T h e L ap is-C h rist P a r a lle l.” 29 H e m e n tio n s H er m es, A rch ela u s, M o rien u s, L u lly , A r n a ld u s, A lb e r tu s M agn u s, H e lia A r tista , R u p escissa , a n d others. 30 A r tis a u r ife ra e (1593), I, p . 185. 31 “D e n a tu ra reru m ," ed . S u d h off, X I, p . 313. 123

re m a rk in th e Paragranum , w here he says th a t th e physician h im self is " rip e n e d ” by the a r t.82 T h is sounds as th o u g h the alchem ical m a tu ra tio n sh o u ld go h a n d in h a n d w ith th e m a tu ra ­ tio n of th e physician. If we are n o t m istaken in this assum ption, we m u st fu r th e r conclude th a t Paracelsus n o t only was ac­ q u a in te d w ith th e arcan e teachings of alchem y b u t was con­ v inced of th e ir rightness. I t is of course im possible to prove this w ith o u t d e ta ile d in v estigation, fo r th e esteem w h ich he ex­ pressed fo r alchem y th ro u g h o u t his w ritings m ig h t in the en d re fe r only to its chem ical aspect. T h is special p re d ile c tio n of his m ad e h im a fo re ru n n e r a n d in a u g u ra to r of m o d e rn chem ical m edicine. E ven his b elief in th e tra n sm u ta tio n of m etals a n d in th e lapis p h ilo so p h o ru m , w hich he shared w ith m any others, is n o evidence of a d e ep e r affinity w ith th e m ystic b a ck g ro u n d of th e ars aurifera. A n d yet such an affinity is very p ro b a b le since his closest follow ers w ere fo u n d am ong th e alchem ical physi­ cians.33 C. T H E A RCAN E TEA C H IN G

160

I n th e course of o u r in q u iry we shall have to scru tin ize m o re closely the arcane teach in g of alchem y, w hich is so im p o rta n t fo r an u n d e rs ta n d in g of th e sp iritu a l side of Paracelsus. I m u st ask th e re a d e r to forgive m e in advance for p u ttin g his a tte n tio n a n d p a tien ce to such a severe test. T h e su b ject is ab stru se an d w rap p ed in obscurity, b u t it co nstitutes an essential p a rt of th e Paracelsan s p irit a n d ex erted a p ro fo u n d influence o n G oethe, so m u ch so th a t th e im pressions he g a in ed in his L eipzig days c o n tin u e d to engross h im even in old age: in d eed , they form ed th e m a trix fo r Faust. W h e n one reads Paracelsus, it is chiefly th e tech n ical n eo lo ­ gisms th a t seem to give o u t m ysterious hints. B u t w h en o n e tries to establish th e ir etym ology a n d th e ir m ean in g , as o fte n as n o t one ends u p in a b lin d alley. F o r instance, o ne can guess th a t 32 Das B u ch P aragranum , ed. Strunz, p. 13. 33 H is influence show ed itself n o t so m uch in any essential m odification o f a l­

chem ical m ethods as in deep en ed p hilosophical sp ecu latio n . T h e m ost im p o rta n t of these p hilosophical alchem ists was th e physician G e ra rd D o rn , of F ra n k fu rt am M ain. H e w rote a d etailed com m entary on on e of P aracelsus’s ra re L atin treatises, D e vita longa. See in fra , pars. 313!!. 12 4

“Iliaster” o r “Y liastrum ” is com posed etym ologically of OXij (m at­ ter) and ό.στήο (star), and th a t it means ab o u t the same as the spiritus vitae of classical alchemy, or th at “C agastrum ” is con­ nected w ith κακό s (bad) and ά σ τ ή ρ , o r th a t “A nthos” an d “Anth era” are em bellishm ents of the alchem ical flores. Even his philosophical concepts, such as the doctrine of the astrum , only lead us back to the know n alchem ical and astrological trad itio n , from w hich we can see th a t his doctrine of the corpus astrale was n o t a new discovery. W e find this idea already in an old classic, the “T ractatu s A ristotelis,” w here it is said th at the “planets in m an ” have a m ore pow erful influence th an th e heavenly bodies;34 an d w hen Paracelsus says th a t the m edicine is found in the astrum , we read in the same treatise th at “ in m an, who is m ade in the im age of God, can be fo u n d the cause and the m edicine.” B ut th a t o th er pivot of Paracelsus’s teaching, his belief in the light of n atu re, allows us to surm ise connections w hich il­ lu m in ate the obscurities of his religio medica. T h e lig h t h idden in n a tu re and p articularly in h u m an n a tu re likewise belongs to the stock of an cien t alchem ical ideas. T h u s the “T ractatu s A ris­ totelis” says: “See therefore th a t the lig h t which is in thee be n o t darkness.” T h e light of n a tu re is indeed of great im portance in alchemy. Ju st as, according to Paracelsus, it enlightens m an as to the w orkings of n a tu re and gives him an u n d erstan d in g of n atu ral things “ by cagastric m agic” (per m agiam cagastricam),35 so it is the aim of alchem y to beget this lig h t in th e shape of the filius philosophorum . A n equally ancient treatise of A rabic provenance a ttrib u te d to H erm es,36 the “T ractatu s au reu s,” says (M ercurius is speaking): “ My lig h t excels all o th er lights, and my goods are higher th a n all o th er goods. I beget the light, b u t the darkness too is of my natu re. N o th in g b e tte r or m ore w orthy of veneration can come to pass in the w orld th an th e u n io n of S i “N a m P la n e ta e S p h aerae et e le m e n ta in h o m in e p e r r e v o lu tio n e m su i Zodiaci veriu s e t v ir tu o siu s o p e r a n tu r , q u a m a lie n a corp ora se u sig n a su p e rio r a corp o r a lia ” (For th e p la n e ts, sp h eres, a n d e le m e n ts in m a n w ork m o r e tr u ly a n d p o w er fu lly th r o u g h th e r e v o lu tio n o f th eir zod iac th a n fo r e ig n b o d ies o r th e h ig h er b o d ily sign s). T h e a t r . c h e m . , V {1660), p . 790. 85 “L ib e r A zoth," ed . H u ser, II, p . 5 2 s. T h e C a g a s tr u m is a n in fe r io r o r “bad " form o f th e Y li a s t r u m . T h a t i t is th is “ cagastric” m a g ic w h ic h o p e n s th e u n d e r ­ sta n d in g is w o r th n o tin g . Se H er m es is an a u th o r ity o fte n c ite d b y P aracelsu s.

162

m yself w ith m y so n .” 37 In the “ D icta B e lin i” (B elinus is a p seudo-A pollonius of T y a n a ) M ercu riu s says: “ I e n lig h te n all th a t is m in e, an d I m ake th e lig h t m an ifest o n th e jo u rn e y from m y fa th e r S a tu rn .” 38 “ I m ake the days of th e w o rld e te rn a l, and I illu m in e all lights w ith m y lig h t.” 39 A n o th e r a u th o r says of th e “chym ical m a rria g e ” from w hich arises th e filius philosop h o r u m : “T h e y em brace a n d th e new lig h t is b e g o tte n of them , w hich is lik e n o o th e r lig h t in th e w hole w o rld .” 40 T h is idea of th e lig h t, w ith Paracelsus as w ith o th e r alche­ m ists, coincides w ith th e concept of S ap ien tia a n d Scientia. W e can safely call th e lig h t the c en tral m ystery o f philosophical alchem y. A lm ost always it is personified as th e filiusj o r is at least m e n tio n e d as o n e of his o u tsta n d in g a ttrib u te s . I t is a S a w o p io v p u re a n d sim ple. O fte n th e texts re fe r to th e n eed fo r a fa m ilia r sp irit w ho sh o u ld h e lp the a d ep t a t his w ork. T h e M agic P ap y ri do n o t h esitate to enlist the services even of the m a jo r gods.41 T h e filius re m a in s in th e a d e p t’s pow er. T h u s th e treatise of H aly, k in g of A rab ia, says: “A n d th a t son . . . shall serve th ee in thy house in this w orld a n d in th e n e x t.” 42 Long before Paracelsus, as I have said, this filius was e q u a te d w ith C hrist. T h e parallel comes o u t very clearly in th e sixteenthc e n tu ry G e rm a n alchem ists w ho w ere in flu en ced by Paracelsus. F o r instance, H e in ric h K h u n ra th says: “T h is [the filius philosop h o ru m ], th e Son of th e M acrocosm , is G od a n d c re a tu re . . . 37 Q u o ted from th e version in R o sa riu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m , vo l. II o f D e a lch im ia (1550), p . 133. R e p r in te d in B ib lio th e c a ch em ica c u rio sa , II, p p . 87(!. 38 T h e lig h t arises from th e darkness o f Saturn. 39 Q u o ted from th e versio n o f R o sa riu m in A r t. a u rif., II, p p . 379 an d 381. T h e o rig in a l (1550) ed itio n o f th e R o sa riu m is based o n a tex t th a t d ates back to a b o u t th e m id d le of th e 15th cent. 40 M ylius, P h ilo so p h ia re fo rm a ta , p. 244. (M ylius w as th e greatest o f th e a l­ ch em ical com p ilers a n d gave extracts from n u m ero u s a n cien t tex ts, m ostly w ith ­ o u t n a m in g th e sources.) Significantly, th e old est o f th e C h in ese alchem ists, W ei-P o-yan g, w h o liv e d a b o u t a .d . 140, w as fa m ilia r w ith th is id ea. H e says: “H e w h o p rop erly cu ltiv a tes h is in n a te n a tu re w ill see th e y ello w lig h t sh in e forth as it sh ou ld ." (L u -ch ’ia n g W u a n d T . L. D avis, “A n A n cien t C h in ese T r ea ­ tise on A lch em y,” p . 262.) 41 P reisendanz, P a p y r i G raecae M a g ica e, I, p . 137, P ap. IV , lin e 2081, co n cern in g th e acq u isitio n o f a p a re d ro s. 42 Q u o ted in R o sa riu m (A rt. a u r if., II, p . 248). Cf. P reisend an z, II, p p . 45—46, lin e 48: “I kn ow th ee, H erm es, and th o u k n ow est m e. I am th o u an d th o u art I, an d th ou sh o u ld st serve m e in a ll th in g s.” 126

that [Christ], is the son of God, the θεάνθρωπος, that is, G od and m an; the one conceived in the womb of the Macrocosm, the other in the w om b of the Microcosm, and both of a virginal womb. . . . W ith o u t blasphem y I say: In the Book o r M irro r of N ature, the Stone of the Philosophers, the Preserver of the Macrocosm, is the symbol of C hrist Jesus Crucified, Saviour of the whole race of m en, th at is, of the Microcosm. From the stone you shall know in n a tu ra l wise C hrist5 and from ChTist th e stone.” 43 T o m e it seems certain th a t Paracelsus was ju st as u n con­ scious of the fu ll im plications of these teachings as K h u n rath was, who also believed he was speaking “w ith o u t blasphem y.” But in spite of this unconsciousness they were of the essence of philosophical alchem y,44 and anyone who practised it th ought, lived, and acted in the atm osphere of these teachings, w hich per­ haps had an all the m ore insidious effect the m ore naively and uncritically one succum bed to them . T h e “n a tu ra l lig h t of m an” o r the “star in m a n ” sounds harmless enough, so th a t n o n e of the authors had any n o tio n of the possibilities of conflict th a t lurked w ith in it. A nd yet th a t light or filius philosophorum was openly nam ed the greatest an d m ost victorious of all lights, and set alongside C hrist as the Saviour and Preserver of the w orld I W hereas in C hrist G od him self became m an, the filius philoso­ phorum was extracted from m atter by h u m an art and, by m eans of the opus, m ade into a new light-bringer. In the form er case the m iracle of m a n ’s salvation is accom plished by G od; in the latter, the salvation or transfiguration of the universe is b ro u g h t about by the m in d of m an— “Deo concedente,” as the authors never fail to add. In the one case m an confesses “ I u n d e r G od,” in the o th er he asserts “ G od u n d e r m e.” M an takes the place of the C reator. M edieval alchem y prepared the way for the greatest intervention in the divine w orld order th a t m an has ever at­ tem pted; alchem y was the daw n of the scientific age, w hen th e *3 A m p h itk e a tru m sap ien tia e aeternae, p. 1 9 7 : "Hie, filius m u n d i m aioris, D eus et creatura . . . ille (scl. Christus) filius D ei 6thv8po>vos, h. e. D eu s et hom o: U n u s irt u te io m u n d i maioris; alter in utero m u n d i m inoris, uterque V irgineo, conceptus. . . . A bsque blasphem ia dico: Christi crucifixi, salvatoris totiu s generis hum ani, i.e., m u n d i m inoris, in N aturae libro, et ceu Speculo, typus est Lapis Philosophorum servator m u n d i maioris. E x lapide Christum naturaliter cognoscito et ex Christo lapidem ." 44 M ylius (P hil, ref., p. 9 7 ) says o f the filiu s ignis: “ H ere lies all o u r philosophy."

127

d a em o n of th e scientific sp irit co m p elled th e forces of n a tu re to serve m an to a n e x te n t th a t h ad n ev er been k n o w n before. I t was from the sp irit of alchem y th a t G oethe w ro u g h t th e figure of the “s u p e rm a n ” Faust, an d this su p erm an led N ietzsche’s Z arathustra to declare th a t G od was dead a n d to p ro claim th e w ill to give b irth to th e su p erm an , to “create a god fo r yourself o u t of your seven devils.” 45 H e re we find th e tru e roots, th e p rep arato ry processes deep in th e psyche, w hich u n le ash e d th e forces a t w ork in the -world today. Science a n d technology have in d e ed con­ q u e re d th e w orld, b u t w h e th e r the psyche has g ain ed a n y th in g is a n o th e r m atter. l64 Paracelsus’s p reo ccu p atio n w ith alchem y exposed h im to an influence th a t left its m ark on his s p iritu a l d ev elo p m en t. T h e in n e r driving-force b e h in d th e asp iratio n s of alchem y was a p re ­ s u m p tio n w hose daem o n ic g ra n d e u r o n th e o n e h a n d a n d psy­ chic d a n g er46 o n th e o th e r sh o u ld n o t be u n d e re stim ate d . M uch of th e o v e rb e arin g p rid e a n d a rro g a n t self-esteem , w hich con­ trasts so strangely w ith th e tru ly C h ristia n h u m ility of P aracel­ sus, com es from this source. W h a t e ru p te d like a volcano in A g rip p a von N e tte sh e im ’s “him self d em o n , h ero , G o d ” re ­ m a in e d , w ith Paracelsus, h id d e n u n d e r th e th re sh o ld of a C h ris­ tia n consciousness an d expressed itself o n ly in d irec tly in exag­ g erated claim s a n d in his irrita b le self-assertiveness, w hich m ade h im enem ies w herever h e w ent. W e know fro m ex p erien ce th at such a sym ptom is d u e to u n a d m itte d feelings of in fe rio rity , i.e., to a re a l fa ilin g of w hich one is usu ally unconscious. I n each of us th e re is a pitiless ju d g e w ho m akes us feel g u ilty even if we a re n o t conscious of h aving d o n e a n y th in g w rong. A lth o u g h we do n o t know w hat it is, it is as th o u g h it w ere k n o w n som ew here. P aracelsus’s desire to h elp th e sick a t all costs was d o u b tless q u ite 45 T h u s S pake Z a ra th u stra (trans. K aufm ann), p. 176: ‘‘L on ely o n e, yo u are g o ­

in g th e w ay to you rself. A n d your w ay lead s past yo u rself a n d your seven devils. . . . Y ou m u st con su m e y o u rself in y o u r ow n flam e; h o w co u ld yo u w ish to becom e n e w u nless you h ad first b ecom e ashes! L o n ely o n e, yo u are g o in g the w ay o f th e creator: y ou w o u ld create a g o d for you rself o u t o f you r seven d evils.” Cf. ‘‘C on siliu m c o n iu g ii,” A r s ch em ica , p . 237: “ O ur sto n e slays itse lf w ith its ow n d art”; and th e ro le o f th e in c in e ra tio an d th e p h o e n ix a m o n g th e a l­ ch em ists. T h e d e v il is th e S a tu rn in e form o f th e a n im a m u n d i. 4 ft T h e se w ere k n ow n to th e a lch em ists sin ce earliest tim es. O lym p iod oru s, for in stan ce, says th a t in le a d (Saturn) th ere is a sham eless d em o n (the sp iritu s m ercu rii) w h o drives m en m ad. (B erth elot, A lc h im iste s grecs, II, iv, 43.)

128

pure and genuine. B ut the magical means he used, and in p ar­ ticular the secret c o n ten t of alchemy, were diam etrically o p ­ posed to th e sp irit of C hristianity. A nd that rem ain ed so w hether Paracelsus was aware of it o r not. Subjectively, he was w ithout blam e; b u t th a t pitiless judge condem ned him to feel­ ings of in ferio rity that clouded his life. D. TH E PRIM ORDfAL M AN

165

T h is crucial point, nam ely the arcane doctrine of the m ar­ vellous son of the philosophers, is the subject of u n frien d ly b u t perspicacious criticism by C onrad Gessner. A propos the works of a p u p il of Paracelsus, A lexander a Suchten,47 he writes to Crato; “ B ut look w ho it is w hom he reveals to us as the son of God, nam ely none o th e r than the spirit of the w orld and of n a ­ ture, an d the same who dwells in o u r bodies (it is a w onder that he does n o t add the spirit of the ox and the ass!). T h is sp irit can be separated from m a tte r o r from the body of the elem ents by the technical procedures of the T heop h rastu s school. If anyone were to take him at his w ord, he w ould say th a t he had m erely voiced a p rinciple of the philosophers, b u t n o t his own opinion. H e repeats it, however, in o rd er to express his agreem ent. A nd I know th at o th e r T h eo p h rastian s besm irch such things w ith th eir w ritings, from w hich it is easy to conclude th at they deny the divinity of C hrist. I myself am entirely convinced th a t T h e o ­ phrastus has been an A rian. T h e y endeavour to persuade us th at C hrist was a q u ite ordinary m an, and th a t in h im was no oth er spirit than in us.” 48 166 G essner’s charge against the T heophrastus school and against the M aster him self applies to alchem y in general. T h e extrac­ tion of the w orld soul from m atter was n o t a peculiarity of Paracelsan alchemy. B u t the charge of A rianism is unjustified. I t was obviously prom pted by the well-known parallel betw een the filius philosophorum and C hrist, though so far as I know this now here occurs in Paracelsus’s own writings. O n the o th e r h and, in a treatise called “Apokalypsis H erm etis,” ascribed by H u ser to Paracelsus, there is a com plete alchem ical confession of faith which lends G essner’s charge a certain weight. T h e re Paracelsus 4T Born in D anzig at the b egin n in g of the 16th cent., studied in Basel. 48 EpistoIarum m ed icin aliu m Conradi Gessnerir Lib. I, fol. 2r.

129

167

168

says of the “sp irit of the fifth essence” : “T h is is th e sp irit of tru th , w hom the w orld cannot com preh en d w ith o u t th e inspira­ tio n of the H oly G host, o r w ith o u t the in stru ctio n of those who know h im .” 49 “H e is the soul of the w orld,” m oving all and preserving all. In his initial earthly form (th at is, in his original S aturnine darkness) he is unclean, b u t he purifies him self pro­ gressively d u rin g the ascent th ro u g h his watery, aerial, and fiery forms. Finally, in the fifth essence, he appears as the “clarified body.” 50 “T h is sp irit is the secret th a t has been h id d en since the b eg in n in g of things.” Paracelsus is speaking here as a tru e alchem ist. L ike his p u ­ pils, he draws th e C abala, w hich h ad been m ade accessible to th e w orld at large thro u g h Pico della M iran d o la an d A grippa, in to the scope of his alchem ical speculations. “A ll you w ho are led by your relig io n to prophesy fu tu re events an d to in te rp re t the past and the present to people, you who see ab ro ad and read h id d e n letters an d sealed books, w ho seek in th e e arth an d in walls for w hat is b u rie d , you w ho learn great w isdom and a rt— bear in m in d if you wish to apply all these things, th a t you take to yourselves the religion of the G abal a n d w alk in its light, for the G abal is w ell-founded. Ask an d it w ill be g ra n te d to you, knock, you w ill be h eard a n d it w ill be o p en ed u n to you. From this g ran tin g an d o p en in g th ere w ill flow w hat you desrre: you w ill see in to the lowest depths of the earth , in to the depths of hell, in to the th ird heaven. You w ill gain m o re w isdom than Solom on, you w ill have greater co m m u n io n w ith G od than Moses an d A aron.” 51 J u st as th e w isdom of the C abala coincided w ith the Sapientia of alchem y, so th e figure of A dam K adm on was identified w ith th e filius p h ilo sophorum . O riginally this figure m ay have been the ανθρω-π-os φ ω τ ε ιν ό ς , th e “m an of lig h t” w ho was im prisoned in A dam , a n d w hom we e n co u n ter in Zosimos of Panopolis 4 9 T h is is a rec u r re n t fo r m u la in a lc h e m ic a l treatises,

so T h e c o r p u s g lo r ific a tio n is o f o th e r a u th o rs. 51 “D e r e lig io n e p e r p e tu a ,” e d . S u d h o ff, P a rt 2, I, p p . io o f. A n e q u a lly p r e ­ su m p tu o u s v ie w is e x p r essed in " D e p o d a g ricis" (ed. H u se r , I, p, 565): “ T h u s m an a c q u ir es h is a n g e lic q u a litie s fr o m h e a v e n a n d is h e a v e n ly . H e w h o k n o w s th e a n g e ls k n ow s th e a stra , h e w h o k n o w s th e a stra a n d th e h o r o s c o p u m k n o w s th e w h o le w o r ld , a n d k n o w s h o w to b r in g to g e th e r m a n a n d th e a n g e ls.” [T h is a n d th e a b o v e p a ssa g e in th e t e x t are tr a n sla te d by D r. R . T . L le w e lly n .— T r a n s l a ­ t o r .]

(third century).®2 B ut the m an of lig h t is an echo of th e preC hristian d octrine of the P rim o rd ial M an. U n d er the influence of M arsilio Ficino an d Pico della M irandola, these and o th er N eoplatonic ideas had already become popularized in th e fif­ teenth century an d were know n to nearly every educated person. In alchem y they fell in w ith the rem nants of classical trad itio n . Besides this there were the views of the Cabala, w hich h ad been philosophically assessed by Pico.53 H e and A grippa54 were p ro b ­ ably the sources for Paracelsus’s som ew hat scanty know ledge of the Cabala. For Paracelsus the P rim o rd ial M an was identical w ith the “astral” m an: “T h e tru e m an is the star in us.” 53 “T h e star desires to drive m an towards great w isdom .” 50 In his Paragranum he says: “For heaven is m an an d m an is heaven, an d all m en are one heaven, an d heaven is only one m an .” 57 M an stands in the relationship of a son to the in n e r heaven,58 which is the Father, w hom Paracelsus calls the hom o m a xim u s59 or A dech,00 an arcane nam e derived from Adam. Elsew here he is called A rcheus: “ H e is therefore sim ilar to m an and consists of the fo u r elem ents an d is an A rcheus and is com posed of four parts; say then, he is the great Cosmos.” 81 U n d o u b ted ly this is the P rim o rd ial M an, for Paracelsus says: “In the whole Ides there is b u t O ne M an, the same is extracted by the U iastrum 62 52 In Zosimos the "man o f lig h t’’ ^ i s = r a a n , φώς = Iight) is sim ply called φώς. H e is the spiritual m an who has clothed h im self in A dam ’s body. Christ let Adam approach (ιτροσήν) and accepted h im into paradise (B erthelot, A Ich. grecs, III, xlix, 5-10). Cf. Psych ology and A lch em y, par. 456. 53 "De arte cabalistica,” O pera om nia, I. 54 O cculta p h ilo so p h ia . 55 A stron om ia m agna, ed. Sudhoff, X II, p. 55. 56 Ibid., p. 62. 57 Ed. Strunz, p. 56; also “V on der A stronom ey,” ed. H user, I, p. 215. 58 Strunz, p. 55. 59 Pico della M irandola also uses this term in H e p ta p lu s, I, ch. VII (O pera om n ia,

h P- 59 )· 60 De v ita longa (ed. D orn), pp. 1698:. A dech is the "interior m an,” presum ably identical w ith A niadus and E dochinum (see infra). C oncerning the h om o m a x i­ m us see Paragranum , p p . 45, 59. D orn calls Adech the “in visib ilem hom inem m axim um .” e i "Von den dreyen ersten essentiis,” ch. IX , ed. H user, I, p. 325. T h e idea that the Prim ordial M an consists o f four parts is fou n d also in G nosticism (Barbelo = "God is fo u r”). 62 T h e U iastrum (or Iliaster) is som ething like th e sp iritu s v ita e or sp iritu s m ercurialis o f the alchem ists. T h is is the occult agent in quicksilver, w hich, ex-

an d is the P ro to p last.” Ides or Ideus is “ the gate th ro u g h w hich all created things have proceeded,” the “globule o r m ateria” from w hich m an was created .83 O th e r secret nam es for the P rim o rd ia l M an are Id e c h tru m 64 and P ro to th o m a .65 T h e n u m ­ b e r of nam es alone shows how preoccupied Paracelsus was w ith this idea. T h e an cien t teachings ab o u t the A n th ro p o s o r P ri­ m o rd ial M an assert th a t God, or the w orld-creating p rin cip le, was m ade m anifest in the form of a “ first-created” (protoplastus) m an, usually of cosmic size. I n In d ia he is P rajap ati o r P urusha, w ho is also “th e size of a th u m b ” an d dwells in th e h e a rt of every m an, like the Iliaster of Paracelsus. In P ersia h e is G ayom art (gayo-maretan, ‘m ortal life’), a y o u th of dazzling w hiteness, as is also said of the alchem ical M ercurius. In the Zohar he is M etatron, w ho was created to g eth er w ith light. H e is the celestial m an w hom we m eet in th e visions of D aniel, Ezra, E noch, an d also in P hilo Judaeus. H e is one of the p rin cip al figures in G nosticism , w here, as always, he is connected w ith the question of creation an d re d e m p tio n .66 T h is is the case w ith Paracelsus. tra c te d in th e fo rm o f th e a q u a p e rm a n e n s, serves, in h ig h ly p a ra d o x ic a l fa sh io n , to se p a ra te th e o c c u lt a g e n t, th e a n im a (soul), fro m th e b o d y (or su b stan ce). T h e c o n tra d ic tio n is d u e to th e fac t th a t M e rc u riu s is a se lf-tra n sfo rm in g b e in g , re p re se n te d as a d ra g o n th a t d e v o u rs itself fro m th e ta il ( u r o b o r o s = ta il-e a te r), o r else as tw o d ra g o n s e a tin g e a c h o th e r. T h e fu n c tio n o f th e Ilia s te r is ju s t as p a ra d o x ic a l: i t is itse lf a c re a te d th in g , b u t it b rin g s a ll c re a tu re s o u t o f a p o te n ­ tia l s ta te o f ex isten ce in th e w o rld o f id eas (w h ich is p ro b a b ly th e m e a n in g o f P ara c e lsu s’s N e o p la to n ic " Id e s”) in to a c tu a l existen ce. [See also in fra , p a rs. i 7 off.] 63 “ D e ta r ta r o : F ra g m e n ta a n a to m ia e ,” ed. S udhoff, II I, p . 4 6 2 . 34 Ib id ., p. 4 6 5 : “ H e is th e first m a n a n d th e first tre e a n d th e first c re a te d o f e v e ry th in g w h atso e v e r,” 35 = " F irst T h o m a s ,” i.e., th e first u n b e lie v e r a n d d o u b te r. 36 B ousset, H a u p ip r o b le m e d e r G nosis, p p . i 6 ff.

2. “DE V IT A L O N G A ” : AN E X P O S IT IO N O F T H E SE C R E T D O C T R IN E >6g

T h e treatise D e vita longa,1 difficult as it is to u n d erstan d in parts, gives us some inform ation on this point, though we have to extricate it w ith an effort from the arcane term inology in which it is em bedded. T h e treatise is one of the few that were w ritten in L atin; the style is exceedingly strange, b u t all the same it contains so m any significant hints th at it is w orth investi­ gating m ore closely. A dam von B odenstein, who edited it, says in a dedicatory le tte r2 to L udw ig W olfgang von H apsberg, gov­ e rn o r of B adenw eiler, th a t it was “ taken dow n from the m outh of Paracelsus an d carefully revised.” T h e obvious inference is th at the treatise is based on notes of Paracelsus’s lectures and is n o t an original text. As B odenstein him self w rote fluent and eas­ ily understandable L atin, q u ite unlike th at of the treatise, one m ust assume th a t he did n o t devote any p a rtic u la r atten tio n to it and m ade no effort to p u t it in to m ore intelligible form , o th er­ wise m uch m ore of his own style w ould have crept in. Probably he left the lectures m ore or less in th eir original state, as is p ar­ ticularly a p p aren t towards the end. It is also likely th a t he had no very clear understan d in g of w hat they were about, any m ore than had the supposed translator O porin. T h is is no t surprising, as the M aster him self all too often lacks the necessary clarity w hen discussing these com plicated m atters. U n d er these circum ­ stances it is difficult to say how m uch should be p u t down to incom prehension and how m uch to undisciplined thinking. N or is the possibility of actual errors in transcription excluded.3 In 1 E d . S u d h o ff, I I I . F o l. d a r o f t h e i s t e d n . (1562). 3 T o g iv e b u t o n e e x a m p le : o n e p a ssa g e says t h a t “ t h e r e is n o t h in g o f m o r ta lity in th e S c a io la e ,” w h ile a n o th e r sp e a k s o f th e “ d e a t h a n d life o f t h e S c a io la e ’’ ( in fra , p a rs . 207, 214). N o t m u c h r e lia n c e s h o u ld th e r e f o r e b e p la c e d o n B o d e n s te in ’s “ re v is io n .” A s a g a in s t m y v ie w t h a t th e V ita lortga c o n sists o f le c tu re n o te s , o n e m u s t c o n s id e r t h e fa c t t h a t t h e r e a re o r ig in a l fra g m e n ts w r itte n in

2

L5IB

o u r in te rp re ta tio n , therefore, we are on u n c e rta in g ro u n d from the start, an d m uch m ust rem ain conjecture. B u t as Paracelsus, for all his originality, was strongly influenced by alchem ical thin k in g , a know ledge of the earlier a n d co n tem porary alchem i­ cal treatises, an d of the w ritings of his pupils and followers, is of considerable h elp in in te rp re tin g some of the concepts and in filling o u t certain gaps. A n a tte m p t to com m ent on an d to in te r­ p re t the treatise, therefore, is n o t entirely hopeless, despite th e a d m itte d difficulties. A . T H E ILIASTER

>7°

T h e treatise is m ainly concerned w ith the conditions u n d e r w hich longevity, w hich in Paracelsus’s o p in io n extends u p to a th o u san d years o r m ore, can be attain ed . In w hat follows I shall give chiefly the passages th a t relate to the secret d o ctrin e an d are of h elp in ex p lain in g it.4 Paracelsus starts by giving a d efin itio n of life, as follows: “ Life, by H ercules, is n o th in g o th e r th a n a certain em balsam ed M um ia, w hich preserves th e m o rtal body from the m ortal w orm s an d from c o rru p tio n 5 by m eans of a m ix ed saline so lu tio n .” M um ia was well know n in the M iddle Ages as a m edicam ent, an d it consisted of th e pulverized parts of real Egyptian m um m ies, in w hich there was a flourishing trade. Paracelsus a ttrib u te s in c o rru p tib ility to a special v irtu e o r agent n am ed “balsam .” T h is was som ething lik e a n a tu ra l elixir, by m eans of w hich the body was k e p t alive or, if dead, in c o rru p t­ ible.® By the same logic, a scorpion o r venom ous snake necesGerm an (ed. Sudhoff, III, pp. 295ft.). T h e se m ay b e Paracelsus’s drafts for a Germ an version. T h e d ate o f com p osition o f th e V ita lon ga is perhaps 1526. N o origin al MSS. o f Paracelsus have b een preserved (ib id ., p p . xxxiiff.). 4 T h e follow in g discussion m akes n o attem p t to ev alu ate the treatise as a w h ole, for w h ich reason I have n o t considered th e D e v ita Iibri tre s o f M arsilio F icin o an im p ortan t con trib u tio n in th is respect. 5 T h e w ord aestph ara in the L a tin m ay be o f A rabic origin . D orn translates it as c o rru p tio . A n other possible derivation is φάρω, ‘to render in v isib le,’ ‘to k ill,’ and αί5

T h e text certainly needs a commentary! T h e Scaiolae, as the four parts, limbs, o r em anations of the A nthropos,4 are the or­ gans w ith which he actively intervenes in the w orld of appear­ ances o r by which he is connected w ith it, just as the invisible quinta essentia, or aether, appears in this w orld as the four ele­ m ents or, conversely, is composed out of them. Since the Scaio­ lae, as we have seen, are also psychic functions, these m ust be understood as m anifestations or effluences of the O ne, the invis­ ible A nthropos. As functions of consciousness, and particularly as im aginatio, speculatio, phantasia, and fides, they “in terv en e” and stim ulate M elusina, the water-nixie, to change herself into hum an form. D orn thinks of this as a “vision appearing in the m in d ” and n o t as a projection on a real woman. So far as o u r biographical knowledge extends, this latter possibility does no t seem to have occurred to Paracelsus either. In C olonna’s H ypnerotomachia P oliphili the Lady Polia attains a high degree of reality (far m ore so than D ante’s ethereal Beatrice b u t still n o t as m uch as H elen in Faust II), yet even she dissolves into a lovely dream as the sun rises on the first day of May: . . . tears shone in her eyes like clear crystals, like round pearls, like the dew which Aurora strews on the clouds of dawn. Sighing like a heavenly image, like incense of musk and amber rising to give delight to the spirits of heaven, she dissolved into thin air, leaving nought behind her but a breath of heavenly fragrance. So, with my happy dream, she vanished from my sight, saying as she went: Poliphilo, most dear beloved, farewell! 5

216

Polia dissolves ju st before the long-desired u n io n w ith her lover. H elen, on the other hand, vanishes only w ith the dissolu­ tion of h e r son E uphorion. T h o u g h Paracelsus gives clear in d i­ cations of the n u p tial m ood w ith his “exaltation” in May and his allusion to the stinging nettle and the little flame, he disregards entirely the projection on a real person o r a concretely visual­ ized, personified image, b u t chooses instead the legendary figure of M elusina. Now this figure is certainly n o t an allegorical chi­ m era or a m ere m etaphor: she has h er p articu lar psychic reality F o r a p a ra lle l, cf. E n o ch 40 : 2, w h ere G od h as fo u r faces a n d is su rro u n d e d by th e fo u r angels of th e Face. B T h e D ream o f P o lip h ilo (ed. Fierz-D avid), p . 210. 4

176

217

in the sense th at she is a glam orous apparition who, by h er very nature, is on one side a psychic vision b u t also, on account of the psyche’s capacity for im aginative realization (which Paracelsus calls Ares), is a distinct objective entity, like a dream which tem porarily becomes reality. T h e figure of M eIusina is em i­ n ently suited to this purpose. T h e anim a belongs to those b o r­ derline phenom ena which chiefly occur in special psychic situa­ tions. T h e y are characterized by the m ore or less sudden collapse of a form or style of life which till then seemed the indispensable foundation of the indiv id u al’s whole career. W hen such a catas­ trophe occurs, n o t only are all bridges back into the past broken, b u t there seems to be no way forw ard into the future. O ne is confronted w ith a hopeless and im penetrable darkness, an abys­ mal void th at is now suddenly filled with an allu rin g vision, the palpably real presence of a strange yet helpful being, in the same way that, when one lives for a long time in great solitude, the silence o r the darkness becomes visibly, audibly, and tangibly alive, and the unknow n in oneself steps u p in an unknow n guise. T h is peculiarity of the anim a is found also in the M elusina legend: Em m erich, C ount of Poitiers, had adopted Raym ond, th e son of a poor kinsm an. T h e relation betw een adoptive father and son was harm onious. B ut once, on the h u n t, when pursuing a w ild boar, they got separated from the rest and w ent astray in the forest. N ight fell and they lit a fire to warm themselves. Sud­ denly the C o unt was attacked by the boar, and R aym ond struck at it w ith his sword. B ut by an unlucky accident the blade re ­ bounded and dealt the C ount a m ortal blow. R aym ond was in­ consolable, and in despair m ounted his horse to flee he knew n o t where. A fter a tim e he came to a m eadow w ith a b u b b lin g spring. T h e re he found three beautifu l women. O ne of them was M elusina, who by her clever counsel saved him from dis­ h onour and a homeless fate. A ccording to the legend, R aym ond found him self in the cat­ astrophic situation we have described, w hen his whole way of life had collapsed and he faced ruin. T h a t is the m om ent when the harbinger of fate, the anim a, an archetype of the collective unconscious, appears. In the legend M elusina sometimes has the tail of a fish and sometimes th at of a snake; she is half hum an, half anim al. Occasionally she appears only in snake form. T h e 177

legend apparently has Celtic roots,6 b u t the m otif is found prac­ tically everywhere. It was not only extraordinarily popular in Europe during the M iddle Ages, b u t occurs also in India, in the legend of Urvashi and Pururavas, which is m entioned in the Shatapatha-B rahm ana.7 It also occurs am ong the N o rth A m eri­ can Indians.8 T h e m otif of half-man, half-fish is universally dis­ sem inated. Special m ention should be made of C onrad Veceriu s,9 according to whom M elusina, or Melyssina, comes from an island in the sea where nine sirens dwell, who can change into any shape they want. T h is is of particular interest as Para­ celsus m entions M elusina along w ith “Syrena.” 10 T h e tradition probably goes back to Pom ponius M ela,11 who calls the island “Sena” and the beings who dwell there “Senae.” T h ey cause storms, can change their shape, cure incurable diseases, and know the fu tu re .12 Since the m ercurial serpent of the alchemists is n o t infrequently called virgo and, even before Paracelsus, was represented in the form of a M elusina, the la tte r’s capacity to change her shape and to cure diseases is of im portance in th a t these peculiarities were also predicated of M ercurius, and w ith special emphasis. O n the other hand, M ercurius was also de­ picted as the grey-bearded M ercurius senex or H erm es Trism egistus, from which it is evident th at two em pirically very com­ m on archetypes, nam ely the anim a and the W ise O ld M an,13 flow together in the symbolic phenom enology of M ercurius. Both are daemons of revelation and, in the form of M ercurius, represent the panacea. Again and again M ercurius is called verSatilisj versipellis, m u tabilis, servus or ceruus fugitivus, Proteus, etc. 819 T h e alchemists, an d Paracelsus too, were no d o u b t con­ fronted often enough w ith the dark abyss of not-knowing, and, unable to go forward, were on their own admission dependent on revelation or illum ination o r a helpful dream . For this rea* G rim m , T e u to n ic M y th o lo g y , I, p. 434. T Sacred B ooks o f th e East, X X V I, p . 91. 8 B a rin g -G o u ld , C u rio u s M y th s of th e M id d le A g e s, p p . 502ff. 9 “D e reb u s gestis Im p eratoris H en ric i V II,” G e rm a n ia e H is to r ic o ru m (ed. U rstisius), II, p p . 63L 10 P a ra g ra n u m , p . 105. [Cf. "Paracelsus th e P h y sic ia n ,” par. 24.] 11 Fl. 1st cen t. a .d . 12 C h ro n o g ra p h ia , e d . Frick, p . 67. i s C f. m y “A rch etyp es o f th e C o llectiv e U n co n scio u s” an d “C on cern in g th e A rch etyp es, w ith Sp ecial R e fer e n c e to th e A n im a C o n cep t.”

178

220

son they needed a “m inistering sp irit,” a fam iliar o r xapeSpos, to whose invocation the G reek Magic Papyri bear witness. T h e snake form of the god of revelation, and of spirits in general, is a universal type. Paracelsus seems to have know n n o th in g of any psychological premises. H e attrib u tes the appearance and transform ation of M elusina to the effect of the “interven in g ” Scaiolae, the driving spiritual forces em anating from the hom o m axim us. T h e opus was subordinated to them , for its aim was to raise m an to the sphere of the A nthropos. T h e re is no d o u b t that the goal of the philosophical alchem ist was higher self-developm ent, or the p ro ­ duction of w hat Paracelsus calls the hom o maior, or w hat I w ould call individuation. T h is goal confronts the alchem ist at the start w ith the loneliness w hich all of them feared, w hen one has “only” oneself for company. T h e alchemist, on principle, w orked alone. H e form ed no school. T h is rigorous solitude, to­ gether w ith his preoccupation w ith the endless obscurities of th e work, was sufficient to activate the unconscious and, through the pow er of im agination, to b rin g into being things that ap p ar­ ently were not there before. U n d e r these circum stances “enig­ m atical speculations” arise in which the unconscious is visually experienced as a “vision appearing in the m in d .” M elusina emerges from the watery realm and assumes h u m an form — some­ times q u ite concretely, as in Faust / , w here Faust’s hopelessness leads him straight into the arms of G retchen, in w hich form Melusina w ould doubtless rem ain were it no t for the catastrophe which drives Faust still deeper into magic: M elusina changes into H elen. B u t she does n o t rem ain even there, for all attem pts at concretization are shattered like the re to rt of the hom unculus against the throne of Galatea. A nother pow er takes over, “th at difficult A dech,” who “at the end changes him self.” T h e greater m an “hinders o u r purpose,” for Faust has to change him self at death in to a boy, the p u er aeternus, to w hom the tru e w orld w ill be shown only after all desirousness has fallen away from him . “ M iserable m ortals, to whom N atu re has denied h er first and best treasure, the lum en naturae!” It is Adech, the in n e r m an, w ho w ith his Scaiolae guides the purpose of the adept and causes him to behold fantasy images from which he w ill draw false conclusions, devising o u t of them situations of whose provisional and fragile n a tu re he is unaw are.

283

N o r is he aw are th a t by k n o ck in g on th e d o o r of th e u n k n o w n h e is obeying the law of the in n e r, fu tu re m an, an d th a t he is diso b ed ien t to this law w henever he seeks to secure a p e rm a n e n t advantage o r possession fro m his work. N o t his ego, th a t frag­ m e n t of a personality, is m ean t; it is ra th e r th a t a w holeness, of w hich he is a p art, w ants to be tran sfo rm ed fro m a la te n t state of unconsciousness in to a n ap p ro x im ate consciousness of itself. T h e “acts of M elu sin a” are deceptive phantasm s com ­ p o u n d e d of su p rem e sense an d th e m ost p ern icio u s nonsense, a v eritab le veil of M aya w hich lu res an d leads every m o rta l astray. F rom these phantasm s th e wise m an w ill ex tract th e “superm o n ic ” elem ents, th a t is, th e h ig h e r in sp iratio n s; h e extracts ev ery th in g m ean in g fu l an d v aluable as in a process of d istilla­ tio n ,14 an d catches th e precious drops of th e liq u o r Sophiae in the ready b eak er of his soul, w here they “ open a w indow ” for his u n d erstan d in g . Paracelsus is h ere a llu d in g to a d iscrim in ativ e process of critical ju d g m e n t w hich separates th e chaff from th e w heat— a n in d isp en sab le p a rt of any rap p ro c h e m e n t w ith the unconscious. I t req u ire s n o a rt to becom e stu p id ; th e w hole a rt lies in e x tra ctin g w isdom from stu p id ity . S tu p id ity is th e m o th er of the wise, b u t cleverness never. T h e “ fix atio n ” refers alchem ically to the lapis b u t psychologically to th e co n so lid atio n of feel­ ing. T h e d istillate m u st be fixed an d h e ld fast, m u st becom e a firm conviction an d a p e rm a n e n t co n ten t. B.

223

T H E H I E R O S G A M OS O F

THE

E V E R L A S T IN G

M AN

M elusina, th e deceptive Shakti, m u st r e tu r n to th e w atery realm if th e w ork is to reach its goal. She sh o u ld n o lo n g er dance before th e ad ep t w ith a llu rin g gestures, b u t m u st becom e w h at she was from th e b eg in n in g : a p a rt of his w holeness.15 As such she m ust b e “conceived in th e m in d .” T h is leads to a u n io n of conscious a n d unconscious th a t was always p resen t uncon1 4 " A n d so t h is s p ir it is e x tr a c te d a n d s e p a r a te d fr o m t h e o t h e r sp ir it, a n d t h e n

t h e S p a g y r ic h a s t h e w in e o f h e a lt h .” (“ F r a g m e n ta ,” e d . S u d h o ff, II I, p . 305.) I S T h e a p p a r e n t c o n t r a d ic tio n b e t w e e n t h e r e je c tio n o f t h e g e s ta M e lo s in e s a n d t h e a s s im ila t io n o f t h e a n im a is d u e to t h e fa c t th a t t h e g e s ta o c c u r i n a sta te o f a n im a p o ss e ss io n , fo r w h ic h r e a s o n th e y m u s t b e p r e v e n t e d . T h e a n im a is t h e r e b y fo r c e d in t o t h e in n e r w o r ld , w h e r e sh e f u n c t io n s as t h e m e d iu m b e tw e e n t h e e g o a n d t h e u n c o n s c io u s , as d o e s t h e p e r s o n a b e t w e e n t h e e g o a n d th e e n v ir o n ­ m e n t.

PARACELSUS AS A SPIRITUAL PH EN O M EN O N

sciously b u t was always denied by the one-sidedness of the con­ scious attitude. From this u n io n arises that wholeness w hich the introspective philosophy of all tim es and clim es has character­ ized w ith an inexhaustible variety of symbols, names, and con­ cepts. T h e “m ille n om in a” disguise the fact that this coniunctio is n ot concerned w ith anything tangible or discursively appre­ hensible; it is an experience that sim ply cannot be reproduced in words, but whose very nature carries with it an unassailable feelin g of eternity or timelessness. 224 I w ill n ot repeat here what I have said elsewhere on this sub­ ject. It makes no difference anyway what one says about it. Para­ celsus does, however, give one more h in t which I cannot pass over in silence; this concerns the “characters of V enus.” 10 !6 T h is recalls the “signs and characters of the p lan ets” in A grippa, w hich are im p rin ted on m an a t b irth as on everything else. B ut m an has, conversely, the faculty of re-approxim ating him self to the stars: “Potest enim anim us noster per im aginationem vel rationem quandam im itatione, ita alicui stellae conform sri, u t subito cuiusdam stellae m uneribus im pleatur. . . . D ebem us ig itu r in quovis opere et rerum applicatione vehem enter affectare, im aginari, sperare firmissimeque credere, id enim plurim um erit adium ento . . . anim um h u m anum q u an d o per suas passiones et effectus ad opus aliquod attentissim us fuerit, coniungi ipsum cum stellarum animis, etiam cum intelligentiis: et ita q uoque coniunctum causam esse u t m irabilis quaedam virtus operibus ac rebus nostris in fu n d atu r, cum quia est in eo rerum om nium apprehensio et potestas, turn q u ia omnes res habent n atu ralem obedientiam ad ipsum , et de necessitate efficaciam et m ovent ad id quod desiderat nim is forti desiderio. E t secundum hoc verificatur artificium characterum , im aginum , incantationum et serm onum , etc. . . . A nim us enim nostcr quando fertu r in aliquem m agnum excessum alicuius passionis vel virtutis, arrip it saepissime ex se ipso horam vel o p p o rtu n itatem fortiorem , etc. . . . hie est m odus p e r quem in v en itu r efficacia [operationum ].” (For through a certain m ental faculty o u r sp irit can thus by im itation be m ade like to some star, so th a t it is suddenly filled w ith the functions of a star. . . . W e ought therefore in every w ork an d application of things eagerly to aspire, imagine, hope, and most firmly believe, for th a t will be a very great help. . . . [De occult, phil., Lib. I, cap. 66.] T h e h um an spirit, when through its passions and operations it is highly in te n t upon any work, should join itself w ith the spirits of the stars, yea, w ith th e ir intelligences; an d w hen thus conjoined, be th e cause th a t a certain w onder­ ful virtue is infused into our works an d afTairs, b o th because there is in it a grasping of and pow er over all things, and because all things have a n atu ra l and necessarily efficacious obedience to it, and move towards w hat it desires w ith an extrem ely strong desire. A nd according to this is verified th e work of the ch ar­ acters, images, incantations, and words, etc. . . . For w hen o u r sp irit is moved to any great excess of any passion or virtue, it very often snatches for itself a more effective hour or opportunity, etc. . . . T h is is the way by w hich the efficacy [of the operations] is found.) (Lib. I, cap. 67.)

S25

M elusina, being a water-nixie, is closely connected with M organa, the “sea-born,” whose classical counterpart is A phro­ dite, the “foam -born.” U nion w ith the fem inine personification of the unconscious is, as we have seen, a well-nigh eschatological experience, a reflection of which is to be found in the Apocalyp­ tic M arriage of the Lam b, the C hristian form of the hierosgamos. T h e passage runs (Revelation 19 : 6-10): And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, say­ ing, Alleluia; for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the mar­ riage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me: Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God. And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren . . .

226

T h e “he” of the text is the angel that speaks to Jo h n ; in the language of Paracelsus, he is the hom o maior, Adech. I need hardly p o in t out that Venus is closely related to the love-goddess Astarte, whose sacred marriage-festivals were know n to every­ one. T h e experience of union underlying these festivals is, psy­ chologically, the em brace and com ing together again of two souls in the exaltation of spring, in the “ true May” ; it is the successful reu n itin g of an apparently hopelessly divided duality in the wholeness of a single being. T h is unity embraces the m ul­ tiplicity of all beings. H ence Paracelsus says: “If you know your­ selves one w ith others.” Adech is n o t m y self, he is also that of my brothers: “I am thy fellowservant, and of thy b reth ren .” T h a t is the specific definition of this experience of the coniunctio: the self which includes me includes many others also, for the unconscious th a t is “conceived in our m in d ” does n o t belong to me and is n o t peculiar to me, b u t is everywhere. It is the q u in ­ tessence of the individual and at the same tim e the collective. 227 T h e participants in the m arriage of the Lam b en ter into eternal blessedness; they are “virgins, which were no t defiled w ith w om en” and are “redeem ed from am ong m en” (Rev. 182

14 : 4). In Paracelsus the goal of redem p tio n is "the year Aniad in ,” or tim e of perfection, w hen the O ne M an reigns for ever. C. SPIRIT AND NATURE

W hy did Paracelsus n o t avail him self of the C hristian im ag­ ery, w hen it expresses the same tho u g h t so very clearly? W hy does Venus appear in the place of M elusina, and why is it n o t th e m arriage of the Lam b, b u t a hierosgamos of Venus and M ars, as the text itself hints? T h e reason is probably the same as th a t which com pelled Francesco C olonna to make Poliphilo seek his beloved Polia n o t w ith the M other of God b u t w ith Venus. For the same reason the boy in C hristian R osencreutz’s Chymical W ed d ing17 led the hero down to an u n d erg ro u n d cham ber, on the door of w hich was a secret inscription graven in copper characters. C opper (cu p ru m ) is correlated w ith the Cyprian (A phrodite, Venus). In the cham ber they fo u n d a three-cor­ n ered tom b containing a copper cauldron, and in it was an angel hold in g a tree that d rip p ed continually into the cauldron. T h e tom b was supported by three anim als: an eagle, an ox, and a lion.18 T h e boy explained th at in this tom b Venus lay buried, who had destroyed m any an u p rig h t m an. C o n tin u in g th eir de­ scent, they came to the bedcham ber of Venus and found the goddess asleep on a couch. Indiscreetly, the boy tw itched the coverlet away and revealed h e r in all h er naked beauty.19 T r a n s. F o x cro ft, p p . i26ff. 18 T h e lo w e r triad, c o rr esp o n d in g to th e u p p e r T r in ity , a n d c o n sistin g o f th e

th e r io m o r p h ic sy m b o ls o f th e th ree evan gelists. T h e an g el as th e fo u r th sym b ol o ccu p ies a sp ecial p o sitio n , w h ic h in th e T r in ity is assign ed to th e d e v il. R e ­ versal o f m oral values: w h a t is e v il ab ove is g o o d b elo w , an d v ice versa. 18 In th e G o ld e n A ss o f A p u le iu s th e process o f r e d em p tio n b e g in s at th e m o m en t w h en th e h ero , w h o h as b e e n c h a n g ed in to an ass b eca u se o f h is d isso lu te life , su cceed s in sn a tc h in g a b u n c h o f roses from th e h a n d o f th e p r iest o f Isis, a n d e a tin g th em . R o ses are th e flow ers o f V en u s. T h e h e r o is th e n in itia te d in to th e m ysteries o f Isis, w h o , as a m o th e r god d ess, corresp on d s to th e M ater G loriosa in F au st I I . It is o f in te r e st to n o te th e a n a lo g ies b e tw e en th e prayer to th e M ater G loriosa a t th e e n d o f F au st a n d the prayer to Isis at th e e n d o f th e G o ld e n A ss: (F aust I I , trans. W a y n e, p . 288) O c o n tr ite hearts, seek w ith y o u r eyes

(G o ld e n Ass) Y ou are in d e e d th e h o ly p reserver of h u m a n k in d ,

«9

T h e ancient w orld contained a large slice of n atu re and a num ber of questionable things which C hristianity was b o und to overlook if the security of a spiritual standpoint was n o t to be hopelessly compromised. No penal code and no m oral code, not even the sublim est casuistry, will ever be able to codify and pro­ nounce ju st judgm ent upon the confusions, the conflicts of duty, and the invisible tragedies of the n atu ral m an in collision with the exigencies of culture. “Spirit” is one aspect, “N atu re” an­ other. “You may pitch N ature out w ith a fork, yet she’ll always come back again,” says the poet.20 N ature must not w in the game, b u t she cannot lose. A nd w henever the conscious m ind clings to hard and fast concepts and gets caught in its own rules and regulations— as is unavoidable and of the essence of civilized consciousness—n a tu re pops up w ith h er inescapable demands. N ature is n o t m atter only, she is also spirit. W ere that n o t so, the only source of spirit would be hum an reason. It is the great achievem ent of Paracelsus to have elevated the “light of n a tu re ” to a principle and to have emphasized it in a far m ore funda­ m ental way than his predecessor Agrippa. T h e lumen naturae is the natural spirit, whose strange and significant workings we can observe in the m anifestations of the unconscious now that psyT h e visage of salvation;

Offering amid the evil chances of the unfortunate the kindly protection of a mother,

B lissful in that gaze, arise

And no sm allest m om ent that passes is devoid o f your favours,

T hrough glad regeneration.

B ut both by land and by sea you care for men, driving off life’s storms and stretching out to them your saving hand; w herewith you unravel the most tangled webs of fate, and calm the tempests of fortune, and control the varied wanderings o f the stars.

N ow may every pulse o f good Seek to serve before thy face;

W herefore, poor though I am, I w ill do what I may, as a devotee,

Virgin, Queen of M otherhood, Keep us, Goddess, in thy grace.

T o keep ever hidden in my heart the vision of your divine face and most holy godhead.

20 Horace, Epist. I. x. 24.

chological research has come to realize th a t the unconscious is n o t ju st a “subconscious” appendage or the dustbin o£ conscious­ ness, b u t is a largely autonom ous psychic system for com pensat­ ing the biases an d aberrations of the conscious attitu d e, for the m ost p art functionally, though it sometimes corrects them by force. Consciousness can, as we know, be led astray by n a tu ra l­ ness as easily as by spirituality, this being the logical consequence of its freedom of choice. T h e unconscious is n o t lim ited only to the instinctual and reflex processes of the cortical centres; it also extends beyond consciousness and, w ith its symbols, anticipates future conscious processes. It is therefore q u ite as m uch a “supraconsciousness.” 230 Convictions an d m oral values w ould have no m eaning if they were n o t believed and did n o t possess exclusive validity. A nd yet they are m an-m ade and tim e-conditioned assertions or explanations w hich we know very well are capable of all sorts of m odifications, as has happened in the past and w ill h ap p en again in the fu tu re. A ll th a t has happened d u rin g the last two th o u ­ sand years shows th at they are reliable signposts for certain stretches of the way, then comes a painful upheaval, which is felt as subversive and im m oral, u n til a new conviction takes root. So far as the essential traits of hum an n a tu re rem ain the same, cer­ ta in m oral values enjoy perm an en t validity. T h e m ost m eticu­ lous observance of the T e n C om m andm ents, however, is no o b ­ stacle to the m ore refined forms of tu rp itu d e, an d the far loftier principle of C hristian love of one’s neig h b o u r can lead to such tangled conflicts of d u ty that sometimes the G ordian knot can only be cut w ith a very u nchristian sword. D. T H E ECCLESIASTICAL SACRAM ENT AND T H E OPUS ALC H Y M IC UM

sS1

Paracelsus, like m any others, was unable to m ake use of the C hristian symbolism because the C hristian form ula inevitably suggested the C hristian solution and w ould thus have conduced to the very th in g th a t had to be avoided. It was n a tu re an d h e r p a rticu lar “lig h t” that had to be acknow ledged and lived w ith in the face of an attitu d e that assiduously overlooked them . T h is could only be done u n d e r the protective aegis of the arcanum . B ut one should n o t im agine Paracelsus or any o th er alchem ist 185

settling down to invent an arcane term inology th at w ould make the new doctrine a kind of private code. Such an undertaking w ould presuppose the existence of definite views and clearly de­ fined concepts. B ut there is no question of that: none of the al­ chemists ever had any clear idea of what his philosophy was really about. T h e best proof of this is the fact that everyone w ith any originality at all coined his own terminology, w ith the result that no one fully understood anybody else. For one alchemist, LulIy was an obscurantist and a charlatan and G eber the great au th o r­ ity; while for another, G eber was a Sphinx and L ully the source of all enlightenm ent. So w ith Paracelsus: we have no reason to suppose that behind his neologisms there was a clear, consciously disguised concept. I t is on the contrary probable that he was try­ ing to grasp the ungraspable w ith his countless esotericisms, and snatched at any symbolic h in t th at the unconscious offered. T h e new world of scientific knowledge was still in a nascent dreamstate, a m ist heavy w ith the future, in which shadowy figures groped about for the right words. Paracelsus was not reaching back into the past; rather, for lack of anything suitable in the present, he was using the old rem nants to give new form to a renew ed archetypal experience. H ad the alchemists felt any seri­ ous need to revive the past, their eruditio n would have enabled them to draw on the inexhaustible storehouse of the heresiologists. B ut except for the “A quarium sapientum ,” 21 which like­ wise treats of heresies, I have found only one alchem ist (of the sixteenth century) who shudderingly adm its to having read the Panarium of Epiphanius. N or are any secret traces of Gnostic usages to be found, despite the fact th a t the texts swarm w ith unconscious parallels. 232 T o re tu rn to o u r text: it is clear th at it describes a procedure for attaining nothing less than im m ortality (“that we may ar­ rive im m ortal at the year A niadin”). T h ere is, however, only one way to this goal, and that is through the sacraments of the C hurch. These are here replaced by the “sacram ent” of the opus alchym icum , less by word than by deed, and w ithout the least sign of any conflict with the orthodox C hristian standpoint. 233 W hich way did Paracelsus hold to be the true one? O r were 21 M usaeum h erm eticu m , pp. 73ff. [T his sentence has been altered in accordance w ith the correction given in Psychology an d A lch em y, 2nd edn., par. 431, n. 11.— T r a n s l a t o r .]

b o th o£ them tru e for him? Presum ably the latter, an d th e rest he “ leaves to the theoreticians to discuss.” 234 W h at is m eant by the “characters of V enus” rem ains ob­ scure. T h e “sapphire” 22 which Paracelsus prized so m uch, the cheyri, ladanum , m uscus, an d am bra belong, according to A grippa , 23 to Venus. T h e goddess undoubtedly appears in o u r te x t on a higher level, in keeping w ith h er classical cognomens: doctaj sublim is} magistra rerum hum anarum divinarum que, etc .24 O ne of h er characters is certainly love in th e widest sense, so D orn is n o t w rong w hen he interprets them as the “shield and buckler of love.” Shield an d buckler are m artial attrib u tes, b u t there is also a Venus armata .25 M ythologically, the personified A m or is a son of Venus an d Mars, whose cohabitation in al­ chemy is a typical co n iu n ctio .26 D orn, despite being a Paracelsist, had a decidedly polem ical a ttitu d e towards certain fu n d a­ m ental tenets of alchem y ,27 so th a t a C hristian love of one’s neighbour, well arm ed against evil, suited him very well. B u t so far as Paracelsus is concerned this in te rp re ta tio n is d o u b tfu l. T h e w ord Venus points in q u ite an o th er direction, an d since the C hristian gifts of grace were included in his C atholic faith he had in any case no need of a christianized Am or. O n the con­ trary, a Venus M agistra o r A phrodite U rania, or even a Sophia, w ould have seemed to him m ore ap p ro p riate to the mystery of the lu m en naturae. T h e words “m inim e tam en usurpatis” m ig h t also be a h in t at discretion .28 H ence th e Venus episode in the Chym ical W ed d in g may have m ore bearing on the in te rp re ­ tatio n of this cryptic passage th an D o rn ’s w ell-m eant circum lo­ cution. 235 T h e concluding reference to a “life w ith o u t e n d ” u n d e r 22 "For b efo re th e sa p p h ir e e x isted , th ere w as n o a r ca n u m ” (P a ra g ra n u m 1 p . 77). D e v it a lo n g a , e d . D o r n , p . 7a: " T h e y are to be referred to th e c h e y ri a n d th e sapp h ir in e flow er, i.e., to th ose tw o p r e cio u s ston es o f th e p h ilo so p h e r s.” B o d e n stein (1O n o m a stic o n , p . 64): “T h e sa p p h ir in e m aterial: th a t liq u id in w h ic h th e r e is n o h a r m fu l m a tte r .” 23 O c c u lt, p k i l., I, cap. 28, p . x x x iv . 2 4 C arter, E p ith e ta D e o r u m , s.v. “V e n u s.” 2 5 Ib id . 26 T h e h e r m a p h r o d itic V e n u s w as regard ed as ty p ify in g th e c o n iu n c tio o f S u lp h u r a n d M ercu rius. C f. P ern ety , F a b les e g y p tie n n e s e t g re c q u e s, II, p. 119. 2 7 C f. " P sych ology an d R e lig io n ,” p . 60. 2 8 i t c o u ld b e tra n sla ted as "you h a v e m e n tio n e d n o t at a ll.”

187

the dom inion of A niadus is very rem iniscent of Rev. 20 :4 : . . and they lived and reigned w ith C hrist a thousand years.” T h e year A niadin w ould thus correspond to the thousand-year reign in the Apocalypse. 236 In conclusion I would rem ark that the survey of the secret doctrine which I have attem pted to sketch here makes it seem likely that besides the physician and C hristian in Paracelsus there was also an alchemical philosopher at work who, pushing every analogy to the very lim it, strove to penetrate the divine mysteries. T h e parallel w ith the mysteries of the C hristian faith, which we can only feel as a most dangerous conflict, was no Gnostic heresy for him , despite the most disconcerting resem­ blances; for him as for every other alchemist, m an had been en­ trusted w ith the task of bringing to perfection the divine will im planted in nature, and this was a truly sacram ental work. T o the question “Are you, as it would seem, an H erm etic?” he could have replied w ith Lazarello: “I am a C hristian, O King, and it is no disgrace to be that and an H erm etic at the same tim e.” 29 29 L a z a re llo , C ra te r H e r m e tis (1505), fol. 32'·-'’. (As i n R e itz e n s te in , P o im a n d re s,

P- 320·)

5

237

238

- E P IL O G U E

I had long been aware th a t alchemy is no t only the m other of chemistry, b u t is also the fo reru n n er of o u r m odern psychology of the unconscious. T h u s Paracelsus appears as a pioneer not only of chem ical m edicine b u t of em pirical psychology and psy­ chotherapy. It may seem th at I have said too little ab o u t Paracelsus the self-sacrificing physician and C hristian, and too m uch ab o u t his dark shadow, th a t o th er Paracelsus, whose soul was interm ingled w ith a strange spiritual cu rren t which, issuing from im m em orial sources, flowed beyond h im into a distant fu tu re. B ut— ex tenebris lux— it was precisely because he was so fascinated by magic th at he was able to open the door to the realities of n a tu re for the benefit of succeeding centuries. T h e C hristian and the p rim ­ itive pagan lived together in h im in a strange and m arvellous way to form a conflicting whole, as in o th er great Renaissance figures. A lthough he had to en d u re the conflict, he was spared th a t agonizing split betw een knowledge and faith that has riven the later epochs. As a m an he had one father, b u t as a spirit he had two m others. H is spirit was heroic, because creative, and as such was doom ed to Prom ethean guilt. T h e secular conflict th a t broke o u t at the tu rn of the sixteenth century, and whose living im age stands before our eyes in the figure of Paracelsus, is a p re­ requisite for higher consciousness; for analysis is always followed by synthesis, an d w hat was divided on a lower level w ill reap ­ pear, un ited , on a higher one.

IV T H E SPIRIT MERCURIUS

[G iven as two lectures a t th e E ranos C onference, Ascona, Sw itzerland, in 1942, th e them e of w hich was “T h e H erm etic P rin cip le in M ythology, Gnosis, a n d A lchem y.” P u b lish ed as “D er Geist M ercurius,” Eranos-Jahrbuch 1942 (Zurich, 1943); revised a n d ex p an d ed in Sym bolik des Geistes: Stu d ien iiber psychische P hanom enologie . . . (Psychologische A bhandlu n g en , V I; Zurich, 1948). A n E nglish tran slatio n by Gladys P h elan a n d H ild e g a rd N agel, title d T h e S p irit M ercury, was p u b lish ed as a book by the A nalytical Psychology C lub of N ew York, Inc., in 1953, a n d form s the basis of the p resen t tran slatio n . Some b rief ch apters have been com bined.— E

d i t o r s .]

( H e r m e s , r u l e r of t h e w o r l d , d w e l l e r i n t h e h e a r t , circle of t h e m o o n , R o u n d a n d s q u a r e , i n v e n t o r of t h e w o r d s of t h e t o n g u e , O b e d i e n t t o j u s t i c e , w e a r e r of t h e c h l a m y s , s h o d i n w i n g e d s a n d a l s , G u a r d i a n of t h e m a n y - s o u n d i n g t o n g u e , p r o p h e t t o m o r t a l s . )

—A Magic Papyrus (Preisendanz, II, p. 139)

P a rt I

i. T H E S P I R I T IN T H E B O T T L E 239

In m y c o n trib u tio n 1 to th e sym posium on H erm es I w ill try to show th a t this m an y -h u ed a n d w ily god d id n o t by any m eans die w ith th e d eclin e of th e classical era, b u t on th e co n tra ry has gone o n liv in g in stran g e guises th ro u g h th e cen tu ries, even in to re c e n t tim es, a n d has k e p t th e m in d of m a n busy w ith his de­ ceptive arts a n d h e a lin g gifts. C h ild re n are still to ld G rim m ’s fairytale of “T h e S p irit in th e B o ttle,” w h ich is ever-living like all fairytales, a n d m o reo v er co n tain s th e q u in tessen ce an d d eep ­ est m e a n in g of th e H e rm e tic m ystery as it has com e dow n to us today: Once upon a time there was a poor woodcutter. H e had an only son, whom he wished to send to a high school. However, since he could give him only a little money to take w ith him, it was used up long before the time for the exam inations. So the son went home and helped his father w ith the work in the forest. Once, during the m idday rest, he roam ed the woods and came to an immense old oak. T h ere he heard a voice calling from the ground, “Let me out, let me out!” He dug down among the roots of the tree and found a well-sealed glass bottle from which, clearly, the voice had come. H e opened it and instantly a spirit rushed out and soon became half as high as the tree. T h e spirit cried in an awful voice: “I have had my punishm ent and I will be revenged! I am the great and mighty spirit M ercurius, and now you shall have your reward. Whoso releases me, him I m ust strangle.” T his made the boy u n ­ easy and, quickly thinking u p a trick, he said, “First, I m ust be sure that you are the same spirit th a t was shut u p in th at little bottle.” T o prove this, the spirit crept back into the bottle. T h en the boy m ade haste to seal it and the spirit was caught again. B ut now the spirit promised to rew ard him richly if the boy would let 11 give only a general survey o f the M ercurius concept in alchem y and by no m eans an exhaustive exposition o f it. T h e illustrative m aterial cited should therefore be taken only as exam ples and makes no claim to com pleteness. [For the "symposium on H erm es” see the editorial n ote on p . 1 9 1 .— E d i t o r s .]

him out. So he let him out and received as a reward a small piece of rag. Q uoth the spirit: "If you spread one end of this over a wound it will heal, and if you ru b steel or iron with the other end it will turn into silver.” T hereupon the boy rubbed his damaged axe with the rag, and the axe turned to silver and he was able to sell it for four hundred thaler. T hus father and son were freed from all worries. T h e young m an could retu rn to his studies, and later, thanks to his rag, he became a famous doctor.2 240

N ow , w h at in sig h t can we gain fro m this fairytale? As you know , we can tre a t fairytales as fantasy p roducts, like dream s, conceiving th em to b e sp o n tan eo u s statem en ts of th e u n co n ­ scious a b o u t itself. 24 1 As a t the b eg in n in g of m any dream s so m eth in g is said ab o u t th e scene of th e d ream action, so th e fairytale m en tio n s th e for­ est as the place of th e m agic h ap p en in g . T h e forest, d a rk an d im p en etra b le to th e eye, like d eep w ater a n d th e sea, is th e con­ ta in e r of the u n k n o w n an d th e m ysterious. I t is an a p p ro p ria te synonym for th e unconscious. A m ong th e m any trees— th e living elem ents th a t m ake u p th e forest— one tree is especially conspic­ uous for its g reat size. T rees, like fishes in th e w ater, rep resen t the liv in g co n ten ts of th e unconscious. A m o n g these contents one of special significance is characterized as an “ oak.” T re e s have in d iv id u ality . A tree, th erefo re, is o ften a sym bol of p er­ sonality .3 L u d w ig I I of B avaria is said to have h o n o u re d certain p artic u la rly im pressive trees in his p ark by having th e m saluted. T h e m ighty old oak is p ro v erb ially th e k in g of th e forest. H ence it rep resen ts a cen tral figure am o n g th e co n ten ts o f th e u n co n ­ scious, possessing p erso n ality in th e m ost m ark ed degree. I t is th e p ro to ty p e of th e s e l f , a sym bol of th e source a n d goal of the in d iv id u a tio n process. T h e oak stands for th e still unconscious core of th e personality, th e p la n t sym bolism in d ic a tin g a state of deep unconsciousness. F ro m this it m ay be co n clu d ed th a t the h ero of th e fairy tale is p ro fo u n d ly unconscious of him self. H e is one of the “sleepers,” th e “ b lin d ” o r “ b lin d fo ld e d ,” w hom we 2 [A u th o r’s paraph rase. Cf. “ T h e S p irit in th e B o ttle ,” G r im m ’s F airy T a les (trans. H u n t, rev. Stern), p p . 4 58-63.— E d i t o r s .] 3 C on cern in g p erson ification o f trees, see Frazer, T h e M a g ic A r t, II, ch. 9. T r ee s are also th e d w e llin g places o f sp irits o f th e d ead o r are id e n tic a l w ith th e life o f the n ew b o rn c h ild (ib id ., I, p . 184).

en co u n ter in the illustrations of certain alchem ical treatises.4 T h ey are the unaw akened who are still unconscious of th em ­ selves, who have n o t yet integrated th e ir future, m ore extensive personality, th eir “w holeness,” or, in the language of the mys­ tics, the ones who are n o t yet “enlightened.” For o u r hero, therefore, the tree conceals a great secret.5 242 T h e secret is h idden n o t in the top b u t in the roots of the tre e ;8 and since it is /o r has, a personality it also possesses the most striking marks of personality— voice, speech, and conscious purpose, and it dem ands to be set free by the hero. I t is caught an d im prisoned against its will, dow n there in the earth am ong the roots of the tree. T h e roots extend in to the inorganic realm , in to the m ineral kingdom . In psychological terms, this w ould m ean th at the self has its roots in the body, indeed in the body’s chem ical elem ents. W hatever this rem arkable statem ent of the fairytale may m ean in itself, it is in no way stranger than the m iracle of the living p lan t rooted in the inanim ate earth. T h e alchem ists described th e ir four elem ents as radices, correspond­ ing to the Em pedoclean rhizom ata, and in them they saw the constituents of the m ost significant and central symbol of al­ chemy, the lapis philosophorum , which represents the goal of the in d iv iduation process. 243 T h e secret h idden in the roots is a sp irit sealed inside a bottle. N aturally it was n o t hidden away am ong the roots to start with, b u t was first confined in a bottle, which was then hidden. Presum ably a m agician, th a t is, an alchem ist, caught an d im prisoned it. As we shall see later, this sp irit is som ething like the n u m en of the tree, its spiritus vegetativus, which is one 4 Cf. th e title -p a g e o f M u tu s lib e r , sh o w in g an a n g e l w a k in g th e sle ep er w ith a

tr u m p e t (“T h e P sy ch o lo g y o f th e T r a n sfe r e n c e ,” F ig. 11). A lso th e illu s tr a tio n in M ic h e lsp a c h e r ’s C abala, s p e c u lu m a r tis e t n a tu ra e (P sy ch o lo g y a n d A lc h e m y , Fig. 93). In th e fo reg ro u n d , b e fo r e a m o u n ta in u p o n w h ic h is a te m p le o f th e in itia te s, stan d s a b lin d fo ld e d m a n , w h ile fu r th e r back a n o th er m an ru n s a fter a fo x w h ic h is d isa p p e a rin g in to a h o le in th e m o u n ta in . T h e “h e lp fu l a n im a l” show s th e w ay to th e te m p le. T h e fo x or h are is its e lf th e “e v a siv e” M ercu rius as g u id e (biryybs). 5 F or a d d itio n a l m a ter ia l o n th e tree sym b ol, see in fra, “T h e P h ilo s o p h ic a l T r e e ,”

P a rt II. 6 T h is m o tif w as u sed in th e sam e sense by th e G nostics. Cf. H ip p o ly tu s, E len ch os, V, 9, 15, w h ere th e m a n y -n a m ed and th o u sa n d -e y ed “W ord o f G o d ” is “h id d e n in t h e r o o t o f A ll.”

244

d efin itio n o£ M ercu riu s. As the life p rin cip le of th e tree, it is a sort of sp iritu al q u intessence ab stracted from it, a n d co u ld also be described as th e prin cipiu m individuationis. T h e tree w ould th e n be th e o u tw ard a n d visible sign of th e realizatio n of the self. T h e alchem ists ap p e a r to have h eld a sim ilar view. T h u s th e “A u relia o ccu lta” says: “T h e p h ilosophers have so u g h t most eagerly for the cen tre o f the tree w hich stands in th e m idst of th e earth ly p arad ise.” 7 A ccording to th e sam e source, C hrist him self is this tree.8 T h e tree co m parison occurs as early as E ulogius of A lex an d ria (c. a . d . 600), w ho says: “ B ehold in the F a th e r the root, in th e Son th e b ran ch , an d in th e S p irit th e fru it: fo r th e substance [ ο υ σ ί α ] in th e th re e is o n e.” 8 M ercurius, too, is trinus et unus. So if we tran slate it in to psychological language, th e fairytale tells us th a t th e m e rc u rial essence, th e prin cipiu m individuUtionisj w ould have developed freely u n d e r n a tu ra l conditions, b u t was ro b b e d of its freedom by d elib e ra te in te rv e n tio n from outside, a n d was artfu lly confined an d b an ish ed lik e an evil spirit. (O nly evil spirits have to be confined, a n d th e wickedness of this sp irit was show n by its m u rd ero u s in te n t.) S up p o sin g the fairytale is rig h t a n d th e s p irit was really as w icked as it relates, we w o u ld have to conclude th a t th e M aster w ho im p riso n ed the prin cipiu m individuationis h ad a good en d in view. B u t who is this w ell-in ten tio n ed M aster w ho has th e p o w er to b an ish the p rin c ip le of m a n ’s in d iv id u atio n ? Such pow er is given only to a ru le r of souls in th e s p iritu a l realm . T h e idea th a t th e p rin cip le o f in d iv id u a tio n is th e source of all evil is fo u n d in Schopen­ h a u e r a n d still m o re in B u ddhism . In C h ristian ity , too, h u m a n n a tu re is ta in te d w ith o rig in al sin a n d is red eem ed from this stain by C h rist’s self-sacrifice. M an in his “n a tu ra l” c o n d itio n is n e ith e r good n o r p u re, a n d if he sh o u ld develop in th e n a tu ra l way the resu lt w o u ld be a p ro d u c t n o t essentially d ifferen t from an anim al. Sheer in stin c tu a lity a n d n aiv e unconsciousness u n ­ tro u b le d by a sense o f g u ilt w o u ld p revail if th e M aster had n o t in te rru p te d the free d ev elo p m en t of th e n a tu ra l b ein g by in tro ­ d u cin g a d istin ctio n betw een good an d evil an d o u tlaw in g the evil. Since w ith o u t g u ilt th e re is n o m o ral consciousness and r Theatrum Chemicumj IV

{1659), p. 500. S Ib id ., p. 478: “ (C hrist), w h o is th e tree o f life b o th sp ir itu a l and. b o d ily .” 9 K rueger, D a s D o g m a v o n d e r D r e i e in ig k e i t u n d G o l t m e n s c h h e it , p . 207.

196

w ithout awareness of differences no consciousness at all, we m ust concede that the strange intervention of the m aster of souls was absolutely necessary for the developm ent of any k in d of con­ sciousness and in this sense was for the good. A ccording to o u r religious beliefs, G od him self is this M aster— and the alchemist, in his small way, competes w ith the C reator in so far as he strives to do w ork analogous to the w ork of creation, an d therefore he likens his microcosm ic opus to the work of the w orld creator.10 245 In o u r fairytale the natu ral evil is banished to the “roots,” that is, to the earth, in o th e r words the body. T h is statem ent agrees w ith the historical fact that C hristian thought in general has held the body in contem pt, w ith o u t bothering m uch about the finer doctrinal distinctions.11 For, according to doctrine, n e ith e r the body n o r n a tu re in general is evil perse: as the work of God, or as the actual form in -which he manifests himself, n a­ tu re cannot be identical w ith evil. Correspondingly, the evil spirit in the fairytale is n o t simply banished to the earth and allowed to roam ab o u t at will, b u t is only hidden there in a safe and special container, so th at he cannot call atten tio n to himself anyw here except rig h t u n d e r the oak. T h e bottle is an artificial h u m an product an d thus signifies the intellectual purposeful­ ness and artificiality of the procedure, whose obvious aim is to isolate the sp irit from the surro u n d in g m edium . As the vas Herm eticum of alchemy, it was “herm etically” sealed (i.e., sealed w ith the sign of H erm es);12 it had to be m ade of glass, and had also to be as ro u n d as possible, since it was m eant to represent the cosmos in which the earth was created.13 T ra n sp a re n t glass is som ething like solidified w ater o r air, both of which are syno­ nyms for spirit. T h e alchem ical re to rt is therefore equivalent to the anima m u n d i, w hich according to an old alchemical concep­ tio n surrounds the cosmos. Caesarius of H eisterbach (th irteen th century) m entions a vision in w hich the soul appeared as a W i n th e “D ic ta B e lin i” M ercu riu s even says: “ O u t o f m e is m a d e th e bread from w h ic h com es th e w h o le w o rld , an d th e w orld is form ed from m y m ercy, an d i t fa ils n o t, b ecau se it is th e g ift o f G o d ” (D istin c tio X X V III, in T h e a tr . ch em ., V , 1660, p , 87). U Cf. th e d o c tr in e o f th e s ta tu s iu s titia e o rig in a lis an d s ta tu s n a tu ra e in te g ra e . 12 Cf. R ev. 20 : 3: "and set a se a l u p o n him ." 13 “T h e F ift is o f C on cord an d o f L ove, / B e tw ee n e y o u r W arkes a n d the Spheare a b o v e .”— N o r to n ’s “ O r d in a ll o f A lc h im y ,” T h e a tr u m c h e m ic u m B r ita n n ic u m , ch . 6, p . 92.

246

spherical glass vessel .14 Likew ise th e “s p iritu a l” o r “eth ereal” (,aethereus) p h ilo so p h e rs’ stone is a precious v itr u m (sometimes described as m alleabile) w hich was o ften eq u ated w ith th e gold glass ia u ru m v itr e u m ) of th e heavenly Je ru sa le m (Rev. 2 1 : 2 1 ) . I t is w o rth n o tin g th a t th e G erm an fairy tale calls th e spirit confined in th e b o ttle b y th e n am e of th e pagan god, M ercurius, w ho was consid ered id e n tica l w ith th e G erm an n a tio n a l god, W o tan . T h e m e n tio n of M ercu riu s stam ps th e fairy tale as an alchem ical folk legend, closely re la te d o n th e one h a n d to the allegorical tales used in teach in g alchem y, a n d o n th e o th e r to th e w ell-know n g ro u p of folktales th a t clu ster ro u n d th e m otif o f the “sp e llb o u n d s p irit.” O u r fairytale th u s in te rp re ts the evil s p irit as a pagan god, forced u n d e r th e influence of C hris­ tia n ity to descend in to th e d a rk u n d e rw o rld an d be m orally disqualified. H erm es becom es th e d em o n of th e m ysteries cele­ b ra te d by all ten ebriones (obscurantists), an d W o tan th e dem on of forest a n d sto rm ; M ercu riu s becom es th e soul of th e metals, th e m etallic m a n (h o m u n c u lu s), th e d rag o n {serpens m ercurialis), the ro a rin g fiery lion, th e n ig h t rav en (nycticorax), an d the black eagle— th e last fo u r b ein g synonym s fo r th e devil. In fact th e s p irit in th e b o ttle behaves ju s t as th e devil does in m any o th e r fairytales: h e bestows w ealth by ch an g in g base m etal into gold; a n d like th e devil, he also gets tricked. 14 D ia lo g u s m ira c u lo ru m , trans. b y Scott a n d B la n d , I, p p . 4a, 236.

2.

247

T H E C O N N E C T IO N B E T W E E N S P IR IT A N D T R E E

B efore co n tin u in g o u r discussion of the sp irit M ercu riu sj I should like to p o in t o u t a n o t u n im p o rta n t fact. T h e place w here he lies confined is n o t ju st any place b u t a very essential one— nam ely, u n d e r th e oak, the king of the forest. In psycholog­ ical term s, this m eans th a t the evil sp irit is im prisoned in the roots of the self, as the secret h id d en in the p rin cip le of in d iv id ­ uation. H e is n o t identical w ith the tree, n o r w ith its roots, b u t has been p u t th ere by artificial means. T h e fairytale gives us no reason to th in k th a t the oak, w hich represents th e self, has grow n o u t of the sp irit in the bottle; we may ra th e r conjecture th a t the oak presented a suitable place for concealing a secret. A treasure, fo r instance, is preferably b u rie d n e ar some k in d of landm ark, o r else such a m a rk is p u t u p afterw ards. T h e tree of paradise serves as a prototype fo r this and sim ilar tales: it, too, is n o t identical w ith the voice of the serpen t w hich issued from i t .1 H ow ever, it m ust n o t be forgotten th a t these m ythical m otifs have a significant connection w ith certain psychological p h e­ n o m en a observed am ong p rim itive peoples. In all such cases th ere is a n o tab le analogy w ith p rim itiv e anim ism : certain trees are an im ated by souls— have the character of personality, we w ould say— an d possess a voice th a t gives com m ands to h u m an beings. A m aury T a lb o t 2 reports one such case from N igeria, w here a n ative soldier h eard an oji tree calling to him , an d tried desperately to b reak o u t of the barracks an d hasten to th e tree. U n d e r cross-exam ination he alleged th a t all those who bore the n am e of the tree now an d th en heard its voice. H e re the voice is u n d o u b te d ly identical w ith the tree. T h ese psychic phenom ena 1 MeTttrrius1 in the form of L ilith 01 M elusina1 appears in the tree in the Ripley Scrowle. T o this context belongs also the hamadryad as an interpretation of the so-called “Aenigma Bononiense.” Cf. M ysterium Coniunctionis, pp. 68f. 2 In the Shadow 0} the Bush, pp. 31L

suggest th at originally the tree and the daem on were one and the same, and that their separation is a secondary phenom enon corresponding to a higher level of culture and consciousness. T h e original phenom enon was nothin g less than a n atu re deity, a tremendum pure and simple, which is m orally n eutral. But the secondary phenom enon implies an act of discrim ination which splits m an off from n atu re and thus testifies to the exist­ ence of a m ore highly differentiated consciousness. T o this is added, as a tertiary phenom enon testifying to a still higher level, the m oral qualification which declares the voice to be an evil spirit u n d er a ban. It goes w ithout saying that this th ird level is m arked by a belief in a “higher” and “good” G od who, though he has not finally disposed of his adversary, has nevertheless ren ­ dered him harmless for some tim e to come by im prisonm ent (Rev. 20 : 1-3). 248 Since at the present level of consciousness we cannot suppose that tree daemons exist, we are forced to assert th a t the prim itive suffers from hallucinations, that he hears his own unconscious which has projected itself into the tree. If this theory is correct— and I do n o t know how we could form ulate it otherwise today— then the second level of consciousness has effected a differentia­ tion between the object “tree” and the unconscious content pro­ jected into it, thereby achieving an act of enlightenm ent. T h e th ird level rises still higher and attrib u tes “ evil” to the psychic content w hich has been separated from the object. Finally a fourth level, the level reached by o u r consciousness today, car­ ries the enlightenm ent a stage fu rth er by denying the objective existence of the “spirit” and declaring th a t the prim itive has heard nothing at all, b u t merely had an auditory hallucination. Consequently the whole phenom enon vanishes into th in air— w ith the great advantage th at the evil spirit becomes obviously non-existent and sinks into ridiculous insignificance. A fifth level, however, which is b o u n d to take a quintessential view of the m atter, wonders about this conjurin g trick th at turns what began as a m iracle into a senseless self-deception— only to come full circle. Like the boy who told his father a made-up story ab o u t sixty stags in the forest, it asks: “B ut what, then, was all the rustling in the woods?” T h e fifth level is of the opinion that som ething did happen after all: even though the psychic content was n o t the tree, n o r a spirit in the tree, n o r indeed any sp irit at 200

all, it was n ev erth eless a p h e n o m e n o n th ru s tin g u p fro m th e u n ­ conscious, th e existence of w h ich ca n n o t be d en ied if o n e is m in d e d to g ra n t th e psyche any k in d of reality. I f one d id n o t do th a t, o n e w o u ld have to e x te n d G o d ’s creatio ex n ih ilo — w h ich seem s so o b n o x io u s to th e m o d e rn in tellect— very m u c h fu r th e r to in c lu d e steam engines, au to m o b iles, radios, an d every lib ra ry o n earth , all of w h ich w o u ld p resu m ab ly have arisen fro m u n ­ im ag in ab ly fo rtu ito u s co n g lo m eratio n s of atom s. T h e only th in g th a t w o u ld have h a p p e n e d is th a t th e C re a to r w o u ld have b e e n re n a m e d C o n g lo m eratio . 249 T h e fifth level assum es th a t th e u n conscious exists a n d has a re a lity ju s t lik e any o th e r ex isten t. H o w ev er o dious it m ay be, this m eans th a t th e “s p ir it” is also a reality , a n d th e “ev il” s p irit a t th a t. W h a t is even worse, th e d istin c tio n betw een “g o o d ” an d “ evil” is su d d en ly n o lo n g e r obsolete, b u t h ig h ly to pical an d necessary. T h e cru cial p o in t is th a t so lo n g as th e evil s p irit can­ n o t be p ro v ed to b e a su b jectiv e psychic ex p erien ce, th e n even trees a n d o th e r su ita b le objects w o u ld have, once again, to b e seriously co n sid ered as its lo d g in g places.

3. T H E PR O B L E M O F F R E E IN G M E R C U R IU S 250

W e w ill n o t pursue the paradoxical reality of the uncon­ scious any fu rth er now, b u t will re tu rn to the fairytale of the spirit in the bottle. As we have seen, the spirit M ercurius bears some resem blance to the “cheated devil.” T h e analogy, how­ ever, is only a superficial one, since, unlike the gifts of the devil, the gold of M ercurius does n o t tu rn to horse droppings b u t re­ m ains good m etal, and the magic rag does n o t tu rn to ashes by m orning b u t retains its healing power. N or is M ercurius tricked out of a soul th at he w anted to steal. H e is only tricked into his own b etter nature, one m ight say, in that the boy succeeds in b ottlin g him u p again in order to cure his bad m ood and make him tractable. M ercurius becomes polite, gives the young fellow a useful ransom and is accordingly set free. W e now hear about the stu d en t’s good fortune and how he became a w onder­ w orking doctor, b u t— strangely enough— n o th in g ab o u t the do­ ings of the liberated spirit, though these m ight be of some in ter­ est in view of the web of m eanings in which M ercurius, w ith his many-sided associations, entangles us. W h at happens w hen this pagan god, H erm es-M ercurius-W otan, is let loose again? Being a god of magicians, a spiritus vegetativus, and a storm daem on, he will hardly have re tu rn e d to captivity, and the fairytale gives us no reason to suppose th a t the episode of im prisonm ent has finally changed his nature to the pink of perfection. T h e b ird of H erm es has escaped from the glass cage, and in consequence som ething has lrappened which the experienced alchemist wished at all costs to avoid. T h a t is why he always sealed the stopper of his bottle w ith magic signs and set it for a very long tim e over the lowest fire, so that “he who is w ithin may no t fly ou t.” For if he escapes, the whole laborious opus comes to n o th ­ ing and has to be started all over again. O u r lad was a Sunday’s child and possibly one of the poor in spirit, on whom was be­ stowed a b it of the K ingdom of H eaven in th e shape of the self202

renew ing tincture, w ith reference to which it was said that the opus needed to be perform ed only once.1 B ut if he had lost the magic rag he w ould certainly never have been able to produce it a second tim e, by himself. It looks as though some M aster had succeeded in capturing the m ercurial spirit and then hid him in a safe place, like a treasure— perhaps p u ttin g him aside for some fu tu re use. H e may even have planned to tam e the w ild M ercurius to serve him as a w illing “fam iliar,” like M ephisto— such trains of thought are n o t strange to alchemy. Perhaps he was disagreeably surprised w hen he re tu rn e d to th e oak tree and found th at his b ird had flown. A t any rate, it m ight have been b etter not to have left the fate of the bottle to chance. 251 Be th a t as it may, the behaviour of the boy—successfully as it w orked o u t for him — m ust be described as alchem icalIy incor­ rect. A part from the fact th a t he may have infringed upon the legitim ate claims of an unknow n M aster by setting M ercurius free, he was also totally unconscious of w hat m ig h t follow if this tu rb u le n t spirit were let loose upon the world. T h e golden age of alchem y was the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth century. A t th a t tim e a storm bird did indeed escape from a spir­ itu al vessel which the daem ons m ust have felt was a prison. As I have said, the alchemists were all for n o t lettin g M ercurius es­ cape. T h e y w anted to keep him in the b o ttle in o rd e r to trans­ form him : for they believed, like Petasios, th a t lead (another arcane substance) was “so bedevilled and shameless th at all who wish to investigate it fall into madness through ignorance.” 2 T h e same was said of the elusive M ercurius w ho evades every grasp— a real trickster who drove the alchemists to despair.3 1 “For h e that shall end it once tor certeyne, / Shall never have need e to begin againe.”— N o rto n ’s “ O rdinall o f A lchim y,” T h ea tr. chem . B rit., ch. 4, p. 48. 2 O lym piodorus in B erthelot, A lch im istes grecs, II, iv, 43. 3 Cf. the entertain in g “ D ialogus M ercurii alchym istae et naturae,” in T h ea tr. chem ., IV (1659), p p . 4 4 9 s.

i. IN T R O D U C T O R Y 252

T h e interested reader will w ant, as I do, to find ou t more about this spirit— especially w hat o u r forefathers believed and said about him . I will therefore try w ith the aid of text citations to draw a picture of this versatile and shim m ering god as he ap­ peared to the masters of the royal art. For this purpose we m ust consult the abstruse literature of alchemy, which has not yet been properly understood. N aturally, in later times, the history of alchemy was m ainly of interest to the chemist. T h e fact that it recorded the discovery of m any chemical substances and drugs could not, however, reconcile him to the p itifu l meagreness, so it seemed to him , of its scientific content. H e was n o t in the position of the older authors, such as Schmieder, who could look on the possibility of goldm aking w ith hopeful esteem and sym­ pathy; instead he was irritated by the futility of the recipes and the fraudulence of alchemical speculation in general. T o him alchemy was bound to seem a gigantic aberration th at lasted for m ore than two thousand years. H ad he only asked himself w hether the chem istry of alchemy was authentic or not, th at is, w hether the alchemists were really chemists or merely spoke a chemical jargon, then the texts themselves w ould have suggested a line of observation other than the purely chemical. T h e scien­ tific eq u ipm ent of the chem ist does not, however, fit him to p u r­ sue this other line, since it leads straight into the history of reli­ gion. T h u s it was a philologist, R eitzenstein, w hom we have to thank for prelim inary researches of the greatest value in this field. I t was he w ho recognized the m ythological and Gnostic ideas em bedded in alchemy, thereby opening u p the whole sub­ ject from an angle which promises to be m ost fru itfu l. For al­ chemy, as the earliest Greek and Chinese texts show, originally form ed p a rt of Gnostic philosophical speculations which also in ­ cluded a detailed knowledge of the techniques of the goldsm ith and ironsm ith, the faker of precious stones, the druggist and 204

a53

apothecary. In East and W est alike, alchem y contains as its core the G nostic doctrine of the A nthropos and by its very n a tu re has the character of a peculiar doctrine of redem ption. T h is fact necessarily escaped the chemist, although it is expressed clearly enough in the G reek and L atin texts as well as in the Chinese of ab o u t the same period. T o begin w ith, of course, it is alm ost impossible for o u r sci­ entifically trained m inds to feel their way back in to th at p rim i­ tive state of participation m ystique in which subject and object are identical. H ere the findings of m odern psychology stood me in very good stead. Practical experience shows us again and again th a t any prolonged preoccupation w ith an unknow n object acts as an almost irresistible b a it for the unconscious to project itself in to the unknow n n a tu re of the object and to accept the resu lt­ a n t perception, and the in terp retatio n deduced from it, as ob­ jective. T h is phenom enon, a daily occurrence in practical psy­ chology and m ore especially in psychotherapy, is w ith o u t d o u b t a vestige of prim itivity. O n the prim itive level, the whole of life is governed by anim istic assum ptions, th a t is, by projections of subjective contents into objective situations. For exam ple, Karl von den Steinen says th a t the Bororos th in k of themselves as re d cockatoos, although they readily ad m it th a t they have no feathers.1 O n this level, the alchem ists’ assum ption th a t a cer­ tain substance possesses secret powers, o r th at there is a prirna materia somewhere which works m iracles, is self-evident. T h is is, however, n o t a fact th a t can be understood or even thought of in chemical terms, it is a psychological phenom enon. Psychol­ ogy, therefore, can m ake an im p o rtan t co n trib u tio n towards elucidating the alchem ists’ m entality. W hat to the chemist seem to be the absurd fantasies of alchemy can be recognized by the psychologist w ithout too m uch difficulty as psychic m aterial con­ tam inated with chemical substances. T h is m aterial stems from the collective unconscious and is therefore identical w ith fantasy products th at can still be found today am ong both sick and healthy people who have never heard of alchemy. O n account of the prim itive character of its projections, alchemy, so barren a field for the chemist, is for the psychologist a veritable gold-m ine of m aterials which throw an exceedingly valuable light on the structure of the unconscious. IV o n den Steinen, U n ter den N a tu rvo lk ern Zentral-B rasiliens1 pp. 35¾!-, 51*.

205

254

Since in w h at follows I shall o ften re fe r to th e o rig in al texts, it m ig h t b e as w ell to say a few w ords a b o u t this lite ra tu re , some of w hich is n o t easily accessible. I shall leave o u t of acco u n t the few C hinese texts th a t have been tran slated , a n d shall on ly m en ­ tio n th a t T h e Secret o f th e G o ld en F low er, p u b lish e d by R ic h ­ a rd W ilh elm a n d myself, is rep resen tativ e of its class. N o r can I consider th e In d ia n “Q u ick silv er System.” 2 T h e W estern lite r­ a tu re I have used falls in to fo u r groups: 1. T e x ts by an cien t authors. T h is g ro u p com prises m ain ly G reek texts, w hich have b een ed ited by B erth elo t, a n d those tran sm itted by th e A rabs, likew ise ed ited by him . T h e y d ate from th e p erio d betw een th e first an d eig h th cen tu ries. 2. T e x ts by th e early L a tin ists. T h e m ost im p o rta n t of these are tran slatio n s from th e A rab ic (or H ebrew ?). R ece n t re­ search shows th a t m ost of these texts d eriv e fro m th e H a rra n ite school, w hich flourished u n til a b o u t 1050, an d was also, p ro b ­ ably, the source of th e C orpus H e rm e tic u m . T o this g ro u p be­ lo n g certain texts w hose A rab ic o rig in is d o u b tfu l b u t w hich at least show A rabic influence— fo r instance, th e “S u m m a perfectio n is” of G e b e r a n d th e A risto tle an d A vicenna treatises. T h is p erio d extends fro m th e n in th to th e th irte e n th cen tu ry . 3. T e x ts by th e later L a tin ists. T h ese com prise th e p rin ci­ pal g ro u p a n d ran g e from th e fo u rte e n th to th e sev en teen th century. 4. T e x ts in m o d ern E u ro p ea n languages. S ix teen th to sev­ e n te e n th centu ry . A fter th a t, alchem y fell in to d ecline, w hich is w hy I have only occasionally used eig h teen th -cen tu ry texts. 2 Cf. D eussen, A llgem ein e G eschichte d er P h ilo so p h ie, I, Part 3, pp. 336®. T his undoubtedly alchem ical philosophy belongs to the fairly late (m edieval) XJpaPuranas, more particularly to the M aheshvarapurana, hence to a doctrine prin­ cipally concerned w ith Shiva. “Para-da” (bestowing the Other Shore) signifies quicksilver.

2. M ER C U R 1U S AS Q U IC K SIL V E R A N D /O R W A T E R 255

M ercurius was first understood p retty well everywhere as hydrargyrum 1 (Hg), quicksilver o r argentum vivu m (Fr. vifargent or argent vive). As such, it was called vulgaris (common) and crudus. As a rule, m ercurius philosophicus was specifically distinguished from this, as an avowedly arcane substance that was sometimes conceived to be present in m ercurius crudus, and then, again, to differ from it com pletely. I t was the tru e object of the alchem ical procedure. Quicksilver, because of its fluidity an d volatility, was also defined as water. A p o p u lar saying is: “A qua m anus n o n m adefaciens” (the w ater th a t does no t make the hands wet).2 O th er designations are aqua vitae/ aqua alba,4 aqua sicca .5 T h e last designation, dry w ater, is paradoxical, for which reason I should like to call special atten tio n to it as char­ acterizing the n a tu re of the object described. A q u a septies distilIata (seven tim es distilled water) and aqueum su b tile6 point to the sublim ated (“sp iritu a l”) n atu re of the philosophic M er­ curius. M any treatises simply speak of M ercurius as w ater.7 T h e doctrine of the h u m id u m radicale (root-m oisture o r radical m oisture) underlies such designations as h u m id u m album ,8 hum iditas m axim e perm anens incom bustibilis et unctuosa and hum iditas radicalis.10 M ercurius is also said to arise from the m oisture like a vapour11 (which again points to his spiritual

,ΰ

1 From ύδωρ, 'w ater,’ and apyupos, ‘silv er .’ 2 E .g., H o g h e la n d e , “D e a lch em ia e d ifficu lta tib u s,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), p. 161. 3 “A q u a r iu m sa p ie n tu m ,” M u sa e u m h e r m e tic u m , p p . 84, 93. 4 Ib id ., p . 84. H e n c e also lac v ir g in is , n iv is , te r ra a lb a fo lia ta , m a g n e sia , etc. 6 H o g h e la n d e , p . 161. 6 M yliu s, P h ilo s o p h ia r e fo rm a ta , p . 176. T “N o v u m lu m e n ,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 581; “T ra cta tu s a u r e u s,” ib id ., p. 34; “ G loria m u n d i,” ib id ., p . 250; K h u n ra th , Von h y le a lisc h e n C haos, p . 214. &R o s a r iu m p h ilo s o p h o r u m , in A r tis a u rife ra e , II, p . 376. 9 " T ractatu s a u r e u s,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 39. 19 M yliu s, P h il, r e p , p . 31. 11 “G lo ria m u n d i,” p . 244.

ALCHEMICAL

STUDIES

nature), or to rule the water. 1 2 T h e "divine water" so often m e n t i o n e d in the Greek texts is quicksilver. 1 3 Mercurius as the arcane substance and golden tincture is indicated by the designation aqua aurea14 and by the description of the water as Mercurii caduceus.15 12 Aurora consurgens II, in Art. aurif., I, p. 189. T h i s text r e m a r k s t h a t the water is fire (p. 212). 13 Berthelot, Alch. grecs, IV, vii, 2. 14 Basilius Valentinus, "Practica," Mus. herm., p. 404. 15 Philaletha, " M e t a l l o r u m metamorphosis," ibid., p. 771, a n d " I n t r o i t u s a p e r t u s , " ibid., p. 654.

208

3- M E R C U R IU S AS F IR E *56

M any treatises define M ercurius sim ply as fire.1 H e is ignis elem entaris,2 noster naturalis ignis certissimus ,s which again in ­ dicates his “philosophic” nature. T h e aqua mercurialis is even a divine fire.4 T h is fire is “highly vaporous” (vaporosus).5 In ­ deed, M ercurius is really the only fire in the whole procedure.6 H e is an “ invisible fire, w orking in secret.” 7 O ne text says that the “h e a rt” of M ercurius is at the N o rth Pole and that he is like a fire (n o rth ern lights).8 H e is, in fact, as an o th er text says, “the universal and scintillating fire of the lig h t of n atu re, which car­ ries the heavenly spirit w ith in it.” 9 T h is passage is particularly im p o rtan t as it relates M ercurius to the lum en naturae, the source of mystical know ledge second only to the holy revelation of the Scriptures. Once m ore we catch a glimpse of the ancient role of H erm es as the god of revelation. A lthough the lum en naturae, as originally bestowed by G od u p o n his creatures, is not by n a tu re ungodly, its essence was nevertheless felt to be abys­ mal, since the ignis m ercurialis was also connected w ith the fires of hell. I t seems, however, th at the alchemists did no t u n d e r­ stand hell, o r its fire, as absolutely outside of G od or opposed to him , b u t rath er as an in tern al com ponent of the deity, which m ust indeed be so if G od is held to be a coincidentia opposi1 A u r o r a c o n su rg e n s II, in A r t . aurif., I, p . 212; D o rn , " C ongeries P aracelsicae,” T h e a t r . c h e m ., I (1659), p . 502; M yliu s, P h i l, ref., p . 245. 2 “V ia v e rita tis,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 200. 3 “ T r a c ta tu s a u reu s,” ib id ., p . 39. 4 “A q u a r iu m sa p ie n tu m ,” ib id ., p. 91. B Ib id ., p. go. β “T h e r e is n o fire in a ll th e w ork save M ercu riu s” (“F ons c h y m ica e v e r ita tis,” ib id ., p. 803). I “ M etall. m e ta m o r p h .,” ib id ., p . 766. 8 “A t th e P o le is th e h e a r t o f M ercu rius, w h ich is th e tru e fire, in w h ic h is th e re stin g p la c e o f h is L ord, sa ilin g th r o u g h th is great sea” (" In tro it. apert.," M u s . h e r m ., p. 655). A so m ew h a t ob scu re sym b olism ! 8 " A q u ariu m sa p .,” ib id ., p . 84.

toru m. T h e co n cep t of a n all-encom passing G od m u st neces­ sarily in c lu d e his opposite. T h e coincidentia, of course, m u st n o t be too radical o r too extrem e, otherw ise G od w o u ld cancel h im ­ self o u t.10 T h e p rin c ip le of th e coincidence of opposites m ust th erefo re be co m p leted by th a t of ab so lu te o p p o sitio n in o rder to a tta in fu ll p arad o x icality an d hence psychological validity. 257 T h e m e rc u rial fire is fo u n d in the “ cen tre of th e e a rth ,” or d rag o n ’s belly, in fluid form . B enedictus F ig u lu s w rites: “Visit th e cen tre of th e earth , th ere you w ill find the global fire.” 51 A n o th e r treatise says th a t this fire is th e “secret, in fe rn a l fire, the w o n d er of the w orld, th e system of th e h ig h e r pow ers in the low er.” 12 M ercurius, th e revelatory lig h t of n a tu re , is also hellfire, w hich in som e m iracu lo u s way is n o n e o th e r th a n a re ­ arra n g e m e n t of th e heavenly, sp iritu al pow ers in th e lower, ch th o n ic w orld of m atter, th o u g h t already in St. P au l's tim e to be ru le d by th e devil. H ell-fire, the tru e energic p rin c ip le of evil, appears h ere as th e m anifest c o u n te rp a rt of th e sp iritu al a n d the good, an d as essentially id en tical w ith it in substance. A fter th at, it can surely cause n o offence w h en a n o th e r treatise says th a t th e m e rc u ria l fire is th e “ fire in w h ich G od him self b u rn s in d iv in e love.” 13 W e are n o t deceiving ourselves if we feel in scattered rem ark s of this k in d th e b re a th of tru e m ysti­ cism. 258 Since M ercu riu s is h im self of fiery n a tu re , fire does n o t h arm him : he rem ain s u n ch an g e d w ith in it, rejo icin g like th e sala­ m a n d e r.14 I t is unnecessary to p o in t o u t th a t q uicksilver does n o t behave like this b u t vaporizes u n d e r h eat, as th e alchem ists them selves knew fro m very early tim es. 10 T h is is a p u re ly p sy ch o lo g ica l e x p la n a tio n h a v in g to d o w ith h u m a n c o n c ep ­ tio n s a n d sta tem en ts a n d n o t w ith th e u n fa th o m a b le B ein g. 11 F igu lu s, R osariu m , n o v u m o ly m p ic u m , P ars I, p . 71. T h is is th e “d o m u s ig n is id e m E n o c h .” Cf. "Paracelsus as a S p iritu a l P h e n o m e n o n ,” supra, par. 186. 12 “Ign is in fe rn a lis secretus . . . m u n d i m ira cu lu m , v irtu tu m su p erioru m in inferiorib u s system a” (“In tro it. a p ert.,” p. 654). 13 “Ig n is in q u o D eu s ip se ardet am ore d iv in o ” (“G loria m u n d i,” p. 246). 14 “F or it is h e w h o overcom es th e fire, an d is h im se lf n o t overcom e by th e fire, b u t rests in it as a frien d , rejo icin g in i t ” (G eber, “Sum m a p e r fec tio n is,” D e a lc h e m ia , cap. L X III, p . 139).

SlO

4· M E R C U R IU S AS S P IR IT A N D SO U L

260

If M ercurius had been understood simply as quicksilver, there w ould obviously have been no need for any of the appella­ tions I have listed. T h e fact th at this need arose points to the conclusion th a t one sim ple and unm istakable term in no way sufficed to designate w hat the alchemists had in m ind w hen they spoke of M ercurius. I t was certainly quicksilver, b u t a very special quicksilver, “o u r” M ercurius, the essence, m oisture, or principle b ehind or w ithin the quicksilver—that indefinable, fascinating, irritating, and elusive th in g which attracts an u n ­ conscious projection. T h e “philosophic” M ercurius, this servus fu g itivu s or ceruus fu g itivu s (fugitive slave o r stag), is a highly im p o rtan t unconscious content which, as may be gathered from the few hints we have given, threatens to ram ify into a set of farreaching psychological problem s. T h e concept swells danger­ ously and we begin to perceive th at the end is now here in sight. T h erefo re we w ould ra th e r n o t tie this concept prem aturely to any special m eaning, b u t shall content ourselves w ith stating that the philosophic M ercurius, so dear to the alchem ist as the transform ative substance, is obviously a projection of the u n con­ scious, such as always takes place when the in q u irin g m in d lacks the necessary self-criticism in investigating an unknow n q u a n ­ tity. As has already been indicated, the psychic n a tu re of the ar­ cane substance did not escape the alchemists; indeed, they actu­ ally defined it as “sp irit” and “soul.” B ut since these concepts— especially in earlier times— were always am biguous, we m ust ap ­ proach them w ith caution if we w ant to gain a m oderately clear idea of w hat the terms spiritus and anim a m ean t in alchem ical usage.

A. M ERCURIUS AS AN AERIAL SPIRIT

261

Hermes, originally a w ind god, and his co u n terp art the Egyptian T h o th , who “makes the souls to b reath e,” 1 are the forerunners of the alchem ical M ercurius in his aerial aspect. T h e texts often use the terms pneum a and spiritus in the origi­ nal concrete sense of “air in m otion.” So when M ercurius is de­ scribed in the Rosarium philosophorum (fifteenth century) as aereus an d volans2 (winged), and in H oghelande (sixteenth century) as totus aereus et spiritualisp w hat is m ean t is n o th ­ ing m ore than a gaseous state of aggregation. Som ething sim ilar is m eant by the poetic expression serenitas aerea in the R ipley Scrowle/ and by the same au th o r’s statem ent th at M ercurius is changed into w ind.5 H e is the lapis elevatus cum vento (the stone uplifted by the w ind).6 T h e expressions spirituale cor­ pus7 and spiritus visibilis, tam en im palpabilis8 (visible yet im ­ palpable spirit) m ight also m ean little m ore than “a ir” if one recalls the aforem entioned vapour-like n atu re of M ercurius, and the same is probably true even of the spiritus prae cunctis valde puruss (pre-em inently pure spirit). T h e designation incom ~ bustibilis10 is m ore doubtful, since this was often synonymous w ith incorruptibilis and then m eant “eternal,” as we shall see later. Penotus (sixteenth century), a pupil of Paracelsus, stresses the corporeal aspect when he says that M ercurius is “n othing other than the spirit of the w orld become body w ithin the earth .” 11 T h is expression shows b etter th an anything else the contam ination— inconceivable to the m odern m ind— of two sep­ arate realms, spirit and m atter; for to people in the M iddle Ages 1 T h is characteristic o£ M ercu riu s is stressed in A u r o ra con su rgen s II, in A r t. a u rif., I, p p . 146 an d 190: “ H e m akes th e n ostrils [of the foetu s] in th e fifth m o n th .” 2 R o sa r iu m , p p . 252, 271. 3 T h e a tr u m c h e m ic u m , I (1659), p . 169. 4 16th cen t. B ritish M useum , MS. A d d. 10302. 6 R ip le y , O p e ra , p . 35. 6 “T ra cta tu s au reu s,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 3g. 7 R o sa r iu m , p . 282. 8 B a siliu s V a le n tin u s, "P ractica,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 404. 8 “In tro it. a p ert.,” ib id ., p . 654. 10 R o sa r iu m , p . 252. H T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), P· 600.

the spiritus m u n d i was also the sp irit which rules nature, and n o t ju st a pervasive gas. W e find ourselves in the same dilem m a w hen an o th er author, M ylius, in his Philosophia reformata ,12 describes M ercurius as an “ interm ediate substance” (m edia su b ­ stantia ), which is evidently synonymous w ith his concept of the anima m edia natura 13 (soul as interm ediate nature), for to him M ercurius was the “spirit and soul of the bodies.” 14 B. M E R C U R IU S AS SO UL 262

a63

“ Soul” represents a higher concept than “sp irit” in the sense of air o r gas. As the “subtle body” or “breath-soul” it means som ething non-m aterial and finer than m ere air. Its essential characteristic is to anim ate and be anim ated; it therefore re p re ­ sents the life principle. M ercurius is often designated as anima (hence, as a fem inine being, he is also called foem ina or virgo), or as nostra a n im a .15 T h e nostra here does n o t m ean “o u r ow n” soul b u t, as in aqua Uostraj M ercurius noster, corpus nostrum , refers to the arcane substance. H ow ever, anim a often appears to be connected w ith spiritus, or is equated w ith i t .16 For the spirit shares the living quality of the soul, and for this reason M ercurius is often called the spiritus vegetativu s 17 (spirit of life) o r spiritus sem inalis .18 A peculiar appellation is found in th a t seventeenth-century for­ gery which p u rports to be the secret book of A braham Ie Juif, m entioned by Nicolas FIameI (fourteenth century). T h e ep ith et is spiritus P hytonis (from φ ύω , ‘to procreate,’ φ υ τ ό ν , ‘creatu re,’ φ ύ τ ω ρ , ‘procreator,’ and Python, the D elphic serpent), and is ac­ com panied by the serpent sign: -T i. . 19 Very m uch m ore m aterial is the definition of M ercurius as a “life-giving power like a 12 P. 183.

13 P- 1914 P . 308. 15 “T ra c ta tu s au re u s," M u s . herrn., p . 39. I® M ylius, P h il, ref., p. 308: "(M e rc u riu s est) sp iritu s e t a n im a c o rp o ris.” T h e sam e in V e n tu ra , T h e a tr . ch em ., I I (1659), p . 282, a n d in " T ra c ta tu s M icreris," ib id ., V (1660), p . 92. 11 A egidius d e V adis, ibid ., I I (1659), p . 106. 18 P h ila le th a , “ M etall. m e ta m o rp h .,’’ M u s. h erm ., p . 766. I» A b ra h a m E leazar, U raltes C hym isches W erck1 p p . 2gff. "P h y to n is th e life of a ll th in g s,” p. 34,

glue, holding the w orld together and standing in the m iddle betw een body and spirit.” 20 T h is concept corresponds to M ylius’ definition of M ercurius as the anim a media natura. From here it is b u t a step to the identification of M ercurius w ith the anima m u n d i,21 which is how A vicenna had defined him very m uch earlier (tw elfth to th irteen th century). “ H e is the sp irit of the L ord which fills the whole w orld and in the beginning swam upon the waters. T h ey call him also the spirit of T ru th , which is hidden from the w orld.” 22 A nother text says th at M ercurius is the “supracelestial spirit which is conjoined w ith the light, an d rightly could be called the anim a m u n d i." 23 It is clear from a n u m b er of texts th a t the alchemists related th e ir concept of the anim a m u n d i on the one hand to the w orld soul in P lato’s Tim aeus and on the other to the H oly Spirit, who was present at the C reation and played the role of procreator (φύτωρ), im­ pregnating the waters with the seed of life just as, later, he played a sim ilar role in the obum bratio (overshadowing) of M ary.24 Elsewhere we read that a “life-force dwells in M ercurius non vulgaris, who flies like solid w hite snow. T h is is a spirit of the macrocosmic as of the microcosmic world, u p o n whom, after the anim a rationalis, the m otion and fluidity of h u m an n atu re itself depends.” 25 T h e snow represents the purified M ercurius in the state of albedo ( = spirituality); here again m atter and spirit are identical. W orth noting is the duality of soul caused by the presence of M ercurius: on the one hand the im m ortal anima rationalis given by G od to m an, which distinguishes him from anim als; on the other hand the m ercurial life-soul, which to all appearances is connected w ith the inflatio or inspiratio of the H oly Spirit. T h is fundam ental duality forms the psychological basis of the two sources of illum ination. 20 H a p p e liu s, “A p h o r ism i B a silia n i,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV (1659), p. 327. 21 V e ru s H e r m e s (1620). 22 “A q u a riu m sap .,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 85. 23 Steeb, C o e lu m S e p h iro tic u m , p . 33. 24 Ib id ., p. 39. 2 5 H a p p e liu s, loc. cit.

THE

SPIRIT

MERCURIUS

C. M E R C U R I U S AS S P I R I T I N INCORPOREAL,

264

METAPHYSICAL

THE SENSE

I n m a n y of the passages it remains d o u b t f u l whether spiritus means spirit in an abstract sense. 2 0 It is moderately certain that this is so in D o r n , for he says that "Mercurius possesses the quality of an incorruptible spirit, which is like the soul, and because of its incorruptibility is called intellectual" 2 7 —i.e., pertaining to the munaus intelligibilis. O n e text expressly calls him "spiritual and hyperphysical," 28 and another says that the spirit of Mercurius comes from heaven. 2 9 Laurentius Ventura (sixteenth century) may well have b e e n associating himself with the "Platonis liber quartorum" a n d h e n c e w i t h the neo-Platonist ideas of the Harranite school w h e n he defined the spirit of Mercurius as "completely and entirely like itself" (sibi omnino similis) and s i m p l e x , 30 for this Harranite text defines the arcane substance as the res simplex and equates it w i t h God. 3 1 Ostanes q u o t a t i o n of considerable antiquity tian), w h i c h says: "Go to the streamings of you will find a stone that has a spirit." 32 In is characterized as incorporeal , 33

(possibly pre-Christhe N i l e , and there Zosimos Mercurius and by another au-

thor as ethereal and as having b e c o m e rational or wise . 3 i I n the very o l d treatise "Isis to H o r u s " (first century) the divine water is brought by an angel and is clearly of celestial or possibly d a e m o n i c origin, since according to the text the angel A m n a e l w h o brings it is not a morally irreproachable figure.35 For the alchemists, as we k n o w n o t only from the ancient b u t also from the later writers, 26 F o r i n s t a n c e , D j a b i r i n B e r t h e l o t , Chimie au rnoyen age, I I I , p . 169; Rosarium, i n Art. aurif., I I , p . 339; H o g h e l a n d e , Theatr. chem., I {1602), p p . 153, 183. 27 Theatr. chem., I (1659), p . 419. T h e s a m e i n R i p l e y , " A x i o m a t a , " ibid., II (1659), p . 123. 28 " T r a c t a t u s a u r e u s , " Mus. herm., p . 11. H e r e c i t e d f r o m V a l e n t i n u s . 28 Steeb, Coelum Sephiroticum, p. 137. 30 Theatr. chem., I I (1659), p. 231. 31 I b i d . , V (1660), p. 129. 32 B e r t h e l o t , Alch. grecs, I I I , vi, 5. 33 I b i d . , I l l , xxviii, 5. 34 I b i d . , IV, vii, 2. 35 I b i d . , I, xiii, 3. [Cf. s u p r a , " T h e Visions of Zosimos," pars. 9 7 s . ] 215

»66

M ercurius as the arcane substance had a m ore or less secret con­ nection w ith the goddess of love. In the “ Book of Krates,” which was transm itted by the Arabs and is possibly of A lexandrian ori­ gin, A phrodite appears w ith a vessel from the m o u th of which pours a ceaseless stream of quicksilver,36 and in the Chymical W edding of C hristian Rosencreutz the central mystery is his visit to the secret cham ber of the sleeping Venus. T h e fact th at M ercurius is in terp reted as spirit and soul, in spite of the spirit-body dilem m a which this involves, indicates th a t the alchemists themselves conceived of th eir arcane sub­ stance as som ething th at we today w ould call a psychic phenom ­ enon. Indeed, whatever else spirit and soul may be, from the phenom enological point of view they are psychic structures. T h e alchemists never tired of draw ing atten tio n to the psychic n atu re of M ercurius. So far we have concerned ourselves with, statistically, the commonest synonyms such as w ater and fire, spirit and soul, and it is now possible for us to conclude that these exemplify a psychological state of affairs best characterized by (or, indeed, actually dem anding) an antinom ian nom encla­ ture. W ater and fire are classic opposites and can be valid defini­ tions of one and the same thing only if this thing unites in itself the contrary qualities of w ater and fire. T h e psychologem “Mercurius” m ust therefore possess an essentially antinom ian dual nature. 36 B erthelot, M oyen dge, III, p 63.

5· T H E D U A L N A T U R E O F M E R C U R IU S *67

M ercurius, follow ing the trad itio n of H erm es, is many-sided, changeable, and deceitful. D orn speaks of “th a t inconstant M er­ curius,’’ 1 and an o th er calls him versipellis (changing his skin, shifty).2 H e is d u p le x3 and his m ain characteristic is duplicity. I t is said of him th a t he “runs ro u n d the earth and enjoys equally the com pany of the good and the wicked.” 4 H e is “ two dragons,” 5 the “ tw in,” G m ade of “two n atu res” 7 o r “two sub­ stances.” s H e is the “giant of tw ofold substance,” in explanation of which the text^ cites the twenty-sixth chapter of M atthew , w here the sacram ent of the Last Supper is in stitu ted . T h e C hrist analogy is thus m ade plain. T h e two substances of M ercurius are thought of as dissim ilar, sometimes opposed; as the dragon he is “winged and wingless.” 10 A parable says: “ O n this m o u n tain lies an ever-waking dragon, w ho is called P antophthalm os, for he is covered w ith eyes on both sides of his body, before and behind, and he sleeps w ith some open and some closed.” 11 T h e re is the “com m on and the philosophic” M ercurius;12 he consists of “ the dry and earthy, the m oist and viscous.” 13 Tw o of his elem ents are passive, earth and w ater, and two active, air 1 T h e a tr. c h e m ., I (1659), p . 470. 2 A egidius de V adis, ib id ., I I (1659), p . 105. 3 “ A q u a riu m sap .,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 84; T re v isan u s, in T h e a tr . ch em ., I (1659), p . 695; M ylius, P h il, ref., p . 176. 4 “A u relia o ccu lta,” T h e a tr . ch em ., IV (1659), p. 506. 5 “ B revis m a n u d u c tio ,” M u s. h erm ., p . 788. 6 V alen tin u s, “ P ra ctice ,” ib id ., p . 425. I M ylius, P h il, ref., p . 18; “ E x e rc ita tio n e s in T u rb a m ," A r t. a u rif., I, p p . 159, 161. 8 D o rn , in T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), p . 420. 8 “A q u a riu m sap.,” M u s. h erm ., p . 111. [Cf. in fra , p a r. 384. n . 5.] 18 “S u m m a riu m p h ilo so p h ic u m ," ib id ., p p . t72f. I I Cf. th e snake vision of Ig n a tiu s L oyola a n d th e p o ly o p h th a lm ia m o tif discussed in “O n th e N a tu re o f th e Psyche,” p p . ig8f. 12 “T ra c ta tu s a u re u s ,” M u s. h erm ., p. 25. 13 "C o n siliu m co n iu g ii,” A rs chem ica (1566), p . 59. 217

a n d fire.14 H e is b o th g o o d a n d ev il.15 T h e “A u re lia o c c u lta ” gives a g ra p h ic d e s c rip tio n of h im :18 I am the poison-dripping dragon, who is everywhere an d can be cheaply had. T h a t u p o n w hich I rest, and th a t w hich rests u p o n me, will be found w ith in me by those who pursue th eir investigations in accordance w ith the rules of the A rt. My w ater and fire destroy and p u t together; from my body you may extract the green lion and the red. B ut if you do n o t have exact knowledge of me, you will destroy your five senses w ith my fire. From my snout there comes a spreading poison th a t has b ro u g h t d eath to many. T h erefo re you should skil­ fully separate the coarse from the fine, if you do not wish to suffer u tte r poverty. I bestow on you the powers of the m ale an d the fe­ male, and also those of heaven and of earth. T h e mysteries of my art m ust be h an d led w ith courage an d greatness of m in d if you w ould conquer me by the pow er17 of fire, for already very m any have come to grief, th eir riches an d lab o u r lost. I am the egg of nature, know n only to the wise, who in piety an d modesty b rin g fo rth from m e the microcosm, w hich was p rep ared for m an k in d by Alm ighty God, b u t given only to the few, w hile the m any long for it in vain, th a t they may do good to the poor w ith my treasure and n o t fasten th eir souls to the perishable gold. By the philosophers I am nam ed M ercurius; my spouse is the [philosophic] gold; I am the old dragon, found everywhere on the globe of the earth, fath er and m other, young and old, very strong an d very weak, d eath and resurrection, visible and invisible, h a rd an d soft; I descend in to the earth and ascend to the heavens, I am the highest an d the lowest, the lightest an d the heaviest; often the order of n atu re is reversed in me, as re­ gards colour, num ber, w eight, an d measure; I contain the light of nature; I am d ark an d light; I come fo rth from heaven and earth; I am know n and yet do n o t exist a t all;18 by v irtu e of the su n ’s rays all colours shine in me, an d all metals. I am the carbuncle of the sun, the m ost noble purified earth , th ro u g h w hich you may change copper, iro n , tin, and lead in to gold. 268

B ecause of h is u n ite d d o u b le n a tu r e M e rc u riu s is d escrib e d as h e rm a p h ro d itic . S o m etim es h is b o d y is said to b e m a scu lin e a n d his so u l fe m in in e , so m etim es th e rev erse. T h e R osarium R o sa riu m , in A r t. a u rif., II, p. 208. K hunrath, H y I. Chaos, p. 218. 16 T h e a tr. chem ., IV (1659), p p . 5018:. i t I read v i in stead o f vim . I 8 T h is paradox recalls th e In d ia n asat (n on -existin g). Cf. C hhandogya U p an ish ad , VI, ii, 1 (Sacred B ooks o f th e East, II, p. 93). 14

15

218

philosophorum , for exam ple, has both versions.19 As vulgaris he is the dead m asculine body, b u t as “o u r” M ercurius he is fem i­ nine, spiritual, alive and life-giving.20 H e is also called husband and wife,21 bridegroom and bride, or lover and beloved.22 His contrary natures are often called M ercurius sensu strictiori and sulphur, the form er being fem inine, earth, and Eve, and the lat­ te r m asculine, water, and Adam 23 In D orn he is the “ true h er­ m aphroditic A dam ,” 24 and in K hunrath he is “begotten of the herm aphroditic seed of the M acrocosm” as “an im m aculate b irth from the herm aphroditic m atter” (i.e., the prim a materia).25 Mylius calls him the “herm aphroditic m onster.” 26 As Adam he is also the microcosm, or even “the h eart of the m icro­ cosm,” 27 or he has the microcosm “in himself, where are also the fo u r elem ents and the quinta essentia which they call H eaven.” 28 T h e term coelum for M ercurius does not, as one m ight think, derive from the firm am entum of Paracelsus, b u t occurs earlier in Johannes de Rupescissa (fourteenth century).29 T h e term hom o is used as a synonym for “microcosm,” as when M ercurius is nam ed the “ Philosophic am bisexual M an.” 30 In the very old “D icta B elini” (Belinus o r Balinus is a corruption of A pollonius of Tyana), he is the “m an rising from the river,” 31 probably a reference to the vision of Ezra.32 In T rism o sin ’s Splendor solis (sixteenth century) there is an illustration of this.33 T h e idea itself may go back to the B abylonian teacher of xvisdom, Oannes. T h e designation of M ercurius as the “high 19 A r t. a u r if., II, p p . 239, 249. 20 “In tro it. a p e r t.,” M u s. h erm ., p . 653. 21 “G loria m u n d i,” ib id ., p . 250. 22 A u r o ra con su rgen s I, P a ra b le V II. 23 R u la n d , L e x ic o n a lc h e m ia e , p . 47. 24 T h e a tr , c h e m ., I (1659), p . 510. 25 H y I. C haos, p . 62. 20 P h il, ref., p . 19. 27 H a p p e liu s in T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV (1659), p . 327. 28 P h il, ref., p . 5. 2S L a V e rtu e t p r o p r ie te d e la q u in te essence, p. 15. T h e " m etal o f th e p h ilo s­ o p h er s” w ill b e c o m e lik e “h e a v e n ,” says th e “T r a cta tu s M icreris,” T h e a tr . ch em .,

V (1660), p . 100. 30 K h u n rath , H y l. C haos, p . ig s . 31 M an get, B ib lio th e c a c h e m ic a , I, p . 478b. 3 2 IV Ezra 13 : 25-53. Cf. C harles, A p o c r y p h a a n d P s e u d e p ig r a p h a , I I , p p . 6 i8 f. 33 In A u r e u m v e llu s (1598), T r a c t 3: S p le n d o r S olis (1920 fa csim ile), p . 23, PI. V III.

m an ” 34 does n o t fit in badly w ith such a pedigree. T h e terms A dam and m icrocosm occur freq u en tly in the tex ts ,35 but the A braham Ie J u if forgery u n b lu sh in g ly calls M ercurius A dam K adm on . 30 As I have discussed this u n m istakab le con tin u ation o f the G nostic doctrin e o f the A nthropos elsew h ere ,37 there is n o n eed for m e to go m ore closely n ow in to this aspect of M ercurius .38 N evertheless, I w ould lik e to em phasize once again that the A nthropos idea coincides w ith the psychological con cep t of the self. T h e atm an and purusha d octrin e as w ell as alchem y give clear proofs o f this. s09 A n oth er aspect o f the dual nature o f M ercurius is his char­ acterization as sen ex 39 and p u e r .40 T h e figure of H erm es as an old m an, attested by archaeology, brings h im in to direct relation w ith Saturn— a relation sh ip w hich plays a considerable role in alchem y (see infra, pars. 274ff.). M ercurius truly consists of the m ost extrem e opposites; on the on e hand he is u n d ou b ted ly akin to the godhead, on the other he is fou n d in sewers. R osinus (Zosimos) even calls h im the te rm in u s a n i.41 In th e B u n dah ish ,42 the anus of G arotm an is ‘‘lik e h ell on earth.” R u la n d , L exico n alchem iae, p. 47. Jo h n Dee in T h e a tr. chem ., II (1659), p. 195; R o sa riu m , in A rt. aurif., II, p. 309. 3 8 Eleazar, V ralles Chym isches W erck, p. 51. A dam K adm on is th e P rim o rd ial M an; cf. M yste rtu m C oniunetionis, ch. V. 3 7 “ Paracelsus as a S p iritu al P henom enon,” sup ra, pars. 165(!., an d Psychology a n d A lch em y, index, s.v. 38 G ayom art also is a k in d o f vegetation n u m e n like M ercurius, an d like him fertilizes his m o th er, th e ea rth . A t th e place w here his life cam e to an end th e e a rth tu rn e d to gold, a n d w here his lim bs d isin teg rated various m etals ap peared. Cf. C hristensen, Les T yp es d u p rem ier h o m m e et d u p rem ier roi dans Vhistoire legendaire des Iraniens, p p . 26, 29. 39 Senex draco in V alentinus, "P ractica,” M us. kerm ., p. 425. In Verus H erm es (1620), pp. 15, 16, M ercurius is also designated w ith th e G nostic n am e ‘'F ath erM o th er.” 4 0 “D e a rte chim ica,” A rt. aurif., I, p. 581. R eg iu s p u e llu s in “ In tro it. ap e rt.,” M us. herm ., p p . 678, 655. 4 1 A rt. aurif., I, p. 310. H e re it is th e stone id en tical w ith M ercurius th at is so called. T h e context disallows the rea d in g "a n n i.” T h e passage w hich follows soon afte r, “n ascitu r in d u o b u s m o n tib u s,” refers to th e “T ra c ta tu s A ristotelis” ('T h e a tr. chem ., V, 1660, p p . 787!!.), w here th e act o f d efecation is described. (Cf. supra, “Paracelsus as a S p iritu al P h en o m en o n ,” p ar. 182, n . 61.) C orrespond­ ing illu stratio n s for A urora consurgens m ay be fo u n d in th e C odex R henoviensis. 4 2 Ch. X X V III. Cf. R eitzenstein a n d Schaeder, S tu d ien zu m a n tik e n Synkretism us aus Iran u n d G riechenland, p. 119.

84

38

6. T H E U N IT Y A N D T R IN IT Y OF M E R C U R IU S 270

In spite of his obvious duality the u n ity of M ercurius is also emphasized, especially in his form as the lapis. “In all the world he is O ne.” 1 T h e unity of M ercurius is at the same tim e a trinity, w ith clear reference to the H oly T rin ity , although his triadic n a tu re does not derive from C hristian dogma b u t is of earlier date. T riad s occur as early as the treatise of Zosimos, irtpi aperijs (C oncerning the A rt).2 M artial calls H erm es omnia solus et ter unus (All and T h rice O ne).3 In M onakris (Arcadia), a three-headed H erm es was w orshipped, and in G aul there was a three-headed M ercurius.4 T h is G allic god was also a psychopomp. T h e triadic character is an a ttrib u te of the gods of the u n d er­ w orld, as for instance the three-bodied T y p h o n , three-bodied and three-faced H ecate,5 and the “ancestors” (τριτοπάτορβτ) w ith th eir serpent bodies. A ccording to Cicero,6 these latter are the three sons of Zeus the King, the rex antiquissimusJ T h ey are called the “forefathers” and are wind-gods;8 obviously by the same logic the H o p i Indians believe th at snakes are at the same tim e flashes of lightning auguring rain. K h u n rath calls Mercurius triunus9 and ternarius.10 M ylius represents him as a three1 R o s a r i u m , in A r t . a u r i f . , II , p . 253. 2 B e r t h e lo t , A l c h . g r e c s , I I I , v i, 18: “ T h e u n it y o f th e c o m p o s it io n [p r o d u c e s] th e in d iv is ib le tr ia d , a n d t h u s a n u n d iv id e d t r ia d c o m p o s e d o f se p a r a te e le m e n t s c r e a te s t h e c o sm o s, t h r o u g h t h e f o r e t h o u g h t [προνοίς.] o f t h e F ir st A u t h o r , t h e c a u se a n d d e m iu r g e o f c r e a tio n ; w h e r e fo r e h e is c a lle d T r is m e g is t o s , h a v in g b e ­ h e l d t r ia d ic a lly th a t w h ic h is c r e a te d a n d th a t w h ic h crea tes." 3 E p i g r a m m a t a , V , 24. * R e in a c h , C u l t e s , m y t h e s e t r e l i g i o n s , I I I , p p . r 6 o f. 5 S c h w e itz e r , H e r a k l e s , p p . 84(!. 6 D e n a t u r a d e o r u m , 3, 2 1 , 53. 7 T h e r e is a lso a Z e u s t r i o p s . 8 R o s c h e r , L e x i c o n , V , c o l. 1208. 9 H y L C h a o s , p p . 6 a n d 199. 10 I b id ., p . 203.

h eaded snake.11 T h e “A q u a riu m sap ie n tu m ” says th at he is a “ triu n e , universal essence w hich is nam ed Jeh o v a.12 H e is divine a n d at the same tim e h u m a n .” 13 27l f r o m all this one m ust conclude th a t M ercurius corresponds n o t only to C hrist, b u t to th e triu n e d iv in ity in general. T h e “A u re lia o ccu lta” calls h im “A zoth,” a n d explains th e term as follows: “ F o r he is the A an d O th a t is everyw here p resen t. T h e philosophers have a d o rn ed [him ] w ith th e n am e A zoth, which is c o m p o u n d ed of th e A and Z of the L atins, th e a lp h a and om ega of th e G reeks, a n d th e aleph a n d ta u of th e H ebrew s:

T h e p arallel w ith th e T r in ity co u ld n o t be m ore clearly in d i­ cated. T h e anonym ous co m m en tato r of the “T ra c ta tu s a u reu s” p u ts th e p arallel w ith C h rist as Logos ju st as unm istak ab ly . All things proceed from th e “ philosophic heaven a d o rn e d w ith an in fin ite m u ltitu d e of stars,” 13 from the creative W o rd in car­ n ate, the Jo h a n n in e Logos, w ith o u t w hich “was n o t any th in g m ade th a t was m ad e.” T h e c o m m e n tato r says: “T h u s th e W o rd of ren ew al is invisibly in h e re n t in all things, b u t it is n o t ev id en t in elem en tary solid bodies unless they have b een b ro u g h t back to th e fifth, or heavenly a n d astral essence. H en ce this W o rd of renew al is the seed of prom ise, o r th e philo so p h ic heaven re fu l­ g e n t w ith th e infinite lights of th e stars.” 18 M ercu riu s is the Logos becom e w orld. T h e d escrip tio n given h ere m ay p o in t to his basic id e n tity w ith th e collective unconscious, fo r as I tried to show in m y essay “ O n the N a tu re of the Psyche,” 17 th e im ­ age of th e starry heaven seems to be a visualization of th e pecul­ ia r n a tu re of the unconscious. Since M ercu riu s is often called filius, his sonship is beyond q u e stio n .18 H e is th erefo re like a I! Phil, ref., p. g6. 12 T his peculiar designation refers to the dem iurge, the saturnine Ialdabaoth, w ho was connected w ith the “God o f the Jews." 13 Mus. herm., p. 112. 14 T heatr. chem ., IV (1659), p. 507. ιε Ibid., p. 614. 16 Ibid., p. 615. 17 Pp. ig8f. 18 Cf. R osarium , in A rt. aurif., II, p. 248: “filius . . . coloris coelici" (cited from 222

272

b ro th e r to C hrist and a second son of God, though in p o in t of tim e he m ust be accounted the elder an d the first-born. T h is idea goes back to the conceptions of the Euchites rep o rted in M ichael Psellus,19 who believed th at G od’s first son was Satanael 20 and th at C hrist was the second.21 However, M ercurius is n o t only the co u n terp art of C hrist in so far as he is the “son” ; he is also the co u n terp art of the T rin ity as a whole in so far as he is conceived to be a chthonic triad. According to this view he w ould be equal to one half of the C hristian G odhead. H e is in ­ deed the dark chthonic half, b u t he is n o t simply evil as such, for he is called “good and evil,” or a “system of the higher powers in the low er.” H e calls to m in d th a t double figure which seems to stand b eh in d both C hrist and the devil— th at enigm atic Lucifer whose attributes are shared by both. In Rev. 22 : 16 C hrist says of himself: “I am the ro o t and the offspring of David, the b rig h t and the m orn ing star.” O ne peculiarity of M ercurius which u n d o u b ted ly relates him to the G odhead and to the prim itive creator god is his abil­ ity to beget himself. In the “A llegoriae super lib ru m T u rb a e ” he says: “T h e m other bore me and is herself begotten of m e.” 22 As the uroboros dragon, he im pregnates, begets, bears, devours, and slays himself, and “him self lifts him self on high,” as the R osarium says,23 so paraphrasing the mystery of G od’s sacrificial death. H ere, as in m any sim ilar instances, it w ould be rash to assume th at the alchemists were as conscious of th e ir reasoning processes as perhaps we are. B ut m an, and through h im the unH a ly ’s “S ecretu m ”); K h u n ra th , H y l. C haos, passim : "filiu s m acrocosm i,” p . 59: “ u n igen itu s" ; P e n o tu s in T h e a tr . c h e m ., I (1659), p . 601: “filiu s h o m in is , fru ctu s v ir g in is.” 1* D e d a e m o n ib u s (trans. M arsilio F icin o ), fo l. N . Vr. 20 Cf. th e rep ort o n th e B o g o m ils in E u th y m io s Z igabenos, “P a n o p lia d o g m a tic a ” (M ig n e, P .G ., v o l. 130, cols. i2gff.). 21 T h e d u a lity o f th e so n sh ip app ears to d a te back to th e E b io n ite s in E p ip h a n iu s: “T w o , th ey assert, w ere raised u p by G od , th e o n e (is) C h rist, th e o th e r th e d e v il” (P a n a riu m 1 X X X , 16, 2). 22 A r t. a u rif., I, p . 151. T h e sam e is said o f G od in th e C o n te s d e l G ra a l o f C h r itie n d e T royes: “ Ce d o in t ic il glor'ieus p ere Q u i d e sa fille fist sa m e re .” (H ilk a , D e r P e r c e v a lro m a n , p . 372.) 23 A r t. a u rif., II, p . 339.

conscious, expresses a great deal th a t is n o t necessarily conscious in all its im plications. N evertheless I sh o u ld lik e to avoid giving th e im pression th a t the alchem ists w ere ab so lu tely unconscious of th e ir thought-processes. H o w little this was so is proved by the above q u o tatio n s. B u t a lth o u g h M ercurius, in m any texts, is stated to be trinus e t Unusj this does n o t p re v e n t h im from shar­ ing very strongly th e qu a tern ity of the lapis, w ith w hich he is essentially identical. H e thus exem plifies th a t strange dilem m a w hich is posed by the p ro b le m of th re e a n d fo u r— th e wellk now n axiom of M aria P rophetissa. T h e re is a classical H e rm es tetracephalus as w ell as th e H e rm e s tricephalus.2i T h e groundplan of the Sabaean tem ple of M ercuriu s was a trian g le inside a sq u a re .25 In the scholia to th e “T ra c ta tu s a u re u s” th e sign for M ercurius is a square inside a trian g le su rro u n d e d by a circle (sym bol of to tality).26 2 * S ch w eitzer, H e r a k le s , p . 84. 2 5 C h w o lso h n , D ie S s a b ie r u n d d e r S sa b ism u s, II, p . 367. 2 6 B ib I. c h e m ., I, p . 40Q.

η. T H E R E L A T IO N O F M E R C U R IU S T O A S T R O L O G Y A N D T H E D O C T R IN E OF T H E ARCHON S «73

O ne of the roots of the peculiar philosophy relatin g to Mercurius lies in ancient astrology and in the Gnostic doctrine of the archons and aeons, w hich is derived from it. Between Mercurius and the planet there is a relatio n of mystical id en tity due e ith er to contam ination or to an actual spiritual identity. In the first case quicksilver is simply the plan et M ercury as it appears in the earth (just as gold is simply the sun in the earth );1 in the second, the “sp irit” of quicksilver is identical w ith the planetary spirit. Both spirits individually, or the two as one spirit, were personified and called upon for aid o r magically conjured in to service as a paredros or “fam iliar.” W ith in the alchem ical tra d i­ tion we find directions for such procedures in the H arran ite treatise “ Clavis m aioris sapientiae” of A rtefius,2 which agree w ith descriptions of the invocations m entioned by Dozy and de G oeje.3 T h e re are also references to procedures of this k in d in the "L ib e r Platonis q u a rto ru m .” * Parallel w ith this is the account according to which D em ocritus received the secret of the hieroglyphs from the genius of the p lan et M ercury.5 T h e spirit M ercurius appears here in the role of a mystagogue, as in the Corpus H e rm e tic u m or the visions of Zosimos. H e plays the same role in the rem arkable dream-vision recorded in “A urelia occulta,” w here he appears as the A nthropos w ith a crown of stars.® As the little star n ear the sun, he is the child of sun and 1 M aier, C irculus ph ysicu s qu adratu s, pp. 15ft. 2 T h eatr. chem ., IV (1659), pp. ig8ff. 3 “N ouveau x docum ents pour l ’etu d e de la religion des H arraniens,” p. 341. 4 T h ea tr. chem ., V (1660), pp. io iff. 6 B erthelot, A lch . grecs, Introduction, p. 236. β T h ea tr. chem ., IV (1659), p. 510. [Supra, par. 106.] H e corresponds to the stella sem p tem p lex w hich appears at the end of the work. “. . . cook, u n til the seven­ fold star appears, ru n n in g ab ou t through the sphere” (ibid., p. 508). Cf. the early

225

m oon .7 B ut contrariw ise he is also the begetter o f his parents;8 or, as the treatise of W ei Po-yang (c. a .d . 142) rem arks, the gold (sun) gets its q u alities from M ercurius.6 (O w in g to the contam i­ n ation, the astrological m yth is always th ou gh t of in chem ical terms as w ell.) Because of his h alf-fem in ine nature, M ercurius is often id en tified w ith the m o o n 10 and V en u s.11 As his own d ivin e consort he easily turns in to the goddess of love, just as in his role o f H erm es he is ithyphallic. B u t he is also called the “m ost chaste v irg in .” 12 T h e relation o f quicksilver to the m oon (silver) is obvious en ou gh . M ercurius as the sh in in g and shim ­ m erin g p lanet, appearing lik e V enus close to the sun in the m orn in g or ev en in g sky, is lik e her a L ucifer, a light-bringer (φώσφοροί). H e heralds, as the m o rn in g star does, o n ly m uch m ore directly, the co m in g of the light. 274 B ut the m ost im portant of all for an in terp retation o f Mercurius is his relation to Saturn. M ercurius senex is id en tical w ith Saturn, and to the earlier alchem ists especially, it is n o t quick­ silver, b u t the lead associated w ith Saturn, w h ich u sually repreC h ris tia n id e a o f C h ris t as th e le a d e r o f th e “ r o u n d d a n c e ’’ o f th e stars. (“ T r a n s ­ fo rm a tio n S ym bolism in th e M ass,” p p . 273ff.) 7 “T a b u la sm a ra g d in a ," R o s a r iu m , in A r t. a u rif., II, p . 253, a n d M y liu s, P h il, ref., p . 101. 8 "A lle g o ria e s u p e r Iib ru m T u r b a e ,” A r t. a u rif., I, p . 155: “o rig o S olis”; V e n tu ra , T h e a tr . c h em ., I I (1659), p . 296: “T h e s u n rises to g e th e r w ith th e m o o n in th e b e lly of M e rc u riu s .” 9 W e i P o -y an g , “A n A n c ie n t C h in ese T r e a tis e ,” p . 241. id “E p isto la a d H e r m a n n u m ,” T h e a tr . ch e m ., V (1660), p . 800; “ G lo ria m u n d i,” M u s . h e rm ., p p . 224, 244. As th e a rc a n e su b s ta n c e m a g n e s ia h e is c a lle d th e “ fu ll m o o n ” (R o s a r iu m , in A r t. a u rif., II, p . 231) a n d su ccu s lu n a ria e (p. 211). H e h as fa lle n d o w n fro m th e m o o n (B e rth e lo t, A lc h . grecs, I I I , vi, g). T h e sig n fo r M e rc u riu s is in th e “B ook o f K ra te s ” (B e rth e lo t, M o y e n age, I I I , p . 48). In th e G reek M agic P a p y ri, H e rm e s is in v o k e d as “ circle o f th e m o o n ” (P re ise n d an z , P a p y ri G raecae M a g ica e, I, p . 195). 11 V ision of K ra te s in B e rth e lo t, M o y e n age, I I I , p . 63. As A d a m w ith V en u s in th e b a th , V a le n tin u s, “ P ra c tic a ,” M u s. h e rm ., p . 425 (cf. A iy s te r iu m C o n iu n c tio n is, p p . 303, 383). As Sal V en eris, g re e n a n d r e d lio n (= V e n u s ), K h u n r a th , H y l. C haos, p p . 91, 104. T h e su b sta n c e of M e rc u riu s consists o f V en u s (M ylius, P h il, ref., p . 17). S ince h is m o th e r V e n u s is th e m a tr ix co rru p ta , M e rc u riu s as h e r son is th e p u e r leprosus (“R o s in u s a d S a rr a ta n ta m ,” A r t. a u rif., I, p . 318). I n th e M agic P a p y ri, th e d ay o f A p h ro d ite is asso ciate d w ith H e rm e s (P re ise n d a n z , P a p . G raec. M a g ., I I , p . 120). I n A l-lIr a q I th e a ttr ib u te s o f V en u s a re id e n tic a l w ith th o se o f M e rc u riu s; sister, b rid e , a ir, g re e n , g re e n lio n , p h o e n ix (H o lm y a rd , p . 420). 12 “A u re lia o c c u lta ,” T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV (1659), p . 480.

8 75

sents the prim a m ateria. In the A rabic text of the T urbaiz quick­ silver is identical w ith the “w ater of the m oon and of S aturn.’’ In the “D icta B elini” Saturn says: “ My sp irit is the w ater th at loosens the rig id lim bs of my brothers.” 14 T h is refers to the “eternal w ater” which is ju st w hat M ercurius is. R aym und L ully rem arks th at “a certain oil of a golden colour is extracted from the philosophic lead.” 15 In K h u n rath M ercurius is th e “salt of S aturn,” 16 o r Saturn is simply M ercurius. Saturn “draws the eternal w ater.” 17 Like M ercurius, Saturn is herm ap h ro d itic.18 S aturn is “an old m an on a m ountain , and in him the natures are b o u n d w ith th eir com plem ent [i.e., the four elem ents], and all this is in S aturn.” 19 T h e same is said of M ercurius. Saturn is the father and origin of M ercurius, therefore the latter is called “S aturn’s child.” 20 Q uicksilver comes “ from the h eart of Saturn o r is S atu rn ,” 21 an d a “b rig h t w ater” is extracted from the p la n t Saturnia, “ the m ost perfect w ater and flower in the w orld.” 22 T h is statem ent of Sir George R ipley, C anon of B rid­ lington, is a m ost rem arkable parallel to the G nostic teach­ ing th at Kronos (Saturn) is a “pow er of the colour of w ater” (ύδατόχρο«) which destroys everything, since “w ater is destruc­ tio n .” 23 L ike the planetary sp irit of M ercurius, the sp irit of S aturn is “very suited to this w ork.” 24 O ne of the m anifestations of M er­ curius in the alchem ical process of transform ation is the lion, now green and now red. K h u n rath calls this transform ation “ lu rin g the lion o u t of S aturn’s m o u n tain cave.” From ancient times the lion was associated w ith S atu rn.25 K h u n rath calls him 13 Ed. R u sk a, p . 204. 14 A r t . aurif., II, p . 379. T h e sa m e in D o rn , T h e a t r . c h e m ., I (1659), p p . 56of. !5 C ited in M yliu s, P h i l, ref., p. 302. 16 H y I. Chaos, p. 197. i t “A e n ig m a p h ilo s o p h o r u m ,” T h e a t r . c h e m ., IV (1659), p p . 4g8ff. 18 H y l . Chaos, p. 195. 19 “ R h a sis E p ist.” in M aier, S y m b . a ur. m ens., p . 211. L ik e S atu rn , M ercu riu s c o m b in e s all m e ta ls in h im se lf (ib id ., p. 531). 20 M yliu s, P h i l, ref., p. 305. "S atu rn ’s C h y ld ” in R ip le y ’s “ M e d u lla ” (T h e a t r . c h e m . B r it., p. 391). 21 P a n th e u s, A r s tr a n s m u t . m e ta ll., fo l. gr. 22 R ip le y , O p e r a , p . 317. 23 H ip p o ly tu s , E len ch os, V , 16, 2. 24 " L iber P la to n is q u a rto r u m ,” T h e a t r . c h e m ., V (1660), p p . 127, 136. 25 P reller, G rie c h isc h e M y t h o l o g i e , I, p. 43.

“ th e lio n o£ th e C a th o lic tr ib e ,’’ 26 p a ra p h ra s in g th e “ lio n o f th e tr ib e of J u d a h ”— a n alleg o ry of C h ris t.27 H e calls S a tu rn “ th e lio n g re e n a n d r e d .” 28 I n G n o sticism S a tu rn is th e h ig h e st a rc h o n , th e lio n -h e a d e d Ia ld a b a o th ,29 m e a n in g “ c h ild of chaos.” B u t in a lch em y th e c h ild o f chaos is M e rc u riu s .30 *76 T h e re la tio n to a n d id e n tity w ith S a tu rn is im p o r ta n t b e­ cause S a tu rn is n o t o n ly a m a le ficus b u t actu a lly th e d w ellingp lace o f th e d ev il h im self. E v en as th e h ig h e st a rc h o n a n d d e m i­ u rg e his G n o stic r e p u ta tio n was n o t th e best. A cc o rd in g to o n e C a b a listic so u rce, B e e lz e b u b was asso ciated w ith h im .81 MyIius says th a t if M e rc u riu s w ere to b e p u rifie d , th e n L u c ife r w o u ld fall fro m h e a v e n .32 A c o n te m p o ra ry m a rg in a l n o te in a s e v e n te e n th -c e n tu ry tre a tise in m y possession e x p la in s th e te rm s u lp h u r, th e m a sc u lin e p rin c ip le of M e rc u riu s ,33 as diab olu s. If M e rc u riu s is n o t ex actly th e E v il O n e h im self, h e a t le ast co n ­ tain s h im — th a t is, h e is m o ra lly n e u tra l, g o o d a n d evil, o r as K h u n ra th says: “ G o o d w ith th e good, ev il w ith th e e v il.” 34 H is n a tu r e is m o re ex actly d efin ed , ho w ev er, if o n e conceives h im as a process th a t beg in s w ith evil a n d en d s w ith good. A ra th e r d e p lo ra b le b u t p ic tu re s q u e p o e m in Verus H e r m e s (1620) su m ­ m arizes th e process as follow s: A w eakling babe, a greybeard old, Surnam ed the D ragon: m e they ho ld In darkest dungeon languishing T h a t I m ay be reb o rn a king. A fiery sword makes me to sm art, D eath gnaws my flesh an d bones apart. H y L Chaos, p. 93. Cf. C hrist as lio n in the A n co ra tu s o f E p ip h a n iu s an d as lio n cub in St. G reg­ ory, In S e p te m P salm . P en it., Ps. 5 : 10 (M igne, P.L., vol. 79, col. 609). 28 H y L Chaos, p. 195. 29 B ousset, H a u p t p r o b l e m e d e r Gnosis, pp. 10, 321, 352. 30 For S aturn’s day as th e last day o f creation, see infra, par. 301. 31 C odex P arisiensis 2419, fol. 277r. C ited in R eitzen stein , P o im an d res, p . 75. 32 P hil, ref., p. 18. 33 S u lp h u r is the "fire h id d en in M ercurius” (T revisanus in T h e a t r . chem., I, 1659, p. 700). H e is id en tica l w ith M ercurius: “S u lp h u r is m ercurial and M ercurius is su lp h u real” ("Brevis m an u d u ctio," M u s . h erm ., p. 788). S i H y l . Chaos, p . 186. T h erefo re, h e says, w e sh o u ld pray to G od for th e sp irit o f discretion, th a t it m ay teach u s th e d istin ctio n b etw een g o o d an d ev il. 26 27

228

My soul and spirit fast are sinking, A nd leave a poison, black and stinking. T o a black crow am I akin, Such be the wages of all sin. In deepest dust I lie alone, O th a t the T hree would make the One! O soul, O spirit w ith me stay, T h a t I may greet the light of day. H ero of peace, come forth from me, W hom the whole world would like to see! 277

In this po em M ercu riu s is d escrib in g his ow n tran sfo rm a­ tio n , w hich a t th e sam e tim e signifies th e m ystic tran sfo rm a tio n of th e artifex ; fo r n o t on ly M ercu riu s b u t also w h at h ap p en s to h im is a p ro je c tio n of th e collective unconscious. T h is, as can easily be seen fro m w h a t has gone before, is th e p ro je c tio n of th e in d iv id u a tio n process, w h ich , b e in g a n a tu ra l psychic o ccu r­ rence, goes on even w ith o u t th e p a rtic ip a tio n of consciousness. B u t if consciousness p articip a tes w ith som e m easu re of u n d e r ­ stan d in g , th e n th e process is acco m p an ied by all th e em o tio n s of a relig io u s ex p erien ce o r rev elatio n . As a re su lt of this, M ercuriu s ivas id e n tified w ith S ap ie n tia an d th e H o ly G host. I t is th e re fo re very p ro b a b le th a t those heresies w h ich b eg an w ith th e E uchites, P au lician s, B ogom ils, a n d C athars, a n d w h ich d ev el­ oped th e co n cep t of th e P araclete very m u ch in th e s p irit of th e fo u n d e r of C h ristian ity , w ere c o n tin u e d in alchem y, p a rtly u n ­ consciously an d p a rtly u n d e r a d e lib e ra te disguise.35 8 5 I t is c o n c e iv a b le th a t t h e c u r io u s n a m e f o r t h e a lc h e m is t s in R u p e s c is s a ’s L a

V ertu

et

p ro p riete

de

la

q u in te

essence,

“ le s

pou res

h om m es

e v a n g e lis a n s .”

g o e s b a c k to t h e C a th a r p e r f e c l i a n d p a u p e r e s C h r i s t i . R u p e s c is s a (J e a n d e R o q u e t a illa d c ) liv e d a b o u t t h e m id d le o f t h e 1 4 th c e n t. H e w a s a c r itic o f t h e C h u r c h a n d t h e c le r g y (F e r g u s o n , B i b l i o t h e c a c h e m i c a , I I , p . 3 0 5 ). T h e C a th a r tr ia ls la s t e d i n t o t h e m i d d l e o f t h e 1 4 th c e n t.

8. M E R C U R IU S A N D H E R M E S 278

W e have already m e t w ith a n u m b e r o£ alchem ical statem ents w hich show p lain ly th a t the character of the classical H erm es was faith fu lly re p ro d u c ed la te r in the figure of M ercurius. T h is is in p a rt an unconscious rep e titio n , in p a rt a sp o n tan eo u s re ­ experience, a n d finally also a conscious referen ce to th e pagan god. T h e re can be no d o u b t th a t M ichael M aier was consciously a llu d in g to H erm es as p o in te r of the way (oSjjyos) w hen he said th a t he fo u n d on his m ystic p ere g rin a tio n a statu e of M ercurius p o in tin g the way to paradise,1 a n d th a t h e was re fe rrin g to H erm es th e m ystagogue w hen he m ade th e E ry th ra ea n Sibyl say of M ercurius: “ H e w ill m ake you a w itness of th e m ysteries of G od an d th e secrets of n a tu re .” 2 A gain, as th e d ivin n s ternarius, M ercurius is the revealer of divine secrets,3 or in th e form of gold is conceived to be th e soul of the arcane substance (m agnesia),4 o r the fructifier of the philosophical tree.5 In the “ E pigram m a M ercurio philosophico d ic a tu m ” 6 he is called the m essenger of th e gods, the h e rm e n e u t (in terp reter), an d the E gyptian “T h e u tiu s ” (T h o th ). M aier even goes so far as to re ­ late h im to H erm es K yllenios w hen he calls h im “this faithless a n d all too elusive A rcadian y o u th ,” 7 fo r in A rcadia was the sanctuary of K yllenios5 th e ith y p h allic H erm es. I n th e scholia to th e “T ra c ta tu s a u reu s” M ercurius is n am ed o u trig h t the “ K yllenian h e ro .” 8 M aier’s w ords m ig h t also b e a referen ce to Eros. A n d in fact, in R osencreutz’s C hym ical W e d d in g , M er1 S y m b . aur. m ens., p. 592. [Cf. M ysteriu m C oniunctionis, pars. 276ff.] Ibid., p. 600. D orn, in T h e a tr. chem ., I (1659), p. 547. K h u n ra th , H yl. Chaos, p. 233. 5 R ipley, in T h e a tr. chem ., II (1659), p. 113. β M us. herm ., p. 738. 7 Sym b. aur. m ens., p. 386. 8 T h ea tr. chem ., IV (1659), p. 673.

2 3 4

curius does appear in the form of C u p id ,9 and punishes the adept for his curiosity in visiting the Lady Venus by w ounding him in the h an d w ith an arrow. T h e arrow is the “d a rt of pas­ sion” (telum passionis), which is also an a ttrib u te of M ercurius.10 H e is an “archer,” an d indeed one who “shoots w ith o u t a bow­ strin g ” and is “now here to be found on earth ,” 11 so is obviously a daem on. In the T a b le of Symbols in Penotus12 he is associated w ith nym phs, w hich rem inds one of the pastoral god, Pan. H is lasciviousness is borne o u t by an illustration in the Tripus chimicus of Sendivogius,13 w here he appears o n a triu m p h al chariot draw n by a cock an d a hen, and b eh in d him is a naked p air of em bracing lovers. In this connection may also be m en­ tioned the num erous som ew hat obscene pictures of the coniunctio in old prints, often preserved m erely as pornographica. Pictures in old m anuscripts of excretory acts, in cluding vom iting, likewise belong to this sphere of the “underw orldly H erm es.” 14 Again, M ercurius represents the “continuous co h ab itatio n ” 15 which is found in unalloyed form in the T a n tric Shiva-Shakti concept. C onnections betw een G reek and A rabic alchemy and In d ia are n o t unlikely. R eitzensteinle reports the story of Padm anaba from a T u rk ish book of folklore17 ab o u t the forty vi­ ziers, w hich may date back to the tim e of the M oguls. A lready in the first centuries of o u r era, In d ia n religious influences were at work in southern M esopotam ia, and in the second century B.C. there were B uddhist m onasteries in Persia. In the royal tem ple of P adm anabhapura in T ravancore (c. fifteenth century) I found two reliefs representing an entirely no n -In d ian senex ithyphallicus w ith wings. In one of them he stands u p to his waist in the bowl of the m oon. O ne is rem inded of the w inged ithyphal8 Also in the form of the boy showing the way and the “age-old son of the mother.” 1ORipley, Opera, pp. 42iff. n "Introit. apert.,” M us. herm., p. 653. 12 Theatr. chem., II (1659), facing p. iog. 13 P. 67. 14 E.g., Codex Rhenoviensis, Zurich, and Codex Vossianus, Leyden. 15 For this m otif see Symbols of Transformation, pp. 2ogf. 16 Alchemische Lehrschriften und Marchen bei den Arabern, pp. 77L 17 B elletete, trans., Contes turcs.

279

lie o ld m an w ho pursues the “b lu e ” o r “d o g lik e” 18 w om an in H ippolytus. K yllenios does in fact a p p ea r in H ip p o ly tu s10 as id en tical on th e one h a n d w ith the Logos an d o n th e o th e r w ith the w icked Korybas, the phallus, a n d th e d em iu rg ic p rin c ip le in g en eral.20 A n o th e r aspect of this dark M ercu riu s is th e m otherson incest, w hich m ay be traceable to M an d aean influences: there N a b u (M ercurius) a n d Istar (A starte) fo rm a syzygy. A starte is th e m o th e r an d love goddess th ro u g h o u t th e w hole N e ar East, w here she is also ta in te d w ith the incest m otif. N ab u is th e “ M essiah of th e L ie,” w ho because of his m alice is p u n ­ ished an d k e p t in p rison by th e su n 21 T h e texts re m in d us again a n d again th a t M ercurius is “fo u n d in the dung-heaps,” b u t they add ironically th a t “m any have g ru b b e d in the dung-heaps, b u t ex tracted n o th in g th ereb y .” 22 T h is d a rk M ercurius m u st once again b e u n d e rsto o d as re p ­ re sen tin g the in itia l nigredo state, the low est b ein g a sym bol of the highest an d vice versa: Anfang und Ende Reichen sich die H ande.23 H e is the uroboros, the O ne an d All, th e u n io n of opposites accom plished d u rin g the alchem ical process, of w hich P en o tu s says:24 M ercurius is begotten by nature as the son of nature and the fruit of the liquid element. B ut even as the Son of M an is begotten by the philosopher and created as the fruit of the Virgin, so must he [Mercurius] be raised from the earth and cleansed of all earthiness, then he ascends entire into the air, and is changed into spirit. T hus 18 KuavotiSjj o r KUjioeiSjj. H ip p o ly tu s , E le n c h o s, V , 20, 6 a n d 7 (ed . W e n d la n d ) h as th e la t te r re a d in g . T h e a lc h e m ic a l e q u iv a le n ts o f th is stra n g e m y th o lo g e m s u p ­ p o r t b o th p o ssib ilitie s: D o g as L ogos, p sy c h o p o m p , a n d filiu s canis coelici coloris ( p u p p y o f c ele stial h u e ), a ll r e f e rrin g to M e rc u riu s . [C f. M y s te r iu m C o n iu n c tio n is, p a rs, j 74H.] i s E le n c h o s, V, 7, 29. 20 T h e d u a lity o f th e M e rc u riu s c o n c e p t h a s a p a ra lle l in th e sy n c re tist view s o f th e N aassenes, w h o so u g h t to g ra sp a n d ex p re ss th e p sy ch o lo g ical e x p e rie n c e o f th e p a ra d o x ic a l F irs t C ause. B u t I m u s t b e c o n te n t w ith th is h in t. 21 B o u sset, H a u p tp r o b le m e d e r G nosis, p p . 43, 55, 142. 22 R o s a r iu m , in A r t. a u rif,, I I , p . 243. 28 " B e g in n in g s a n d e n d s / T o u c h h a n d s .” 2^ T h e a tr . ch e m ., I (1659), P· 6 ° 1·

is fulfilled the word of the philosopher: He ascends from earth to heaven and receives the power of Above and Below, and puts off his earthy and impure nature and clothes himself in the heavenly nature. Since Penotus is here re ferrin g to the “T a b u la sm aragdina,” it m ust be em phasized th at he departs from the sp irit of the “T a b u la ” in one essential point. In the version of Penotus, the ascent of M ercurius is in entire accord w ith the C hristian trans­ form ation of the hylic in to the pneum atic m an. T h e “T a b u la ,” on the other hand, says: “ H e ascends from earth to heaven and descends again to earth, and receives the pow er of Above and Below. H is pow er is com plete w hen he has re tu rn e d to earth .” So it is n o t a question of a one-way ascent to heaven, but, in contrast to the ro u te followed by the C hristian R edeem er, who comes from above to below an d from there retu rn s to the above, the filius macrocosmi starts from below, ascends o n high, and, w ith the powers of Above and Below u n ited in himself, retu rn s to earth again. H e carries o u t the reverse m ovem ent and thereby m anifests a n a tu re contrary to that of C hrist and the Gnostic Redeem ers, w hile on the other h an d he displays a certain affinity w ith the B asilidian concept of the th ird sonship. M ercurius has the circular n a tu re of the uroboros, hence he is symbolized by the circulus sim plex of which he is at the same tim e the cen tre.25 H e can therefore say of him self: “I am O ne and at the same tim e M any in myself.” 26 T h is same treatise says th a t the centre of the circle in m an is the earth, and calls it the “salt” to which C hrist referred w hen he said: “Ye are the salt of the earth .” 27 H erm es is a god of thieves and cheats, b u t also a god of rev­ elation who gave his nam e to a w hole philosophy. Seen in histor­ ical retrospect, it was a m om ent of the utm ost significance w hen the hum anist P atrizi proposed to Pope Gregory X IV th a t H e r­ m etic philosophy should take the place of A ristotle in ecclesias­ tical doctrine. A t th a t m om ent two worlds came into contact, which— after heaven knows w hat happenings!— m ust yet be 25 “Tractatus aureus cum scholiis,” ibid., IV, p. 608. 2« “Aurelia occulta,” ibid., p. 507. 27 Ibid., p. 489.

u n ite d in th e fu tu re . A t th a t tim e i t was o b v io u sly im p o ssib le. A psychological d iffe re n tia tio n o f re lig io u s as w ell as scientific view s is s till n e e d e d b efo re a u n io n c a n b e g in to b e b r o u g h t a b o u t.28 28

[T h is paragraph orig in a lly en d ed the m on ograp h .— E

d ito r s .]

9- M E R C U R IU S AS T H E A R C A N E S U B S T A N C E 282

M ercu riu s, it is g en erally affirm ed, is th e a rc a n u m ,1 th e p rim a m a te ria ,2 th e “ fa th e r of all m etals,’’ th e p rim ev al chaos, th e e a rth of p aradise, th e “m a te ria l u p o n w hich n a tu re w o rk ed a little , b u t nevertheless le ft im p erfect.” 4 H e is also th e u ltim a m a teria , the goal of his ow n tran sfo rm a tio n , th e sto n e,5 th e tin c ­ tu re, th e p h ilo so p h ic gold, th e carb u n cle, th e p h ilo so p h ic m an, th e second A d am , th e an alo g u e o f C h rist, th e king, th e lig h t of lights, th e deus terrestris, in d e e d th e d iv in ity itself o r its p erfect c o u n te rp a rt. Since I have alread y discussed th e synonym s an d m eanings of th e stone elsew here th e re is n o n e e d fo r m e to go in to fu rth e r details now . 283 Besides b e in g th e p rim a m a te ria of th e low ly b e g in n in g as w ell as th e lapis as th e h ig h est goal, M ercu riu s is also th e process w hich lies b etw een , a n d th e m eans by w hich it is effected. H e is th e “b eg in n in g , m id d le, a n d e n d of th e w o rk .” 8 T h e re fo re he is called th e M e d iato r,7 Servator, a n d Salvator. H e is a m e d ia to r like H erm es. As th e m ed icin a catholica a n d a le xip h a rm a k o n he is th e “ preserv er [servator] of th e w o rld .” H e is th e “h e a le r [salvator] of all im p e rfe c t b o d ie s” 8 a n d th e “ im age of C h rist’s in c a rn a tio n ,” 8 th e u n ig e n itu s “c o n su b stan tial w ith th e p aren 1 ‘‘T ra c t, a u r. cum scholiis,” T h e a tr . ch em ., IV (1659), p . 608. 2 M ylius, P h il, ref., p . 179; “ T ra c t, a u re u s ,” M u s. h erm ., p . 25; T re v isa n u s in T h e a tr. chem ., I (1659), p . 695. 3 “E x ercit. in T u r b .,” A r t. a u rif., I, p . 154. 4 R o sa riu m , ib id ., II, p . 231. 5 V e n tu ra , in T h e a tr . c h e m ., II (1859), P- 232: “ la p is b e n e d ic tu s”; D o rn , in T h e a tr. ch em ., I (1659), p . 510: "fiery a n d p erfe c t M e rc u riu s” ; p . 520: “T h e A dam ic sto n e is m a d e o u t of th e A d a m ic M e rc u riu s in th e w o m an Eve” ; L ully, C odicillus, p p . 88of.: “T h e good th a t is so u g h t is o u r stone a n d M e rcu riu s.” β " T ra c t, a u r. cum scholiis," T h e a tr . ch em ., IV (1659), p . 608. 7 “E x ercit. in T u r b .,” A r t. a u rif., I, p . 170; R ip ley , C h ym isch e S c h riffte n , p . 31; “T ra c t, a u r. cum scholiis,” p . 610; “A m e d ia to r m a k in g p eace betw een en em ies.” 8 "A q u a riu m sap .,” M u s. h e rm ., p. 111. ®Ib id ., p . 118.

tal h e rm a p h ro d ite .” 10 A ltogether, in th e m acrocosm of n a tu re he occupies the position w hich C hrist holds in the m u n d u s rationalis of div in e revelation. B u t as the saying “ My lig h t su r­ passes all o th e r lig h ts” 11 shows, the claim of M ercu riu s goes even fu rth e r, w hich is why th e alchem ists endow ed h im w ith the a ttrib u te s of the T r in ity 12 in o rd e r to m ake clear his com plete correspondence to G od. In D ante, Satan is three-headed an d therefore three-in-one. H e is the c o u n te rp a rt of G od in the sense th a t he is G o d ’s antithesis. T h e alchem ists d id n o t h o ld this view of M ercurius; on the contrary, they saw h im as a div in e em an a­ tio n h arm onious w ith G o d ’s ow n being. T h e stress they laid o n his capacity for self-generation, self-transform ation, self­ re p ro d u c tio n , an d self-destruction contradicts the idea th a t he is a created being. It is th erefo re only logical w hen Paracelsus and D o rn state th a t the p rim a m ateria is an “ in c re a tu m ” an d a p rin ­ ciple coeternal w ith G od. T h is den ial of creatio ex nihilo is su p ­ p o rte d by the fact th a t in the b e g in n in g G od fo u n d th e T e h o m already in existence, th a t same m a te rn al w o rld of T ia m a t whose son we en co u n te r in M ercu riu s.13 K hunrath, H y l . Chaos, p. 59. u “Septem T ract, h erm et.,” Ars chemica, p. 22. R o sa riu m , p. 381: "I illu m in e the air w ith m y lig h t a n d w arm the earth w ith m y heat, I b rin g forth and nourish the things o f nature, plants an d stones, an d w ith m y pow er I take away the darkness o f n ig h t, and cause day to en d u re in th e w orld, and I lig h te n all lig h ts w ith m y lig h t, even those in w h ich there is n o sp len d ou r nor greatness. For all these are o f m y work, w hen I p u t u p on m e m y garm ents; and those w ho seek m e, let them m ake peace b etw een m e and m y b rid e.” T h is is cited from the “D icta B e lin i” (p rin ted in M an get’s B ib l. chem., I, p. 478). T h er e are variation s in the text. I have q u oted the passage in fu ll because o f its psych ological interest. 12 “For in the Stone are body, soul, and sp irit, and yet it is on e sto n e” (“Exercit. in T u r b .,” A r t. aurif., I, p. 170). 1 3 Cf. P sychology an d A lc h e m y , par. 26.

10

10. SU M M ARY T h e m u ltiple aspects o£ M ercurius may be sum m arized as follows: (1) M ercurius consists of all conceivable opposites. H e is thus q u ite obviously a duality, b u t is nam ed a u n ity in spite of the fact th at his in n u m erab le in n e r contradictions can d ram ati­ cally fly apart into an equal n u m b e r of disparate and apparently in d ep en d en t figures. (2) H e is bo th m aterial and spiritual. (3) H e is the process by w hich the low er and m aterial is transform ed into the higher and spiritual, and vice versa. (4) H e is the devil, a redeem ing psychopom p, an evasive trickster, and G od’s reflection in physical n atu re. (5) H e is also the reflection of a mystical experience of the artifex th a t coincides w ith the opus alchymicum. (6) As such, he represents on the one h an d th e self and on th e o th er the in d iv id u atio n process and, because of the lim itless n u m b e r of his names, also the collective unconscious.1 # # *

C ertainly goldm aking, as also chem ical research in general, was of great concern to alchemy. B ut a still greater, m ore im ­ passioned concern appears to have been— one cannot very well say the “investigation”— b u t ra th e r the experience of the u n co n ­ scious. T h a t this side of alchemy— the μυστικά— was for so long m isunderstood is due solely to the fact th at n o th in g was know n of psychology, let alone of the suprapersonal, collective u n co n ­ scious. So long as one knows n o th in g of psychic actuality, it will be projected, if it appears at all. T h u s th e first know ledge of psychic law an d order was found in the stars, and was later ex­ tended by projections into unknow n m atter. T hese two realm s of experience branched off into sciences: astrology becam e astron1 H en ce the designation of M ercurius as more nostru m .

237

286

omy, a n d alchem y chem istry. O n the o th e r h an d , the p ecu liar co n nection betw een ch aracter a n d the astronom ical d e te rm in a ­ tio n of tim e has only very recently begun to tu rn in to som ething app ro ach in g an em pirical science. T h e really im p o rta n t psychic facts can n e ith e r be m easured, w eighed, n o r seen in a test tu b e o r u n d e r a m icroscope. T h e y are th erefo re supposedly in d e ­ term in ab le, in o th e r w ords they m ust be left to people w ho have a n in n e r sense for them , ju s t as colours m u st be show n to the seeing a n d n o t to the b lin d . T h e store of projections fo u n d in alchem y is, if possible, even less know n, an d there is a fu rth e r draw back w hich m akes closer investigation extrem ely difficult. For, u n lik e the astrolog­ ical constitu en ts of character w hich, if negative, are a t m ost u n ­ pleasant for th e in d iv id u al, th o u g h am using to his n e ig h b o u r, th e alchem ical projections re p re se n t collective co n ten ts th a t stand in p ain fu l contrast— o r ra th e r, in com pensatory re la tio n — to o u r highest ra tio n a l convictions an d values. T h e y give the strange answers of the n a tu ra l psyche to th e u ltim a te questions w hich reason has left u n to u c h ed . C o n trary to all progress an d b elief in a fu tu re th a t w ill deliver us from th e sorrow ful present, they p o in t back to som ething prim eval, to the a p p aren tly h o p e­ lessly static, e tern al sway of m a tte r th a t m akes o u r fondly believed-in w orld look like a p hantasm ag o ria of sh iftin g scenes. T h e y show us, as the red em p tiv e goal of o u r active, desirous life, a sym bol of the inorganic— the stone— so m eth in g th a t does n o t live b u t m erely exists o r “ becom es,” the passive su b ject of a lim ­ itless a n d u n fath o m ab le play of opposites. “ Soul,” th a t b o d i­ less ab stractio n of th e ra tio n a l in tellect, an d “sp irit,” th a t twodim ensional m e ta p h o r of dry-as-dust philosophical dialectic, ap ­ p e ar in alchem ical pro jectio n in alm ost physical, plastic form , like tan gible breath-bodies, an d refuse to fu n c tio n as co m p o n en t p arts of o u r ra tio n a l consciousness. T h e h o p e fo r a psychology w ith o u t th e soul is b ro u g h t to n o th in g , an d the illu sio n th a t th e unconscious has only ju s t been discovered vanishes: in a som e­ w hat p e cu liar form , adm ittedly, i t has b een know n for close o n two th o u san d years. L e t us, how ever, n o t d elu d e ourselves: n o m ore th a n we can separate th e constitu en ts of ch aracter from th e astronom ical d eterm in an ts of tim e are we able to separate th a t u n ru ly an d evasive M ercurius from th e au to n o m y o f m atter. Som ething of the p ro jection-carrier always clings to th e projec238

tion, and even if we succeed to some degree in in teg ratin g in to o u r consciousness the p art we recognize as psychic, we shall in te ­ grate along w ith it som ething of the cosmos and its m ateriality; o r rath er, since the cosmos is infinitely greater than we are, we shall have been assim ilated by the inorganic. "T ran sfo rm your­ selves into living philosophical stones!” cries an alchem ist, b u t he d id n o t know how infinitely slowly the stone “becomes.” A nyone w ho gives serious th o u g h t to the “n a tu ra l lig h t” th at em anates from the projections of alchem y w ill certainly agree w ith the M aster who spoke of the “wearisomeness of the in te r­ m inable m ed ita tio n ” dem anded by the work. In these projec­ tions we encounter the phenom enology of an “objective” spirit, a tru e m atrix of psychic experience, the m ost ap p ro p riate sym­ bol for which is m atter. N ow here an d never has m an controlled m a tte r w ith o u t closely observing its behaviour and paying heed to its laws, and only to the ex ten t th a t he did so could he con­ trol it. T h e same is tru e of th a t objective sp irit w hich today we call the unconscious: it is refractory like m atter, m ysteri­ ous and elusive, an d obeys laws w hich are so non-hum an or suprahum an th at they seem to us like a crim en laesae majestatis hum anae. If a m an puts his h an d to the opus, he repeats, as the alchem ists say, G od’s w ork of creation. T h e struggle w ith the unform ed, w ith the chaos of T iam at, is in tru th a p rim ordial experience. 887 Since the psyche, w hen directly experienced, confronts us in the “living” substance it has anim ated and appears to be one w ith it, M ercurius is called argentum vivu m . Conscious discrim ­ ination, o r consciousness itself, effects th a t w orld-shattering in ­ tervention w hich separates body from soul and divides the sp irit M ercurius from th e hydrargyrum , as if draw ing off th e sp irit in to the bottle, to speak in term s of o u r fairytale. B ut since body and soul, in spite of the artificial separation, are u n ite d in the m ystery of life, the m ercurial spirit, though im prisoned in the bottle, is yet found in the roots of the tree, as its quintessence an d living num en. In the language of the U panishads, he is the personal atm an of the tree. Isolated in the bottle, he corresponds to the ego and the principle of individ u atio n , w hich in th e I n ­ d ian view leads to the illusion of in d iv id u al existence. Freed from his prison, M ercurius assumes th e character of the suprapersonal atm an. H e becomes the one an im atin g p rin cip le of all

288

created things, the hiranyagarbha (golden germ ),2 th e suprap ersonal self, rep resen ted by th e filius m acrocosm i, th e one stone of th e wise. “R osinus ad S a rratan tam ” cites a saying of “ M alus P hilosophus” 3 w hich attem pts to fo rm u late th e psychological re la tio n of th e lapis to consciousness: “T h is stone is below thee, as to obedience; above thee, as to d o m in io n ; th erefo re from thee, as to know ledge; a b o u t thee, as to equals.” 4 A p p lied to the self, this w ou ld m ean: “T h e self is su b o rd in a te to you, yet on th e o th e r h a n d ru les you. I t is d e p e n d e n t o n y o u r ow n efforts an d y o u r know ledge, b u t transcends you a n d em braces all those w ho are of like m in d .” T h is refers to th e collective n a tu re of th e self, since th e self epitom izes the w holeness of th e personality. By definition, w holeness includes th e collective unconscious, w hich as experience seems to show is everyw here id entical. T h e e n c o u n te r of the p oor stu d e n t w ith the sp irit in the b o t­ tle portrays the sp iritu a l ad v en tu re of a b lin d an d un aw ak en ed h u m a n being. T h e sam e m o tif underlies the tale of th e sw ine­ h e rd w ho clim bed the w orld-tree,5 a n d also form s the le itm o tiv of alchem y. F or w h at it signifies is th e in d iv id u a tio n process as it p repares itself in th e unconscious an d grad u ally enters con­ sciousness. T h e com m onest alchem ical sym bol fo r this is th e tree, th e arbor philosophica, w hich derives from th e paradisal tree of know ledge. H ere, as in o u r fairytale, a daem onic serp en t, an evil spirit, prods an d persuades to know ledge. I n view of th e B iblical precedent, it is n o t su rp risin g th a t th e sp irit M ercu riu s has, to say the least, a great m an y connections w ith th e d ark side. O ne of his aspects is th e fem ale serpent-daem on, L ilith or M elusina, w ho lives in the philosophical tree. A t th e sam e tim e, he n o t only partakes of th e H oly S p irit b u t, according to alchem y, is actually id en tical w ith it. W e have no choice b u t to accept this shocking parad o x a fte r all we have le a rn t a b o u t th e am bivalence of the sp irit archetype. O u r am biguous M ercu riu s sim ply conC f. M aitray an a-B rah m an a U p an ish ad , V, 8 (Sacred Books of th e East, vol. ig, p. 311). H e occurs as th e spiritus vegetativus an d collective soul in th e V edantaS utras (ibid., vol. 34, p. 173, an d vol. 48, p. 578). ®T h e treatise of R osinus (Zosimos) is p robably o f A rab ic origin. "M alu s” m ig h t b e a co rru p tio n of "M agus.” T h e F ihrist of Ib n al-N adim ( a . d . 9 8 7 ) lists, along w ith w ritings of R im as (Zosimos), tw o works by M agus one of w hich is en title d “T h e Book of th e W ise M agus (?) o n th e A r t” (Ruska, T u rb a , p. 272). 4 A rt. aurij., I, p. 310. B Cf. “T h e P henom enology of the S pirit in F airytales,” p p . 2318. 2

240

firms the rule. In any case, the paradox is no worse th an the C reato r’s w him sical n o tio n of enlivening his peaceful, in n o cen t paradise w ith the presence of an obviously ra th e r dangerous treesnake, “accidentally” located on the very same tree as the fo rb id ­ den apples. 289 I t m ust be ad m itted th a t the fairytale an d alchem y b o th show M ercurius in a predom inantly unfavourable light, which is all the m ore striking because his positive aspect relates him n o t only to the H oly Spirit, b u t, in the form of the lapis, also to C hrist and, as a triad, even to the T rin ity . It looks as if it were precisely these relationships which led the alchem ists to p u t p a r­ ticu lar stress on the dark and dubious q u ality of M ercurius, and this m ilitates strongly against the assum ption th a t by th e ir lapis they really m eant Christ. If this had been th e ir m eaning, why should they have ren am ed C hrist the lapis p h ilo s o p h o r u m ? T h e lapis is at m ost a co u n terp art o r analogy of C hrist in th e physical world. Its symbolism, like th a t of M ercurius who constitutes its substance, points, psychologically speaking, to the self, as also does the symbolic figure of Christ.® In com parison w ith th e p u ­ rity and u n ity of the C hrist symbol, M ercurius-Iapis is am bigu­ ous, dark, paradoxical, and thoroughly pagan. I t therefore re p re ­ sents a p a rt of the psyche which was certainly n o t m oulded by C hristianity and can on no account be expressed by the symbol “C hrist.” O n the contrary, as we have seen, in m any ways it points to the devil, who is know n at times to disguise him self as an angel of light. T h e lapis form ulates an aspect of the self w hich stands apart, b o u n d to n a tu re and at odds w ith the C hris­ tian spirit. I t represents all those things which have been elim i­ n ated from the C hristian m odel. B ut since they possess living reality, they cannot express themselves otherw ise th an in dark H erm etic symbols. T h e paradoxical n a tu re of M ercurius reflects an im p o rtan t aspect of the self— the fact, nam ely, th a t it is essen­ tially a c o m p le x io O p p o sito ru m j and indeed can be n o th in g else if it is to represent any k ind of totality. M ercurius as d e u s terrestris has som ething of th a t deus a b s c o n d itu s (hidden god) which is an essential elem ent of the psychological self, an d th e self can­ n o t be distinguished from a God-image (except by incontestable an d unprovable faith). A lthough I have stressed th a t th e lapis is e [Cf. Psychology a nd A lchem y, ch. 5 , “T h e Lapis-Christ Parallel," and A ion , ch. 5 , "Christ, a Symbol o f the Self."— E d i t o r s . ]

241

290

a sym bol em b racin g th e opposites, it sh o u ld n o t be th o u g h t of as a— so to speak— m ore com plete sym bol of th e self. T h a t w o u ld be decidedly incorrect, for actually it is an im age w hose fo rm an d c o n ten t are largely d e term in e d by the unconscious. F o r this rea­ son it is never fo u n d in the texts in finished an d w ell-defined form ; we have to com bine all the scattered references to the various arcane substances, to M ercurius, to the tran sfo rm atio n process a n d the end product. A lth o u g h the lapis in one aspect o r a n o th e r is alm ost always the subject discussed, th ere is n o real consensus of o p in io n in reg ard to its actual form . A lm ost every a u th o r has his ow n special allegories, synonyms, a n d m etaphors. T h is m akes it clear th a t th e stone, th o u g h in d e ed an o b ject of g eneral ex p erim en t, was to an even g reater e x te n t an o u tc ro p ­ p in g of th e unconscious, w hich only sporadically crossed the b o rd e rlin e of subjectivity a n d gave rise to th e vague general concept of the lapis p h ilo sophorum . O pposed to this figure veiled in th e tw ilig h t of m ore o r less secret doctrines th e re stands, sharply o u tlin e d by dogm a, th e Son of M an an d Salvator M undi, C h rist the Sol N ovus, before w hom th e lesser stars pale. H e is th e affirm ation of th e daylight of con­ sciousness in trin ita ria n form . So clear an d definite is th e C h rist figure th a t w hatever differs from h im m u st a p p ea r n o t only in fe­ rio r b u t perverse a n d vile. T h is is n o t th e re su lt of C h rist’s ow n teaching, b u t ra th e r of w h at is ta u g h t a b o u t him , a n d especially of the crystal p u rity w hich dogm a has bestow ed u p o n his figure. As a resu lt, a tension of opposites such as h ad n ev er occurred b efore in th e w hole history of C h ristia n ity b e g in n in g w ith th e C reatio n arose betw een C h rist an d th e A n tich rist, as Satan 01 th e fallen angel. A t the tim e of Jo b , Satan is still fo u n d am ong th e sons of G od. “ N ow there was a day,” it says in J o b 1 : 6, “w hen th e sons of G od cam e to p resen t them selves before th e L ord, an d Satan cam e also am ong th em .” T h is p ic tu re of a celes­ tia l fam ily re u n io n gives n o h in t of th e N ew T e sta m e n t “ G et thee hence, Satan” (M atthew 4 : 10), n o r yet of th e d ragon c h ain ed in th e u n d e rw o rld for a th o u san d years (Rev. 20 : 2). I t looks as if the su p erab u n d a n ce of lig h t o n one side h a d p ro d u ced a n all th e blacker darkness on th e other. O n e can also see th a t th e uncom m o nly great diffusion of black substance m akes a sin­ less b e in g alm ost im possible. A loving b elief in such a b e in g n a t­ u rally involves cleansing o n e ’s ow n house of black filth. B u t th e 242

filth m ust be d u m p ed som ew here, and no m atter w here the d u m p lies it w ill plague even the best of all possible w orlds w ith a bad smell. 291 T h e balance of the p rim ordial w orld is upset. W h at I have said is n o t in ten d ed as a criticism , for I am deeply convinced n o t only of the relentless logic b u t of the expediency of this develop­ m ent. T h e em phatic differentiation of opposites is synonymous w ith sharper discrim ination, and th a t is the sine qua non for any b roadening o r h eightening of consciousness. T h e progressive differentiation of consciousness is the m ost im p o rtan t task of h u ­ m an biology and accordingly meets w ith the highest rew ards— vastly increased chances of survival and the developm ent of pow er technology. F rom the phylogenetic p o in t of view, the effects of consciousness are as far-reaching as those of lungb reath in g an d w arm-bloodedness. B ut clarification of conscious­ ness necessarily entails an obscuration of those dim m er elem ents of the psyche w hich are less capable of becom ing conscious, so th a t sooner o r later a split occurs in the psychic system. Since it is n o t recognized as such it is projected, and appears in the form of a m etaphysical split betw een the powers of light and the pow­ ers of darkness. T h e possibility of this projection is guaranteed by the presence of num erous archaic vestiges of the original dae­ mons of light an d darkness in any age. I t seems likely, therefore, th a t the tension of opposites in C hristianity is derived to a still unclarified degree from the dualism of ancient Persia, though the two are n o t identical. 292 T h e re can be no d o u b t th a t the m oral consequences of the C hristian developm ent represent a very considerable advance com pared w ith the ancient Israelite relig io n of law. T h e C hristi­ anity of the synoptic gospels signifies little m ore th an a com ing to term s w ith issues inside Judaism , w hich m ay fairly be com ­ pared w ith the m uch earlier B uddhist reform ation inside H in d u polytheism . Psychologically, b oth reform ations resu lted in a tre ­ m endous strengthening of consciousness. T h is is particularly evident in the m aieutic m ethod em ployed by Shakyam uni. B ut the sayings of Jesus m anifest the same tendency, even if we dis­ card as apocryphal the clearest form ulatio n of this kind, th e Iogion in C odex Bezae to L uke 6 : 4: “ M an, if th o u know est w hat thou doest, th o u a rt blessed. If thou know est it not, th o u a rt accursed and a transgressor of the law.” A t all events, the para-

b le of the u n ju s t stew ard (L uke 16) has n o t fo u n d its way in to th e A pocrypha, w here it w ould have fitted so well. *93 T h e r if t in the m etaphysical w orld has slowly rise n in to con­ sciousness as a sp lit in th e h u m a n psyche, an d th e struggle b e ­ tw een lig h t an d darkness moves to th e b a ttle g ro u n d w ith in . T h is shift of scene is n o t en tirely self-evident, fo r w hich reason St. Ig n atiu s Loyola considered i t necessary to o p en o u r eyes to th e conflict a n d im press’ it on o u r feelings by m eans of th e m ost drastic sp iritu a l exercises.7 T h e se efforts, fo r obvious reasons, h a d only a very lim ite d range of applicatio n . A n d so, strangely enough, it was the m edical m en w ho, a t th e tu r n o f th e n in e ­ te en th century, w ere forced to in terv en e an d g et th e o b stru cted process of conscious realization going again. A p p ro ach in g th e p ro b lem from a scientific angle, an d in n o c en t of any religious aim , F reu d u ncovered the abysm al darkness of h u m a n n a tu re w hich a w ould-be e n lig h te n ed optim ism h ad striven to conceal. Since th e n psychotherapy, in one form o r an o th er, has p ersist­ ently ex plored th e extensive area of darkness w hich I have called th e shadow . T h is a tte m p t of m o d e rn science o p en ed th e eyes of only a few. H ow ever, the historic events of o u r tim e have p a in te d a p ic tu re of m a n ’s psychic reality in in d e lib le colours of b lo o d an d fire, a n d given h im an o b ject lesson w hich he will n ev er be able to fo rg et if— an d this is th e g re a t q u estio n — he has today a cq u ired en o u g h consciousness to keep u p w ith th e fu ri­ ous pace of th e devil w ith in him . T h e only o th e r h o p e is th a t he m ay le arn to c u rb a creativity w hich is w asting itself in the ex­ p lo ita tio n of m a te ria l pow er. U n fo rtu n ate ly , all attem p ts in th a t d ire c tio n look like bloodless U topias. *94 T h e figure of C hrist th e Logos has raised th e a n im a rationalis in m a n to a level of im portance w hich rem ains u n o b je ctio n ab le so long as it know s itself to be below an d su b ject to th e nbptos, the L o rd of Spirits. R eason, how ever, has set itself free an d p ro ­ claim ed itself th e ru le r. I t has sat e n th ro n e d in N o tre D am e as Deesse R aison a n d h e ra ld ed events th a t w ere to com e. O u r con­ sciousness is n o lo n g er confined w ith in a sacred tem enos of o th e r­ w orldly, eschatological images. I t was h elp ed to break free by a force th a t d id n o t stream dow n from above— like th e lu m e n de lu m in e — b u t cam e u p w ith trem en d o u s pressure from below an d increased in stren g th as consciousness detached itself from the 7 T h e S p ir itu a l E xercises (trans. R ickaby), pp. 75ft.

244

darkness and clim bed into the light. In accordance w ith the p rinciple of com pensation w hich runs th ro u g h the whole of n a­ ture,, every psychic developm ent, w hether individual o r collec­ tive, possesses an o p tim u m which, w hen exceeded, produces an enantiodrom ia, th a t is, tu rn s in to its opposite. C om pensatory tendencies em anating from the unconscious may be n o ted even d u rin g the approach to the critical turning-point, though if con­ sciousness persists in its course they are com pletely repressed. T h e stirrings in the darkness necessarily seem like a devilish be­ trayal of the Ideal of sp iritu al developm ent. Reason can n o t help condem ning as unreasonable everything that contradicts it or deviates from its laws, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. M orality can p e rm it itself no capacity for change, for w hatever it does n o t agree w ith is inevitably im m oral and has therefore to be repressed. I t is n o t difficult to im agine the m u ltitu d e of energies w hich m ust flow off in to the unconscious u n d e r such conscious dom ination. 295 H esitantly, as in a dream , th e introspective bro o d in g of the centuries gradually p u t together the figure of M ercurius and created a symbol w hich, according to all the psychological rules, stands in a com pensatory relatio n to C hrist. It is no t m eant to take his place, n o r is it identical w ith him , for then indeed it could replace him . It owes its existence to the law of com pensa­ tion, and its object is to throw a bridge across the abyss separat­ ing the two psychological w orlds by presenting a subtle com pen­ satory c o u n terp o in t to the C hrist image. T h e fact th a t in Faust the com pensatory figure is not, as one m ig h t alm ost have ex­ pected from the a u th o r’s classical predilections, the wily messen­ ger of the gods, but, as the nam e “ M ephistopheles” 8 shows, a fam iliaris risen from the cesspits of m edieval magic, proves, if anything, the ingrained C hristian character of G oethe’s con­ sciousness. T o the C hristian m entality, the dark antagonist is al­ ways the devil. As I have shown, M ercurius escapes this p re ju ­ dice by only a h a ir’s breadth. B u t he escapes it, thanks to the fact th a t he scorns to carry on opposition at all costs. T h e magic of his nam e enables him , in spite of his am biguity and duplicity, to keep outside the split, for as an ancient pagan god he possesses a n a tu ra l undividedness w hich is im pervious to logical and m oral contradictions. T h is gives him in v u ln erab ility and incorrupti8

[From L . m ep hitis, a noxiou s ex h a la tio n from the earth.— T r a n s l a t o r . ]

bility, the very q u alities we so u rg e n tly n eed to heal th e sp lit in ourselves. 296 If one m akes a synopsis of all the descriptions an d alchem ical p ictures of M ercurius, they form a strik in g p arallel to th e sym­ bols of the self d eriv ed from o th e r sources. O n e can hard ly es­ cape the conclusion th a t M ercurius as the lapis is a sym bolic ex­ pression fo r th e psychological com plex w hich I have defined as th e self. Sim ilarly, th e C h rist figure m u st b e view ed as a self sym­ bol, an d for the same reasons. B u t this leads to an ap p aren tly insoluble co n trad ictio n , for it is n o t at first clear how th e u n c o n ­ scious can shape tw o such different images fro m one an d the same content, w hich m oreover possesses th e ch aracter of totality. C ertain ly th e centuries have d o n e th e ir sp iritu a l w ork u p o n these two figures, and one is in clin ed to assum e th a t b o th have been in large m easure a n th ro p o m o rp h ized d u rin g th e process of assim ilation. For those w ho h old th a t b o th figures are in v en tio n s of th e intellect, the co n trad ictio n is q u ick ly resolved. I t th en m erely reflects th e subjective psychic situ atio n : th e two figures w ould stand for m an an d his shadow. 297 T h is very sim ple an d obvious so lu tio n is, u n fo rtu n ate ly , fo u n d ed o n prem ises th a t do n o t stan d u p to criticism . T h e fig­ ures of C h rist an d th e devil are b o th based o n archetypal p a t­ terns, a n d w ere never in v en ted b u t ra th e r experienced. T h e ir existence preceded all cognition of th e m ,9 a n d the in te lle ct had n o h a n d in th e m a tte r, except to assim ilate th e m an d if possible give them a place in its philosophy. O nly th e m ost superficial intellectu alism can overlook this fu n d a m e n tal fact. W e are a c tu ­ ally co n fro n ted w ith two d ifferen t images of th e self, w hich in all lik elih o o d presented a d u a lity even in th e ir o rig in al form . T h is d u a lity was n o t in v ented, b u t is an auto n o m o u s p h en o m en o n . 298 Since we n a tu ra lly th in k from the stan d p o in t of conscious­ ness, we in ev itab ly com e to th e conclusion th a t th e sp lit betw een consciousness an d th e unconscious is th e sole cause of this d u a l­ ity. B u t experience has d e m o n strated th e existence of a preconscious psychic fu n c tio n in g an d of co rresp o n d in g au to n o m o u s factors, the archetypes. O nce we can accept th e fact th a t th e voices a n d delusions o f th e insane an d th e phobias an d obses­ sions of th e n e u ro tic are beyond ra tio n a l co n tro l, a n d th a t th e ego c an n o t v o lu n ta rily fabricate dream s b u t sim ply dream s w h at 9 Evidence for this is the widespread m otif of the two hostile brothers. 246

it has to, th e n we can also u n d e rs ta n d th a t th e gods cam e first a n d theology la ter. In d e e d , we m u st go a step fu rth e r a n d as­ sum e th a t in th e b e g in n in g th e re w ere tw o figures, o n e b rig h t a n d o n e shadow y, an d only afterw ard s d id th e lig h t of conscious­ ness d etach itself fro m th e n ig h t a n d th e u n c e rta in sh im m e r of its stars. 299 So if C h rist a n d th e d a rk n atu re -d e ity are au to n o m o u s im ­ ages th a t can be d irec tly ex p erien ced , we are o b lig ed to reverse o u r ra tio n a listic causal seq u en ce, a n d in stead of d e riv in g these figures fro m o u r psychic co n d itio n s, m u st d eriv e o u r psychic c o n d itio n s fro m these figures. T h is is ex p ec tin g a good deal of th e m o d e rn in te lle c t b u t does n o t a lte r th e logic o f o u r h y p o th e­ sis. F ro m this s ta n d p o in t C h rist ap p ears as th e arch ety p e of co n ­ sciousness a n d M ercu riu s as th e arch ety p e of th e unconscious. As C u p id a n d K yllenios, he tem p ts us o u t in to th e w o rld of sense; h e is th e b en ed icta virid ita s an d th e m u lti flores of early spring, a g od of illu sio n a n d d e lu sio n of w h o m it is rig h tly said: “ Inv e n itu r in v en a / S an g u in e p le n a ” (H e is fo u n d in th e v ein sw ollen w ith blood). H e is a t th e sam e tim e a H erm es C hthonios a n d an Eros, y et it is fro m h im th a t th e re issues th e “ lig h t surpassing all lig h ts,” th e lu x m o d ern a , fo r th e lapis is n o n e o th e r th a n th e figure o f lig h t v eiled in m a tte r .10 I t is in this sense th a t St. A u g u stin e q u o tes I T h essalo n ian s 5 : 5, “Ye are all th e c h ild re n of lig h t, a n d th e c h ild re n o f th e day: we are n o t of th e n ig h t, n o r of d ark n ess,” a n d d istin g u ish es tw o form s of know ledge, a co g n itio vesp ertin a a n d a co gnitio m a tu tin a , th e first c o rre sp o n d in g to th e scientia creaturae a n d th e second to th e scientia C reatoris .11 I f we e q u a te cog n itio w ith conscious­ ness, th e n A u g u stin e ’s th o u g h t w o u ld suggest th a t th e m erely h u m a n a n d n a tu ra l consciousness g rad u ally d ark en s, as a t n ig h t­ fall. B u t ju s t as ev en in g gives b ir th to m o rn in g , so fro m th e darkness arises a n ew lig h t, th e stella m a tu tin a , w h ich is a t once th e ev en in g a n d th e m o rn in g star— L u cifer, th e lig h t-b rin g er. 300 M ercu riu s is by n o m eans th e C h ristia n d ev il— th e la tte r 10 Cf. the saying of Ostanes concerning th e stone th at has a spirit. 11 “For th e know ledge o f the creature, in com parison w ith the know ledge of the Creator, is bu t a tw ilight; and so it dawns and breaks into m orning w hen the creature is drawn to the love and praise of the Creator. N or is it ever darkened, save w hen the Creator is abandoned by th e love o f the creature.”— T h e City of G o d , X I, vii.

co u ld ra th e r be said to be a “d ia b o liz atio n ” of L u cifer o r of M ercurius. M ercu riu s is a n a d u m b ra tio n of th e p rim o rd ia l lightb rin g er, w ho is n ev er him self the light, b u t a φωσφόρου who b rings th e lig h t of n a tu re , the lig h t of th e m oon a n d th e stars w hich fades before the new m o rn in g light. O f this lig h t St. A u­ g u stin e says th a t it w ill never tu rn to darkness unless th e C reator is a b an d o n e d by the love of his creatures. B u t this, too, belongs to the rh y th m of day an d n ig h t. As H o ld e rlin says in “ P atm os” ; an d sh a m efu lly A p o w er wrests aw ay the h eart from us; F or the H ea v en ly each d em an d sacrifice, B u t if it sh o u ld b e w ith h eld , N e v e r has th at led to good . 3°

1

W h e n all visible lights are ex tin g u ish ed one finds, according to the w ords of the wise Y ajnavalkya, th e lig h t of th e self. “W h at th e n is th e lig h t of m an? Self is his lig h t. I t is by th e lig h t of the self th a t a m an rests, goes forth, does his w ork a n d re tu rn s .” 12 T h u s, w ith A ugustine, the first day of creatio n begins w ith selfknow ledge, cognitio su i ipsius , 13 by w hich is m e a n t a know l­ edge n o t of the ego b u t of th e self, th a t objective p h en o m en o n of w hich th e ego is the su b je c t.14 T h e n , follow ing th e o rd e r of th e days of creation in Genesis, comes know ledge of the firm a­ m en t, of th e earth , the sea, the plants, the stars, th e anim als of th e w ater an d air, a n d finally, on th e sixth day, know ledge of the la n d anim als an d of ipsius h o m in is, of m an him self. T h e cognitio m a tu tin a is self-knowledge, b u t th e cognitio vespertina is know ledge of m a n .15 As A u gustine describes it, the cognitio B rih ad aran y ak a U panishad, IV, 3, 6 (c£. H u m e, T h e T h irte e n P rincipal U panishads, p. 133). 13 “A nd w hen i t [the cre a tu re ’s know ledge] comes to th e know ledge o£ itself, th a t is one d ay ” (Et hoc cum facit in cognitione sui ipsius, dies u n u s est).— T h e City o f G od, X I, vii. T h is m ay be the source for th e stran g e d esig n atio n of the lapis as "filius u n iu s diei." [Cf. M yste riu m C oniunctionis, p p . 335, 504.] 1* “Since n o know ledge is b e tte r th a n th a t by w hich m an know s him self, let us exam ine o u r thoughts, words, an d deeds. F or w h a t does it avail us if we are to investigate carefully a n d u n d e rsta n d rig h tly th e n a tu re of all things, yet do n ot u n d e rsta n d ourselves?”— L ib e r de S p iritu et A n im a , L I (M igne, P.L., vol. 40, cols. 816-17). T h is book is a very m u ch la te r treatise falsely a ttrib u te d to A u ­ gustine. 15 "W herefore th e know ledge of th e creature, w hich is in itself evening know l­ edge, was in G od m o rn in g know ledge; fo r th e cre atu re is m ore p la in ly seen in 12

248

m a tu tin a gradually grows old as it loses itself in the “ten thou­ sand things” and finally comes to man, although one w ould ex­ pect this to have happened already w ith the onset of selfknowledge. B ut if this were true, A ugu stin e’s parable w ould have lost its m ean in g by contradicting itself. Such an obvious lapse cannot be ascribed to so gifted a man. H is real m ean in g is that self-know ledge is the scientia C r e a to r is ^ a m orning lig h t revealed after a n ig h t during w hich consciousness slum bered, wrapped in the darkness o f the unconscious. But the know ledge arising w ith this first light finally and inevitably becom es the scientia hominis, the know ledge of man, who asks him self: “W ho is it that knows and understands everything? W hy, it is m yself.” T h a t marks the com in g of darkness,17 ou t of w hich arises the seventh day, the day of rest: “But the rest of God sign i­ fies the rest of those w ho rest in G od.” 18 T h e Sabbath is there­ fore the day on w hich m an returns to G od and receives anew the light of the cognitio matutina. A nd this day has no even in g.19 From the sym bological standpoint it may n ot be w ithout signifi­ cance that A ugustine had in m ind the pagan names of the days of the week. T h e grow ing darkness reaches its greatest intensity on the day of V enus (Friday), and changes into L ucifer on SatGod th an it is seen in itself.”— Dialogus Q uaestionum L X V , Q uaest. XXVI (Migne, P.L., vol. 40, col. 741). 18T h e L iber de S piritu et A n im a attrib u tes very great im portance to selfknowledge, as being an essential condition for u n io n w ith God. “T h ere are some w ho seek God through outw ard things, forsaking th a t w hich is in them , an d in them is God. L et us therefore retu rn to ourselves, th a t we may ascend to o u r­ selves. . . . At first we ascend to ourselves from these outw ard and inferior things. Secondly, we ascend to the high heart. . . . In the th ird ascent we ascend to G od” (chs. L I-L II; Migne, P .L., vol. 40, col. 817). T h e “high h e a rt” (cor altum ; also “deep h e a rt”) is the m andala divided into four, th e imago D ei, or self. T h e L iber de S piritu et A n im a is in the m ainstream of A ugustinian tra ­ dition. A ugustine him self says (De vera religione L X X I I , Migne, P.L., vol. 34, col. 154): “Go n o t outside, re tu rn into yourself; tr u th dwells in the in n er m an. A nd if you find th a t you are by n a tu re changeable, transcend yourself. B u t re ­ m em ber th a t when you transcend yourself, you m ust transcend yourself as a reasoning soul.” is “Evening descends w hen the sun sets. Now the sun has set for m an, th a t is to say, th a t lig h t of justice w hich is the presence of G od.”— Enarrationes in Ps. X X I X , II, 16 (trans. H obgin and C orrigan, I, p. 308). T hese words refer to Ps. 30 : 5 (A.V.): “W eeping may tarry for the night b u t joy com eth in the m o rning.” 18 T h e City of God, X I, viii. Cf. also Dialog. Quaest. L X V , Quaest. XXVI, 1O Confessions (trans. Sheed), p. 289.

u r n ’s day. S aturday heralds the lig h t w hich appears in full stren g th on Sun-day. As I have shown, M ercu riu s is closely re­ lated n o t only to V enus b u t m ore especially to S atu rn . As Merc urius h e is ju v en is, as S atu rn senex. 3°2 I t seems to m e th a t A u gustine a p p re h en d e d a g reat tru th , nam ely th a t every sp iritu a l tru th gradu ally tu rn s in to som ething m aterial, becom ing n o m ore th a n a to o l in th e h a n d of m an. In consequence, m an can hard ly avoid seeing him self as a know er, yes, even as a creator, w ith boundless possibilities a t his com ­ m and. T h e alchem ist was basically this so rt of person, b u t m uch less so th an m o d e m m an. A n alchem ist co u ld still pray: “ P urge the h o rrib le darknesses of o u r m in d ,” b u t m o d ern m an is al­ ready so d a rk e n ed th a t n o th in g beyond th e lig h t of his ow n in­ tellect illu m in ates his w orld. “ Occasus C hristi, passio C h risti.” 20 T h a t surely is w hy such strange things are h a p p en in g to o u r m u ch la u d ed civilization, m ore like a G o tterd d m m eru n g th an any n o rm a l tw ilight. 3°3 M ercurius, th a t two-faced god, comes as the lu m e n naturae, th e Servator a n d Salvator, only to those w hose reason strives to­ w ards th e highest lig h t ever received by m an, a n d w ho d o n o t tru s t exclusively to th e cognitio vespertina. F o r those w ho are u n m in d fu l of this lig h t, the lu m e n naturae tu rn s in to a perilous ignis fa tu u s, a n d the psychopom p in to a diab o lical seducer. L u ­ cifer, w ho co u ld have b ro u g h t light, becom es th e fa th e r of lies w hose voice in o u r tim e, su p p o rte d by press a n d radio, revels in orgies of pro p ag an d a and leads u n to ld m illio n s to ru in . so Enarrationes in Ps. CIIIj Sermo III, 21 (Migne, P.L., vol. 37, col. 1374).

V T H E P H IL O S O P H IC A L T R E E

[O riginally w ritte n fo r a F estschrift p la n n e d to m ark the 70th b irth d ay of G ustav Senn, professor of b o tan y at the U niversity of Basel. O w ing to the u n tim ely d eath of Professor Senn, the F estschrift d id n o t a p p ear, an d J u n g ’s essay, e n title d “D er philosophische B aum ,” was p u b lish e d in the V erh a n d lu n g e n der N aturforschend en Gesellschaft Basel, L V l (1945): 2, 411-23. A revised a n d e x p a n d e d version a p p e a re d in Fon den W urzeln des Bewusstseins: Stu d ie n Uber den A rchetypus (Psychologische A b h a n d lu n g e n , Vol. IX ; Zurich, 1954), from w hich the p re se n t tran slatio n is m ade.— E d ­ i t o r s .]

All theory, my friend, is grey, B ut green life’s golden tree. Faust I

IN D IV ID U A L R E P R E S E N T A T IO N S O F T H E T R E E SYMBOL

A n image w hich freq u en tly appears am ong the archetypal configurations of the unconscious is that of the tree o r the w on­ der-w orking plant. W h en these fantasy products are draw n or painted, they very often fall in to sym m etrical patterns th a t take the form of a m andala. If a m andala may be described as a sym­ bol of the self seen in cross section, th e n the tree w ould rep re­ sent a profile view of it: the self depicted as a process of grow th. I shall n o t discuss here the conditions u n d e r w hich these pictures are produced, for I have already said all th a t is necessary in my essays “A Study in the Process of In d iv id u atio n ” an d “ C oncern­ ing M andala Sym bolism .” T h e exam ples I now propose to give all come from a series of pictures in which my patients tried to express th eir in n e r experiences. In spite of the diversity of the tree symbol, a n u m b e r of basic features may be established. In the first p art of my essay I shall com m ent on the pictures that have been rep ro d u ced and then, in the second part, give an account of the philosophical tree in alchem y an d its historical background. My case m aterial has no t been influenced in any way, for none of the patients had any previous know ledge of alchem y o r of sham anism . T h e pictures were spontaneous products of creative fantasy, an d th eir only conscious purpose was to express w hat happens w hen u n con­ scious contents are taken over into consciousness in such a way th a t it is not overw helm ed by them and th e unconscious not subjected to any distortion. M ost of th e pictures were done by patients w ho were u n d e r treatm ent, b u t some by persons who

w ere not, o r w ere no longer, u n d e r any th e ra p e u tic influence. I m u st em phasize th a t I carefully avoided saying an y th in g in a d ­ vance th a t m ig h t have h a d a suggestive effect. N in e te e n of the thirty-tw o pictures w ere done at a tim e w hen I m yself knew n o th in g of alchem y, an d th e rest before my book Psychology and A lch e m y was published. F igure i 3°6

T h e tree stands by itself on an islan d in th e sea. Its g re a t size is in d icated by the fact th a t the u p p e r p a rt of it is c u t off by th e edge of the pictu re. T h e buds an d the little w h ite flowers suggest th e com ing of spring, w hen th e great tree, w hose age far exceeds th e span of h u m a n existence, w ill aw aken to new life. T h e soli­ tariness of the tree an d its axial positio n in th e cen tre of th e p ic tu re b rin g to m in d th e w orld-tree an d th e w orld-axis— a ttr i­ b u tes w ith w hich th e tree sym bol is alm ost u n iv ersally endow ed. T h e se traits give expression to the in n e r process a t w ork in the p a in te r, a n d show th a t it has n o th in g to do w ith his personal psychology. H e re th e tre e represents a sym bol th a t is universal an d alien to the personal consciousness. I t is possible, how ever, th a t th e p a in te r was m ak in g conscious use o f the C hristm as tree in o rd e r to illu stra te his in n e r state. Figure 2

3°7

T h e abstract stylization a n d th e p o sitio n of th e tree on the globe of the earth illu stra te the feeling o f sp iritu a l isolation. T o m ake u p for this, th e p erfect sym m etry of th e crow n p o in ts to a u n io n of opposites. T h is is th e m o tiv a tin g force a n d th e goal of th e in d iv id u a tio n process. If the p a in te r of such a p ic tu re n e i­ th e r identifies w ith th e tree n o r is assim ilated by it,1 h e w ill n o t succum b to th e d an g er of an auto-erotic isolation, b u t will only be intensely aw are th a t his ego p erso n ality is co n fro n ted w ith a sym bolical process he m u st com e to term s w ith because it is ju s t as real a n d u n d e n ia b le as his ego. O n e can deny an d n u l­ lify this process in all sorts of ways, b u t in d o in g so all th e values rep resen ted by the sym bol are lost. A naively cu rio u s m in d w ill n a tu ra lly cast ro u n d for a ra tio n a l ex p lan atio n , an d if it does n o t 1 Cf. A io n j pp. 24ff.

find o ne a t once it e ith e r m akes do w ith a facile an d com p letely in a d e q u a te hypothesis o r else tu rn s away in d isa p p o in tm e n t. I t seems to be very h a rd fo r p eo p le to live w ith rid d les o r to let th e m live, a lth o u g h o n e w o u ld th in k th a t life is so fu ll of rid d le s as it is th a t a few m o re th in g s w e c a n n o t answ er w o u ld m ake no difference. B u t p erh ap s it is ju s t this th a t is so u n e n d u ra b le , th a t th e re are irra tio n a l th in g s in o u r ow n psyche w hich u p set the conscious m in d in its illu so ry ce rta in tie s by c o n fro n tin g it w ith th e rid d le of its existence. F igure 3 308

T h e p ic tu re shows a tree o f lig h t th a t is a t the sam e tim e a ca n d e la b ru m . T h e ab strac t fo rm of th e tree p o in ts to its s p irit­ u al n a tu re . T h e en d s o f th e b ran ch es are lig h te d candles illu m i­ n a tin g th e dark n ess of an enclosed space, p erh ap s a cave o r vault. T h e secret a n d h id d e n n a tu re of th e process is th u s em phasized an d its fu n c tio n m ad e clear: th e illu m in a tio n of consciousness. F ig u re 4

3°9

A lth o u g h c u t o u t of gold-foil, th e tree is realistic. I t is still in th e w in try , leafless state of sleep. I t rises u p ag ain st a cosm ic b a ck g ro u n d a n d bears in its b ran ch es a large g o ld en ball, p ro b ­ ab ly th e sun. T h e gold in d icates th a t th o u g h th e p a in te r does n o t y et have a living, conscious re la tio n to th is c o n ten t, she n evertheless has a n em o tio n a l in tu itio n of its g re a t value. F ig u re 3

3 10

T h e tree is leafless b u t bears little re d flowers, h a rb in g e rs of spring. T h e b ran ch es are tip p e d w ith flames, a n d fire leaps u p fro m th e w ater o u t of w h ich th e tree is grow ing. So th e tree is also so m eth in g lik e th e je t of a fo u n ta in . T h e sym bol of th e fo u n ta in , th e fo n tin a , is k n o w n in alchem y; in th e alchem ical p ic tu res it is o ften show n as a m ed iev al to w n fo u n ta in ,2 a n d th e u p rig h t p a rt in th e m id d le w o u ld co rresp o n d to th e tree. T h e u n io n o f fire a n d w ater expresses th e u n io n of opposites. T h e p ic tu re bears o u t th e alch em ical saying: “ O u r w ater is fire.” 2 [Cf. “T h e Psychology o f the T ransference,” Fig. 1.]

255

Figure 6 3 11

T h e tree is red and looks lik e a branch o f coral. It is n ot reflected in the water, b u t grows sim u ltan eou sly downw ards and upwards. T h e fo u r m ou n tain s in the low er h alf o f the picture are n o t reflections either, for their opposites are five m ountains. T h is suggests that the low er w orld is n ot a m ere reflection of the upper w orld, b u t that each is a w orld in itself. T h e tree stands in the m id d le b etw een two walls o f rock, rep resenting the op p o­ sites. T h e four m ou n tain s also appear in Figure 24. Figure 7

3 12

T h e tree has broken w ith irresistible force through the earth’s crust, h eavin g up m ou n tain ou s boulders on eith er side. T h e painter is expressing an analogous process in h im self, w hich runs its course o f necessity and can n ot be ch eck ed by any a m o u n t o f resistance, Since the boulders are snow -capped m o u n ­ tains, the tree has the cosm ic character o f the w orld-tree. F igure 8

3 1¾

T h e tree is leafless, b u t its branches end in little flam es lik e a Christm as tree. Instead of grow in g from the earth or water, it grows o u t o f th e body of a w om an. T h e p ain ter was a Protestant and was n o t fam iliar w ith th e m ed ieval sym bolism o f Mary as earth and stella marts. Figure 9

3*4

T h e tree is o ld and h u ge and stands on a tangle o f roots w hich is strongly em phasized. T w o dragons are approaching from le ft and right. In the tree there is a boy w ho has clim b ed up to w atch the dragons. W e are rem in d ed o f the dragons that guard the tree o f the H esperides, and o f the snakes that guard the hoard. T h e conscious sid e o f the boy is in a rather precarious situ ation because the m od icu m o f security it has ju st acquired is liab le to be d evou red again by the unconscious. T h e tu rm oil of the u n con sciou s is in d icated by the tangled roots as w ell as by the evid en tly enorm ous dragons and the tininess o f the ch ild.

T h e tree itself is n o t threatened inasm uch as its grow th is in d e­ p e n d en t of h u m an consciousness. It is a n a tu ra l process, and it is even dangerous to risk d istu rb in g it since it is guarded by drag­ ons. B u t because this is a n a tu ra l and ever-present process it can give m an protection provided that he summons u p courage enough to clim b in to the tree despite its guardians. F igure 10 3*5

O nce again we m eet the two dragons, b u t in the form of croc­ odiles. T h e tree is abstract and doubled, and is loaded w ith fruit. For all its d u ality it gives the im pression of being a single tree. T his, besides the rin g th a t unites the two trees, points to the u n io n of opposites which are also represented by the two croco­ diles. In alchemy, M ercurius is symbolized by the tree as well as by the dragon. H e is notoriously “d u p lex ,” is b o th m asculine and fem inine, and is m ade one in the hierosgamos of the chymical w edding. T h e synthesis of M ercurius forms an im p o rtan t p a rt of the alchem ical procedure. F igure n

3*6

A lthough tree and snake are b oth symbols of M ercurius, they stand for two different aspects on account of the la tte r’s dual n atu re. T h e tree corresponds to the passive, vegetative principle, the snake to the active, anim al principle. T h e tree symbolizes e arth b o u n d corporeality, the snake em otionality and the possession of a soul. W ith o u t the soul th e body is dead, and w ith o u t the body the soul is unreal. T h e u n io n of th e two, w hich is plainly im m in en t in this picture, w ould m ean the an i­ m ation of the body and the m aterialization of the soul. Similarly, the tree of paradise is an earnest of the real life which awaits the first parents w hen they em erge from th eir in itial childlike (i.e., plerom atic) state. Figure 12

3*7

T re e and snake are united. T h e tree bears leaves, an d the sun rises in its m idst. T h e roots are snakelike.

Figure 13 S18

3 !9

T h e stylized tree has in its tru n k a locked door leading to a h idden recess. T h e m iddle branch is decidedly snakelike and bears a lum inous body like a sun. T h e sim ple-m inded bird, re p ­ resenting the painter, weeps because it has forgotten the key to the door. It obviously suspects th a t th ere is som ething valuable inside the tree. Figure 14 T h e same p ain ter did a n u m b e r of variations on the treasure m otif. H ere and in the n ext picture it takes the form of a hero m yth: the hero discovers a sealed coffer in a h id d en vault, w ith a w onderful tree grow ing o u t of it. T h e little green dragon that follows the hero like a dog corresponds to the fam iliar sp irit of the alchemists, the m ercurial serpent o r draco viridis. M ythlike fantasies of this kind are n o t infrequen t, an d are m ore or less the equivalent of alchem ical parables or didactic tales. Figure 13

320

X he tree does n o t w ant to yield u p the treasure an d clasps the coffer all the tighter. W hen the hero touches the tree, a flame springs o u t a t him . I t is a fire-tree, like th at of the alche­ mists, and like the w orld-tree of Sim on Magus. Figure 16

S21

M any birds are sitting on the leafless tree, a m o tif fo u n d also in alchemy. T h e tree of wisdom (Sapientia) is su rro u n d ed by num erous birds, as in R eusner’s Pandora (1588), or else the birds fly ro u n d the figure of H erm es Trism egistus, as in De chem ia (1566).3 T h e tree is shown guarding a treasure. T h e precious stone h idden in its roots recalls G rim m ’s fairytale of the bottle h id d en in the roots of th e oak tree, w hich contained the sp irit M ercurius. T h e stone is a d ark blue sapphire, b u t its con­ nection w ith the sapphire stone in Ezekiel, w hich played a great role in ecclesiastical allegory, was n o t know n to th e p ain ter. T h e [Cf. P sychology a n d A lch em y, Figs. 231 (the P an dora picture) and 128 (the H erm es picture). D e chem ia is the work b y Zadith Senior.— E d i t o r s .]

3

special v irtue of the sapphire is th at it endows its w earer w ith chastity, piety, and constancy. I t was used as a m edicam ent for “com forting the h e art.” 4 T h e lapis was called the “sapphirine flower.” 5 Birds, as w inged beings, have always symbolized spirit o r thoughts. So the m any birds in o u r picture m ean th a t the thoughts of th e p ain ter are circling ro u n d the secret of the tree, th e treasure h idden in its roots. T h is symbolism underlies the parables of the treasure in the field, the pearl of great price, and th e grain of m u stard seed. Only, the alchemists were n o t refer­ rin g to the K ingdom of H eaven, b u t to the “ad m iran d u m M u n d i M aioris M ysterium ” (the w ondrous mystery of the m ac­ rocosm), and it looks as though the sapphire in the p ictu re has a sim ilar m eaning. Figure /7 3®a

T h is was done by the same painter, b u t a t a m uch later stage, w hen th e same idea reappeared in differentiated form . H e r tech­ nical ab ility has also im proved. T h e birds have been replaced by heart-shaped blossoms, for the tree has now come alive. Its four branches correspond to the square-cut sapphire, whose “con­ stancy” is em phasized by the little uroboros encircling it. In Horapollo the uroboros is the hieroglyph of etern ity .50 For the al­ chemists the self-devouring dragon was herm ap h ro d itic because it begot and gave b irth to itself. T h e y therefore called the sapp h irin e flower (i.e., the lapis) “H erm ap h ro d iti flos saphyricus.” Constancy and perm anence are expressed n o t only in th e age of the tree b u t also in its fruit, the lapis. L ike a fru it, the lapis is at the same tim e a seed, a n d although the alchem ists constantly stressed th a t the “seed of co rn ” dies in the earth, th e lapis de­ spite its seedlike n a tu re is in co rru p tib le. I t represents, ju st as m an does, a b eing th a t is forever dying yet eternal. Figure 18

3*3

T h e picture shows an initial state in w hich th e tree is unable to raise itself from the earth in spite of its cosmic n atu re. It is a 4 Ruland1 A Lexicon of Alchemy, p. 286. 5 "Epistola ad Hermannum," Theatrum chemicum, V (1660), p. 804.

Ba [But Cf. T he Hieroglyphics of Horapollo, tr. Boas, p . 57.]

case of regressive developm ent, probably d ue to the fact th a t w hile the tree has a n a tu ra l tendency to grow away from the earth in to a cosmic space filled w ith strange astronom ical and m eteorological phenom ena, this w ould m ean reaching u p into an eerie unearthly w orld and m aking contact w ith otherw orldly things w hich are terrifying to the earth b o u n d ratio n ality of the n a tu ra l m an. T h e upw ard grow th of the tree w ould n o t only endanger the supposed security of his earthly existence b u t w ould be a th reat to his m oral an d sp iritu al inertia, because it w ould carry him in to a new tim e and a new dim ension w here he could not get along w ithout m aking considerable efforts at re­ adaptation. T h e p atient in these cases is held back no t by m ere cowardice, b u t by a largely justifiable fear th a t warns him of the exacting dem ands of the future, w ithou t his being aware of w hat these dem ands are o r know ing the dangers of no t fulfilling them . H is anxious resistance and aversion seem q u ite g ro u n d ­ less, and it is only too easy for him to rationalize them away and, w ith a little assistance, brush them aside like a troublesom e in ­ sect. T h e result is just the psychic situation shown by o u r pic­ ture: an in tu rn e d grow th which throw s the supposedly solid earth in to increasing turm oil. Secondary fantasies th en arise w hich, according to the p a tien t’s disposition, revolve ro u n d sex­ uality or the pow er drive or both. T his leads sooner or later to the form ation of n eurotic symptoms and to the alm ost unavoid­ able tem ptation for both p atien t and analyst to take these fan­ tasies seriously as causative factors and thus to overlook the real task.

F igure 19

324

T h is picture, done by a different p atien t, shows th a t Figure 18 is n o t unique. It is, however, no longer a case of unconscious regression, b u t of one th a t is becom ing conscious, w hich is why th e tree has a hum an head. W e cannot tell from the p ictu re w hether the w itchlike tree nym ph is clutching at the earth or rising unw illingly from it. T h is is in com plete accord w ith the divided state of the p a tie n t’s consciousness. B ut the u p rig h t trees standing around show th a t w ithin o r outside herself she has p er­ ceived living exam ples of the way trees ou g h t to grow. She has 260

in te rp re te d the tree as a witch and the regressive grow th as the cause of magical effects of a sinister nature. Figure 20 3*5

T h e tree stands in isolation dom inating the top of a m o u n ­ tain. I t is thick w ith leaves and has in its tru n k a doll swathed in m u lticoloured wrappings. T h e p ain ter was rem in d ed of the h ar­ le q u in m otif. T h e fool's m otley shows th at she felt she was deal­ ing w ith som ething crazy an d irrational. She was conscious of having thought of Picasso, whose style was ap parently suggested by the h a rle q u in ’s dress. T h e association probably has a deeper m eaning and is not ju st a superficial com bination of ideas. I t was this same im pression of irratio n ality that led to the regressive developm ent in the two previous pictures. All three cases are concerned w ith a process w hich the m odern m in d finds ex­ trem ely disturbing, and not a few of my patients have openly confessed th eir fear of any such autonom ous developm ent of th e ir psychic contents. In these cases it is of the greatest th era­ peutic value if one can dem onstrate to th em the historicity of th e ir apparently u n iq u e and unassim ilable experiences. W h en a p atien t begins to feel the inescapable n a tu re of his in n e r devel­ opm ent, he may easily be overcome by a panic fear th a t he is slipping helplessly in to some k ind of madness he can no longer understand. M ore than once I have had to reach for a book on m y shelves, b rin g dow n an old alchem ist, an d show my p atien t his terrifying fantasy in the form in which it appeared four h u n ­ dred years ago. T h is has a calm ing effect, because the p a tie n t then sees that he is n o t alone in a strange w orld which nobody understands, b u t is p art of the great stream of h u m an history, which has experienced countless tim es the very things th a t he regards as a pathological proof of his craziness. Figure 21

Sa6

T h e doll in the previous p ictu re contained a sleeping h u m an figure undergoing m etam orphosis like the larva of an insect. H e re as well the tree acts as a m o th er to the h u m an figure h id ­ den in its tru n k . T h is accords w ith the trad itio n al m atern al sig­ nificance of the tree.

F ig u r e 22 327

T h e d e v e lo p m e n t h a s g o n e a sta g e f u r t h e r . T h e s le e p in g fig­ u r e aw ak es, h a l f e m e rg e s f r o m t h e tr e e a n d m a k e s c o n ta c t w i t h th e a n i m a l w o r ld . T h e “ t r e e - b o r n ” is th u s c h a r a c te r iz e d n o t o n ly as a c h i l d o f n a t u r e b u t as a n a u t o c h t h o n o u s p r i m o r d i a l b e i n g g r o w in g t r e e l ik e o u t o f th e e a r th . T h e tr e e n y m p h is a n E v e w h o , in s te a d o f b e i n g ta k e n fr o m A d a m ’s s id e , h a s c o m e in to e x is te n c e i n d e p e n d e n t ly . T h i s s y m b o l is e v id e n tly i n t e n d e d to c o m p e n s a te n o t m e r e ly th e o n e -s id e d n e s s a n d u n n a t u r a l n e s s o f th e u ltr a - c iv iliz e d m a n b u t also , a n d i n p a r tic u la r , th e b ib lic a l m y th o f th e s e c o n d a ry c r e a tio n o f E v e .

F ig u r e 23 328

T h e tr e e n y m p h c a r r ie s th e s u n a n d is a fig u re c o m p o s e d o f lig h t. T h e w avy b a n d in th e b a c k g r o u n d is r e d , a n d c o n sis ts o f liv in g b l o o d t h a t flow s r o u n d th e g ro v e o f t r a n s f o r m a tio n . T h i s in d ic a te s t h a t th e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n is n o t j u s t a n a ir y fa n ta s y , b u t is a p ro c e ss t h a t re a c h e s d o w n i n t o th e s o m a tic s p h e r e o r e v e n a ris e s f r o m it.

F ig u r e 24 329

T h i s d r a w in g c o m b in e s v a r io u s m o tif s f r o m t h e p r e c e d in g p ic tu r e s b u t lays p a r t i c u l a r stress o n t h e lig h t- o r s u n -s y m b o l, w h ic h is r e p r e s e n t e d as a q u a t e r n i t y . I t is w a te r e d b y f o u r riv e r s e a c h d o n e i n a d i f f e r e n t c o lo u r . T h e y flow d o w n f r o m w h a t t h e p a t i e n t c a lle d f o u r h e a v e n ly o r “ m e ta p h y s ic a l” m o u n t a i n s . W e m e t t h e f o u r m o u n t a in s e a r l i e r i n F ig u r e 6 . T h e y also a p p e a r in th e d r a w i n g o f a m a le p a t i e n t w h ic h I m e n t i o n e d in P s y c h o lo g y a n d A l c h e m y ,G w h e r e th e f o u r r iv e r s a r e r e p r o d u c e d i n F ig s. 62 a n d 109. I n a ll th e s e cases I a m as l i t t l e r e s p o n s ib le f o r t h e n u m ­ b e r f o u r as I a m f o r a ll t h e o t h e r a lc h e m ic a l, G n o s tic , a n d m y th o ­ lo g ic a l q u a t e r n i ti e s . M y c r itic s s e e m to h a v e t h e f u n n y id e a t h a t I h a v e a s p e c ia l l i k in g f o r t h e n u m b e r f o u r a n d t h e r e f o r e f in d i t e v e ry w h e re . J u s t f o r o n c e , th e y s h o u l d lo o k i n t o a n a lc h e m ic a l tr e a tis e — b u t t h a t is e v id e n tly to o m u c h o f a n e ffo rt. S in c e “sci6 Par. 217.

en tific” criticism is n in e ty p e r c e n t p re ju d ic e , it in v a riab ly takes a v ery lo n g tim e fo r th e facts to b e recognized. 33° T h e n u m b e r fo u r, lik e th e s q u a rin g of th e circle, is n o t acci­ d en tal, w hich is w hy— to take an ex am p le k n o w n even to m y critics— th e re are n o t th re e or, fo r th a t m a tte r, five d irectio n s, b u t precisely fo u r. I w ill on ly m e n tio n in passing th a t, besides this, th e n u m b e r fo u r possesses special m a th em a tic al p ro p erties. T h e q u a te rn a ry elem en ts in o u r p ic tu re , as well as a c c e n tu a tin g th e light-sym bol, am p lify it in such a way th a t it is n o t difficult to see w h at is m e an t: an acceptance of w holeness by th e little fem ale figure, an in tu itiv e a p p re h e n sio n of th e self. F igure 331

25

A still la te r stage is show n here. T h e fem ale figure is n o lo n g e r ju s t th e re c ip ie n t o r b e a re r of th e light-sym bol b u t has b e e n d raw n in to it. T h e p erso n ality is m o re p o w erfu lly affected th a n in the prev io u s p ic tu re. T h is increases th e d a n g e r of id e n ­ tificatio n w ith th e self— a d a n g e r n o t to be taken lightly. A nyone w ho has passed th ro u g h such a d e v e lo p m e n t w ill feel te m p te d to see th e goal of his experiences a n d efforts in u n io n w ith th e self. In d eed , th e re are suggestive p reced en ts fo r this, a n d in th e pres­ e n t case it is a lto g e th e r possible. B u t th e re are c e rta in factors in th e p ic tu re w h ich en ab le th e p a in te r to d istin g u ish h e r ego from th e self. She was a n A m erican w o m an w ho was in flu en ced by th e m ythology of th e P u e b lo In d ia n s: th e corn-cobs ch aracterize the fem ale figure as a goddess. She is fasten ed to th e tre e by a snake, a n d th u s form s an analogy to th e crucified C h rist, w ho, as th e self, was sacrificed fo r earth ly h u m a n ity , ju s t as P ro m e th e u s was c h a in e d to th e rock. M a n ’s efforts to achieve w holeness corres­ p o n d , as th e d iv in e m y th shows, to a v o lu n ta ry sacrifice of th e self to th e b o n d ag e of earth ly existence. H e re I w ill only p o in t o u t this co rresp o n d en ce w ith o u t g o in g in to it fu rth e r. 332 I n this p ic tu re, th en , th e re are so m an y elem en ts of th e d i­ v in e m y th th a t unless th e p a tie n t’s consciousness w ere u tte rly b lin d e d (an d th e re are n o signs of this) she c o u ld easily d iscrim ­ in a te b etw ee n ego an d self. A t this stage it is im p o rta n t n o t to su ccu m b to a n in flatio n , such as w o u ld in ev itab ly su p erv en e w ith ’ all its very u n p le a sa n t consequences if, a t th e m o m en t w h en th e self becam e recognizable, she id e n tified w ith it a n d 263

333

thus b lin d ed herself to the insight she had attained. If the n a tu ­ ral im pulse to identify w ith the self is recognized, one then has a good chance of freeing oneself from a state of unconsciousness. B ut if this o p p o rtu n ity is overlooked or n o t used, the situ atio n does n o t rem ain the same as before b u t gives rise to a repression coupled w ith dissociation of the personality. T h e developm ent of consciousness which the realization of the self m ight have led to turns into a regression. I m ust emphasize that this realization is n o t ju st an intellectual act b u t is p rim arily a m oral one, in com parison w ith which intellectual un d erstan d in g is of second­ ary im portance. For this reason, the symptoms I have described can also be observed in patients who, from inferior motives which they will not adm it, refuse a task th at has been laid u p o n them by fate. I w ould like to draw atten tio n to a fu rth e r peculiarity: the tree has no leaves, and its branches could ju st as well be roots. A ll its vitality is concentrated in the centre, in the h um an figure th a t represents its flower and fru it. A person whose roots are above as well as below is thus like a tree grow ing sim ultaneously downwards an d upw ards. T h e goal is n e ith e r height n o r depth, b u t the centre. Figure 26

334

T h e idea developed in the previous p ictu re reappears here in slightly variant form. T h is idea may truly be said to be in the process of delineating itself, for the conscious m in d of the pa­ tie n t follows only a vague feeling which gradually takes shape in the act of draw ing. She w ould have been q u ite u nable to form ulate beforehand, in a clear concept, w hat she w anted to express. T h e structure of the picture is a m andala divided into four, w ith the m id p o in t displaced downwards, beneath the feet of the figure. T h e figure stands in the u p p e r section and thus belongs to the realm of light. T h is m andala is an inversion of the traditional C hristian cross, whose long u p rig h t is below the cross-beam. W e m ust conclude from the picture th at the self was realized first of all as an ideal figure of light which nonetheless takes the form of an inverted C hristian cross. W hereas the Iatte r’s p o in t of intersection is n ear the top, so th at the goal of u n ­ conscious striving towards the centre is displaced upw ards, the 264

dow nw ard glance of the figure shows th at h er goal should lie b e ­ low. T h e short u p rig h t beam of the cross of lig h t rests on the black earth, and the figure holds in h er left hand a black fish draw n from the dark sphere. T h e mudra-like , 7 hesitant gesture of the rig h t hand, directed towards the fish com ing from the left (i.e., from the unconscious), is characteristic of the p atient, who had studied theosophy and was therefore u n d e r In d ian influ­ ence. T h e fish has a soteriological significance w hether conceived in C hristian o r in In d ia n term s (as the fish of M anu and as an avatar of V ishnu). T h e re is reason to conjecture (see Figure 2 9 ) th a t the p atien t was acquainted w ith the Bhagavadgita, w hich says (X, 3 1 ): “A m ong fishes I am M akara.” M akara is a dolphin or a species of L eviathan, and is one of the symbols of the svddhisthana-chakra in T a n tric yoga. T h is centre is localized in the bladder and is characterized as the w ater region by the fish and m oon symbols. As the chakras are presum ably eq uivalent to earlier localizations of consciousness (the cmdhata-chakra, for in ­ stance, corresponding to the 4>pkves of the Greeks ) , 8 svadhisthana is probably the earliest localization of all. From this region comes the fish symbol w ith its age-old num en. W e are rem in d ed of the “days of C reation,” of the tim e w hen consciousness arose, w hen the prim ordial u n ity of being was barely d istu rb ed by the tw i­ light of reflection ,9 an d m an swam like a fish in the ocean of the unconscious. In this sense the fish signifies a restoration of the plerom atic paradisal state or, in the language of T ib e ta n T an trism , of the B ardo . 10 335 T h e plants at the foot of the figure are really rooted in the air. T ree, tree nym ph, and plants are all lifted up from the earth or, m ore probably, are on the p o in t of com ing down to it. T h is is also suggested by the fish as emissary of the deep. T h e situa­ tion is in my experience an unusual one and may be due to theosophical influences. F illing the conscious m in d w ith ideal con­ ceptions is a characteristic feature of W estern theosophy, b u t no t the confrontation w ith the shadow and the w orld of darkness. O ne does not become enlightened by im agining figures of light, I M u d r a (Skt.) is a r i t u a l o r m a g ic a l g e s tu r e . 8 F o r t h e c h a h r a th e o ry see A v a lo n , T h e S e r p e n t P o w e r , a n d c o n c e r n in g see O n ia n s , T h e O r ig i n s o f E u r o p e a n T h o u g h t , p p . 14SF. 8 [Cf. s u p r a , p a r . 301.] 10 Cf. E v a n s -W e n tz , T h e T i b e t a n B o o k o f t h e D e a d , p p . io if f .

265

329 cockatoo, re d , 205 code: m o ra l, 184; p e n a l, 184 C odices a n d M a n u sc rip ts: B asel: "A lch y m istisc h e s M S.”: 144η; “ D e a rb o re c o n te m p la tio n is ,” A X . 128b: 315η B e rlin : C od. B ero l. L a t. 532: 152η; C od. B ero l. L a t. Q.584: 67η, 305η, 3°S L e id e n : C od. Voss. C h em . 520 (29): 83η, 23 in L o n d o n : “ L e L iv re des A n sien es Esto ire s” : B M MS. A d d . 15268: fig. B i; R ip le y S crow le, B M MS. S Ioane 5025: fig. B5, 199η, 212, 286η, 303, 306η, 317 M u n ic h : C od. G e rm . 598 (“ B u c h d e r h lg . D re if a ltig k e it”): 144η, fig. B3 N ew H a v e n : G e rm a n alc h . m s. (M el­ lo n C oll.): fr o n tis p . P a ris: B N MS. g r. 2250: 15412; B N MS. gr. 2252: 64η,· B N MS. g r. 2419: 228η; Ste. G en . MS. 2263-64: 16611 St. G a ll: C od. G e rm . A lch. V ad .: 144η; C od. V ad. 390: 76n V a tic a n : C od. V at. L a t. 7286: 83η Z u ric h : C od. R h e n o v . 172: 144η, 220η , 23 m O th e r : MS A k h m im : 71; C od. B ezae:

243 c o e lu m (heav en ), 136η; as M e rc u riu s, 219; as q u in ta essen tia , 219 coffer, figs. 14-15, 258 coffin, as tre e o f d e a th , 304 co g n itio : m a tu tin a , 247-49; s u i ip siu s, 248; v e sp e r tin a , 247f , 250 c o g n itiv e process, 289

c o h a b ita tio n of Sol a n d L u n a , 123 c o in c id e n tia o p p o s ito r u m , G o d as, 209/ c o ld /w a rm , 278 C o lerid g e , S. T ., 15311 co llective: a n d a rc h e ty p a l sym bols, 301; consciousness, 341; d elu sio n s, 36; n a ­ tu r e o f self, 240; p syche, 347; p sych ic p h e n o m e n a , 36; so u l, 240η; u n c o n ­ scious, see u n co n sc io u s c o lly riu m , 75 C o lo n n a , F ran cesco : H y p n e r o to m a c h ia P o lip h ili, 141η, 157, 176, 183, 304 colo u r(s), 23, 5g, 106, 152801, 154, 218, 238, 290, 339; em p ty , a n d fo rm s, 29, 37; fo u r, 305; fo u r p rim a ry , figs. A 6, A8; th re e , 76; see also b lack ; b lu e ; g ree n ; p u rp le ; re d ; w h ite ; y ellow C o lso n , T . H ., a n d G . H . W h ita k e r, 26611 c o m b u s tib le liq u id , 320 C o m m u n io n , 157; su b stan ces, 154 c o m p a ra tiv e : a n a to m y , 27312; re se a rc h in to sy m b o ls/sy m b o lism , 273, 341 c o m p assio n , 112 c o m p e n s a tio n : b io lo g ic a l, b y d re a m s, 69; la w /p r in c ip le of, 245 c o m p e n sa to ry : Logos, 297; p o w ers of th e u n co n scio u s, 335; p rim o rd ia l im ­ ages, 301; re la tio n to C h ris t sy m b o l­ ized b y M e rc u riu s , 245; te n d en c ies fro m u n co n scio u s, 245 com p!ex(es): a u to n o m o u s , 5 0 / (see also system s); a u to n o m y of, 34; c a s tra tio n , 30411; n u m in o u s , 328; psychology, 326; sp lit-o ff, 34 c o m p le x io o p p o s ito r u m , 241 c o m p o sitio n : o f th e liq u id s , 62; o f th e w aters, s g f, 66, 91, 102, 105, 108 c o n c e n tra tio n , 25 c o n c e n tra tio n cam p , 342/ c o n c re tiz a tio n , 105, 179 c o n d e n sin g a p p a ra tu s , 88 c o n d u c t: C h in ese, 324; p rin c ip le s of,

325 c o n fig u ra tio n s, a rc h e ty p a l, o f th e u n ­ conscious, 253

INDEX co n ftrm am entum , 137 conflict(s), ig, 15, 116, 120, 127, 189, 244; betw een know ledge an d faith , 115; of duty, 184f; in Paracelsus, 112; of opposites, 348; w ith th e u n co n ­ scious, 336 coniunctio, 123, 135η, 152/, 153«, fig· B4, 181 f, 187Scn1 337; anim ae cum corpore, fig. B5; fourfold, 278η; n o ­ blest, 278ft; obscene pictures of, 231; rela tio n of suffering to the, 334; supracelestial, 153; tetraptiva, 277, erS n; threefold, 278n; triptativa, 277 co n junction, 137; cross as m ed iu m of, 337; o f sun an d m oon, 79n ; tree as m edium of, 337 conscious: a ttitu d e , aberratio n s of, 185: — , one-sidedness of, 181; d ifferentia­ tion, 301; discrim ination, 239; expec­ tations, 16; ju d g m en t, 17; m in d , see m ind; m orality, 325; psyche, 347; realization, 244; an d unconscious, dissociation betw een, 34; u n io n w ith unconscious, 180; way, 20; w ill, 12/, 28; w illing, 16 consciousness, 11-14, 20, 37- 42, 89, g4, 150, 197, 260, 301; acute state of, 27; b ro ad e n in g o r h eig h ten in g of, 243; Chinese, gg; C hrist as archetype of, 247; C hristian, 128; — character o f G oethe's, 245; circum ferential, 26; civilized, 184; clarification of, 243; clarity of, 28, 40; collective, 341; cram p of, 17; creative, 40; cu lt of, 36; daylight of, 242; d etach m en t of, 27, 44/, 46, 52; developm ent of, 69; differ­ en tia tio n of, 200, 243, 335; disintegra­ tion of, 29; divided, 260; as effect of anim a, 42; evolution of hig h er, 54; extinction of, 336; finite, 171; fire as, 15m ; fo u r functions of, 84; free of contents, 38; functions of, 176; h ead is seat of, 81; higher, 15, 18, 48, 73, 189, 200, 297; as h u i, 2 in , 25; illu m i­ n atio n of, 255; — a n d expansion of, Sg. 3; illusion of suprem acy of, 52; in d iv id u al, 29; in n e r an d central, 26;

intensification of, 21; language of, see language; an d life, 21, 23; — , union of, 21-25; lig h t of, go, 247; — , an d reason, 40; localizations of, 265; m asculine, 335; m o d ern , 327; m ono­ theism of, 36; m oral, 196; narrow ness of, 37; n a tu ra l, 247; o rd erin g p rin c i­ ples of, 325; o rien tin g system of, 167; is p artisan , 28; possession by, 36; present level of, 28, 200; p rim itiv e, 268; P ro testan t cu lt of, 48; q u a te r­ nary stru ctu re of, 169; ratio n al, 238, 345; rela tio n of lapis to, 240; sep ara­ tion of, a n d life, 21; stren g th en in g of, 243; supra-, 184; symbols com pen­ sate u n a d a p te d a ttitu d e of, 302; tw i­ lig h t state of, 92; unconscious n o t d e­ rivative of, 42; an d unconscious, sp lit betw een, 246; u n ity of, 29; u p ro o ted , 12, 21, 49; W estern, 55; w idening of, 9 - 55 - 296 C onsecration in Mass, 84 conservatism , psychic, 12 C onsideratio1 165η “Consilium co niugii,” 82η, 83, 88, 94, 103«, 107η, 128«, 15280«, 217«, 310«, 319

. 331

constancy, 259 C onstantine, E m peror, 122 c o n te m p la tio , 165« contem plation, 29«, 44, fig. A5; of life o f Jesus, 165«; sage in, 29; tree of, 315

content(s): repressed, 36; unconscious, see unconscious contradictions, logical an d m oral, 245 conviction, inw ard, 54 cooking, 68, 75 Coom arasw am y, A. Κ., 310η, 313«, 337« copper, 89, 183, 218, 277 coral, tree of, 30880« cor a ltu m , 249« corn: seed of, 259; cobs, 263, fig. 25 corners, four, of th e heavens, 279 co ro n a , 269, fig. 31 corporalia an d sp iritu alia, 103

INDEX c o r p o r e a l / i n c o r p o r e a l , 75; l a n g u a g e of, 76 c o r p o r e a l i t y , 257 corpus: astrale, 125, 152, 167, 16872; coeleste sive supracoeleste, 137; glorificationis, 13073, 167; Jesahach, 167; mysticum, jo^n, 107; n o s t r u m , 233 Corpus Hermeticum, 73, 78, 206, 225 c o r r u p t i o n , 134&71 cortical centres, 185 cosmic: principles, fig. A6; p r o j e c t i o n , 335; tree, see tree cosmos, m a t e r i a l i t y of, 239 C r a t o von C r a f f t h e i m , 119 Crawley, A l f r e d E r n e s t , 14373 creatio ex nihilo, 201; d e n i a l of, 236 c r e a t i o n , 132; days of, 248, 265; of m a n , 86; m y t h , 99; of souls, 86 C r e a t o r : k n o w l e d g e of t h e , 247n; love a n d p r a i s e of the, 24772; r e n a m e d C o n g l o m e r a t e , 201 crocodile(s), 7922, 257, fig. 10 cross, 22, 2 8 m , 332, fig. 26; as b r i d a l b e d , 337; c o n n e c t i o n of tree w i t h , 332; of light, 265; m e d i u m of conj u n c t i o n , 337; m o t i f s , 268; as q u a t e r n i t y , 282, 332; s e r p e n t on t h e , 333; sign of, 68, 282 cross-cousin m a r r i a g e , 278 crow, black, 229 crowd, 41 crowfoot, 15572 crown, 269, 317; King's, 8073; m u r a l , 30372; of stars, 80 c r o w n e d : boy, fig. 32; d r a g o n , fig. 14; s e r p e n t , fig. 32 crucifix, 334; see also cross c r y s t a l s ) , 101; terrible, 281 cube, 271 Sen c u l t , 37; of consciousness, 36; of t h e d e a d , 280; i n s t r u m e n t , c h u r i n g a as, 97; stone-, 100 c u l t u r e , 11; Chinese, 8; C h r i s t i a n , g; h e r o , 100; m e g a l i t h i c , 100 C u m o n t , Franz, 30773 C u p i d , 247; a r r o w of, 83; M e r c u r i u s as, 231

cupiditas, 38 c u t t i n g off of h a n d s a n d feet, 329 cycle: b i r t h a n d d e a t h , 79, 102; d e a t h a n d r e b i r t h , 105 C y p h a n t a , 175 C y p r i a n , t h e , 183

D D a e m o g o r g o n , M a r s called, 14172 daemon(s), 36, 203, 231, 268f, 28571; c o n q u e r e d , 327; as a f a m i l i a r , 328; is an illusion, 37; m a s c u l i n e , 267; Merc u r i u s as s t o r m , 202; of r e v e l a t i o n , 178; of scientific spirit, 128; serpent-, f e m a l e , 240; tree, 200 d a e m o n i c : agencies, 323; forces of life, 38 d a e m o n i z a t i o n of m a n , 282 D a i m o r g o n , 14171 D a m a s c e n e e a r t h , 318 d a n c e : m a n d a l a , 23; r o u n d , of stars, 22672 danger(s): of t h e Art, 322, 327, 329; psychic n a t u r e of, 170 D a n i e l : B o o k of, 13, 132, 2 8 m , 28271, 283; vision of, 282 D a n t e Alighieri, 1 4 m , 176, 236, 295, 31172 d a r k : abyss of n o t - k n o w i n g , 178; backg r o u n d of soul, 147; M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; p o w e r s of psyche, 42 darkness(es), 24, 162, 170, 177, 242, 245, 247, 249, 325, 335/; c r e a t u r e s of, 162; h o r r i b l e , of o u r m i n d , 250; of h u m a n n a t u r e , 244; l i g h t of, 1 6 0 f f ; of n a t u r e , 160; of n i g h t , 23672; poles of light a n d , 25; of S a t u r n , 12672, 130, 15272; w o r l d of, 265 d a u g h t e r s : of m e n , 81; f o u r , 98/ D a v i d , 346, 223 Davis, T . L „ a n d L u - c h ' i a n g W u , 1 2 6 7 7 , 22672, 32472 day(s): of j u d g m e n t , 297; a n d n i g h t , r h y t h m of, 248; a single, 62, 7972; of week, p a g a n n a m e s of, 249

395

INDEX d a y - d r e a m i n g , subjective, 43 dead, 29, 35, 68; a w a k e n e d , 290*1; c u l t o£ the, 280; G o d , 128; h e a r t s / s o u l s o f , 271*3, 317; r e s u r r e c t i o n of, 297; tree, see tree; see also d e a t h ; E g y p t i a n Book of t h e D e a d ; Tibetan Book of the Dead De alchemia, 126*1, 140*1, 147n, 2ion, 297*7; see also individual treatises in Bib!. A Dea N a t u r a , 98 " D e a r b o r e c o n t e m p l a t i o n i s , " see Codices a n d M a n u s c r i p t s " D e a r t e c h y m i c a , " see " L i b e r d e a r t e cbymica" d e a t h , 38ff, 46, 105, 16480*1, 166, 218, 228, 322, 326; cycle of b i r t h a n d , 79, 102; - d e a l i n g poison, 323; of d r a g o n , 316; n o t e n d b u t goal, 46; figurative, 6 3 n ; a n d life, 51 *?; -ray, red, 304; a n d r e b i r t h , 73, 102, 105; — , of p h i l o sophical tree, 287; survival a f t e r , 51 n; tree of, 304; — , life a n d , 271 d e c a p i t a t i o n , 72 De chernia, see Z a d i t h Senior " D e c l a r a t i o et E x p l i c a t i o A d o l p h i , " 80 d e c o m p o s i t i o n , 134*1 Dee, J o h n , 155*1, 220*1, 32211, 332*1 d e e p h e a r t {cor altum), 249*1 D£esse R a i s o n , 244 d e f e c a t i o n , 220*1 d e G o e j e , M. J., see Dozy deity, n a t u r e , 200, 247 delusion(s), 34, 37, 105*1; 335; collective, 36; of insane, 246; M e r c u r i u s a god of, 247; social a n d political, 8 d e m i u r g e , 73, 2 2 m , 222*1, 228; powers of, 87; p r i n c i p l e of, 232 D e m o c r i t u s , 67, 76, 103, 161, 225, 286, 321; pseudo-, 77*1, 147 demon(s), 39, 89, 117, 119, 128, 161; of air, 161; of forest, 198; lead possessed of a, 323; p e r s o n a l , 41 d e m o n o l o g y , p r i m i t i v e , 42 " D e m o r g o n , " 141*1 d e p e n d e n c e , free, 52

37

d e p e r s o n a l i z i n g of unconscious figures, 42 deprcssion(s), 331, 335 descent, 59, 63, 150, 154; ascent a n d , 59, 1038c?!, 104*1, 218, 304; of M e r c u r i u s , 233 d e t a c h m e n t , 41; of consciousness, 44/, 52; i n n e r , 38 D e u c a l i o n , 99 Deursen, Arie v a n , 100*1 deus: absconditus, 95, 104/, 241; terrenus, 166; terrestris, M e r c u r i u s as, 235, 241; see also god(s) Deussen, P a u l , 20611 D e u t e r o n o m y , 306, 318 d e v e l o p m e n t : C h r i s t i a n , 48; of m e a n ing, 272; of personality, 18, si; psychic, n f , 15, 21, 162, 245; regressive, 260/; s p i r i t u a l , 47, 245 devil(s), 7, 83, 90, 105*1, 113*1, 114/, 128*1, 143, 170, 183*?, 223, 241, 245/, 328; d e c e p t i o n s of the, 323; d r a g o n ' s tail identical w i t h , 316; M e r c u r i u s as. 237; S a t u r n d w e l l i n g p l a c e of, 228; seven, i28&n; tricked, 198; w i t h i n , 244 dew, 86, 176, 305*1; r e a n i m a t i n g , 103 Dharmakaya, 35 d i a b o l i z a t i o n , of L u c i f e r a n d M e r c u rius, 248 diabolus, s u l p h u r as, 228 d i a d e m , 147, 269 diadema cordis tui, 26g dialectic, p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 238 " D i a l o g u s M e r c u r i i , A l c h y m i s t a e et N a t u r a e , " see Sendivogius d i a m o n d body, 21, 46, 51 D i a n a (goddess), 303 dice, g a m e of, 267/ " D i c t a B e l i n i " : (1) Distinctio X X V I I I , in Theatr. chem. V, 197*1; (2) Theatr. chem. I, 227; (3) Bibl. chem. curiosa, 219, 236*1; (4) Rosarium, in Art. aurif., 126, 227 " D i c t i o n a r y of G o l d m a k i n g , " 74 D i e t e r i c h , A l b r e c h t , 70n difference(s), racial, 11

INDEX d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , 336; conscious, 301; of consciousness, see consciousness; of W e s t e r n i n t e l l e c t , 9; see also n o n differentiation D i o n y s i u s , 70 D i o s c o r i d e s , 155", 156 D i o s k o r o s , 13871 d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , 41, 200, 243, 336; c o n scious, 239 disease(s): " e n s s p i r i t u a l e " of, g o d s h a v e b e c o m e , 37; o b s c u r i t y as d a r k n e s s of, 331 d i s e m b o w e l l i n g , 329 d i s m e m b e r m e n t / d i s m e m b e r i n g , 60, 67/, 70&J1, 71, 73, 84, 8771, 91, 30471 d i s o r d e r , i n f e r n a l , 122 d i s o r i e n t a t i o n , 13; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 8 d i s p l a c e m e n t : d o w n w a r d s , 266/; u p w a r d s , 265 d i s p o s i t i o n s : i n d i v i d u a l , 342; i n s t i n c tive, 275 d i s s o c i a t i o n , 35, 37, 82, 342, 345; b e t w e e n c o n s c i o u s a n d u n c o n s c i o u s , 34; of p e r s o n a l i t y , 264 d i s t i l l a t i o n , 148, 180; c i r c u l a t o r y , 148; t h o u s a n d f o l d , 148; vessel of, fig. B 7 , 88, 317; see also P e l i c a n ; retorta distillatio d i s t i l l i n g a p p a r a t u s , 317 d i s t u r b a n c e ( s ) , m e n t a l / p s y c h i c , 34, 324, 342; see also a b e r r a t i o n ; disease d i v i d e d : consciousness, 260; i n t o f o u r , t o t a l i t y i m a g e , 283 d i v i n e : a t t r i b u t e s of s t o n e , 328; d y n a m i s m of self, 285; fire, 209; l i g h t , 107, 330; love, 210, 307; m a g i c , 139; m o t h e r , 333; m y s t e r i e s , 188; m y t h , 263; n u m e n , 268; office of p h y s i c i a n , 116; r e v e l a t i o n , 116, 236; secrets, M e r c u r i u s as r e v e a l e r of, 230; s p a r k , 160; s p i r i t , 26; w a t e r , see w a t e r ; will, see will Divine Comedy, see D a n t e d i v i n i t y / D i v i n i t y , 149; of C h r i s t , 95, 119, 129; itself, M e r c u r i u s as, 235; t r i u n e , M e r c u r i u s as, 222 divinus ternarius, M e r c u r i u s as, 230

d i v i s i o n , 93; i n t o f o u r , 6 8 n , 8271, 8311, 168; by sex, 139 D j a b i r i b n H a y y a n , 2 1 5 7 1 , 286, 314 doctor(s), 13, 119, 121 d o c t r i n a i r i s m , F r e u d i a n , 342 d o c t r i n e ( s ) : a r c a n e , 129; B u d d h i s t yoga, 36; G n o s t i c , of A n t l i r o p o s , 171, 205, 220; of r e d e m p t i o n , in a l c h e m y , 205; secret, 49, 1 3 3 [ f , 188, 242 d o g . 69, 7312, 90, 93, 258; b l a c k , 311; -like w o m a n , 232; as logos, 232n; as p s y c h o p o m p , 23271 d o g m a , 242, 29371; C h r i s t i a n , 90, 221 d o l l , 261, fig. 20 d o l p h i n , 265 domus: ignis, 21 on; sapientiae, 172; thesaurorurn or gazophyladomus cium ( t r e a s u r e - h o u s e ) , 85 D o r n , G e r a r d , 86/, 1157;, 12477, 13471, •49#'

'54,

157-

16572,

L6FI

>

I6

9.

17 1 -

176, 187, 215, 217, 236, 287/?, 291 Sen, 292. 295, 330/, 334; " q u i d " of, 300; Veritas of, 324 WORKS: "Congeries Paracelsicae," 86n, 20971, 22771, 23071, 23571, 289, 31072, 33173; " D e t e n e b r i s c o n t r a n a t u r a m e t vita b r e v i , " 21773, 31177; " D u e l l u m a n i m i c u m c o r p o r e , " 15172; " D e g e n e a l o g i a m i n e r a l i u m , " 28772, 31 i n ; " P h i l o s o p h i a c h e m i c a , " 86/, 23572; " P h y s i c a g e n e s i s , " 139", 14922, 150; " P h y s i c a T r i s m e g i s t i , " 15072, 33 of; "Physica T r i t h e m i i , " ison, 15171; " S p e c u l a t i v a p h i l o s o p h i a , " 72, 83, 332; ed., De vita longa (Paracelsus), 13171, 144, I 6 4 « , 16812, 17272, 173/7, 18771 d o u b l e : c o n t r a r y n a t u r e of M e r c u r i u s , 319; d y a d s , u n i f i c a t i o n of, 278 d o v e , 339; of H o l y G h o s t , 89, g2?2 d o w n w a r d s , d i s p l a c e m e n t , see d i s p l a c e ment Dozy, R . , a n d M . J . d e G o e j e , 225Sen draco viridis, 258; see also s e r p e n t , dragon d r a g o n ( s ) , 64, 7 9 " , 87, 89/, 13273, 198, 228, 257, 330, 340; belly of, 210;

397

INDEX d u n g h e a p s , 14671, 170, 232 d u p l e x , M e r c u r i u s , 309, 3 i g D u r d a l e s , 158 d w a r f , 271, 2g7 dyad(s), 278, 280 d y n a m i s m , d i v i n e , of self, 28571

dragon(s) (cont.): c h a i n e d i n t h e u n d e r w o r l d , 242; c h t h o n i c n u m e n of tree, 317; d i v i n e w a t e r , 8271; egg s y n o n y m f o r , 82; ever-waking, 217; fire-spitting, 303, 321; g r e e n , c r o w n e d , fig. 14; h e a d of, 2911, 316; — , a n d tail of, 7971; killi n g of, 8371; l i t t l e g r e e n , 258; m a n y eyed, 86; o l d , 218; p o i s o n - d r i p p i n g , 218; p o i s o n o u s , 321; s e l f - d e v o u r i n g , 259; tail-eater, 79, 13271; tail, i d e n t i fied w i t h A n t i c h r i s t / d e v i l , 316; two, 217, 256/; u r o b o r o s , 223; w i n g e d a n d wingless, 217; see also s e r p e n t , m e r curial

E

dream(s), 66, 89, 91, 96, 11471, 176/, 194, 246, 283, 293, 300/, 341, 343; a l c h e m i cal l a n g u a g e of, 301; a n x i e t y in, 345; a p p a r e n t disguise i n , 347; a r c h a i c residues in, 347; a r c h e t y p a l , 6 g n ; -exp e r i e n c e ^ ) , 6771, 80; F r e u d ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of, 301; h e l p f u l , 179; images, 273; i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , subjective, 66; l a n g u a g e , 69; m e a n s w h a t it says, 347; of N e b u c h a d n e z z a r , 27271, 337; of P o l i p h i l o , see P o l i p h i l o ; s e n t by G o d , 105; s y m b o l i s m of, 6g, 347; -vision, 80; w o m e n ' s , 347; w o r l d of, 9871; of Z a r a t h u s t r a , 89; of Zosimos, 102; see also d a y - d r e a m i n g A n eagle circles o v e r Y's c o n c e n t r a t i o n c a m p ; h e t h i n k s of s h o o t i n g it f r o m a r o c k e t - p r o p e l l e d a i r c r a f t , 342-47 Dreifaltigkeitsbuch, see Codices a n d Manuscripts: Munich d r i n k , of i m m o r t a l i t y , 313 drive, p o w e r , 260 drug(s), 15371, 204 D r u i d s , 119 d u a l i s m : of a n c i e n t Persia, 243; see also Cathars d u a l i t y , 182, 214, 237, 246, 257, 336; of G o d , 26; of M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; of s o n s h i p , 22371; of soul, 214; in w o r l d a n d soul, 116 D u C a n g e , C. d u F., 14871, 32271 EXAMPLE:

eagle, 183, 280, 303, 317, 33g, 343^, 347; black, 198; b r a z e n , g3; " e y e , " 344 earth(s), 39, 49, 92, 217, 219, 233, 23671, 248, 256, 278, fig. 8; b l a c k , 265/; c e n t r e of, 149, 210; glorified, 311; goddess, fig. 8; M a r y as, 256; M e r c u rius, of p a r a d i s e , 235; m e t a l l i c , 310; p h i l o s o p h i c , 290; p u r i f i e d , 218; r e a l ity of, 54; r e d D a m a s c e n e , 318; salt of, 233; -spirit, 297; two, 27871; - w o r l d , fig. A4 E a r t h : M o t h e r , 98; S p i r i t , 7971 e a r t h l y : A d a m , 16971; astrology, 276; firmament of Paracelsus, 27671; p a r a dise, 196; stone, C h r i s t c o m p a r e d w i t h , 29271 E a s t / e a s t , 14, 22, 42/, 166; E u r o p e a n invasion of, 55; m i n d of, 56; philoso p h e r s of, 50; p r a c t i c e s of, 24; psychology of, 8; r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e s of, 53; s p i r i t of, 49; a n d W e s t , 55; —, d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n , 53 Easter Eve, 78 E a s t e r n : e n l i g h t e n m e n t , 54; ideas, 7, 10; i n t e l l e c t , 9, 55/; m a n d a l a s , 56; occultism, 7; p h i l o s o p h e r s , 6, 56; realism, 7, 288; religions, 6; w i s d o m , 11 Ebionites, 22371 ecclesiastical: allegory, 259; S a c r a m e n t , I 8 5 # ; t e r m i n o l o g y , 157; t r a d i t i o n , 2gg, 3 2 1 E c h i d n a : s y m b o l of M e r c u r i u s , 1 4 4 " E c k h a r t , M e i s t e r , 16, 50, 1 1 4 7 1 , 284 eclipse, 7971 ecstatic: e x p e r i e n c e , 40; states, 34; j o u r ney, 341

398

INDEX E d d a , 337*1 E d e m , 321 E d e n , r i v e r of, 319*1 E d f u , 73 E d o c h i n u m , 131, 164/f effect: n u m i n o u s , of a r c h e t y p a l symbols, 302; t h e r a p e u t i c , of d e t a c h m e n t , 45 efficacity, of things, 154, 157, 175 efflorescence, of m e t a l l i c salts, 146*1 egg(s), 63, 83, 87, 290; division of, 82; g e r m of, i52&*i; i d e n t i t y of, w i t h u r o b o r o s , 82n; of n a t u r e , 218; nom e n c l a t u r e of, 82*3; O l y m p i o d o r u s o n , 82**; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 82; s h i n i n g , fig. 32; s y n o n y m , f o r d r a g o n , 82; —, f o r vessel, 82; — , f o r w a t e r , 82; -white, 82 ego- 34. 45- 5lf> 9°- 18o8c*i, 239, 246, 248, 254, 263, 285n; affinity w i t h G o d , 117; c e n t r e of consciousness, 45; -centricity, 285*1; e n t a n g l e m e n t in t h e , 302; godlike, 118; - m a n i a , 38; m o r t a l , 171; personality, 254; r e l a t i o n of to self, 172 E g y p t , 81; a n c i e n t , 73 Egyptian(s): Book of t h e D e a d , 279; H e l l e n i s m , 279; m u m m i e s , 134; m y t h ology, 142; q u a t e r n i t y , 280; tale of B a t a , 305, 337n; y o u n g , 320 Eisler, R o b e r t , 307*1 Eleazar, A b r a h a m , 213*1, 220*1, 333*1 element(s), 150; ascent of, 150; b o d y ' s chemical, 195; chemical, 159; creation of, 150; Eucharistic, 159; f o u r , 65, 68, 82, g2#, 115, 129, 131, 13580*1, 141, 152, i 6 6 f f , 168*1, 176, 195, 219, 227, 266, 269, 278n, 293, 305, 332; h e a d - , 291*1; heavenly, 155; m a s c u l i n e , 74; of M e r c u r i u s , 217; o g d o a d of, 278; o m e g a , see o m e g a ; physical, 155; q u a t e r n i t y of, 278; r o u n d , 72, 76; of t h e stone, 314*1; " s u p e r m o n i c , " 180 Eliade, Mircea, 7 0 n , 1 0 m , 305*1, 307*1, 309*1, 340*1, 34 in Elias, see E l i j a h Eliezer b e n H y r c a n u s , R a b b i , 318, 337*1

E l i j a h / E l i a s , 136*1, 167; Apocalypse of, 71, 101 elixir, 166, 172; h u m a n , 94; of life, 51*1, 78&n, 81, 154; n a t u r a l , 134 e m b a l m i n g , 61, 64 E m b l a , 337*1 e m b r y o , 52 E m m e r i c h , C o u n t of Poitiers, 177 e m o t i o n , 15 e m o t i o n a l : intensity, 268; v a l u e , 268 e m o t i o n a l i t y , g, 257 e m p a t h y , 163 E m p e d o c l e a n rhizomata, 195 e m p i r i c a l n o m i n a l i s t , 289 e m p t i n e s s : c e n t r e of, 38; g r e a t , 39 e n a n t i o d r o m i a , 245 enclosure, 25 e n d of work, M e r c u r i u s as, 235 e n e r g y : life, 25; of b o d i l y sensations, 28 English "rescue circles," 51*1 " E n i g m a of B o l o g n a , " 338*1 E n k i d u , 321; s h a d o w of Gilgamesh, 320 e n l i g h t e n m e n t , 85, 186, 200, 280*1; Easte r n , 54; tree symbolizes, 313/ E n o c h , 132, 136*1, 137 Sen, 149, 166, 176*1, 210*1, 283; Book of, 143", "49 n > 282, 306, 308, 318; E t h i o p i c B o o k of, 306; p r e f i g u r a t i o n of Christ, 137*1; "son of m a n , " 149*1 E n o c h d i a n u s ( - u m , -i), 137, 142, 153, 165*1, 166, 168 Enos, 138*1 ens spirituale, of diseases, 113*1 e n t a n g l e m e n t ( s ) : in t h e ego, 302; e m o t i o n a l a n d i n t e l l e c t u a l , 28 entelechy, of Aristotle, 27 epidemic(s), psychic, 37 "Epigramma Mercurio philosophico d i c a t u m , " 230 E p i m e t h e u s , 94 E p i m e t h e u s , Franciscus, 144*1; see also Reusner E p i p h a n i u s , 88*7, 14680*1, 186, 223*1, 228*1, 309*1 E p i s t l e of B a r n a b a s , 87 " E p i s t o l a ad H e r m a n n u m , " 226*1, 259*1 e q u i l i b r i u m , psychic, 46; l e f t / r i g h t , 269

399

INDEX Eranos

Jahrbuch:

( • 9 3 7 ) . 58".

(I942)'

(1936, 1 1

1937),

9 *' (1945).

471; 3LON

Eros, 157, 230, 247, 2 9 5 f ; a n i m a as c a r i c a t u r e of f e m i n i n e , 41; f e m i n i n e , 295 E r y t h r a e a n Sibyl, 230 Esdras, 147 n e s s e n c e / E s s e n c e : e t h e r e a l , 324; fifth, 130; m e r c u r i a l , 196; S a l a m a n d r i n e , 138, 142; t r i u n e , 293 E s t s d n a t l e h i , 98 e t e r n a l : blessedness, 182; ideas, 289; m a n , 3067?,' p r i n c i p l e ( s ) , 169; w a t e r , 227 e t e r n i t y , 1 4 1 7 ? ; f e e l i n g of, 181; h i e r o g l y p h of, u r o b o r o s as, 259 " E t h i o p i a n , " T h e , 6 0 n , 316 E t h i o p i c B o o k of E n o c h , see E n o c h e t h n o l o g y , 6, 5 m E u c h a r i s t i c : e l e m e n t s , 159; s i g n i f i c a n c e of fish, 266 E u c h e r i u s , B i s h o p of Lyons, 10471 E u c h i t e s , 223, 229 e u h e m e r i s t i c allegories, 301 E u l o g i u s of A l e x a n d r i a , 196 e u p h e m i s m , a p o t r o p a i c , 326 E u p h o r i o n , 176 E u r i p i d e s , 70 Europaische Revue, 1 E u r o p e , 97 E u r o p e a n : consciousncss, 45; e n l i g h t e n e d , 37; i n v a s i o n of t h e E a s t , 55; m a n d a l a s , 2, 2277., 24, 56; see also Western E u t h y m i o s Zigabenos, 22371 E u t y c h i u s , P a t r i a r c h of A l e x a n d r i a , 6 on e v a n g e l i s t s : f o u r , 22; t h r e e , 18371 E v a n s - W e n t z , W . Y., 25n, 26 Eve, 8371, 95, 143, fig. B4, 219, 262, 304; A d a m a n d , 303; A d a m i c M e r c u r i u s i n , 23571; g e n i t a l s of, 143 e v e n i n g k n o w l e d g e , 248&71; see also cognitio e v e r l a s t i n g hills, 306 evil, 47, 16571, 18371, 187, 197, 200, 223; c o u n t e r p a r t of g o o d , 210; g o o d a n d , see g o o d a n d evil; h e l l - f i r e , s u b s t a n c e

of g o o d a n d , 210; individuation, s o u r c e of all, i g 6 ; s p i r i t , 196-201, 240 e x a l t a t i o n , 1 5 3 ^ ; i n M a y , 161, 163, 176, 182; of s p r i n g , 182 excoction, i52n e x c r e t o r y acts, 231 exercises, s p i r i t u a l , 244 "Exercitationes in T u r b a m philosop h o r u m , " 6 o n , 6 8 n , 8 3 n , 217n, 2 3 5 n , 236n e x p a n s i o n , of consciousness, fig. 3; see also c o n s c i o u s n e s s e x p e r i e n c e ( s ) : i n n e r , 16; psychic, 2"jn, 52 e x t e n s i t y , 25 eye(s), 25, 39; " e a g l e , " 344; fleshly, 288; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 22; s p i r i t u a l , 288 e y e w a s h , 75 Ezekiel: B o o k of, 1 3 6 ^ 258, 281; f o u r c h e r u b i m of, fig. 32; vision of, 280 Ezra, 132, 21971; F o u r t h B o o k of, 21971; vision of, 132, 219

F f a b l e s , d i d a c t i c , 66 face(s), 25; f o u r , see f o u r f a i t h , 7, 34, 46, 54, 187, 241; a l c h e m i c a l c o n f e s s i o n of, 129; c h a r i s m a of, 49; in G o d , 111; g r a c e o f , 160; i n b o r n , 167/; a n d k n o w l e d g e , c o n f l i c t bet w e e n , 115; — , s p l i t b e t w e e n , 189; m y s t e r i e s of C h r i s t i a n , 188 F a l l , 290, 295, 304 f a m i l i a r ( s ) , fig. B5, 179, 203, 225, 341; d a e m o n as, 328 familiar is, 245 f a m i l y r e u n i o n , celestial, 242 fantasy(-ies), 16, 22, 24, 43, 276, 283, 285, 339, 342; a c t i v i t y , s p o n t a n e o u s , 17; of a l c h e m i s t s , 205, 293; c r e a t i v e , 43> 253; ideas b o r n of, 277; i m a g e s , 179; m o d e r n , of t r e e , 341; m y t h l i k e , 258; p e r s o n a l , 344; p r i m i t i v e , 98; p r o d u c t s , si, 194, 205, 253; s e c o n d a r y , 260

4

INDEX f a s c i n a t i o n , 171 fate(s), 15/, 41, 171, 18471, 264; a e s t h e t i c flirtations w i t h , 18; of psyche, 349 f a t h e r ( s ) / F a t h e r , 52, 112, 166; C h u r c h , 29271; f o u r , 150; -God, 339; G o d is M o t h e r a n d , 27; of lies, L u c i f e r as, 250; of all metals, 235; - m o t h e r , 22071; a n d Son, 116 Faust, 47, 118, 119; for the drama, see Goethe " f e d e l i d ' a m o r e , " 294 feeling(s), 9, 167; c o n s o l i d a t i o n of, 180; of e t e r n i t y , 181; t o n e , 268 feet, c u t t i n g off of, 329 f e m a l e : genies, w i n g e d , 281; m a l e a n d , p o w e r s of, 218; s e r p e n t - d a e m o n , 240 f e m i n i n e , 13; a n i m a is, 39; aspect of M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; c h a r a c t e r of unconscious, 325; Eros, 295; figure in unconscious, 40; n a t u r e of tree, see tree; p r i n c i p l e , f o u r t h , g6; psyche / s o u l , 40, fig. A6; psychology, 41, 82; significance of Yggdrasil, 340; see also masculine

filius, 142, 150&n, 168n, figs. B2, B4; canis coelici coloris, 232n, and see p u p p y ; ignis, 127n; macrocosmi, 96, 166, 233, 240, 292, 293n; — , lapis p h i l o s o p h o r u m as, 294; M e r c u r i u s as, 222; microcosmi, 96, 292; — , C h r i s t as, 294; noster rex genitus, 148; philosophorum, 123, 125^, 129, 130, 140, 150, 284; — , son of macrocosm, 126; regis, fig. B6; regius, 145/7; sapientiae, 123; unicuSj 172; unigenitus, 172n; " u n i u s diei," lapis as, 24871; see also son(s)

f e m i n i n i t y : of m a n , 338; unconscious, 99

F e r d i n a n d I, 11971, 15871 F e r g u s o n , J o h n , 14171, 22971 Fergusson, J a m e s , 34071 fertility: ceremonies, Attic, 70; of l a n d , 71; of m e n a n d a n i m a l s , 97; significance of c h u r i n g a s , 100n; symbol, fish as, fig. A2 Ficino, Marsilio, 131, 13411, 22371 Ficus religiosa, see ashvattha fides, 176 field: of s q u a r e i n c h , 25, 51; t r e a s u r e in the, 259 fiery: a n d gaseous poison, 27871; p i l l a r ,

filth, 1460, 153, 170, 242/ fire, 24, 63/, 74, 7771, 78, 7971, 85/, 107, 11371, 1380, 14171, 142, 146/, 150, 15371, 162, 216, 218, 244, 268, 27977, 298, 307, 30971, fig. 5; of t h e a r t , 60; b a p tism by, gg; in c e n t r e , 149; coal, 138; as consciousness, 15 m ; divine, 209; of d i v i n e love, 210, 307; ever-living, 310; fighter of, 148; global, 149, 210; of h e a r t , 164; of hell, see hell; h o u s e of, 149; invisible, 209; m e r c u r i a l , 210; M e r c u r i u s as, zogff, 310; m i d p o i n t of centre, 151; o u r , 148; p i l l a r of, 62; secret, i n f e r n a l , 210; s p h e r e of, 74; spirits of, 142; s p i r i t u a l , 15071; - s p i t t i n g d r a g o n , 303, 321; struck f r o m stones i n Persia, 320; i n s u n , 150; supracelestial, 310; symbolical, 148; system of h i g h e r a n d lower powers, 210; t o n g u e s of, 29; t o r m e n t of, 67, 72, 146; -tree, 258, 33971; u n n a t u r a l , 330; w a r r i o r , 148; a n d w a t e r , see w a t e r , —, u n i o n of, 255 firmament, fig. A6, 137, 248, 281; e a r t h l y , of Paracelsus, 27671; i n m a n , 152 firmamentum, 219 F i r m i c u s M a t e r n u s , J u l i u s , 7071 firm-rootedness, 272 First Cause, 23271 first p a r e n t s , 257 First T h o m a s , 13271 fish(es), 51, 69, 75, 7671, 143, 177, 194, fig. 32; black, 265; as fertility sym-

31071

Fierz-David, L i n d a , 17671 fifth essence, 130; s p i r i t of, 130 fig tree, 313 figments, " s u p e r m o n i c , " 173/ F i g u l u s , B e n e d i c t u s , 149, 210, 307 Fihrist, 24071 ft Iii Sapientiae, 308 401

INDEX fish(es) (cont.): bols, fig. A2; h a l f - m a n , half-, motif of, 178; meal, fig. B i ; pot-, 15571; r o u n d , 7 5 f ; symbol, 265 fishing rod, God's, 336 fitness, in biology, 342 five m o u n t a i n s , 256 fixation, 25, 180 flame(s), 155 Flamel, Nicolas, 213, 21777, 30671, 309&72, 333"

flammula, 1 5 5 7 2 , 1 5 7 flattery, 329 flatus vocis, 289 flaying, 70, 71, 8772 flesh, 60/, 63/, 84, 92, 94, 96, 101, 10372, 10471, 1 1 4 7 2 , 116, 228, 310 fleshly eyes, 288 flint, 107, 11372; body, 100; m a n , 100 flores, alchemical, 125 Flos cheiri, 13572 flower(s), 22, fig. A4, 154, 253, 255, 268, 29072, 314, 320; discoloured, 27172, 2860; g o l d e n / G o l d e n , 23/, 51, 53, figs. A t , A2, B2; •—, of Chinese alchemy, 26g; —, origin of, 23; heavenly, 155, 163-, of light, fig. 32; l u m i n o u s , fig. A3; red, fig. 5 flowerlike centre, 2Gg, fig. 31 F l u d d , R o b e r t , 288/ f o a m - b o r n , 182 foemina alba, 182 foetus: of longevity, 166; n o v e n a r y , 151; spagyric, i5o&n folk: beliefs, 122; customs, 24; magic, 122 "Fons chymicae veritatis," 20972 f o n t , 73, 7872 fontina, 255 f o o d of i m m o r t a l i t y , 306 force(s): life-, 214; —, d a e m o n i c , 38; of n a t u r e , 128 forest, 193/, 200; d e m o n of, 198; k i n g of, 194, igg; of mares'-tails, fig. 27 f o r e t h o u g h t , 22171 f o r m , psychoid, 272 fortress, 294

f o u n t ( a i n ) , 255; of a m b r o s i a , 30872; of A r d v i Sura A n a h i t a , 308; of gold a n d silver, 10372; of H u l d a , 317; of life, 84, 10372; of living w a t e r , 1 0 4 7 2 ; of renewal, 33272; salty, 308 f o u r , 166, 2 7 5 7 1 , 277; angels, 1 7 6 7 2 , 282; animals, 282, figs. 24, 25; arms, 281; b r a n c h e s , 332; C a n o p i c jars, 280; c h e r u b i m , 280; — of Ezekiel, fig. 32; colours, 305, figs. A6, A8; corners of t h e heavens, 279; d a u g h t e r s , g8/; directions, 168; division into, see division; elements, see e l e m e n t s ; evangelists, 22; faces, 27972, 280; — of G o d / g o d , 1 7 6 7 2 , 279; f a t h e r s a n d m o t h e r s , 150; f u n c t i o n s , 167; gates, 172; gospels, 283; g u a r d i a n angels, 282; heads, 266, fig. 27; kings, 282; m a i n articles of C h r i s t i a n f a i t h , 168; m o u n t a i n s , 256, 262, fig. 24; m u l t i p l e s of, 96, 280; n u m b e r , 150/, 262/; pillars of Shu, 279, 281; q u a r t e r s , 2 7 1 7 2 , 281; — of h e a v e n , 167; — of t h e w o r l d , 281; q u a t e r n i o n s , 28on; rivers, 262, fig. 24; — of paradise, 149, 172; roots, 68; sacrificial animals, 280; Scaiolae, 167; seasons, 167/; sons of H o r u s , 22, s y g f f ; streams, 304, s i g n ; t h r e e a n d , d i l e m m a , 224; totality image, divided i n t o , 283; wheels, 167, 281; wings of t h e c h e r u b i m , 281; see also q u a t e r n i t y f o u r f o l d : c o n i u n c t i o , 27872; M e r c u r i u s , 279 f o u r t h , t h e , 167 fox, ig$n Foxcroft, T . , see R o s e n c r e u t z Franz, M a r i e - L o u i s e von, 6371, g g n ; (ed.) Aurora consurgens, 6971, 7871, 9572,

12372,

14972,

30672,

32272,

32372;

" D i e Passio P e r p e t u a e , " 31672 Frazer, J a m e s G., 70?1, 7 1 7 2 , 9 7 7 2 , 9 8 7 2 , i94™ f r e e d o m , P r o m e t h e a n , 12 F r e u d , S i g m u n d , 34, 82, 244, 302, 347; i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of d r e a m s , 301 F r e u d i a n : a n d alchemical r e d u c t i o n of

402

INDEX symbols, 301; o r t h o d o x y , d o c t r i n a i r ism of, 342; repression t h e o r y , 42 F r i d a y , day of Venus, 249 F r i e d l a n d e r , G e r a l d , 318Sen, 33771 F r o b e n i u s , Leo, 101 fruit(s), 52; - b e a r i n g tree, 166, 305; f o r b i d d e n , 304; a n d h e r b s of p a r a d i s e , 30677; holy, 46; n o u r i s h i n g , 272; suna n d - m o o n , 303, 306, 308/ frumentum nostrum, 310 f u l f i l m e n t , 44, 49, 53 f u l m i n a t i o n , metallic, 15271 f u n c t i o n ( s ) : of a n i m a , i 8 o n ; of consciousness, see consciousness; f o u r , 167 (see also under individual functions); h i g h e r m e n t a l , 1 3 9 7 1 ; of persona, i 8 o n ; psychic, 9, 169, 176 f u r n a c e , fig. B4 f u t u r e Christ, 296

G G a b a l , t h e , 130 G a b r i c u s a n d Beya, 93 G a l a t e a , 179 G a l e n , C l a u d i u s , 116, 13571, 28771 g a m e of dice, 267/ g a m o n y m u s , 136, 161; see also hierosgamos G a o k e r e n a , P e r s i a n tree, 340 G a r d e n / g a r d e n : ascetic, 3ogn; of E d e n , 304, 318; of G e t h s e m a n e , 295; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 309; of spices, see hortus aromatum g a r m e n t , p u r p l e , 62 G a r o t m a n , a n u s of, 220 gas(es), 213, 325; fiery poison of, 27871 gates, f o u r , 172 G a u d e n t i u s , Saint, 10471 G a u l , 221 G a y o m a r t / g a y d - m a r e t a n , 132, 2 2 on, 337n; b l o o d of, 288 G e b e r , 186, 206, 21 on, 330/ Geley, Gustave, 5171 gem(s), 98. 287 Genesis, 78, 81, 137n, 248, 309, 318

genies: protective, 281; w i n g e d f e m a l e , 281 genitals of A d a m a n d Eve, 143 Gentiles, gods of, 1 4 m g e o m a n c y , 119 g e o m e t r i c p a t t e r n , 23 G e r m a n i c m a n . F a u s t i a n split in, 47 g e r m i n a l vesicle, 23/, figs. A8, Ag g e r m i n a t i o n a n d b i r t h of stone, 2g8 Gessner, C o n r a d , n g , 129 G e t h s e m a n e , g a r d e n of, 295 ghost, 45; c o n n e c t i o n w i t h a n i m a , 40; w h i t e , 39 g i a n t of twofold s u b s t a n c e , 217, 2g2/&n G i l b e r t Islands, 337n G i l g a m e s h : epic, 320f glass, ig7; gold, ig8 " G l o r i a m u n d i , " g2n, 20771, 2 i o n , 2 i g n , 226n, 286n, 307, 31072, 311 glorified: body, 297; " e a r t h , " 311 Glory, K i n g of, 146 Glover, A. S. B., vi, 5gn, 29371, 2g6r2 gnome(s), fig. B 5 Gnosis, 4, 318, 338/ Gnostic(ism), 4, 5g, 1 3 m , 132, lg571, 228, 310, 3 i g , 321, 334/; analogical t h i n k i n g of, 147; archa'i, 22; Christ, 336; d o c t r i n e of, A n t h r o p o s , 205, 220; — , a r c h o n s a n d aeons, 225; h e r esy, 102, 188; ideas, 147; a n d m y t h ological ideas i n alchemy, 204; p n e u m a t i c m a n of, 310; R e d e e m e r s , 233; s p e c u l a t i o n , 283; systems, 3; t h i n k i n g , circular, 84 goal, 17, 20, 264/, 274; of alchemist, i7g; of alchemy, 161; of first half of life, 46; highest, 23; of i n d i v i d u a t i o n process, 195; M e r c u r i u s is, of his own t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 235; of o p u s . 152, 180, 275/, 279, 2gg, 305, 307; of psyche, 25; of s p i r i t u a l existence, 46 goblins, g3 G o d , 20, 26, 37, 50/, 54, 77/, 8 i n , 86, 88n, 102, 106/, 116/, 126, 128, 132, i 6 4 n , i 6 g n , 182, 197, 2og, 236, 268, 284, 292, 300, 317, 324/; affinity of ego w i t h , 117; a r c a n e s u b s t a n c e as

4°3

G od (con£.): res sim p le x an d , 215; a ttr ib u te of q u a te rn ity of, 281; a ttrib u te s of, 82η; — tra n sfe rre d to th e stone, 294; b re a th of, 139; child of, 52; as cotncid en lia o p p o sito ru m , 209; d ea d , 128; d rea m sen t by, 105; d u a lity of, 26; face of, 88; faith in, 111; F ath e r-, 339; is F e m in in e an d M asculine, 27; first son of, 223; fish-eating brin g s p a r tic i­ p a tio n w ith , 266; fishing ro d of, 336; “is fo u r,” 1 3 m ; fo u r angels of, 282; — faces of, 176η; “ h ig h e r a n d g ood,” 200; is hypothesis, 36; illu sio n o f p e r ­ sonal, 35; -im age, stone as, 97; im age of, 125; of Jews, 222; kin g d o m of, 106; know ledge of, 94; lig h t of, 288; is Love, a n d W ill, 26; -m an, 297; in m an, 96; m a n ’s idea of, 344; M ercurius, second son of, 222; M o th e r of, 183; is — a n d F a th e r, 27; as p ro d u c t o f th e opus, 307; S atan is c o u n te rp a rt of, 236; science of, 96; second son of, 223; sign of, 281; Son of, 103η, 159f; sons of, 81, 283; s p irit of, 136η; is S p irit, 104; is S ubstance a n d Force, 26; te rrify in g vision of, 346; tra n sfo r­ m a tio n of, 334; is tw o in one, 27; W o rd of, 83, 87η, iig , 195η; w ra th of, 83; “ u n d e r m e ,” 121, 127; u n io n w ith , 24973; u n ity of, 116 god(s), 36, 38/, 45, 70, 98, 267η, 268; acknow ledgm ent of, 38; air, 279; b ir th of, 37; have becom e diseases, 37; d ism em b ered , 73; ea rlier, 33; -ea tin g (teoqualo), 8173; fav o u rab le a n d u n fav o u rab le , 29; w ith fo u r faces, 279; of G entiles, 14173; H erm es, o f rev e latio n , 209, 233; — , o f thieves an d cheats, 233; h id d e n , 241 (see also deus absconditus); of illu sio n a n d d e ­ lusion, M e rc u riu s as, 247; of In d ia n s, 337; lo tu s as b irth p la c e of, 269; of m agicians, M e rc u riu s as, 202; m asters of, 5073; n a tu re , 150; o rig in a n d seed of, 76; p h a n ta sm a l, 37; becom e p h y si­ cal, 104; ra in -, 26873; o f rev elatio n ,

179; sacrifice of, 8on; sky-, 26873; solar, 26773; sto n e as b irth p la c e of, 97; sun-, 8173; tw o-faced, 250; of th e u n ­ d erw o rld , tria d ic c h a ra c te r of, 221; “ of u tm o s t em p tin ess a n d life ,” 38; w ind-, 221; w o rld of, 155; see also deity; d eu s goddess: e a rth , fig. 8; of love, see love; m a tria rc h a l, 99; m o o n , D ian a , 303; m o th e r, 18373; tu rq u o ise , 99; see also D ea N a tu ra ; D iesse R aiso n G odfrey, A b b o t of A d m o n t, 29573 god-im age, 241, 337; arch aic, 345; self as in d is tin g u ish a b le fro m , 241 G oethe, J. W . von, 69, 13673, 2g6; co n ­ sciousness of, has C h ristia n ch a racter, 245; F a u st, 7, 90, 111, 124, 128, 170, 179, 245; (trans. L. M acN eice), 7973; F aust I I (trans. P . W ayne), 12073, 176, 18371; “D ie G eh eim n isse,” 296 gold, 24, 72, 75, 77, 89, 101, 122/, 135, 155, 160, 172, 255, 277«, 284, 296, 307, 332; b ra n c h o f tree, 8g; com m on, 275; essence of, 13573; glass, 198; m a k in g of, 5173, 91, 204, 237, 314; of M ercuriu s, 202; p e rish a b le , 218; p erso n ifica­ tio n of, 314; p h ilo so p h ic(al), 218, 274; — , M e rc u riu s is, 207, 211; p o ta b le , 13573; a n d silver, fo u n ta in of, 10373; sun, 226; — , in th e e a rth , 225; sym ­ bol of e te rn ity , 149 golden: Age, 167; a p p le o f th e H esp erides, 307; flower, see flower; g erm , 240; m a n , 64; oil, 227; star, fig. A4; tem ple, fig. A10; tin c tu re , 208; tree, see tree; trid e n t, 334 g old sm ith , 204 good, 47, 18373, 18473; evil as c o u n te r­ p a r t of, 210 good a n d evil, 196, 201, 228; M ercurius· as, 218 G o rd ian k n o t, 185 Gospel(s), 68 t i ; fo u r, 283; lan g u ag e of, 73; Jo h n , 8773, 102, 10373, 104, 182, 283, 306, 333, 33873; L u k e, 106, 13673, fig. B6, 29571; M a tth e w , 106, 217, 242, 29273, 316, 319; synoptic, 243, 283

INDEX Gotterdammerung, 250 G o u r m o n t , R e m y de, 333*1 goyim, 113 grace, 53, 108, 187 g r a i n : of m u s t a r d seed, 259; s o w i n g of, 7371; of w h e a t , 306; as granum frumenti, 306 grape(s), 27971, 306, 318 g r a s s h o p p e r , fig. 25 G r a t i a n u s , 331 graves, 97 Graves, R o b e r t , 63*1 G r a y , R o n a l d D., 6971 G r e a t Magic P a p y r u s of Paris, 161; see also P r e i s e n d a n z G r e e k : a l c h e m y , 97, 284; — , a n d Arabic, c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n , a n d I n d i a , 231; •—, t e t r a s o m i a of, 277; Magic P a p y r i , 126, 148, 179, 192, 22671, 329; m y t h o l o g y , 142; Satan, 288 g r e e n : b i r d , 286; c r o w n e d d r a g o n , fig. 14; a n d red lion, see lion greenness: blessed, 77; glorious greenness (viriditas gloriosa), 315 G r e g o r y X I V , Pope, 233 G r e g o r y t h e G r e a t , Saint, 228*7, 30971, 338"

G r e t c h e n , 179; see also F a u s t G r e v e r u s , J o d o c u s , 274/, 275n, 277, 285, 30671, 31077 greybeard,228 griffins, H y p e r b o r e a n , 63*1 G r i m m , J a c o b a n d W i l h e l m , 17871, 194*1; fairy tale of spirit in bottle, 193, 19471, 258; see also bottle, spirit in g r o u p , I m p e r a t o r , 41 grove of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 262 g r o w t h , 24; f r o m a b o v e / b e l o w , 272; int u r n e d , 260; process of. self d e p i c t e d as, 253; regressive, 261 G r i i n b a u m , Max, 31771 g u a r d i a n : angels, f o u r , 282; spirit, 7171, 341; of spirits, 61, 105 G u a r i n i , 163 G u d a k e s h a , 267 guilt, 196; P r o m e t h e a n , 189

gumma aqua permanens), also aqua divina g u n a s , 313 g y p s u m , 28771

32971; see

H H a d e s , 78&71, 154, 29071 H a g g a d i c t r a d i t i o n , 317 H a g g a r d , H e n r y R i d e r , 9971 h a i r , 92, 279, 28771, 290, 312, 340; w o m en's, 81 hallucination(s), 34, 200, 286 H a l m , Karl, 7077 h a l o , fig. 12 H a l y , K i n g of A r a b i a , 126, 22371, 322 hand(s), 17; a n d feet, c u t t i n g off of, 329 hapax legomenon, 121 H a p i , 279 H a p p e l i u s , N i c o l a u s Niger, 214*1, 21971 h a p p e n i n g , o u t e r , 16 h a p p i n e s s , 153, 160 h a r e , 195*1 H a r f o r e t u s ( H a r p o k r a t e s ) , 306 h a r l e q u i n m o t i f , 261 harmony(-ies), 65; r u l e of, 60, 84 H a r p o k r a t e s , see H a r f o r e t u s H a r r a n , priests of, 8171 H a r r a n i t e school, 8171, 14777, 206, 215 H a s t i n g s , J a m e s , 9771 h a w k , 280 head(s), 29, 72, 80, 86, 88, 280, 312, 341, 347, figs. 27-29; of d r a g o n , see d r a g o n ; - e l e m e n t , 291*7; e n t r a n c e i n t o , 89; f o u r heads, 266, fig. 27; mystery, H a r r a n i t e , 81*1; s k i n n i n g of, 71/; of snake, 29173; sons of t h e G o l d e n , 72; symbolism, 88; t e m p l e i n , 89 h e a l i n g : a r t of, 111, 117; psychic systems of, 347; s n a k e of Moses, 104 heart(s), 70, 73, 139, 152, 160, 164, 192, 248, 259, 267, 294; bodily, fleshly, 39; capsule, 164, c e n t r e of, 139; as c e n t r e , 271; c u t t i n g o u t a n d e a t i n g , 71; of t h e d e a d , 271*7; d e e p , 24971; d i a d e m

4°5

INDEX heart(s) (cont.): of, 147, 269; fire of, 164; heavenly, 23, 39, 44; high, 249M; of Mercurius, at N o r t h Pole, 2 0 9 7 3 ; of the microcosm, 219; region, 165; -shaped, 2 7 i n ; —, blossoms, 259; see also cor altum h e a t h e n , 18 heating, 21 heaven(s), 2 i g n ; ascent to, one way, 233; birds of, 314; f o u r corners of, 279; h e a r t of, 44; invisible rays of, 72; k i n g d o m of, 73, 87ft, 202, 259; light of, see light; philosophic, 222; "space of f o r m e r , " 23; spirits of, 176; starry, Mercurius as, 222; waters above a n d below, 151; see also caelum heavenly; A d a m , i6gn; bodies, 125; elements, 155; flowers, 155, 163; h e a r t , 23; image, 176; J e r u s a l e m , ig8; journey of t h e s h a m a n , 303, 309; m a r riage, 163; physician of soul, 293; rose, 295; spirit, 2og; spouse, 337; waters, 151 Hebrews, 95 Hebrews, Epistle to the, 83 Hecate, triple, 221 H e g e m o n i u s , 31873 H e l e n , in Faust, 176, 179 Helia Artista, 12371 hell, 96, i65n; fire(s) of, 209, 210, 330 Hellenistic: Hermes, 279; n a t u r e p h i losophy, 79; syncretism, 102, 104 hen,231 henosis, 277 H e r a , 70 Heraclitus, 310 Heraclius, 31473 H e r a k l e o n , 87Sen Herakles, 99 heresiologists, 3, 147, 186 heresy(-ies), 186, 229; Gnostic, 188 h e r m a p h r o d i t e , 123, 1360, figs. B1-4, 166; M e r c u r i u s as, 319; — p a r e n t a l , 236 h e r m a p h r o d i t i c : m o n s t e r , 139, 219; true, A d a m , 219; u n i o n , 136; Venus, 18773

h e r m e n e u t , 230 H e r m e s , 60n, 122, 12373, i25n, i26n, 147, fig. B6, 192/, 19373, 197/, 217, 220, 226n, 230, 283, 309, 331; All a n d T h r i c e One, 221; b i r d of, 152, 202; Chthonios, 247; god of revelation, 209, 233; -— thieves a n d cheats, 233; Hellenistic, 279; ithyphallic, 230; Kyllenios, 230; - M e r c u r i u s - W o t a n , 202; Psychopompos, 80; t h r e e - h e a d e d , 221, 224; tetracephalus, 224; tree of, 3ogn; u n d e r w o r l d l y , 231; vine of the wise, 314; wind god, 212 H e r m e s Trismegistus, 76, i03n, 178, 258, 279, 2 9 m , 298, 303; M e r c u r i u s symbolized by, 319; see also " T r a c tatus aureus" H e r m e t i c : literature, 123; p h i l o s o p h e r , 289; philosophy, 233, 274, 288; q u a ternity, 283; symbols, 241; vessel, see vas Hermetis H e r m o l a u s B a r b a r u s , 7673 hero, 98, 101, 117, 128, i83n, 194, 258, 292. 305, 320, 337, fig. 15; culture, 100; d a n g e r o u s f a t e of, 99; Kyllenian, 230; m y t h , 258, fig. 14; of peace, 229; struggle of, w i t h d r a g o n , 89 Hesperides: golden a p p l e of, 307; tree of, 256, 3o8n, 340 hexagrams, 56 h i e r o g l y p h of eternity, u r o b o r o s as, 259 hieTOsgamos, 123, 155, 180ff, 183, 257; of light a n d darkness, 161 h i g h h e a r t (cor altum), 24gn H i l d e g a r d of B i n g e n , 27/ H i l k a , Alfons, 223n, 30673 hills, everlasting, 306 Himalayas, 312 H i n d u polytheism, 243 H i n k l e , Beatrice, 26n H i p p o l y t u s , 76n, 87n, 146/, i g ^ n , 22773, 232, 283n, 285, 3 i o n , 3 1 9 ^ 33973 hiranyagarbha (golden germ), 240 history, 43; of religion, 204; of symbols.

406

344

H o b g i n , S., a n d Corrigan, F., 24gn H o l d e r l i n , Friedrich, 248

INDEX H o g h e l a n d e , T h e o b a l d de, 85n, 10573, 138*1, 13973, 20771, 212, 21573, 314, 322, 32377, 324 H o l l , Karl, 14673 H o l m b e r g , U n o , 274, 29 m H o l m y a r d , E r i c J o h n , 13971, 22673, 3 0 5 7 7 , 30973, 3 1 0 7 3 h o l y : d r e a d , 171; s a c r a m e n t s , 157; S c r i p t u r e , 28673; trees of I n d i a , 340 H o l y G h o s t , 7873, 157; dove of, 8g; ins p i r a t i o n of, 130; S a p i e n t i a a n d , M e r c u r i u s identified w i t h , 22g H o l y Spirit, see Spirit, H o l y H o l y T r i n i t y , see T r i n i t y H o m e r i c ftw\v, 31073 homo: alius, 166; maior, i7g, 182; m a x imus,

131&73,

166,

168,

i7g,

284,

29173; —, i n n e r , 165; — , q u a t e r n i t y of, 167; — , u n i o n w i t h , 167; purissimus, C h r i s t t h e , 2 9 5 f ; putissimus, 295; s y n o n y m f o r m i c r o c o s m , 219; totus, 284, 295 h o m u n c u l u s ( - i ) , 60n, 84, 89, go, 102, 123, 140; 158/, 179, ig8; l e a d e n , 71 h o n e y d e w , 15373 H o n o r i u s of A u t u n , 8773 h o o k , t h r e e - p r o n g e d , 332, 334 H o r a c e , 18473 H o r a p o l l o , 259 H o r f o l t u s , 6773 H o r m a n u t h i , 74 horoscopes, 118 horoscopum, 13073 horse, O d i n ' s , 34073 H o r s t m a n n , Carl, 30473 H o r t u l a n u s , 6973, 10373, 14073 hortus aromatum/conclusus, 294 H o r u s , 74/, 280; a n d f o u r sons, 22; o l d e r , 281; as rising s u n , 28073 H o s t , 306 house: "of t h e C r e a t i v e , " 39; of fire, 149 hsing ( h u m a n n a t u r e ) , 2173, 25, 29, 40/; -rning ( h u m a n n a t u r e a n d life), 23 hui (consciousness), 2173, 25 Hui Ming Ching (Book of Consciousness a n d Life), 1, 2, 20/, 2173, 23, 29, 30, 37, 44, 53

H u l d a , f o u n t a i n of, 317 h u m a n : a n a t o m y , 27371, 27473; or a n i m a l blood, stone consists of, 290; biology, 243; i n c a r n a t i o n , 53; m i n d , 54; n a t u r e , see n a t u r e h u m a n i s t s , 338 h u m a n i t y , c u l t u r a l a c h i e v e m e n t s of, 13; l e a d e r of, 53 H u m e , R o b e r t Ernest, 24873 humiditas, 207 humidum, 138, 207 hun soul, 41; as a n i m u s , 38, 40; as " c l o u d - d e m o n , " 39; as Logos, 40 h u n d r e d pulses, 325 H u n t , M a r g a r e t , 19477 h u s b a n d a n d wife, M e r c u r i u s as, 219 H u s e r , J o h a n n , 11273, 11473, 11573, 117, 12273, 12573, 129, 1301, 13177, 13973, 14373, 16473, 17271 hybris, 12, 37 hydrargyrum, 239, 284; M e r c u r i u s as, 207 h y d r o l i t h , 64 hylic i n t o p n e u m a t i c m a n , C h r i s t i a n t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of, 233 Hymns of the Atharva-vedn, 31373 Hypnerotomachia Poliphili, see Colonna; Poliphilo hypostases, 142 h y p o t h e s i s of G o d , 36 H y s l o p , J a m e s H., 4171 hysteria, 34 hysterical self-deceivers, 107

I I a l d a b a o t h , 22271; l i o n - h e a d e d , 228 ibis, 279 I b n Sina, 28871; see also A v i c e n n a I Ching, 8, 10, 13, 56, fig. A4 idea(s), 26; abstract, 35; a r c h e t y p a l , 346; b o r n of fantasy, 277; E a s t e r n , 10; e t e r n a l , 28g; Gnostic, 147; i n t u i t i v e , 9, 40; m a n ' s , of G o d , 344; —, i n alchemy, 204; n u m i n o u s , 2gg, 301; per-

407°3

INDEX idea(s) (cont.): sonified, 35; religious, 301; w o r l d o f , " 13273 i d e a t i o n , conscious, a n d a c t i o n , 12 I d e c h t r u m , 132 i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of psyche w i t h consciousness, 42; w i t h self, 263 i d e n t i t y : of C h r i s t a n d lapis, 294; mystical, 225; psychic, 92; s t o n e ' s w i t h m a n , 300; u n c o n s c i o u s , 45, g i , 93; of u r o b o r o s a n d egg, 8271 ideology, C h r i s t i a n , 283 I d e s / I d e u s , 131/, 154 I g n a t i u s L o y o l a , Saint, 86, 165n, 21771, 244&M ignis: coelestis, 7 7 n ; elementaris, 209; fatuus, 250; mercurialis, 209 i g n i t i o n , 13871 Iliaster/ Iliastrum /Iliadus / Iliastes/Ylias t r u n / Y l i e d e s / Y I i e d u s , 125&71, 1318:71, 132&71, 134/, 13671, 140, 142; extrinsic, 166; g r e a t , 152; hypostasis of b e i n g , 140; as p r i n c i p l e of i n d i v i d u a t i o n , 137; sanctitus, 136; s p i r i t u a l , 165; — p r i n c i p l e , 140; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of, 148; w a t e r y a s p e c t of, 138 iliastric: A q u a s t e r , 139; s p i r i t , 139 i l l u m i n a t i o n , 81, 85, 8g, 115, 317; of consciousness, see consciousness; reve l a t i o n or, i7g; t w o sources of, 214 illusion(s), 18, 29, 38, 297; d a e m o n is, 37; M e r c u r i u s a g o d of, 247; of p e r sonal G o d , 35; t r a n s c e n d e n t a l , 34 Iloch, 153 image(s), 66, 274; a r c h e t y p a l , 272; — , t r e e as, 272; a u t o c h t h o n o u s , 273; a u t o n o m o u s , 247; C h r i s t , see C h r i s t ; compensating, primordial, 301; d r e a m , 273; eschatological, 244; etern a l , 337; f a n t a s y , 179; G o d - , 97; of G o d , 125; h e a v e n l y , 176; p r i m o r d i a l , 12/, 118, 301/; — , of t h e m o t h e r , 112; is psyche, 50; r e g u l a t i n g , a n d u n c o n scious, 301; t o t a l i t y , 284; — , d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r , 283; t w o d i f f e r e n t , of self, see self; of wholeness, 283 i m a g e r y , 52; C h r i s t i a n , 183

imaginatio, 137, 167, 176; per sensus, 16571 i m a g i n a t i o n , 154, 159, 164/?, 168, 175, 179, 2gg; active, 6 i n , 16571, 286; corp o r e a l , 140 i m a g o : Dei, 24gn, 316; m o t h e r - , 112 imitatio Christi, 53, 325 imitation, 18m; Western, 8 I m m a c u l a t e C o n c e p t i o n , g6 i m m o r t a l i t y , 46, 5171, 13673, 186; connection of l a p i s w i t h , 101; d r i n k of, 313; f o o d of, 306; f r a g r a n c e of, 337; o d o u r of, 3 3 4 I m p e r a t o r g r o u p , 41 imps, 93 i m p u l s e s , vital, 44 i m p u r e m e t a l s , 2go7i i n c a r n a t i o n ( s ) , 2973; of C h r i s t , see C h r i s t incest, 280; a r c h e t y p e , 301; m o t h e r - s o n , 232; p r i m a l , 302 incineratio, 12871 i n c o r p o r e a l , see c o r p o r e a l / i n c o r p o r e a l i n c o r r u p t i b i l i t y , 134, 13673, 142; of M e r c u r i u s , 245/ increatum, 236 I n d i a ( n ) , 14, 23, 24, 97, 132, 142, 178, 2 8 m ; connections between Greek/ A r a b i c a l c h e m y a n d , 231; god of t h e , 337; h o l y trees o f , 340; " Q u i c k s i l v e r System," 206; t h e o s o p h y , 268, 26g I n d i a n s , A m e r i c a n , gg/, 178; Aztec, 100; H o p i , 221; I r o q u o i s , 99; N a t c h e z , 100; N a v a h o , 22; P e r u v i a n , 100; P u e b l o , 22, 100, 263; Sioux, 100; T h o m p s o n a n d S h u s w a p , 7171; W i c h i t a , 100 i n d i v i d u a l i t y , s p i r i t u a l , 27 i n d i v i d u a t i o n , 28, 105, 179, 325, 327; of t h e a d e p t , 326; p r i n c i p l e of, 137, 142, 199, 239; — , Ares as, 140; process, 176, 194, 240, 254, 269, 325, 328, 339, 341; —, goal of, 195; — , M e r c u r i u s r e p r e sents, 237; — , p r o j e c t i o n of, 22g; — , s y m b o l i s m of, 2gg; source of all evil, ig6; s y m b o l of, fig. 24 i n d o l e n c e , 15 infantile memories/wishes, repressed,

408

34»

INDEX i n f e r i o r Logos, a n i m u s as, 41 i n f e r i o r i t y , f e e l i n g s of, 1 28/, 335 i n f l a t i o n , 263, 326*1 i n i t i a t e , 63*1, 72, 80 i n i t i a t i o n , 91 i n n e r : e x p e r i e n c e , 16; homo maximus, 165; l i g h t , 106; m a n , 87*1, 8gf, 106, 1 57» J 7 9 ' 2 4 g n ; — , o r a s t r a l , 131, 165, i 6 8 n ; — , i m a g i n a r y , 165*1; — , l a w of f u t u r e , 180; — , secret o f , 163; — , s p i r i t u a l , 148; t h i n g s , 43; w o r l d , 180*1 i n n o v a t i o n s , 53 i n o r g a n i c , 239; r e a l m , 195; s t o n e , s y m b o l of t h e , 238 i n s a n e , d e l u s i o n s of t h e , 246 i n s a n i t y , 18, 36, 325 i n s i d e , 15/, 18 i n s i g h t ( s ) , 17, 28; d e s t r u c t i v e , 117; sec r e t , 37; s u p e r i o r , 343/ instinct(s), 8, 12; a t r o p h y of, 12/; c o n c e p t of, 5; d e e p l y r o o t e d , 16; of i d e a t i o n a n d a c t i o n , 12; p s y c h o s o m a t i c , 346; r e p r e s s i o n of, 47 i n s t i n c t i v e : d e m a n d s , 8; d i s p o s i t i o n s , 275 i n s t i n c t u a l i t y , 9, 12, 196, 333 " I n s t r u c t i o d e a r b o r e s o l a r i , " 308*1 " I n s t r u c t i o n of C l e o p a t r a b y t h e A r c h p r i e s t K o m a r i o s , " 154 i n t e g r a t i o n : n e w , 48; of u n c o n s c i o u s ,

i n v u l n e r a b i l i t y of M e r c u r i u s , 245 I o n , 60, 80, 84 I o n i a n s , 60*1 I r a n i a n t r a d i t i o n , 337*1 I r e n a e u s , 318, 3348c*!, 338, 339*1 i r o n , 1 4 m , ig4, 218, 277, 332; m i x e d , b r a n c h of t r e e , 89 i r o n s m i t h , 204 I r o q u o i s , 9g i r r a t i o n a l i t y , 17, 261 i r r i t a t i o n , 82 I s a i a h , 146 I s h e r w o o d , C h r i s t o p h e r , see P r a b h a v a nanda I s h t a r / I s t a r / A s t a r t e , 182, 232, 320; Sem i t i c , 308*1 Isis, 73, 183*1, 30311; a t t r i b u t e s of, 318; h a s f o r m of M e l u s i n a , 318; m y s t e r i e s , 80, 183*1; treatise, 74, 81; vision of, 81 "Isis to H o r u s , " 73, 215 i s l a n d , 253, 271, 308, figs. 1, 23 isles, blessed, 3og i s o l a t i o n , 301; a u t o - e r o t i c , 254 I s r a e l , 146 I s t a r , see I s h t a r I s t r i a , 298*1 i t h y p h a l l i c o l d m a n , w i n g e d , 232

J

325 3°9> S ' 9 : d u p l i c i t y of, 217, 245; as e a r t h of p a r a d i s e , 235; E c h i d n a s y m b o l of, 1 4 4 7 1 ; e l e m e n t s of, 217; e n d o w e d w i t h a t t r i b u t e s of T r i n i t y , 236; evasive, 1 9 5 7 1 ; as f a t h e r of a l l m e t a l s , 235; as F a t h e r - M o t h e r , 22071; f e m i n i n e aspect o f , 321; — , r o l e of w i s d o m , 319; as fiery a n d p e r f e c t , 23571; as filius, 222; as fire, 2ogff, 310; as foemina, 213; f o u n d in d u n g h e a p s , sewers, 220, 232; f o u r f o l d , 279; o r G i a n t , 292; as g l u e , 2 1 3 f ; as g o a l of his o w n t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 235; G o d , of i l l u s i o n a n d d e l u s i o n , 247; — , of m a g i c i a n s , 202; g o l d o f , 202; as g o o d a n d evil, 218; as g r e e n a n d r e d l i o n , 227; h e a r t o f , a t N o r t h P o l e , 2og&n; is hell-fire, 210; as h e r m a p h r o d i t e , 319; H e r m e s - W o t a n , 202; as " h i g h m a n , " 219; as h u s b a n d a n d w i f e , 219; as hydrargyrum, 207; i d e n t i f i e d w i t h anima mundi, 214; — collective u n c o n s c i o u s , 222, 237; — M o o n a n d V e n u s , 226; — S a p i e n t i a

m e n t a l : a b e r r a t i o n s , 323; diseases, 35: d i s t u r b a n c e s , 34, 324; processes, 56 M e p h i s t o p h e l e s , 13671, 203, 245; coldness of, 90; see also G o e t h e , Faust m e r c u r i a l : essence, 196; fire, 210; lifesoul, 214; pneuma, 215; p o i s o n i n g , 323; s e r p e n t , see s e r p e n t ; spirit, see spirit M e r c u r i u s , 6771, 75, 7871, 7971, 83, 8g, 96, 122/, 125/, 13211, 13671, 178, 18771, 196/, 202/, 2 0 7 f , 275, 277, 284, 291, gog/f, 329; A d a m i c , i n Eve, 23571; aerial, 212; is a k i n t o g o d h e a d , 220; a l c h e m i c a l , 269; as alexipharmahon, 235; a m b i g u i t y of, 245; as anima, 213; as a n a l o g u e of C h r i s t , 235; a n t i n o m i a n n a t u r e of, 216; as a r c a n e s u b 416

IN D E X a n d H o ly G h o st, 2 2 9 ;— tre e , 338; is ig n is e le m e n ta ris, 209; as im ag e of C h ris t’s in c a r n a tio n , 235; in c o r r u p ti­ b ility of, 245 / ; in v u ln e ra b ility of, 245; as Je h o v a , 222; ju v e n is, 250; as k in g , 235; as K y lIe n ia n h e ro , 230; as la p is, 221, 235, 241, 246; lasciv io u s­ ness, 231; as life p rin c ip le o f tree, 319; as lig h t o f lig h ts, 235; — of n a ­ tu re , 2ogf; as L ogos b eco m e w o rld , 222; h a s m an y -sid e d asso ciatio n s, 202; m a s c u lin e a sp e c t of, g ig ; as M e d ia to r, 235; as m e d ic in a Catholica1 235; is m o st ch aste v irg in , 226; m u l­ tip le asp ects of, 237; as m y stag o g u e, 225; n o ste r, 213; — , n a tu ra lis ignis certissim u s, 209; n o n v u lg a r is jv u lg i, 214, 284; no stra a n im a , 213; " o u r ,” 211, 219; P a ra c e lsa n , 136 n ; p a r a ­ d o x ical n a tu r e of, 241; as p a r e n ta l h e rm a p h ro d ite , 236; p e rs e c u te d w ith to rm e n ts, 331; as p e rso n ific a tio n of u n co n scio u s, 333; p h ilo s o p h ic u s J p h iIo s o p h o ru m j 136n , 207, 211; ■ —■a m b i­ sex u al M an , 2 ig ; — g o ld , 235; — m a n , 235; p o sitiv e a sp e c t of, 241; as p rim a m a te ria , 235, 309; as p rim e v a l chaos, 235; p sy ch ic n a ­ tu r e of, 216; p sy ch o lo g em of, 216; as p u e r , 220; — lep ro su s, 226n ; q u a d ra tu sj 278; as q u ic k silv e r, 207ff; as re d e e m in g p sy c h o p o m p , 237; as r e ­ flection o f m y stical e x p e rie n c e of a rtife x , 237; re la tio n to astro lo g y , 225; — to S a tu rn , 226, 250; — to V enus, 250; re p re se n ts in d iv id u a tio n process, 237; — th e self, 237; as re v e a le r o f d iv in e secrets, 230; as salt o f S a tu rn , 227; as S a lv a to r, 235; as second A d a m , 235; — son o f G od, 222; se lf-d e stru c tio n / tra n s fo rm a tio n of, 236; as se n e x , 178, 220, 226, 250; as S erv ato r, 235; as son o f T ia m a t, 236; as so u l of m e ta ls, 198; as so u rce o f a ll o p p o sites, 348; as s p irit, see s p irit; as s p ir it a n d so u l o f th e bod ies, 213; as s p ir itu s veg eta tiv a s, 202, 310; as

s ta rry h e a v e n , 222; as sto n e , 235; as sto rm d a e m o n , 202; s u lp h u r, is fire h id d e n in , 228η ; — , is m a s c u lin e p rin c ip le of, 228; as su p ra c e le stia l s p irit, 214; sym bols of, 257; sy m b o l­ ized by H e rm e s T ris m e g istu s , 319; sy n th esis of, 257; as system of h ig h e r a n d lo w er po w ers, 222; as te r m in u s a n ij 220; th re e -h e a d e d , 221; — snake, 222; as tin c tu r e , 235; tra n s fo rm a ­ tio n of, 333; as tre e o f m eta ls, 309; as tre e -n u m e n , 239; tr ia d o f s u lp h u r, s a lt a n d , 277; — of su n , m o o n a n d , 277; tr ia d ic n a tu r e of, 221; as tric k ­ ste r, 203, 237; as tr in ity a n d q u a te rn ity , 222; tr in ity a n d u n ity of, 221 ff; as tr in u s e t u n u s , 196; as tr iu n e d i ­ v in ity , 222; as tr iu n u s a n d tern a riu s, 221; tu r n s in to god d ess o f love, 226; tw o su b sta n c e s of, 217; as u ltim a m a ­ te ria , 235; u n d iv id e d n e ss of, 245; as u n ig e n itu s , 235; u n ite s o p p o sites, 309/; as u n ity , 237; u tr iu s q u e ca p a x, 348; v a p o u r-lik e n a tu r e of, 212; a n d V en u s, 226n ; as v irg o , 213; as w a te r, 207#, 309 m e rc u ry , 277n ; see also q u ic k silv e r M e rc u ry : e x te rn a l, 135η; p la n e t, 225; son of, 6on m e re L u sin e , 143 m e rid ia n , 46; of th e S u n , 63, 72, 8off; see also life, m id d le M e rk a b a h , 281 M e so p o ta m ia , 231 “ M essiah o f th e L ie ,” 232 M e sth a , 280 m etal(s), 72, 89, 218, 227n , 287, 290, 331; b ase, 101; im p u re , 290n; lep ro sita s of, 29 m ; le p ro u s, 290; m e n , 8g, 93; M e rc u riu s, fa th e r o f all, 235; o f p h i ­ lo so p h ers, 2 ig n , 275; seven, 288/, 337; — , co n n e c tio n o f tre e w ith , 310; -s p irit, 297; sp irits of, g i; tr a n s m u ta ­ tio n of, 124; tre e of, 315, 332; see also a n tim o n y ; b rass; c o p p e r; g o ld ; iro n ; le a d ; m e rc u ry ; q u ick silv e r; s il­ v er; steel; tin

INDEX metallic: e a r t h , 310; m e n , 89, 93, 198; tree, see tree m e t a m o r p h o s i s , 261 m e t a p h y s i c a l : assertions, 51; m o u n t a i n s , 262; p r e s u m p t i o n , 51; split, 243; w o r l d , 244 metaphysicians(s), 276/ metaphysics, 50, 54, 300 metasomatosis, 75 M e t a t r o n , 132 m e t h o d , 7, 16, 21, 63, 65, 327; " f a l s e , " 324 M e t r o p o l i s , 172 Mexico, a n c i e n t , 8 m ; w o r l d - t r e e , fig. 8 M i c h e l s p a c h e r , Steffan, 195*2 Micreris, 323 m i c r o c o s m , 82, 127, 135, 13712, 138*1, 152, 165, 218/, 220, 284, 285*1, 291; h e a r t of, 164; homo as s y n o n y m for, 219; m a n as, g2; Saviour of, 127; s t o n e as, 328; w a n d e r i n g , 153 M i d d l e Ages, 22, 106; L a t e , 103 m i d p o i n t , u n i v e r s a l , 271 M i g n e , J a c q u e s P a u l (ed. P.G. a n d P.L.,), 6on, 248*1, 249*1, 2 8 m , 294*2, 295"; 3 3 3 "

m i l k , virgin's, 290 m i n d , 41, 104*2; conscious, 17, 184, 255; — , i m p a t i e n c e of, 17; — , l a n g u a g e of, 28; — , one-sidedness o f , 348; d i f f e r e n t i a t e d m a s c u l i n e , 41; E a s t e r n , 55/; — , p o l y t h e i s t i c a t t i t u d e of, 35; — , s h a d o w l a n d of, 11; h o r r i b l e d a r k n e s s o f , 250; h u m a n , 54; m a s c u l i n e , 336; M e l u s i n a , vision a p p e a r i n g in, 144, 174; p r i m i t i v e , 51*2; t r a n q u i l l i t y of, 152; W a l p u r g i s n a c h t o f , 90; W e s t e r n , 6, 7, 20, 42 mine(s), 89, 93 mineral(s), see m e t a l m i n e r a l k i n g d o m , 77, 195 ming (life), 25, 41 m i r e of t h e d e e p , 146/ m i r r o r of W i s d o m , 22 Missal, 68n, 78*2 M i t h r a s , 97; relief f r o m O s t e r b u r k e n ,

307

Moguls, 231 m o i s t / d r y , 278 m o i s t u r e , 86*i m o n a d , 82; C a t h o l i c , 1 5 m M o n a k r i s (Arcadia), 221 M o n o g e n e s , 104, 172*2 m o n o l i t h , 85 m o n o t h e i s m of consciousness, 36 monster(s): h e r m a p h r o d i t i c , 139, 219; p r i m o r d i a l , 98; w i t h v u l t u r e ' s wings, 79"

m o o d s , 34, 37, 39, 335; b a d , 82; p e r sonal, 41 m o o n , 44, 72, 76*1, 86, 98/, 161, 22680*2, 265, 2758:12, 277, 308, 311, 339, fig. 32; b o w l of, 231; circle of, 192, 226n; goddess D i a n a , 303; h o m s o f , 155*2; m o t h e r a n d w i f e of s u n , 150*1; - p l a n t , of t h e a d e p t s , 308; r e l a t e d t o w a t e r , 139; sickle, 155*1; a n d stars, l i g h t of, 248; a n d s u n , 79*2; — , M e r c u r i u s , c h i l d of, 7 6 n , 225; — a n d M e r c u r i u s , t r i a d of, 277; — , tree, 306*1, 308, 339; t r e e of, 30311; a n d Venus, Mercurius identified with, 226; w a t e r of, a n d of S a t u r n , 227; see also L u n a m o r a l : code, 184; consciousness, 196; c o n t r a d i c t i o n s , 245; q u a l i t i e s , 326; u n m a s k i n g , 54; values, 185 m o r a l i t y , 13, 245; b r u t a l , 47; C h r i s t i a n ascetic, 46; conscious, 325 M o r g a n a , 182 M o r i e n u s R o m a n u s , 123*1, 314*2 m o r n i n g , k n o w l e d g e , 249; see also cognitio m o r t a l i t y , 133*1, 168/ mortificatio, Son, 68*1, 80, 83*1, 87*1 Moses, 113*1, 130, 2 g i n , 298, 321; heali n g s n a k e of, 104; r e l a t i o n o f , t o self / s h a d o w , 321 M o t h e r / m o t h e r ( s ) , 87f, 100, 184*2; A n i adic, 166; C h u r c h a, 117; -complexes, m a s c u l i n e , 99; d i v i n e , 333; f o u r , 150; - F a t h e r , M e r c u r i u s as, 220*2; G o d is, a n d F a t h e r , 27; of G o d , 183, 333*1; goddess, 183*1; i m a g e of, 112; - i m a g o .

4i8

INDEX i i 2 ; N a t u r e , 117; of Q u e t z a l c o a t l , ioo; -son, incest, 232; of t w i n gods, 98; t w o , 112, 117, 189; see also M a t e r ; m a t r i a r c h a l society; m e r e L u s i n e M o t h e r h o o d , Q u e e n of, 18471 m o t h e r l y angels, 318 m o t i f ( s ) : of a s c e n t / d e s c e n t , see ascent; cross, 268; d i s m e m b e r m e n t ^ 30471; d o u b l e q u a t e r n i t y , 305; e a r l y C h r i s t i a n , fig. B i ; h a r l e q u i n , 261; incest, 232, 280, 302; m u t i l a t i o n , 30471; m y t h , i i , 273; m y t h o l o g i c a l , 69n, 299; spellb o u n d s p i r i t , ig8; t o r t u r e , 328; treasu r e , 258; t w o h o s t i l e b r o t h e r s , 24671 m o t i o n , c i r c u l a r , 77 m o u n t a i n ( s ) , 15, fig. B6, 19571, 227, 256, 261, 2 9 m , 298, 312; b o u n d a r y r e g i o n of snow, 23; five, 256; f o u r , 256, 262, fig. 24; m e t a p h y s i c a l , 262; r e l a t i o n of t r e e to, 309; S a t u r n i n e , 2g2; s y m b o l of p e r s o n a l i t y / s e l f , 309; tree's h a b i t a t i o n , 308; w o r l d , 2 g m m o v e m e n t , c i r c u l a r , 21, 25 Moyses, 323 mudra, 265 M i i l l e r , M a r t i n , 16871 M u i r h e a d , J a m e s F u l l e r t o n , 34071 multi flores, 247 M u m i a , 134, 152 m u m m y ( - i e s ) , E g y p t i a n , 134 Mundus/mundus, 32g; intelligibilis, 215; rationalis, 236 m u r a l c r o w n , 30371 Musa, 2 g m Musaeum hermeticum, Sen, 8372, 92 n, 10571, fig. B6, I86TI, 20771, 20871, 2ogn, 21271, 21471, 21571, 21771, 21971, 22071, 22271, 22671, 2 2 8 n , 23071, 2 3 m , 23571, 28671, 29271, 303, 30671, 30771, 30971, 31071, 31171; see also names of individual treatises in Bibl. A M u s a i o s , 29 m muscus, 15671, 187 m u s i c a l i t y , 108 m u s k , 155, 176 m u s t a r d seed, 259

m u t i l a t i o n , m o t i f of, 30471; see also dismemberment Mutus liber, 19571 Mylius, J o h a n n D a n i e l , 72, 85/, 12671, 12771, 13872, 152&71, 20711, 2ogn, 213, 214, 21772, 219&72, 221, 22271, 22671, 22772, 228&T2, 23572, 26671, 30371, 30671, 308&72, 30972, 319&72 m y r t l e , 286; mystic, 314 m y s t a g o g u e , 80; M e r c u r i u s as, 225 mysterium: a l c h e m i c a l , 334; et magnate Dei, 120 mystery(-ies), 63; C h r i s t i a n , 10372, 188; d i v i n e , 188; of H a r r a n i t e h e a d , 8 m ; Isis, 80, 18371; of life, 239; of N a a s senes, 145; n a t u r a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 157; n a t u r e , 158; r e b i r t h — , o p u s a, 338; of r e l i g i o n , 276; - t r a d i t i o n , D i o nysian, 70 mystic(s), 27, ig5; A d a m , i3g; b o d y , 10772; M e r c u r i u s a r e f l e c t i o n of, exp e r i e n c e of a r t i f e x , 237; p e r e g r i n a t i o n , 230; s p e c u l a t i o n , 91, 111; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 13671 mysticism, 87; n e b u l o u s , 349; rose, 295; t r u e , 210 m y s t i f i c a t i o n , 162; s p u r i o u s , 276 m y s t i q u e of t h e R o s e , 2g4 myth(s), g8, 301; c r e a t i o n , gg; d i v i n e , 263; h e r o , 258, fig. 14; m o t i f s , 11, 6 g n , 273, 2gg; m o t i f s , u n i v e r s a l , 347; sacred, 298 m y t h i c a l b i r d , 344/ m y t h l i k e f a n t a s i e s , 258 m y t h o l o g e m ( s ) , 162, 273/, 2g2, 300, 348 m y t h o l o g y , 41, 6 g n , i s g , 274, 293, 348; G r e e k a n d E g y p t i a n , 142; T e u t o n i c , 3*7

N N a a s , 319&T1, 321, 333 N a a s s e n e s , 146, 23271, 31971; m y s t e r i e s of, 145; see also N a a s N a b u , 232 a l - N a d i m , I b n , 24.071

419

INDEX naga s t o n e s , 3 4 0 Nagel, Hildegard, igi N a k a s s a , 340 n a k e d ( n e s s ) , 53; s n a k e , 304 n a m e ( s ) : p a g a n , of d a y s of w e e k , 249; secret, 327; s p e l l b i n d i n g , 328 N a t c h e z I n d i a n s , 100 natura abscondita, g5 n a t u r a l : c o n s c i o u s n e s s , 247; e l i x i r , 134; l i g h t , 239; m a n , p u r i f i c a t i o n o f , 142; p h i l o s o p h y , 102, 159, 274, 348; p s y c h e , 238; science, see science; secrets, 301; s p i r i t , 184; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n m y s t e r y , 157; w i s d o m , 271, 333; — , c e n t r e of,

N e g r o , 52 N e k h e n , c i t y of, 2 8 0 N e l k e n , J a n , 3398:" n e o l o g i s m ( s ) , 113, i 2 i & n , 124, 137, 186 N e o p l a t o n i c ( - i s t ) : i d e a s , 131, 215; I d e s , 132*1 N e p t u n e , 303*1 n e r v o u s n e s s , 13, 37 n e t t l e ( s ) , 155, 176 N e u m a n n , E r i c h , 335 n e u r o s i s ( - e s ) , 8, 12/f, 36, 45, 341, 343, 345; m a s c u l i n e , 336; t r e a t m e n t o f , 69 n e u r o t i c ( s ) , 302; s t a t e s , 50;

symptoms,

37

n a t u r a l n e s s , 185 n a t u r e ( s ) , 197; c o l l e c t i v e , of self, 240; c o n t r a r y , of M e r c u r i u s , 319; d o u b l e / d u a l / t r i o d i c , of M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; f e m i n i n e - m a t e r n a l of t r e e , 3 1 7 / ; f o u r , 76, g 4 (see also e l e m e n t s , f o u r ) ; h u m a n , d a r k n e s s of, 244; — , e s s e n c e o f , 4 0 ; — , as hsing, 2 i n , 25; — , a n d l i f e , 20, 2 3 ; — . l i g h t of, 29; — , l i g h t a n d d a r k f o r c e s o f , 25; — , t r u e , 39; of l i g h t , 151; of m a n , see m a n ; n y m p h i d i d i c , 173/; o n e ' s o w n , 48; P l a t o n i c , 292; r e v e r s a l of o n e ' s , 18; s e p a r a t i o n o f , 161; t r u e , of alc h e m y , 123; t w o , 284; u n i o n o f , 161 N a t u r e / n a t u r e , 65, 160, 184; c o n v e r g e s i n m a n , 94; d a r k n e s s o f , 160; d e i t y , 200; — , d a r k , 247; e g g of, 218; f o r c e s of, 128; g o d s , 150; i n v i s i b l e b o d y o f , 114; m o n a r c h y o f , 163; M o t h e r , 117; m y s t e r y , 158; p h i l o s o p h y , H e l l e n i s t i c , 7g; w i s d o m o f , 120; w o r s h i p , 161 N a v a h o I n d i a n s , 22, 9 8 Nazari, G. Battista, 67n N e a l e , J . M . , Collected Hymns, Sequences and Carols, 2930, 296™ N e b u c h a d n e z z a r , 13, 310; d r e a m o f , 272*1, 337 necrocomica, 139*1 necrolica, 172 n N e c r o l i i , 171, 172*1 n e c r o m a n c y , 119 420

n e w : e n e m y of t h e o l d , 48; t h i n g , 15/ N e w T e s t a m e n t , 78, 242; C o r i n t h i a n s I , 107, 296*1; H e b r e w s , 83; T h e s s a l o n i a n s , 247; see also G o s p e l s ; R e v e l a t i o n N e w t o n , S i r I s a a c , 69 N i c o d e m u s , 102/ N i e t z s c h e , F . W „ 52, 99, 118, 1288cn, 332; see also Z a r a t h u s t r a n i g h t m a r e , 143 nigredo, 68, 79*1, 165*1, 232, 266, 325, 3 3 3 4 I

N i k l a u s v o n d e r F l u e , 346 Nikotheos, 76 N i l e , 215; s t o n e , 101; v a l l e y , c i v i l i z a t i o n o f , 101; w a t e r o f , 7 3 N i n c k , M a r t i n , 340*1 n i n e : n u m b e r , 157; s i r e n s , 178 nirdvandva, 14 nivis, 2 0 7 n N o a h , 314 n o m e , 279n n o m e n c l a t u r e : a n t i n o m i a n , 216; of e g g , 82*1; s y m b o l i c , 275 n o m i n a l i s m , 288/ n o n - a c t i o n , 16, 25 n o n - d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , 45 n o n - e x i s t i n g (asat), z i 8 n n o r t h e r n lights, 209 N o r t o n , T h o m a s , 197*1, 203*1 N o s t o c ( s ) / N o s t o c h , 153*1, 154 n o t - k n o w i n g , d a r k a b y s s o f , 178 N o t r e D a m e , as D e e s s e R a i s o n , 244

INDEX n o u r i s h i n g f r u i t s , 272 N o u s , 73, 104, 269; f e m a l e , 321; o p p o s i t i o n w i t h sex, 269; s e r p e n t of, 333 n u m b e r : basic, 22; o n e , two, t h r e e , f o u r , 151; s y m b o l i s m , 1 5 m ; see also o n e ; two; t h r e e ; f o u r ; five; six; seven; n i n e ; h u n d r e d ; ten t h o u s a n d n u m e n : c h t h o n i c , of tree, d r a g o n / s n a k e as, 317; d i v i n e , 268; tree-, 195, 315, 317; — , as a n i m u s , 338; — , f e m i n i n e , 338; — , M e r c u r i u s as, 239; vegetat i o n , 22071 n u m i n o s i t y , 301, 324 n u m i n o u s : complexes, 328; effect, 302; ideas, 299, 301 N y a g r o d h a , 31371 nycticorax, 198 n y m p h ( s ) , 142/, 158, 231; tree-, w i t c h like, 260; w a t e r - , 143 N y m p h i d i d a , 143 n y m p h i d i d i c r e a l m , 173/

O oak, 193/, 197, igg, 203, 286, 308, 33271 O a n n e s , 219 o b j e c t , 15; a n d s u b j e c t , 45 o b j e c t i v i t y , scientific, 6, 28g obscurantist(s), ig8 o b s c u r i t y as t h e d a r k n e s s of disease, 331 obsession(s), 37, 246 obsessional neurosis, 34 obumbratio of M a r y , 214 occult, m a n i f e s t a t i o n of, 15171 occultism, E a s t e r n , 7 O d i n , 333; h o r s e of, 34071 o d o u r of i m m o r t a l i t y , 334 o g d o a d , 151, 305; of e l e m e n t s , 278; as s y m b o l of t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n process, 316 oil, 287; g o l d e n , 227 O k e a n o s , 76 o l d : age, 272 O l d T e s t a m e n t , 333; see also Apocr y p h a ; D a n i e l ; D e u t e r o n o m y ; Eze421

kiel; Ezra; Genesis; J e r e m i a h ; J o b ; Psalms o l d e r H o r u s , 281 olive, 279Sen O l y m p i a n ( s ) , 37 O l y m p i o d o r u s , 74, 8 2 7 1 , 105 n, 1 2 8 7 1 , 13972, 20371, 284/, 323 O l y m p u s , 37 o m e g a : a l p h a a n d , 222, 281; e l e m e n t , 72, 76 omniscience, d r i n k of, 89 O m p h a l e , 99 O n e , 148, 150, 151, 176; a n d All, 232; F a t h e r a n d Son are, 116; a n d M a n y , 233; a n d t h e r o o t of itself, 139; imp u r e / p u r e , 15171; m i d p o i n t of circle, 151; s u b s t a n c e , 284 one-sidedness, 9, 13, 262, 336; of conscious m i n d , 348 O n i a n s , R . B., 26571 O n k e l o s , 16971 O n l y - B e g o t t e n , 145 o n o m a s t i c a , 121 O p h i t e s , 333 O p h i u c h o s d e m o n , 323 opinion(s), a n i m u s , 41 o p i u m , 15671 O p o r i n , 119, 133 opposite(s), 9, 14, 5171, 99, 216, 237, 242, 245, 256, 293, 332; clash of, 14, 348; d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of, 243; f r e e of (nirdvandva), 14; M e r c u r i u s consists of, 220, 237; — source of, 348; — u n i t e s , 309/; p a i r s of, 336; p l a y of, 238; p r o b l e m of, 326; psychological, 25; q u a t e r n i o of, 278; r e d u c t i o n / s y n t h e s i s of, 278; t e n s i o n of, 112, 118, 242; — , in C h r i s t i a n i t y , 243; u n i o n of, 21, 15171, 162, 210, 232, 254, 255, 257, 336, 341; EXAMPLES: a c t i o n / n o n - a c t i o n , I 6 N ; a c -

tive/passive, 79; c o r p o r e a l / i n c o r p o real, 75; l i f e / d e a t h , 5171; m a s c u l i n e / f e m i n i n e , 79; N o u s / s e x , 269; p h y s i c a l / s p i r i t u a l , 5171; S o l / L u n a , 161; w a t e r / fire, 74, 216; w a t e r / s p i r i t , 74; y a n g / yin, g; y e a / n a y , 14

INDEX opposition: absolute, 210; between N o u s a n d sex, 269 o p u s , 66, 67*2, 8 8 n , 104, 127, 1 4 m , 148, 170, 179, 202/, 239, 275, 2 9 7 # , 322*2; a l c h e m i c a l , alchymicum, 123, 154, 160, 185/f, 186, 237; 166, 172; — , t w o p a r t s o f , 348; c o m p l e t i o n o f , 152*2; contra naturam, 3 1 4 / ; divinum, 123, 160; i n f o r m of a Mass, 158; g o a l o f , see g o a l ; G o d as p r o d u c t o f , 307; m i c r o c o s m i c , 197; m i s t a k e s d u r i n g , 324; a r e b i r t h m y s t e r y , 338; r e l a t i o n t o z o d i a c , 314*1; a s t r e e , 313; — , s y m b o l i z e s w h o l e , 311 o r a t o r i u m , 349 o r d e r , d i v i n e , 122 O r e s t e s , m a d n e s s of, 97 o r g y , D i o n y s i a n , 70 O r i e n t a l , 53; r e l i g i o n , 4 7 ; Sages, 3 7 ; w i s d o m , 7; see also E a s t e r n o r i e n t a t i o n , q u a t e r n a r y systems of, 167 O r i g i n a l : M a n , 166; sin, i g 6 ; w h o l e n e s s , 284, 3 3 6 Orpheus, 2 9 m O r t h e l i u s , 94*1 o r t h o d o x y , F r e u d i a n , 342 Osiris, 73/, 2 8 o f ; p r i n c i p l e of all m o i s t u r e , 74*1; s e a l e d t o m b of, 74 O s t a n e s , 79*1, 99, 101, 154, 215, 247*1, 2 7 9 " . 3°9>

3 2 ° - 32", 3 2 7/> 3 3 1

O s t e r b u r k e n , 307 o t h e r : s h o r e , 206*1; s i d e , 101 o u r s e l v e s , s p l i t i n , 246 o u t e r h a p p e n i n g , 16 o u t f l o w i n g , 24, 2 9 o u t g r o w i n g of p r o b l e m , 14/ o u t s i d e , 15/, 18 o x , 70, i 2 g , 183, 280 o x i d e s , 104*2, 290*1

P Pacific c u l t u r e ,

101;

Gilbert

Islands,

337"

P a d m a n a b a , 231 P a d m a n a b h a p u r a , t e m p l e o f , 231

p a g a n ( s ) , 113/, 116, 122, 189; a l c h e m i s t s , 299; a n t i q u i t y , 157; l o r e , 122 p a g a n u m , 113 p a g o d a s , 281*2 P a g o y u m , 113*2, 116, 122*1 p a i n t i n g ( s ) , s a n d , 22 p a i r , r o y a l , 332; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a n d u n i t y o f , 326 p a l a e o l i t h i c : c u l t of s o u l - s t o n e s , 100; s u n - w h e e l , 28 p a l m , 318; t r e e , 3 1 5 P a n , 231 p a n a c e a , 104, 150, 166, 178, 274*2, 296, 306 P a n d o r a , 94 Pandora, see R e u s n e r p a n s y , m o u n t a i n , 135*2 P a n t h e u s , Ars transmutationis metallicae, 227*2 P a n t o p h t h a l m o s , 217 p a p y r i : m a g i c , see M a g i c P a p y r i ; G r e e k M a g i c , see G r e e k s.v. p a r a b l e : of h o u s e b u i l t o n s a n d , 319; of t h e u n j u s t s t e w a r d , 243f p a r a b o l i c figure, 8 0 P a r a c e l s u s , 212, 219, 236; a l c h e m y , 129; a r c a n e p h i l o s o p h y , 110; C h r i s t i a n , 160; d e f i n i t i o n of l i f e , 134; e a r t h l y f i r m a m e n t , 276*2; P a g o y u m ( a ) , 113, 122, 158; s u b s t a n c e s , 277; t h i n k i n g , 115, 142; t r i a d , 277; W O R K S : " A p o k a lypsis H e r m e t i s , " 129; " A r c h i d o x i s m a g i c a e , " 122*2; Astronomia magna, 114*2, 115*2, 131*2; " D a s B u c h M e t e o r u m , " 143*2; " C a p u t d e m o r b i s s o m n i i , " 113*2, 114*2; " D e c a d u c i s , " 112*2, 1 1 7 n ; " D e m o r b i s a m e n t i u m , " 122*1; " D e n a t u r a r e r u m , " 123*2; " D e n y m p h i s , " 115*2; " D e p e s t i l i t a t e , " 114*2, 122ti, 164*2; De philosophia occulta, 18m; " D e p o d a g r i c i s , " 114*2, 1 1 5 0 , 130*2; " D e p y g m a e i s , " 143; " D e r e l i g i o n e p e r p e t u a , " 130*2; " D e s a n g u i n e u l t r a m o r t e m , " 143; " D e t a r t a r o : f r a g m e n t a a n a t o m i a e , " 132*2; De vita longa, 113*1, 124*2, 1 3 m , i 3 3 # , 135*2, 136*1, 144, 160, 172*1, 173 ff, 187*1;

422

INDEX " F r a g m e n t a , " 16472, 18072; " F r a g m e n t a m e d i c a , " 11472, 135", 15372; "Labyrinthus medicorum errant i u m , " 11371, 11472, 11572; " L i b e r A z o t h , " 12521, 13972, 14372, 16472, 17272; Das Buch Paragranum, 111, 124, i 3 i & n , 17822, 18772; Paramirum de quinque entibus morborum, 113, 11572, 12272; Paramirum primum, 11372; " P h i l o s o p h i a a d A t h e n i e n s e s , " 14372; " P h i l o s o p h i a sagax," 116; " V o n d e r A s t r o n o m e y , " 13172; " V o n d e n d r e y e n ersten essentiis," 13172; "Von E r k a n t n u s des Gestirns," 11372 P a r a c l e t e , 229 P a r a - d a , 20671 p a r a d i s e , 83, 13172, 143, 1548:72, 230, 241, 298, 30872, 311/; A d a m ' s t r e e of, 138; e a r t h l y , 196; f o u r rivers of, 149, 172, fig. 24; f r u i t s a n d h e r b s of, 30672; M e r c u r i u s , e a r t h of, 235; s e r p e n t of, 303; t r e e in, 318; tree of, see t r e e p a r a d o x i c a l i t y of life, 9 parallelism(s), psychological, 12 p a r a p h y s i o l o g i c a l theory, Geley's, 5171 p a r a p s y c h o l o g y , 4of p a r e d r o s , 12671, fig. 5, 179, 225 parent(s): first, 257, 321; i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h , 45 P a r i s MS., see Codices a n d M a n u s c r i p t s P a r j a n y a , 268 P a r m e n i d e s , 77 participation mystique, 52, 91, 205, 266; dissolution of, 45, 4712; p r i m o r d i a l , 44

P a t a g o n i a n s , 71 pater mirabilis, 166 Patrizzi, Francesco, 233 p a t t e r n , g e o m e t r i c , 23 P a u l , St., 52; i n n e r Christ of, 27 P a u l , of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e , 3ogn P a u l i , W „ 28872 P a u l i c i a n s , 229 P a u l i n u s of N o l a , 2818:72 P a u s a n i a s , 9771 paws, cut-off, lion w i t h , 304, 321 Pe, city of, 280

peace, h e r o of, 229 peacock(s), 114; tail, 290/2 pearl(s), 135, 176; of g r e a t p r i c e , 259 Pelagios, 274 Pelican, 148, figs. B2, B7, 316; p h i l o sophical, 87 p e n a l code, 184 P e n o t u s , 2128(72, 2 2 3 7 2 , 231, 2328:71, 233 Peratics, 76 p e r e g r i n u s microcosmus, 153 p e r f e c t i o n , s y m b o l of, 269 p e r m a n e n c e , 259, 272 P e r n e t y , A. J., 14171, 16672, 18772 persea trees, 305, 33772 Persia(n), 132; a n c i e n t , d u a l i s m of, 243; B u d d h i s t m o n a s t e r i e s in, 231; fire s t r u c k f r o m stones in, 320; t r a d i t i o n , 288, 308; tree, 340 p e r s o n a , 18071, medical, 121 p e r s o n a l : affects, 346; fantasies, 344: p r o b l e m s , 301/, psyche/psychology, 347; r e s e n t m e n t s , 345/; unconscious, 348 p e r s o n a l i t y , 25, 35, 39, ig4, 272, 341; all sides of, 25; d e v e l o p m e n t of, 18, 21; dissociation of, 264; d o u b l e , 35; ego, 254; e n l a r g e m e n t of, 18; e p h e m e r a l / g r e a t e r , go; h i g h e r level of, 15; i n n e r ( m o s t ) , 24, 28; m a r k s of, 195; p h e n o m e n a l , 27; psychic, 35, 37; psychogenic s p l i t t i n g of, 35; s u p e r i o r , 46; symbol of, 194; symbolized by m o u n t a i n a n d tree, 309; total, 16, 45; trees a n i m a t e d by souls, have, lgg; u n i t y of, 14, 34; wholeness of, 240 personification, 38/, 41, g2, 112; a n i m a as, of unconscious, 42; of lifeless things, 91; of metals, 93; of s u n o r g o l d , 80; of trees, 1 9 4 7 2 Petasios, 74, 1 0 5 7 2 , 203 P e t r i , H e n r i c , 14471 P e t r i e , W . F., 3 0 5 7 2 p e t r i f a c t i o n , 100 p h a l l i c : a r r o w , 263; symbol, fig. 30 p h a l l u s , 232 phantasia, 16772, 176 P h a r a o h , 305

423

INDEX p h a r m a c e u t i c s , 122 p h a r m a c o l o g y , 122 4>6-PHO.KOV AOavaoias, 154 p h a s e s , seven, of t h e a l c h e m i c a l p r o c ess, 303 P h e l a n , G l a d y s , 191 p h e n o m e n a : collective p s y c h i c , 36; telep a t h i c , 139*1 P h e r e k y d e s , fig. 2 p h i a l , s p h e r i c a l , 82*1 P h i l a l e t h a / P h i l a l e t h e S , E i r e n a e u s , 2o8n, 2og*i, 2 i o n , 212*1, 217*1, 219*1, 220*1, 228*1, 2 3 m , 286*1 P h i l o J u d a e u s , 132, 266*1, 333 p h i l o s o p h e r s , 70, 95; C h i n e s e , 40, 50*1; E a s t e r n , 50; H e r m e t i c , 289; g a r d e n o f , 309; m e t a l o f , 219*1; m o d e r n , 121; secrets o f , 7 6 n ; s o n o f , 129; s t o n e o f , 198, 271; v i n e g a r / w a t e r of, 85 p h i l o s o p h i c ( a l ) : a l c h e m i s t s , 124*1, 161; a l c h e m y , a i m o f , 135*1; " c o m m o n a n d , M e r c u r i u s , " 217; d i a l e c t i c , 238; e a r t h , 290; E y e , 22; g o l d , 218, 274; h e a v e n , 222; l e a d , 227; m a n , g4, 235; m a t t e r , 29o; s p e c u l a t i o n , 124*1; s t o n e , 94, 293; t r e e , see t r e e ; w a t e r s , 279*1 philosophic ambisexual man, Mercur i u s as, 219 p h i l o s o p h y ( - i e s ) , 111; a l c h e m i c a l , 206*1; A r i s t o t e l i a n , 116; C h i n e s e , 9, 11, 40; — , yoga, 4, 14, 29; E a s t e r n , 6, 56; H e l l e n i s t i c n a t u r e , 79; H e r m e t i c , 233, 274, 288; I n d i a n , 142; of life, 50; n a t u r a l , 102, 159, 348; — , m e d i e v a l , 274; P a r a c e l s a n , n o t C a b a l i s t i c , 123; t r u e , 288 p h o b i a ( s ) , 37, 246 p h o e n i x , 128*1, 226*1 P h r y g i a n ( s ) , 87*1 p h y s i c a l : e l e m e n t s , 155; l i g h t n i n g , 152; a n d s p i r i t u a l , 5 m ; s y m p t o m s , 335 p h y s i c i a n ( s ) : a c a d e m i c , 120; a l c h e m i c a l , 124; d i v i n e office of, 116; h e a v e n l y , o f t h e s o u l , 293; m a t u r a t i o n o f , 124 physics: m o d e r n , 289; t r u e , 288 p h y s i k a a n d m y s t i k a , 103 p h y s i o c h e m i s t s , 149

physiological c o n t i n u u m , 9 Physis, 104, 307 Picasso, P a b l o , 261 P i c i n e l l u s , P h i l i p p u s , 155*1, 3 1 7 " Pico della Mirandola, Joannes,

130,

» 3 i . i37n-> 169*1 P i e r r e , N o e l , 27of p i e t y , s t o r k as a l l e g o r y o f , 317 p i g , fig. 22 p i l l a r ( s ) : f i e r y / p n e u m a t i c / s o l a r , 310*1; of S h u , f o u r , 279, 281 p i n e t r e e of A t t i s , 305*1 pinguedo mannae, 153*1; see also manna P i p e r , L e o n o r a , 418c*! P i r k e d e R a b b i E l i e z e r , see E l i e z e r p i s c i n a , 73 P i t r a , J e a n - B a p t i s t e , 74*1, 309*1 p l a g u e b a l l s , 155*1 p l a n e t a r y s p i r i t s , fig. B 5 , 225, 227 p l a n e t s , 1411, 181*1, 277, 316; i n m a n , 125*1; seven, 303, 310; — , t r e e s of, 309 p l a n t ( s ) , 23, 45, 248, 297; a s p a r a g u s , 313; k i n g d o m , 77; m o o n - , of t h e a d e p t s , 308; re'tvas, 337*1; s e e d , 24; s y m b o l i s m , 194; w o n d e r - w o r k i n g , 253 P l a t o , 77, 139, 214, 298, 31280*1 P l a t o n i c : m a n , 26; n a t u r e , 292 " P l a t o n i s l i b e r q u a r t o r u m , " see " L i b e r Platonis quartorum" P l e r o m a , 87*1, 334, 336 P l u t a r c h , 74*1 p n e u m a , 75/, 87*1, 212, 284; m e r c u r i a l , 215 p n e u m a t i c : b o d y , 52; m a n , 46, 233; p i l l a r , 310*1 p'o s o u l , 39, 4 0 P o i m a n d r e s , 73 p o i n t ( s ) , 151, 337; c a r d i n a l , fig. 25; crea t i v e , v i s u a l i z a t i o n of, 25; i n d i v i s i b l e , 148; s u n - , 15281*1 poison(s), 135, 229, 297; d e a t h - d e a l i n g , 323; - d r i p p i n g d r a g o n , 218; fiery a n d g a s e o u s , 278*1 p o i s o n i n g , 322; m e r c u r i a l , 323 p o i s o n o u s : d r a g o n , 218, 321; t i n c t u r e , 284*1

424

INDEX P o l a (Istria), 298n p o l a r i t y , 26; of life, g; in self-regulating systems, 15 pole(s): of l i g h t a n d darkness, 25; star, 14171 pole-dwellings, g8 Polia, 176, 183 P o l i p h i l o , 176, 183, 305; h i e r o s g a m o s of, 155; see also Francesco C o l o n n a political Utopias, 300 politician(s), 37 p o l y o p h t h a l m i a , 86, 21771 p o l y t h e i s m , 47; H i n d u , 243 p o m a n d e r , 1558:71 P o m p o n i u s Mela, 17881:73 ponderatio, 16573 P o r d a g e , J o h n , 15771, 30671 p o r n o g r a p h i c a , 231 possession: of a n i m u s , 267; by consciousness, 36; s t a t e of, 34 " p o u r e s l i o m m e s evangelisans," 22971 power(s): c o m p e n s a t i n g , of t h e u n c o n scious, 335; of darkness, 243, 334; drive, 260; to fly, 101; of light, 243; m a t e r i a l , 244; t h r o u g h words, 4g; t r u s t in h i g h e r , 54; -words, 121 P r a b h a v a n a n d a , Swami, a n d Isherwood, C . , 31373

" P r a c t i c a M a r i a e P r o p h e t i s s a e , " see Maria Prophetissa praise of t h e C r e a t o r , 24771 P r a j a p a t i , 132 p r e c i n c t , sacred (temenos), 24/, 244 p r e c i p i t a t i o n s , 331 P r e i s e n d a n z , Karl, 12611, 148, 16173, 179, 192, 22673, 27973, 32:911 prejudice(s), 41, 45 P r e l l e r , L u d w i g , 7073, 22771 premises, psychic, 289 " P r e t i o s a m a r g a r i t a novella correctiss i m a , " see B o n u s ; L a c i n i u s P r e u s c h e n , E r w i n , 10473 priest, 59, 60/, 64, 68, 70; sacrificial, 5gn, 84; i n w h i t e r o b e , 63 prima compositio, 13671 p r i m a m a t e r i a , 6on, 67, 73, 7771, 86/, 92, i05n, 122, 13611, 138/, 140, 147,

fig. B6, 170, 205, 219, 227, 236, 3198:71, 3 2 5. 33o/>" lapis as, 319; lead as, 30573; M e r c u r i u s as, 235, 309 p r i m a l incest, 302 P r i m a r y Force, 25 p r i m e v a l time, 9871 primitive(s), 12, 34, 5a, 346; analogies, 28; a n i m i s m , igg; b e l i e f s / p a r a d o x e s of, 6; consciousness, 268; d e m o n o l o g y , 42; instincts, 47; life, 8; m e n t a l i t y , 14, 45, 5171; psychology, 268 p r i m o r d i a l / P r i m o r d i a l : image, see image; l i g h t - b r i n g e r , 248; M a n , see m a n ; monsters, g8; participation mystique, 44; pass, 23; tree, 33771; u n i t y , 265; w o r l d , 243 prince, A n d a l u s i a n , 320/, 328 principium individuations, 196 principle(s), 22; a n i m a l , 257; a n i m a t i n g , 239; a r c h e t y p a l e x p l a n a t o r y , 288/; of c o m p e n s a t i o n , 245; of c o n d u c t , 325; cosmic, fig. A6; d e m i u r g i c , 232; etern a l , 169; f e m i n i n e , tao of the, 324; f o r m a t i v e , 137, 165; f o u r t h , f e m i n i n e , 96; of i n d i v i d u a t i o n , see i n d i v i d u a tion; life, 135, 213; — , of tree, M e r c u r i u s as, 319; m a s c u l i n e , 268; o r d e r ing, of consciousness, 325; psychic, 140; s p i r i t u a l , 138//; —, of stork, tree as, 317; of sufficient reason, 84; vegetative, 257 Priscillian,

102&73

P r i t c h a r d , J. B., 33811 problem(s): insoluble, of life, 15; of opposites, 326; o u t g r o w i n g of, 14; p e r sonal, 301/ p r o c e d u r e , reductive, 348 process(es): alchemical, seven p h a s e s of, 303; chemical, 67; cognitive, 289; of g r o w t h , self d e p i c t e d as, 253; of ind i v i d u a t i o n , see i n d i v i d u a t i o n ; psychic, 16/, 67, 88; of realization, 348; spagyric, 150; of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , see t r a n s f o r m a t i o n ; unconscious m e n t a l , 56 p r o c r e a t i o n , 46, 213/

425

IN D E X P ro d ro m u s R h o d o sta u r o tic u s, 312 η; see also V eru s H e rm e s products: sp on tan eou s, o f u n con sciou s, 273. 299, 339, 346 p rojection , 36, 67, 88, 91, 106, 138, 159, 170, 176, 211, 238, 286, 297, 330f; a l­ ch em ical, 92, 238; o f alch em y, 239: anim a, 340: o f — figure, tree a, 338; arch etyp al, 300; -carrier, 238: o f co l­ lectiv e u ncon sciou s, 229; cosm ic, 335; o f dissociated tend en cies, 37; o f in d i­ v id u a tio n process, 22g; in to m atter, 300: on o u tsid e w o rld , 35; o f psychic a ctu ality, 237; — even ts, 24; in to tree, 200; o f u n co n scio u s, 205, 211; — co n ten ts in to an o b ject, 91; o f to r­ ture, 329; w ith d ra w a l of, 89 P rokonnesos, 64η P rom eth eu s, 12, 94, 263; g u ilt, 189 !Γρούμπον, go p ropaganda, 250 p ro p h et, 59η , 113η, i i 4 p rotective gen ies, 281 P rotestant(s), 54, 81; c u lt o f con sciou s­ ness, 48; schism , 112 P roteus, 178 p rotoplast(s), 132, 166 P rototh om a, 132 Psalm (s), 1458177, 146, 292η P sellu s, M ich ael, 2238071 p sy ch e/P sy ch e, 9, 11, 16, 24, 35, 40, 42/, 51» 55· 92. !2 8. !59· 162, 239, 235, 288/, 346; a b o lish m en t of, 300; archetypal w orld of, 171; bord er region s of, 96; co llectiv e/co n scio u s, 347: conscious im a g e is, 50; dark pow ers of, 42; d im m er elem en ts of, 243; e x is te n c e / m ea n in g of, 346; fa te of, 349: fe m i­ n in e , 40; g o a l of, see goal; in terio r w o rld of, 297; liv in g , 328; n atu ral, 238; person al, 347; P rim o r d ia l M an n am ed , 334; rea lity of, 201; u n c o n ­ scious, 11, 36; w o m a n ’s, sp lit in , 269 psychiatrists, 34 psychic: actu ality, p ro jectio n of, 237; a u to n o m o u s system , see system ; c e n ­ tre, 152; co llectiv e, p h en o m en a , 36;

co m p lex , a u to n o m o u s, 50; c o m p lic a ­ tions, so lu tio n o f, 28; co n ten ts, 34, 92; — , a u to n o m o u s, 35, 37; con trols, 4111; d an ger o f alch em y, 128; d e v el­ o p m en t, see d ev elop m en t; d efin itio n of, 5 1 7 1 ; distu rb an ces, 342; ep id em ics, 37; e q u ilib riu m : 46; even ts, p ro jec­ tio n of, 24; exp erien ce(s), 2777, 52; factor in alch em y, 137; facts, 37; h a p ­ p en in g s, 28; id en tity , g2; law s, 237, 277; n a tu r e o f M ercurius, 216; — Scaiolae, 169; o p era tio n , 86; personality(-ies), 35, 37; prem ises, 28g; p r in ­ cip le, 140; processes, see processes; rea lity , see reality; — , o f m an , 244; state(s), 19, 23, 44, 54f; — , ab n orm al, 43; suffering, 336; system s, o f h ea lin g , 347; — , sp lit in th e, 243; tran sform a­ tio n , 144, 155, 160; tru th , 171; visio n , 177 p sy ch o g en ic d istu rb an ces, 34, 157 p sy ch o id form , 272 psych ologem , 336; M ercu riu s, 2x6 p sych ological: b lin d n ess, 336; ru les, re­ v ersib ility o f, 347; sym p tom s, 335 p sych ologism , 49, 5 0 / psych ologist(s), 34, 39, 46, 69; sy m b o li­ cal, 50; W estern , 40 p sych ology, 4 , 43, 5 0 /, 51η, 159; aca­ d em ic, 3; o f alch em y, 93; c o m p lex , 326; o f th e East, 8; fe m in in e , 41, 82; m ascu lin e, 81 f, 269; m ed ica l, 3, 273; and m etap h ysics, 49, 54; m o d e m , 91; p erson al, 347; p erso n a listic, 107; p rim itiv e, 268; — an d archaic, 91; o f r e lig io n , 332; sh am an istic, yon ; o f th e u n co n scio u s, go, 189, 268; w ith ­ o u t sou l, 238; see also typ ology, psy­ ch o lo g ica l p sy ch o p o m p , 80, 13677, 221, 250; d o g as, 23277; M ercurius as red eem in g , 237 psychosis(-es), 322; m ass, 36 p sych osom atic in stin cts, 346 p sych oth erap y, 189, 205, 244, 327; see also analysis P u e b lo In d ia n s, 22, 100; m y th o lo g y o f, 263

INDEX puer aeternus, 179 puer leprosus, M e r c u r i u s as, 226n puff-ball(s), 290 pulses, h u n d r e d , 325 p u n i s h m e n t ( s ) , 60n, 61, 71, 105, 281, 330; p l a c e of, 62/ p u p p y of celestial h u e , 2320 p u r e m a n , 290 p u r i f i c a t i o n , 138; of n a t u r a l m a n , 142 p u r p l e , 148, 312Sen P u r u r a v a s , 178 P u r u s h a , 132, 171, 220 p u t r e f a c t i o n , 83*1, 13472 P y r a m i d Text(s), 279&71 pyrites, 28777 P y r r h a , 99 P y t h a g o r a s , 306; tetraktys of, 22 Python, 213

216, 225/f, 269, 284; fixation of, 7371; s p i r i t of, 225; system, I n d i a n , 206; as w a t e r , 207; see also m e r c u r y " q u i d , " of D o r n , 300 quinta essentia, 87, 115, 135, 176, 219; as coelum, sig quintessence, 76, 88, 13571, 151, 166, 168n, i6g, 196, 239, 266, 292, 325; of i n d i v i d u a l a n d collective, 182

Q

radices, 195 R a h n e r , H u g o , 31071 r a i n , 221, 268; -god, 26871 r a i n b o w , figs. 26, 29 r a m , of M e n d e s , 279 ranunculus, 15571 Rasis, see R h a z e s rationalism(-ality), 18, 40, 45; of consciousness, 345; of intellect, 336, 345 r a v e n , 9271, 198 ray(s): d e a t h - , r e d , 304; of Surya, 267 R a y m o n d (in M e l u s i n a legend), 177 Raziel, 33771 R e , 280 realism, E a s t e r n , 7, 288 reality, 51; d i f f e r e n t i a l , 37; of e a r t h , 54; living, 54; of psyche, 201; psychic, 42; — , c o n c e p t of, 5 m ; — , of m a n , 244; —, of M e l u s i n a , 176; relative, 38; of unconscious, 42, 201; — , p a r a d o x i c a l , 202 r e a l i z a t i o n , go; conscious, 244; imagin a t i v e , 177; of t h e opposite, 21; p r o c ess of, 348; of t h e self, 264; of T a o , 21 r e a l m : of light, 264; of spirit, 300 reason, 13, 184, 238, 244, 250, 328, 335, 344; laws of, 245

R R a b a n u s , M a u r u s , 2958071 R a b b i , son of J o s e p h u s C a r n i t o l u s , 311 R a b b i Eliezer, see Eliezer racial differences, 11 r a d i c a l m o i s t u r e , 67, 75, 7771, 86, 138,

151 Q e b h s e n n u f , 280 quadratus, M e r c u r i u s as, 278 quality(-ies): m o r a l , 326; of

wisdom,

338 q u a r t e r ( s ) , f o u r , 27171, 281 Quaternarius, 15m q u a t e r n a r y : p r i n c i p l e , 28; s t r u c t u r e , 22, i6g; symbols, 336; system, 167 q u a t e r n i o ( s ) : f o u r , 28071; of opposites, 278 quaternity(-ies), 151, 166/, 262, 269, 282, 305, fig. 24; alchemical, 278; a p o t r o p a i c significance of, 281; cross as, 282; d o u b l e motif of, 305; E g y p t i a n , 280; of t h e elements, 278; God's att r i b u t e of, 281; of God's sons, 283; H e r m e t i c , 283; of O r i g i n a l M a n , 172; symbolized by c r o s s / t r e e , 332; as u n i t y , 151 Q u e e n of M o t h e r h o o d , 18471 q u e s t f o r t h e stone, 300 Q u e t z a l c o a t l , m o t h e r of, 100 q u i c k l i m e , 307 quicksilver, 72, 7771, 7971, 89, 10771, 122, 13135". 20671, 207/, 210/,

427

re b irth , 332; cerem onies, 70; a n d d eath , 73, 102; — , cycle of, 105; — , of p h ilo ­ sophical tree, 287; of m an , 27, 68n; m ystery, opus a, 338; —, tree a, 338; sp iritu a l, 73; see also tw ice-born R ebis, fig. B3 re d /R e d , 339; cockatoo(s), 205; D am a­ scene ea rth , 318; flowers, fig. 5; and green lion, see lion; M an, g2n, 93; slave, 93; stone, 297; tin c tu re, see tin c tu re redeem er(s), 307; alchem ical, 295; C h ristian , 233; g en e ratio n , b irth and re su rre ctio n of, 298; G nostic, 233; o ri­ g in of, low liness of, 146η red e m p tio n , 53, 132, 145, 147, 159, 183η; alchem ical, d o ctrin e of, 205; by blood, 296; C h rist’s w ork of, g6; goal of, 183; m a n ’s longing for, 107 red u c tio n : of opposites to u n ity , 278; of symbols, a lc h e m ic a l/F re u d ia n , 301 refining, 24 reflection, 334; ra tio n a l, 169; to rm e n t of u n lim ite d , 330; tw ilig h t of, 265 reg e n eratio n , 184η regression, 264, 282, 345; unconscious, 260 R e in ach , Salom on, 22 m R eitzenstein, R ic h a rd , 73η , 188η, 204, 228η, 231 Sen; a n d H . Schaeder, 89η, 220n , 332n reivas p la n t, 337η relatedness, 41; in ferio r, 41 rela tio n sh ip , fu n c tio n of, 42 religio m edica, 125 religion(s), 54; co m p arativ e, 6; E astern, 6; facts of, 36; history of, 204; m yster­ ies of, 276; O rien ta l, 47; p h en o m e­ n ology of, 35; p h ilosophical, 47; as psychic systems of healing, 347; psy­ chology of, 332; see also C h ristian ity ; P ro te sta n t religious: cerem onies, 22; experiences of W est a n d East, 53; ideas, 301; la n ­ guage, 52; practice, 47; p ro b lem s of th e p resen t, 53; segregation of — from n a tu ra l tran sfo rm atio n m ystery.

157; sp irit, ev o lu tio n of, 53; th erap ies for disorders of soul, 48; th o u g h t, 46 rem edy(-ies), arcane, 135, 156η rem ission of sins, 276 R enaissance, 189; sp irit of, 117 renew al: fo u n t of, 332η; sp iritu a l, 73; a n d tran sfo rm atio n , tree as seat of, 317; w ord of, 222 repercussion, alchem ical, 138η representations collectives, 347 repression, 8, 82, 264, 342; o f contents, 36; F re u d ian , theory, 42; of in fan tile m em ories an d wishes, 341; theory, 34; unconscious, of sexuality, 34; v io ­ len t, of in stin cts, 47 rep ro d u ctio n , goal of first h a lf o f life, 46 res, 329; quaerenda, 286; s im p le x , 88n, 215 “ rescue circles,’’ E nglish, 51η research: co m p arativ e, 345; — , in to sym bolism , 273, 341 resentm en ts, p erso n al, 345/ resignatio n , 320, 327 resistance(s), 17, 260; in n e r, 121; non-, 327

resp ira tio n , in te rn a l, 27 responsib ility , 297; d im in ish ed , 34 resu rrectio n , 218, 276, 298; o f th e dead, 297

resuscitatio n , w ate r has p o w er of, 74 re to rt, 148, 316η; alchem ical, 197; tree in the, 315 retorta d istilla tio , 138, 148, 152 re u n io n w ith unconscious laws, 21 R eu sn er, H iero n y m u s, 144η, fig. B4, 258, 304, 317, 319, 32i&n, 338 revelatio n , 113, 209, 229; angel of, 339; daem ons of, 178; divine, 116, 236; god of, j 79; lig h t of, 111, 115 R evelatio n , Book of, 71, 182, 187, 197n, 200, 223, 242, 332 rev e n an t, 3g rcverberatio, 165η rev e rb e ra tio n , alchem ical, 138η reverbera to riu m , 138η

INDEX r e v e r s a l : m o t i f of, 314; of o n e ' s n a t u r e , j 8; process of, 21 r e v o l u t i o n ( s ) , 36 rex: fig. B2; antiquissimus, 221; coronatus, 148; marinus, 146 R h a z e s / R a s i s , 116, 1 4 i n , 288&n, 297 R h en a n us, J o a n n e s , fig. B 7 , 316 n rhizomata, 195 r h i z o m e , go R h o d e s i a , 28 R i c k a b y , J o s e p h , 165n, 244n r i d d l e s , 255 r i f t i n m e t a p h y s i c a l w o r l d , 244 R i m a s , 2 4 0 ^ ; see also Zosimos R i p l e y , G e o r g e , 2 i 2 n , 227, 230, 2 3 m , 235n, 286n, 30gn, 311, 3 i 4 & n , 330, 332&n,"Axiomata philosophica," 2 i 5 n , 309n, 3 3 o n ; " C a n t i l e n a , " 8 3 n ; " V e r s e s b e l o n g i n g to a n E m b l e m a t i call S c r o w l e , " fig. B5, 212, 286n, 303, 3o6n, 317; tree in, i g g n rite(s): of benedictio jontis, 78; ecclesiastical, 68; m a g i c a l , 54, 122; p r e C h r i s t i a n , 68n r i t u a l a c t i o n , 25 river(s): of E d e n , 31 gn; f o u r , 262, fig. 24; — , of p a r a d i s e , i4g, 172 r o c k e t - p r o p e l l e d a i r c r a f t , 343, 345 R o m a n u s , St., 7 4 " R o m e , i m p e r i a l , 317 root(s), 8 7 n , 195//, 239, 2 5 7 f t 264, 268, 275n, 286, 3 1 m , 313, 315, 320, 340, figs. 12, 15; of All, i g s n ; f o u r , 68; O n e a n d , of itself, 139, 151; secret in, of tree, 195; of self, lgg R o q u e t a i l l a d e , J e a n de, 2 2 g n ; see also Rupescissa rosa mystica, 294 " R o s a r i u m p h i l o s o p h o r u m , " 68n, 6gn, 73n, 77n, 78, 7 9 " , 85, i 0 3 n , i 2 6 n , i 3 g n , 1 4 4 ^ I47&n, 15311, figs. B2, B3, 2 0 7 n , 2 i 2 & n , 2 i 5 n , 2ig8cn, 220 n , 2 2 m , 22221, 223, 2 2 6 n , 232n, 235n, 2 3 6 n , 294, 331, 327n " R o s a r i u s " ( r o s e - g a r d e n e r ) , 294 R o s c h e r , W . H . : Lexicon, 14m, 2 2 m rose(s), 294; flowers of V e n u s , i 8 3 n ;

h e a v e n l y , 295; as m a n d a l a , 295; m y s ticism, 295; m y s t i q u e of t h e , 294; sign of t h e , 2g6 r o s e - c o l o u r e d b l o o d , see b l o o d R o s e n c r e u t z , C h r i s t i a n , 90, 183, 187, 216, 230, 315, 326 R o s i c r u c i a n m o v e m e n t , 296 R o s i n u s , 220, 2 4 o n ; see also Z o s i m o s " R o s i n u s ad S a r r a t a n t a m , " 94n, 226n, 240, 322n r o t a t i o n , s p i r a l , 271 R o t h - S c h o l t z , F r i e d r i c h , 157n rotundum, 76 r o u n d : b o d y , 139; e l e m e n t , 72, 76 r o y a l : a r t , 204, 275; m a r r i a g e , 278, 326 R u e l l e , C. E., 5gn R u l a n d , M a r t i n , 137, i 3 8 n , 140, 154, 1 57> LF>7/, i 6 8 n , i6g, 2 i g n , 2 2 o n ; Lexicon alchemiae, 7671, 7 8 n , 134", 135", i36n, i3gn, i4on, i44n, i52n, i53n, 15411, 25gn, z'jgn, zS'jn R u m p e l s t i l t s k i n , 327 R u p e s c i s s a , J o h a n n e s de, i 2 3 n , i 3 8 n , i 4 8 n , 229n R u s k a , J u l i u s , ed.: Turba philosophorum, 6 7 n , f68en, 77Sen, 7 8 n , 8272, i 0 5 n , i 3 8 n , i52&n, 227, 24on, 305Sen, 3 0 6 n , 3i4n, 322n, 32g&n r u s t , 138, 1 4 m

S Sabaean(s), 6on S a b b a t h , 24g sacraments: Christian, 154; of the Church, 186; ecclesiastical, 185 ff; H o l y , 157 s a c r e d : l e g e n d , agg; m y t h , 298; p r e c i n c t , 24 f S a c r e d B o o k s of t h e E a s t , 56, 2 i 8 n , 24on, 267n, 17811 sacrifice(s), 72; a n i m a l ( s ) , 45, 280; of g o d , 8 o n , s n a k e , 333; see also k n i f e , sacrificial sacrificer, 80; is sacrificed, 84

429

INDEX sage(s): a n c i e n t , 21; i n

contemplation,

29. 3 0 -33; o r i e n t a l , 37 saint(s), 35, 71, 182, 282; b o d y of, becomes s t o n e , 101 Sainte Bible traduit . . . sous la direcde Jerusation de VEcole Biblique lem, 28 i n St. E x u p ^ r y , A n t o i n e de, fig. 2 St. Vitus's D a n c e , 12271 S a l a m a n c a , 119 salamander, 142,210 S a l a m a n d r i n e Essence, 138, 142 S a l a m a n d r i n i , 142, 163 Saldini, 142, 163 salt(s), 1 3 6 7 1 , 277, 286&71, 287, 290&71, 308; c o n n e c t i o n of t r e e w i t h , 309; e a r t h l y , 14 m , 233; efflorescence of metallic, 14677; interior, 13571 salty: f o u n t a i n , 308; s p r i n g , 287 s a l v a t i o n , 1 8 4 7 1 , 298; C h r i s t i a n story of, 2gg; m a n ' s , 127; of u n i v e r s e , 127 s a l v a t o r / S a l v a t o r , 166, 250; M e r c u r i u s as, 235; microcosmi, 296; Mundi, 242 S a m a r i a , w o m a n of, 104 s a n d p a i n t i n g s , 22 S a p i e n t i a , 126, 130, 258, 333; a n d H o l y Ghost, Mercurius identified with, 229; tree's r e l a t i o n to, 318 s a p p h i r e , i87&n, 258/, figs. 16, 17; s t o n e , 258 s a p p h i r i n e : flower, 18771, 269; m a t e r i a l , 18771, 259 S a t a n , 8 i « , 114, 316; A n t i c h r i s t as, 242; c o u n t e r p a r t of G o d , 236; G r e e k , 288; a Kabbalist, 11471; three-headed, 14 m , 236 S a t a n a e l , 223 S a t u r d a y , see d a y s of t h e week S a t u r n , 6771, 7671, 83, 126, 12871, 14171, 170, 220, 2 2 6 f t 278, 30571, 31 of, 331; as B e e l z e b u b , 228; c h i l d of, 7671, 227; d a r k n e s s o f , 12671, 15271; d a y of, 22871, 24971; h i g h e s t a r c h o n , 228; l i g h t n i n g of, 152; l i o n associated w i t h , 227; M e r c u r i u s , r e l a t i o n to, 226, 250; a n d Sol, s e p a r a t i o n of, 153; s p i r i t of, 227 "Saturn's Chyld," 227n

67

S a t u r n i a , p l a n t , 227 S a t u r n i n e : d a r k n e s s , 130; f o r m , 12871; l e a d , 331; m e l a n c h o l y , 153; m o u n t a i n , 292 s a v i o u r , 100; s e r p e n t - , 104; s y m b o l of, 101; see also S a l v a t o r Saxo G r a m m a t i c u s , 98 Scaiolae, 13371, 13971, 15571, i68&n, 171174, 176, 179; f o u r , 167; psychic n a t u r e of, 169 Scaioli, 168&71, 172 "Scala p h i l o s o p h o r u m , " 27871 Scaliger, J . J., 13771 scalping, 71 scayolic, A q u a s t e r , 139 Scayolus, 16871 S c h a e d e r , H . , see R e i t z e n s t e i n Schevill, M a r g a r e t E., 9871 s c h i z o p h r e n i a , 34, 7071; process of, 29; states of, 106 S c h m i e d e r , K. C., 204 S c h o p e n h a u e r , A r t h u r , 84, 16771, 196 S c h r e b e r , D . P., 37 Schrottli, 143 Schweitzer, B e r n a r d , 2 2 m , 22471 science, 6, 7, 34, 43, 55, 106, 128, 244; 01 G o d , g6; n a t u r a l , 111, 115, i5g, 300; Western, 6 scientia/Scientia, 126; creaturae, 247; Creatoris, 247, 249; hominis, 249 s c o r p i o n , 71, 7971, 134 Scott, H . v o n E., see B l a n d , C. C. S. Scott, W a l t e r , 7371, 7871; see also Corpus Hermeticum " S c r i p t u m A l b e r t i , " see A l b e r t u s M a g nus Scripture(s), 2 0 9 , 2 8 6 7 1 ; see also N e w and O l d T e s t a m e n t Scylla a n d C h a r y b d i s , 145 Scythian(s), 71; j u i c e , 76 sea, 44, 51, 92, 139, 146, fig. B5, 178, J 94> z o 9 n > 248, 253, 291, fig. 1; - b o r n , 182; b o t t o m of, 23; d e p t h s of, 8771; kingly s u b s t a n c e , h i d d e n in, 145; t r e e p l a n t e d i n t h e , 308; w a t e r , 308; — , c o n n e c t i o n of t r e e w i t h , 309 seat of h e a v e n l y l i g h t , 2071

INDEX second: A d a m , C h r i s t t h e , 304; t e t r a d , 283 secret(s), 199; artificial, 301; c o n t e n t of alchemy, 129; doctrines, see doctrines; — , of A n t h r o p o s , 171; i n f e r n a l fire, 210; of i n n e r m a n , 163; l a n g u a g e , 162; of m a t t e r , 299; M e r c u r i u s , revealer of divine, 230; n a m e , 327; n a t u r a l , 301; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 76 n ; p o w e r , 4g; in roots of tree, 195; stone, 291; t r e a s u r e , fig. 14 seducer, diabolical, 250 seed(s): of corn, 259; divine, 86; of gods, 76 Seele, 4 0 Sefiroth, 3x2 self, 45, 99, 101, 139, 142, 152, 182, 194/, 220, 240/, 249, 263, 267/7, 282, 284, 300, 325, 338; A n t h r o p o s or, tree as, 338; a r c h e t y p e of, 87; b i r t h of, 266; c e n t r e of total personality, 45; collective n a t u r e of, 240; deus absconditus as e l e m e n t of, 24; d i v i n e d y n a m i s m of, 285n; i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with, 263; imm o r t a l , 171; i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m G o d - i m a g e , 241; l i g h t of t h e , 248; Mercurius represents, 237; Moses' r e l a t i o n to, 321; as process of g r o w t h , 253; realization of t h e , 264; roots of, 199; sacrifice of, 263; s u p r a p e r s o n a l , 240; symbolized by m o u n t a i n / t r e e , 309; symbol (ism) of, 241, 246, 253, 28012; tree, visible sign of r e a l i z a t i o n of, xg6; u n i o n w i t h , 263 self-awareness, psychological, go self-brooding, 26 self-conquest, heroic, 47 self-deception, 7, 200 s e l f - d e s t r u c t i o n / d e v o u r i n g , 79; d r a g o n , 259; of M e r c u r i u s , 236 s e l f - d e v e l o p m e n t , 179 self-fertilization, 7g self-generation / r e p r o d u c t i o n / transf o r m a t i o n of M e r c u r i u s , 236 self-knowledge, 25, 94&71, 248/, 24922, 284 self-realization, 53

68

s e l f - r e g u l a t i n g systems, 15 self-sacrifice, 325 S e n a / S e n a e , x78 senarius, 266 Sendivogius, Michael, 6722, 203n, 20772, 231 senex: draco, 22072; ithyphallicus, 231; M e r c u r i u s as, 2so, 250 Senior, Z a d i t h , see Z a d i t h Senn, Gustav, 251 sensation(s), 167; bodily, 28 sense: organs, 152; - p e r c e p t i o n , 167 separatio, 68 s e p a r a t i o n : of b o d y a n d soul, 23g; f r o m world of t h o u g h t , 267 " S e p t e m t r a c t a t u s h e r m e t i s , " see " T r a c tatus aureus" serenitus aerea, 212 Seringapatam, 34072 serpens mercurialis, ig8; see also serpent, mercurial serpent(s), fig. A4, 7972, 89, 103, 1 4 1 7 2 , 143, 14671, igg, 279, 304, 3x972, 321; brazen, 333; c h t h o n i c , 333; on t h e cross, 333; c r o w n e d , fig. 32; - d a e m o n , f e m a l e / d a e m o n i c , 240; D e l p h i c , 213; I n d i a n , 6372; m e r c u r i a l , 68, 77, 82, 144/, 152, 258, 315 (see also d r a g o n ) ; of t h e N o u s , 333; old, 83; of p a r a d i s e , 303; -saviour, 104; t h r e e - h e a d e d , fig. B2; see also s n a k e senator, x66; cosmi, 296; M e r c u r i u s as, 235. 250 servus (cervus) fugitivus, 178, 211 Set ( T y p h o n ) , 74, 281 Seth, 1 3 7 7 2 , 304 seven: b r a n c h e s , 315; devils, 1288071; -fold star, 225; metals, 288/, 337; p l a n e t s , 303, 3x0; trees of, 309 sex(uality), 260, 269; division by, 139; e x c i t e m e n t of, 82; o p p o s i t i o n w i t h N o u s , 269; t h e o r y of, 343; u n c o n scious repression of, 34 shadow, 47, 244, 265/, 268, 348; of Gilgamesh, 320; m a n a n d his, 246; u n i o n w i t h , 326 Shakti, 95, 180

INDEX S h a k y a m u n i , see B u d d h a s h a m a n , 70n, 337, 341; East S i b e r i a n , 340; h e a v e n l y j o u r n e y of t h e , 303, 309; t r u e p e r s o n a l i t y of, 341 s h a m a n i s m , 101, 253, 305, 341 s h a m a n ( i s t ) i c ; a n i m a , 303; psychology, p r i m i t i v e , 7 0 n ; s y m b o l i s m , 341; tree, fig. 2, 272 shape(s), 37 S h a t a p a t h a B r a h m a n a , 178, 267, 313*1 Sheed, F. J., 24gn shell, 21 shen (spirit), 3g, 4 0 s h i n i n g bodies, 151/, 157 Shiva, 20671; - S h a k t i , 231 S h u , f o u r p i l l a r s of, 279, 281 S i b e r i a n s h a m a n s , 340 Sidgwick, Mrs. H e n r y , 4 i n sign: of G o d , 281; of t h e rose, 296 signa T h a u , 28 m silver, 75, 89, 122, 194, 226, 27771, 296, 332; b r a n c h of tree, 8g; c o m m o n , 275; g o l d a n d , f o u n t a i n of, 10371; m a n , 64; u n a l l o y e d , 29071, 295; waters, 284; w h i t e e l i x i r o f , 13571 S i m o n (Magus), 13771 simplicity, 16, i 5 i & n sin(s): A d a m ' s , 304; o r i g i n a l , 196; r e m i s sion of, 276; w a g e s of all, 22g Sinn, 20 sinology(-ists), 6, 10 S i o u x , 100 sirens, 14371; n i n e , 178 six ( n u m b e r ) , 266 skin, 64, g2; of h e a d , 60; stuffing of, 70 s k i n n i n g , 71/ sky-god, 2 6 8 7 1 Sky F a t h e r , 98 slave, f u g i t i v e , 211 slaying, of a l c h e m i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s , 321; see also k i l l i n g sleep, 114&71; of i n c u b a t i o n , 105 snake(s), 83, 134, fig. B2, 177; 221; 256/, 263, 27171, 314, 3 4 o f , figs. 11, 12; as c h t h o n i c n u m e n of tree, 317; conn e c t e d w i t h tree, 315; crucified, 333; h e a d of, 29171; h e a l i n g of Moses, 104;

as m o s t s p i r i t u a l a n i m a l , 333; n a k e d , 304; as s y m b o l of u n c o n s c i o u s , 333; t h r e e - h e a d e d , fig. 32; —, M e r c u r i u s as, 222; tree-, 241; t r e e a n d , u n i o n of, fig. 12; as t r e e - n u m e n , 315; vision, 86; —, of I g n a t i u s L o y o l a , 21771; - w o m a n , 144; see also s e r p e n t snow, 214 society, m a t r i a r c h a l , 99 Socrates, 77 Sol, 13671, 150, fig. B4, 303, 310; c o h a b i t a t i o n w i t h L u n a , 123; as g o l d , 122; l i g h t n i n g of, 152; N o v u s , C h r i s t t h e , 242; a n d S a t u r n , s e p a r a t i o n of, 153; see also s u n solar: gods, 26771; p i l l a r , 31071; p l e x u s , 37, fig. Ag, 266; p o i n t , 152 solidity, 272 solificatio, 72, 80 S o l o m o n , 130 S o l o t h u r n (canton), 98 solutio, 330 s o l u t i o n , saline, 134 soma, 313 s o m a t a a n d a s o m a t a , 103 s o m a t i c : d i s t u r b a n c e s , 342; s p h e r e , 262 s o m n a m b u l i s t , 2377, 25 s o m n a m b u l i s t i c states, 34 son(s), 116; e x i s t e n c e of, 52; of t h e G o l d e n H e a d , 72; King's, fig. B6; m o t h e r - , incest, 232; o n l y b e g o t t e n , i 6 g « ; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 129; -ship, d u ality of, 22371; see also filius Son, 26; F a t h e r a n d , 116; of G o d , see G o d ; — , first a n d second, 223; of M a c r o c o s m , 126; of M a n , 96, 232 S o n g of God, 31371; see also B h a g a v a d gita Song of Songs, 312 S o p h i a , 187, 308, 334, 336; - A c h a m o t h , 334; p e r v e r t e d i n t o P h i l o s o p h i a , 288; s u f f e r i n g s of, 335 Sophists, 2go, 331 s o r c e r e r (Magus), 119 sorcery, 119, 122 soror mystica, 73 soul(s), 9, 41, 50, 5171, 71, 78, 83, 88n,

432

INDEX 94/» 97> , 2 2 » ' 4 ' " , 145?!, 161, 164/, 180, 2 H , 213, 216, 236n, 238, 257, 27812, 330; of ancestor, 97; a n i m a t i o n of, 257; ascent of, 103; b o d y a n d , see body a n d soul; b o d y a n d s p i r i t cont a i n e d in stone, 290/; b r e a t h - , 213; cagastric, 164/; as celestial A q u a s t e r , 140; c h i l d r e n ' s , 97; collective, 2 4 0 7 2 ; c r e a t i o n of, 86; d a m p , 171; d a r k b a c k g r o u n d of, 147; darkness of, 79n; of t h e d e a d , 317; descent of, 86n; d u a l i t y of, 214; — in w o r l d a n d , 116; e a r t h - b o u n d bodily, 39; e x t r a c t i o n of, 72, 32972, 330; heavenly, a n d earthly, fig. A6; —, physician of the, 293; lliastric, 1360,' i m p u l s e of, 54; as int e r m e d i a t e n a t u r e , 213; " L a d y S o u l , " 340; loss of, 34; m a s c u l i n e a n d femi n i n e , fig. A6; m a s t e r of, 197; m e r c u r i a l life-, 214; M e r c u r i u s , of metals, 398; moist, 77T1; " n o t h i n g b u t , " 50; psychology w i t h o u t , 238; P r i m o r d i a l M a n as world-, 334; reasoning, 2 4 9 7 2 ; r o o t e d in t h e a e t h e r , 312n; r u l e r oE, 196; of t h e sick, 101; simple, 88n; skin is, 72; as spherical glass vessel, J97; s p i r i t a n d , see spirit; of stone, 68; stones, 98; -substance, 325; of t h e substance(s), 138, 1501%; suffering of t h e , 335; t r a n q u i l l i t y of, 165; tree-, 319; trees a n i m a t e d by, h a v e personality, 199; t r u e , 139; u n i o n with, 155; w o r l d , 77, 122, 129, 214; of w o r l d , 77, 130; see also anima mundi source of life, 272 spagirica foetura, 150 spagyric/Spagyric, 113, 135", 1508cn, 180n spark, divine, 160 s p a t i a l p r i n c i p l e , 25 specialism, 6 spectres, verbal, 37 speculatio, 167, 176 s p e c u l a t i o n ^ ) : alchemical, f r a u d u l e n c e of, 204; e n i g m a t i c a l , 175, 179; Gnostic, 283; mystic(al), 91, 111; p h i l o sophical, 1 2 4 7 1 ; theological, 96

433

" S p e c u l u m vcritatis," 83 speech, colloquial, 34 spell(s), 119, 162; magic, 10 s p e l l b i n d i n g names, 328 Spence, Lewis, 8 m , fig. 8 Spencer, W . B., a n d F. J . Gillen, 9771 sperma mundi, 138 sphere(s), 26; m o v e m e n t of, 74/,- somatic, 262 spider, black, 333 Spielrein, Sabina, 70n spiral r o t a t i o n , 271&7J s p i r i t s ) , 8, 36, 5 m , 6af, 64, 75, 7 7 f , 89, 96-99, 102, 113 n, 140, 1 4 m , 148, 149", 154, 161/, 16577, i8on, 1 8 m , 184, 193, 196, 211, 213, 216, 23672, 238, 259, 278&n, 284, 323// in abstract sense, 215; aerial, 212; a e t h e r i a l , 162; of t h e a g c / e p o c h , 116/7,• of t h e air, 161; i n / of alchemy, 75, 103, 10472, 128; archetype, a m b i v a l e n c e of, 240; astral, 114; a n d body, see body; in bottle, see bottle; celestial, 292/; of C h r i s t i a n i t y , 129; c h t h o n i c , 118; d a e m o n of the scientific, 128; diabolical, 139; of discretion, 22872; divine, 26; e a r t h - , 297; E a r t h , 7972; of t h e East, 49; evil, 196201, 240; e v o l u t i o n of religious, 53; e x p a n d i n g a n d self-revealing, 39; f a m i l i a r , 90, 126, 258, 340; fiery, 63; of the fifth essence, 130; -fire, 29, 37; of fire, 142; ghostly, 139; God is, 104; of G o d , 13672; g u a r d i a n , 7 m , 341; of heaven, 176; heavenly, 209; iliastric, 139; i n n a t e , 1148:72, 1 4 m ; i n t u i t i o n s of, 28; kabbalistic, 11472; of life, 213; l i n k b e t w e e n body a n d . 95; L o r d of, 244; m a n ' s , 40; a n d m a t t e r , c o n t a m i n a t i o n of, 212; m a t t e r a n d , identical, 214; M e r c u r i a l , 13672, 203, 239; M e r curius, 258; metal-, 297; m i n i s t e r i n g , 101, 179; n a t u r a l , 184; objective, 2gg; — existence of, 200; o l d black, 329; p l a n e t a r y , fig. Bg, 225, 227; p o o r i n , 202; of quicksilver, 225; reality, 201, realm of, 300; red, 77; of Renaissance, 117; of S a t u r n , 227; scientific, g i ;

INDEX spirit(s) (cont.): soul, b o d y a n d , c o n t a i n e d i n s t o n e , 2 9 o f ; a n d Soul, fig. B6, 229; spellb o u n d , m o t i f of t h e , 198; of stars, 1 8 m ; of stone, 2 4 7 n ; s u f f e r i n g s of, 9; s u p r a c e l e s t i a l , M e r c u r i u s as, 214; — , of t h e waters, 77; i n tree, 200; t r u e , i n m a n , 136n; of t r u t h , 130, 214; u n d i vided a n d d i v i d e d , 70; victory of t h e , 335; a v o l a t i l e b o d y , 5 i n ; as w a t e r , 74, 76, 78; of t h e w o r l d , 212, see also anima mundi Spirit, H o l y , 78, 214, 240/, 334; a p p l e s of, 3ogn; g i f t of, 102, 107, 114/7 g r a c e of, 160; inflatio o r inspiratio of, 214; l i g h t of, 116 " S p i r i t in t h e B o t t l e , T h e , " see b o t t l e s.v.; G r i m m s.v. s p i r i t u a l : b e i n g , 52; b l o o d , 7 7 n ; develo p m e n t , 47, 245; exercises, 244; eyes, 288; Iliaster, 140, 165; m a n , 94/, 13 m ; — , i n n e r , 148; •—•, g r o w t h of, 89; m a r t y r d o m , 330; a n d physical, 5 m ; p o w e r , 29; p r i n c i p l e , 138ff; symbols, 54; t r e n d s of a l c h e m y , 144*1; truth, turning into something mat e r i a l , 250; u n d e r s t a n d i n g , 322 Spiritual Exercises, see I g n a t i u s L o y o l a s p i r i t u a l i t y , 47, 118, 185, 214, 335; of C h r i s t , g6; m a s c u l i n e , Christ's, 335/ spiritus, 21 i f ; aquae, 138; humidus et aereus, l a p i s as, 104*1; mercurialis, 7 9 n , 131*1, 150*1; mercurii, 128*1, 135; mundi, 213; Phytonis, 213; prae cunctis valde purus, 212; seminalis, 213; vegetativus, ig5, 213, 240*1, 338; — , c h t h o n i c , 315; — , M e r c u r i u s , 202, 310; visibilis, tamen impalpabilis, 212; vitae, 125, 1 3 m , 136*1, 140 S p i t t e l e r , C a r l , 170, 340&*i s p i t t l e , 97 Splendor solis, 68*1, 72, 219&H split: b e t w e e n consciousness a n d t h e u n c o n s c i o u s , 246; b e t w e e n k n o w l e d g e a n d f a i t h , 189; i n h u m a n psyche, 244; m e t a p h y s i c a l , 243 s p o n g e , 290*1; 291; l o a t h s o m e , 290

spouse, h e a v e n l y , 337 s p r i n g , 154, 247, 253, 255, 290*1, 314; e t e r n a l , 154*1; 156*1; e x a l t a t i o n of, 182; salty, 287; z o d i o n , 311*1 s q u a r e , 224; i n c h , 25 s q u a r i n g of circle, see circle s q u i r r e l , 340*1 stag(s), 200; f u g i t i v e , 211 star(s), fig. A3, 114, 125, 137, 141*1, 184*1, 222, 237, 247/, fig. 13; c r o w n of, 80, 225; e v e n i n g , 247; i n flesh a n d b l o o d , 116, g o l d e n , fig. A4; jelly, 153*1; m a l e seeds of, 150; i n m a n , 127, 152; m o o n a n d , l i g h t of, 248; m o r n i n g , 223, 226, 247; P o l e , 141*1; r o u n d d a n c e of, 226*1; s e v e n f o l d , 225; i n s o u t h , 100; s p i r i t s of, 1 8 m ; t r u e m a n is, 131; w a t e r , 138*1; see also stella s t a t e : p a r a d i s a l , 265; of s u s p e n s i o n , 267 status iustitiae originalis / naturae integrae, 197*1 Steeb, J o h a n n C h r i s t o p h , 778c*!, 82*1, 151*1, 214*1, 215*1, 318*1 steel, ig4, 332; b r a n c h of tree, 89 S t e i n d o r f f , G e o r g , 71*1, 101*1 S t e i n e n , K a r l v o n d e n , 2058c*! stella: maris, 256; matutina, 247 S t e r n , J a m e s , 194*1 Stevenson, J a m e s , 22*1 Stobaeus, J o h n , 337*! stoics, 85*1 stone(s), 85, 92/, 100, 103*1, 107, 119*1, 1 4 m , 146*1, 236*1, 240, 278, 2g3, 314, 317, 322, 331; A d a m i c , 235*1; is a n i m a t e , 99, 291; of A r r a n , g r e e n , 98; a t t r i b u t e s of, 95; b l o o d of, 290/, 295; -birth(s), 97, 99; as b i r t h p l a c e of gods, 97; - b o d y , m o t i f of, gg; c h a r i o t s , 2 8 m , c h i l d - , 97; consists of a n i m a l o r h u m a n b l o o d , 290; c o n t a i n s b o d y , soul, s p i r i t , 290/; -cult, m e g a l i t h i c , 100; d i v i n e a t t r i b u t e s of, 328; e a r t h l y , C h r i s t c o m p a r e d w i t h , 292*1; e l e m e n t of t h e , 314*1; a n e n e m y , 321; g e r m i n a t i o n a n d b i r t h of, 2g8; G o d ' s a t t r i b u t e s t r a n s f e r r e d to, 2g4; as G o d i m a g e , g7; g r e e n , 100; h e a l i n g , 95;

434

INDEX h e a t e d , 329; hostile, 320; i d e n t i t y w i t h m a n , 300; i n c o r r u p t i b i l i t y of, 72; magic(al), 97, 98; M e r c u r i u s as, 235; as a microcosm, 328; m o t h e r of, 86; naga, 340; Nile, 101; o c h r e p a i n t e d , 97n; as o u t c r o p p i n g of t h e unconscious, 242; i n Persia, fire s t r u c k f r o m , 320; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 127, ig8; p h i l o s o p h i c , 94, 293; p r e cious, 258; — , f a k e r of, 204; p r e s e r v e r of macrocosm, 127; q u e s t f o r t h e , 300; r e d , 297; r o u n d w h i t e , 76; s a p p h i r e , 258; secret, 291; — of, 6g, 99; soul, g8, 100; t h a t h a s a spirit, 24771; statues, 101; t h a t is n o stone, 29 in, 292; symbol, 97; — of t h e i n o r g a n i c , 238; symbolism, 94; of t h e wise, 320; see also lapis stork, 315/, 339; A d e b a r , 317; a n allegory of C h r i s t , 317 s t o r m , 15, 268; d e m o n of, 198 stream(s): f o u r , 304, 31971; of life, 17; of t i m e , 16 s t r e n g t h of b u l l , 268 s t r u c t u r e : q u a t e r n a r y , 22; of u n c o n scious, 36 Strunz, F r a n z , i n n , 12411, 1 3 m s t u p i d i t y , m o t h e r of t h e wise, 180 subconscious, 185 s u b j e c t a n d o b j e c t , 45 s u b l i m a t i o n ( s ) , 10411, 15371, 16571, 331 substance(s): a r c a n e , see a r c a n e ; a n t i m o n y , t r a n s f o r m a t i v e , 146; black, 242; chemical, 204/, 275/, 2gg, 301, 310; C o m m u n i o n , 154; i n t e r m e d i a t e , 213; kingly, h i d d e n i n sea, 145; living, 239; moist, 3 i g i i ; n o b l e , 331; o n e , 284; P a r a c e l s a n , 277; soul-, 325; symbolic, 302; t o r m e n t i n g of the, 330; t r a n s f o r m a t i v e , 211; two of M e r c u r i u s , 217; — f o l d , 292; volatile, 148, fig. B6; v u l g a r , 302 succus lunariae, 22671 Sudhoff, K a r l (ed. of Paracelsus): 11371, 11471, 11771, 12371, 130, 13171, 13271, • 3 3 n , J53M» s u f f e r i n g ^ ) , 330, 332, 334; psychic, 336;

r e l a t i o n of to t h e c o n i u n c t i o , 334; of S o p h i a , 335; of t h e soul, 335 suggestion, 24 sulcus primigenius, 24 s u l p h u r , 74, 13671, 14171, 18771, 2 i g , 277; diabolus, 228; fire h i d d e n i n M e r curius, 22811; i n c o m b u s t i b l e , 142; m a s c u l i n e p r i n c i p l e of M e r c u r i u s , 228 summa of secret k n o w l e d g e , 22 S u m m u m B o n u m , n a t u r a l , 116 s u n / S u n , 25, 27, 47, 6371, 64, 72, 8on, g S f f , 1 4 m , 147, 152, 161, 176, 225, 22612, 232, 24971, 255, 257/, 262, 268, 275&71, 277/, 307/, 324, 339, figs. 12, 1 3» 23> 32; a u r e o l e of, 80/; B e a r e r , 99; b i r t h p l a c e of s p i r i t u a l fire, 15072; black, 266; called a f t e r G o d , 15012; c a r b u n c l e of, 218; c h i l d of, 7672; c i r c u l a t o r y w o r k o f , 72; d a r k c o u n t e r - , 7671 (see also S a t u r n ) ; -day, 250; disk, 15572, figs. 17, 24; -god, 8 m , 2678cn; gold, 225, 226; h e a r t as, in Microcosm, 164; M e r c u r i u s , c h i l d of m o o n a n d , 7671, 225; — , a n d m o o n , t r i a d of, 277; M e r i d i a n of, 63, 72, Soff; a n d m o o n , 7971, 83; — , - f r u i t , 303, 306, 309; — , tree, 30672, 308, 309; p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n of, 80; - p o i n t , 1528072; rays of, 218; rises, 89; rising, H o r u s as, 28071; -symbol, 262; synony m o u s w i t h g o l d , 72; tree of, 30371; w h e e l , 25; — , p a l e o l i t h i c , 28; see also Sol; solar S u n d a y ' s child, 202 superiority, mental, 8 s u p e r m a n , 128 supermonic:

elements,

180;

figments,

173/ superstition(s), 7, 122, 158; folk, 122; r a t i o n a l i s t i c f e a r of, 159 s u p r a c e l e s t i a l fire, 310 survival a f t e r d e a t h , 5171; see also immortality Surya, 2678011 suspension, s t a t e o f , 207 svadhisthana-chakra, 265

435

IN D EX Svaha, 267 sw an, fig. 32 sweat, bloody, of arcane substance, 290, 295

sw ine-herd, 240 Sw itzerland, p a tro n sa in t of, 346 sw ord, 60, 63/, 68, 80, 828cw, 83/, 177, 185; C h rist as, 333; fiery, 83η, 228; o f G od’s w ra th , 83, 332; h an g in g o n a tree, 333; tw o-edged, 83", 332 Sylvester II, P ope, 8 m symbol(s), 12, 19, 2 i f, 27, 46-49, 162/7 alchem ical, 299, 301; — a n d F re u d ia n red u c tio n of, 301; o f th e A nthropos, stork a, 317; arch ety p al, 272, 302, 348; C hrist, 54; — as “son of m a n ," 52; of chrysopoea, tree as, 314; collec­ tive an d arch ety p al, 301; com pensate u n a d a p te d a ttitu d e of conscious, 302; co ntrasexual, 338; cross as, of q u a te rn ity , 332; d ream , red u ctiv e in te r p re ­ ta tio n of, 347; eth nological, 101; fish, 265, fig. A2; fo rm atio n , 274; H e r­ m etic, 241; h isto ry of, 344; of in d iv id ­ u atio n , fig. 24; “jew el" th e central, 53; lig h t, see lig h t; m agic of, 28; m a n d ala, 23; m e an in g of, 302; of M ercurius, see M ercurius; of p erfec­ tio n , 269; of perso nality, 194; p h allic , fig. 30; is p rim itiv e e x p o n e n t o f u n ­ conscious, 28; p ro d u c tio n , 301; q u a ­ tern ary , 336; research in to , 273; of saviour, xoi; snake-, 333; of soul, 143; sp iritu a l, 54; stone, see stone; sun, 262; th e rio m o rp h ic, 183n; of to tality, g6; tran sfo rm atio n , 71; p ro c ­ ess of — , ogdoad as, 316; tree , see tree; of th e unconscious, snake as, 333; o f w holeness, 320, 337 sym bolic: b lood, 296; n o m en clatu re, 275; substances, 302 sym bolism , 24, 55; of alchem y, 69, 80, 88; C h ristian , 84, 185, 300; co m p ara­ tive research in to , 341; of dream s, 69; h ea d , 88; of in d iv id u a tio n process, 299; lig h t, 25; n u m b e r, 151η; p la n t, 194; of self, 280η; sham anistic, 341;

spontan eo u s tree sym bolism , 270; — of th e unconscious, 282; of starry heaven, 86; stone, 94; w ater, 101 “ Sym bolum S a tu rn i,” 303η, 309η sym ptom (s); n eu ro tic, 37, 260, 327; physical or psychological, 335 syncretism , H ellen istic, 102, 104 Synesios, 138η synthesis, 189, 277; of M ercurius, 257; of opposites to u n ity , 278; see also henosis Syrena, 178 Syriktes, 87η syzygy, 232 Szebeny, N icholas M elchior (C ibinensis), 123Sen, i588cn

T T a b e rn a e m o n ta n u s, Ja co b u s T h eo dorus, 135η, 153n > taboo, 54, 97 “T a b u la sm a ra g d in a ,” 103η, 104η, 140, 226η, 233, 297” . 331” T 'a i I C hin H u a T su n g C h ih , 1 T a lb o t, A m aury, 199« talism ans, 119 T a n tris m , 231, 265 ta o /T a o (W ay), 20f, 25, 40, 54; of fem ­ in in e p rin cip le, 324; grows o u t of th e in d iv id u al, 53; is lig h t of heaven, 23; realizatio n of, 21 T aoism , 4, 16 T ao s P ueblos, 100 tapas, 26 tares, 288 ta u , a le p h an d , 222 T a u ru s, 155η T av , 28 m technology, 55, 128 T eh o m , 236 teleological aspect o f fitness, 342 te lep a th ic p h en o m en a, 139η te lu m passionis (cu p id ’s arrow ), 83, 231 tem enos (sacred precinct), 24, 244 tem p eram en ts, astrological, 275

INDEX t e m p l e , 24, 64, 89, 195", 325; b u i l t of a single s t o n e , 91; c i r c u l a r , 84; g o l d e n , fig. A10; of Zosimos, 85 T e m p t a t i o n , t h e , fig. B6 T e n C o m m a n d m e n t s , 185 " t e n t h o u s a n d t h i n g s , " 249 tenebriones, 198 teoqualo (god-eating), 8 m t e r m i n o l o g y : a r c a n e , 122, 133, 186; ecclesiastical, 157 terminus ani, M e r c u r i u s as, 220 ternarius, 1 5 m ; M e r c u r i u s , 221 terra alba foliata, 20771 t e r t i u m , 162 T e r t u l l i a n , 54 t e t r a d , s e c o n d , 283 tetraktys, fig. A7, 283; P y t h a g o r e a n , 22 t e t r a m o r p h , 282/ t e t r a s o m i a , 8273, 27577, 277, 283; of G r e e k a l c h e m y , 277 T e u t o n i c : b a r b a r i a n s , 47; m y t h o l o g y , 317 texts, m a g i c , 327 Tezcatlipoca, 8 m T h a l e s , 31971 0e6.v&pa>Tros, 127 Theatrum chemicum, 7271, 8071, 8373, 8573, 8 8 n , 9473, 10573, 12373, 12573,

13873,

13973,

14673,

14973,

150*3,

15m,

15573,

15873, 21473, 22373, 23171, 28673, 30773,

19673,

19773, 21773, 22773, 2357I, 28873, 31073,

20373, 21873, 22873, 25971, 28973, 31171,

20gn, 2ign, 22973, 27573, 30573, 31271,

21273, 22273,

38171,

32271,

32373,

32473,

31573,

21573, 226?3, 23273, 28773,

309M, 31971,

23073,

27971, 30673, 31473,

names of individual treatises in Bibl. A Theatrum chemicum Britannnicum, 1 9 7 7 3 , 2 0 3 7 3 , 2 2 7 7 3 ; see also names of individual treatises in Bibl. A T h e o d o r e t h e Studite, 30973 T h e o l o g i a , 11371 theologian(s), 277 theology, 1 1 3 7 1 , 247 t h e o p h a n y , 7473 T h e o p h r a s t u s , 119; school, lsg 32673,

33073,

33271; s e e

ako

t h e o r y : aetiological, 342; s e x u a l , 343 T h e o s e b e i a , 73, 284 t h e o s o p h y , 7; I n d i a n , 268/; W e s t e r n , 265 t h e r a p e u t i c : effect, 45; m e t h o d , J u n g ' s , 4 T h e r e n i a b i n , 15373, 154 thesaurus thesaurum, 315 T h e s s a l o n i a n s I, E p i s t l e to, 247 T h e u t i u s ( T h o t h ) , 230; see also T h o t h t h i n g ( s ) : -in-itself, 54; i n n e r , 43; m a g i cal c l a i m of, 44; n e w , 15f; s i m p l e , 88 t h i n k i n g , 167; a l c h e m i c a l , 288; a l c h e m i cal w a y of, 293; a n a l o g i c a l , of Gnostics, 147; G n o s t i c , c i r c u l a r , 84; m a s c u l i n e , 267; P a r a c e l s a n , 115, 142; philosophical, 16873 t h i r d s o n s h i p , B a s i l i d i a n c o n c e p t of, 233 thistle, 15573 T h o m a s A q u i n a s , 123 T h o m p s o n a n d S h u s w a p I n d i a n s , 7171 T h o t h , 94, 212, 230 t h o u g h t ( s ) , 29, 259, 267; cessation o f , 324; C h i n e s e , 8; -figures, 2g; religious, 46; w i n g e d , b i r d s r e p r e s e n t i n g , 266; w o r l d of, 266; — , s e p a r a t i o n f r o m , 267 t h r e e , 166, 277; - b o d i e d H e c a t e , 221; — T y p h o n , 221; - f o l d c o n i u n c t i o , 27871; a n d f o u r d i l e m m a , 224, 278; - h e a d e d , M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s ; — , S a t a n , 236; — , s n a k e , see s n a k e ; n u m b e r , 151; - i n - o n e , S a t a n as, 236; P e r s o n s , g6; - p r o n g e d h o o k , 332, 334; see also triads; T r i n i t y t h r o n e , C h r i s t ' s , 283 t h u n d e r b o l t s , fig. A2 t h u n d e r s t o r m s , 26771 T i a m a t : c h a o s of, 23g; m a t e r n a l w o r l d of, 236 T i b e t a n : B u d d h i s m , 22; T a n t r i s m , 265 Tibetan Book of the Dead (Bardo Thodol), 25, 29, 35, 265 T i f e r e t h , 312 tiger, 34oScn

437

IN D E X tim e : a s tro n o m ic a l d e te rm in a tio n , of, 238; o u r, 36; o f p e rfe c tio n , 174η, 183: p rim e v a l a lc h e rin g a , 98 η ; s tre a m of, 16 tim elessn ess, 181 tin , 218, 277 tin c tu r e , 92, 101, 166, 278η ; g o ld e n , 208; p o iso n o u s, 2 8 4 η ; M e r c u riu s as, 235; r e d , 160, 292/, 295; self-re n e w in g , 203 T it a n s , 70 T o d d , R u th v e n , 153η to rc h , 318 to rm e n t(s ), 105, 328/, 336; fiery, 138: o f fire, 67, 72, 146: o f h e ll, 71, 331: M erc u r iu s p e rs e c u te d w ith , 331; u n e n ­ d u r a b le , 60, 62, 80; o f u n lim ite d r e ­ flectio n , 330 to r m e n tin g o f su b sta n c e s, 330 T o r q u e m a d a , 296 to rto ise , 100, fig. 25 to r tu re ( -in g ), 67, 71, 105η, 329: o f m a ­ te r ia , 105n ; m o tif of, 328; p ro je c te d , 329

to ta lity , 167, 224, 243, 246, 268; im ag e, see im a g e ; o f m a n , 139; sy m b o l of, 96; tra n s c e n d e n t, 101; see also w h o le ­ ness to te m a n c e sto r, 97 to u c h s to n e , 72 T o x c a tl, fe s tiv a l of, 8 i n to x in s, 34 “ T r a c t a tu lu s A v ic e n n a e ,” 79n “ T r a c t a tu s A ris to te lis ,” see A ris to tle , p se u d o " T r a c t a tu s a u r e u s ,” 144 n ; in B ib l. c h e m ., I, 85, 224; in D e a lc h im ia a n d B ib l. c h e m ., II, 125/; in A r s c h e m ., 338τι, 147n , 236η ; in T h e a tr . c h e m ., IV , 87, 222, 230, 233η, 23573; in M u s . h e r m ., 20773, 209η , 21213, 21573, 21773,

235n “ T r a c t a tu s M ic re ris,” 2 1 9 1 3 , 329 tr a d itio n (s ), 273; a lc h e m ic a l a n d a s tro ­ lo g ical, 125; a u th o r ity o f, 115; C h ris ­ tia n , 280, 317; ecclesiastical, 299, 321; H a g g a d ic , 317; I r a n ia n , 33771, Je w ish ,

339; P e rs ia n , 288, 308; S a b a e a n , 6 o n tra n c e , 341 tra n q u illiz e r(s ), 45 tr a n s c e n d e n ta l s ta te m e n ts , 54 tr a n s fig u ra tio n , 105 tr a n s fo r m a tio n , 61, 67, 7 0 7 3 , 88, 146, 162, 323; a lc h e m ic a l, 70, 75, 227; C h r is ­ tia n , o f h y lic in t o p n e u m a tic m a n , 233; G o d ’s, 334; g ro v e of, 262; o f Ilia ste r, 148; o f M e lu sin a , 179; o f M erc u riu s , 333; M e rc u riu s , g o a l o f h is o w n , 235; m y stic, 13613; — , o f a rtife x , 229; n a tu r a l, m y stery , 157; p o w e r o f, 68; p ro c e ss of, 6773, 89, 105, 242, 274, 278; — , o g d o a d as sy m b o l o f, 316; psy ch ic, 144, 155, 160; in t o s p ir itu a l b e in g , 73; in to sto n e , ioo ; sy m b o l, 71; tre e , as s e a t of, 317; — sy m b o l of, 332; a n d u n ity o f ro y a l p a ir , 326 tra n s fo rm a tiv e : o r a rc a n e su b s ta n c e , 72, 74, 211; a n tim o n y as, 146 tr a n situ s, 101; o f a d e p t, 80 tr a n s m u ta tio n , 91; o f m e ta ls , 124, 159 tr a n s u b s ta n tia tio n , 159 T ra ra m e s , 139, 158, 160 T ra v a n c o re , 231 tr e a s u re , 163, 179, 199, 203, 218, 258, 2 5 9 . 271; i n fie ld , 2 5 9 ; k in g ly , 145; m o tif, 258; se c re t, fig. 14; tre e as g u a r d ia n of, 314 tre a s u re -h o u s e , 85, 88 tree(s), 183, 193#, 201, 308, 320, 329; A d a m ’s, see A d a m ; a n im a te d b y so u ls, 199; as A n th ro p o s , o r self, 338; a rc h e ty p a l, 289; as a rc h e ty p a l im a g e , 272; a rc h e ty p e of, 339; b ir d s ’ r e la tio n to , 315; - b ir th , 266; — , a rc h e ty p e of, 307; -b o rn , 262; in B u n d a h is h , 308; c e n tre , ig 6 ; C h ris t th e , 196, 338; C h r is t’s g e n e a lo g ic a l, 307; C h ris tm a s, 23. 253, 256, 303, 340, fig. 2; o f c o n ­ te m p la tio n , 315; o f c o ra l, 287, 3088:71; cosm ic, 305, 340, figs. 4, 18, 20; — , a sso c ia tio n s of, 339; a n d cross, 332; d a e m o n , 200; o f d e a th , 304; d ra g o n is c h th o n ic n u m e n o f, 317; fe m in in e -m a te rn a l n a t u r e o f, 261,

INDEX 3 1 7 f ; as fiery p i l l a r , fig. 313, 31 on; fire-, 258, 33972; w i t h f o u r m e t a l l i c / b r a n c h e s , 89, 332; f r u i t - , 166, 305; as gnosis, 318; g o l d e n , 289, 310, 316/; as g u a r d i a n of t r e a s u r e , 314; a n d heavenly b r i d e , 340; of H e r m e s , 30972; of H e s p e r i d e s , 256; holy, of I n d i a , 340; i d e n t i t y of, w i t h M e r c u r i u s , 338; imm o r t a l , 6772; i n d i v i d u a l i t y of, 194; inv e r t e d (arbor inversa), 311, 314, 318, 3 4 0 ; — , m a n as, 31271; as Jesus, 318; of knowledge, 318, 339, fig. 11; as lapis, 319; leafless or d e a d , 256, 264, 268, 304; of life, 83, 19673, 274, 308, 312, 318, 339; — a n d d e a t h , 271; — , r o o t e d in B i n a h , 312; life p r i n c i p l e of, 196; of light, 255; L o r d of, 33772; magic(al), 303, 341; as m a n , 337; m a t e r n a l significance of, 261; m e d i u m of c o n j u n c t i o n , 337; M e r c u r i u s a n d , see M e r c u r i u s ; metallic, 286, 310, 311, 315, 332; —, of alchemy, 8g; m o d e r n fantasies of, 341; of m o o n , 30371; o n m o u n t a i n t o p , 308, 320; - n u m e n , 195, 3'5> 317' 3*8; n y m p h , 262, 265, 339; — , witchlike, 260; oji, 199; o p u s as, 313, 338; of p a r a d i s e / p a r a d i s a l , 143, J 99> 257. 3°2, 304, 318, 332, 339/; — , B u d d h a / C h r i s t n a m e d , 33871; — , of knowledge, 240; — , as m a n , 337; —, two, 306; p e r s o n a l a t m a n of, 239; p e r sonification of, 1 9 4 7 3 ; p h i l o s o p h i c a l , 230, 240, 253, 287; p l a n t e d i n sea, 308; as p n e u m a t i c pillar, 3 1 0 7 1 ; prim o r d i a l , 33771; p r o j e c t i o n i n t o , 200; -—, of a n i m a figure, 338; q u a t e r n i t y of, 332; r e b i r t h mystery, 338; r e l a t i o n of, to m o u n t a i n , 309; —, t o S a p i e n t a , 318; in t h e r e t o r t , 315; in R i p l e y Scrowle, lggn; r o o t e d in air, 311; as seat of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a n d renewal, 317; secret i n r o o t s of, 195; of Sefiro t h , 312; a n d seven metals, 310; of seven planets, 3og; shaman(ist)ic, fig. 2, 272; snake, 241, 315; —, c h t h o n i c n u m e n of, 317; a n d —, u n i o n of, fig. 12; as solar p i l l a r , 3 1 0 7 3 ; -soul, divi-

sion of i n t o m a s c u l i n e / f e m i n i n e , 3 i g ; s p i r i t in, see spirit; is s p i r i t u a l p r i n ciple of stork, 317; of s u n , 30371; — a n d m o o n , 30672, 308, 339; sword h a n g i n g o n the, 333; symbol(s), ig572, 253, 270, 272; — , of chrysopoea (goldm a k i n g ) , 314; — , of e n l i g h t e n m e n t , 313/; —, of p e r s o n a l i t y a n d self, 309; —, of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , 332; — , of w h o l e opus, 311; as system of b l o o d vessels, 287; t r u n c a t e d , 304/; o r v i n e , C h r i s t as, 338; visible sign of realization of self, ig6; -voice, lgg; a n d water, sog; in W e s t e r n L a n d , 306; w h i t e , 30572; of w i s d o m , 258, 306, 318; as w o m a n , 338; world-, see w o r l d ; Z a r a t h u s t r a ' s vision of, 332; see also acacia; a l m o n d ; ash; ashvattha; baob a b ; B o d h i ; cedar; fig; forest; G a o k e r e n a ; m y r t l e ; n e t t l e ; oak; olive; p a l m ; persea; p i n e ; p l a n t s tremendum, 200 T r e v i s a n u s , B e r n a r d u s , see B e r n a r d u s triad(s), 151, 221, 241; of a n i m a l s , 1 4 1 7 1 ; c h t h o n i c , fig. B2, 223; indivisible, 22171; lower, 1 4 m , 18373; Paracelsan, 277; s u n / m o o n / M e r c u r i u s , 277; upp e r , 165, 167 triadic: c h a r a c t e r of gods of u n d e r world, 221; n a t u r e of M e r c u r i u s , 221 t r i a n g l e , 224 t r i d e n t , g o l d e n , 334 T r i n i t y , 35, 10372, 15172, 166, 222, 241, 2 77> 334> 336; Holy, 221, 276; —, u n i o n of persons in, 277; m a s c u l i n e , g6; M e r c u r i u s as, see M e r c u r i u s ; totality of, 96; u n i o n of, 27871; u p p e r , 1 4 m , 18372 Trismegistos, 22 i n ; see also H e r m e s Trismegistus T r i s m o s i n , S a l o m o n , 6871, 219; see also Splendor solis t r i u n e essence, 293 triunus, M e r c u r i u s , see M e r c u r i u s t r u t h , 77, 24973, 301; absolute, 300; div i n e b o d y of, 35; living, 162; psychic, 171; revealed, 160; seekers a f t e r , 160;

439

IN D E X tr u th (cont.)'.: s p irit of, 130, a 14; sp iritu a l, tu r n in g in to so m e th in g m a teria l, 250 T u a m u te f, 280 T u r b a p h ilo s o p h o ru m , see R u sk a tu rq u o ise , 98, 100 tw ice-born, 73; see also r e b ir th tw ilig h t, 163, 247n , 250; o f reflection, 265 tw ins, 100 tw o: dragons, 217, 256f; dyads, 280: ea rth s, 278η; -faced god, 250; -fold su bstance, g ia n t of, see g ia n t; m o th ­ ers, 112, 117, 189; n a tu re s, 284; n u m ­ ber, 151; p a rts o f alchem ical opus, 348; sources o f know ledge, 116; s u b ­ stances o f M ercu riu s, 217; trees of p ara d ise, 306; w aters, 278η; see also d u a lity tw ofold substance, 217, 292fScn T y p h o n , th ree -b o d ied , 221; see also Set typology, psychological, 84 ΰδωρ θΐϊο ν, 150η, 208, 284; see also w a te r

U U itz ilo p o c h tli, 8 m u ltim a m a te ria : lap is as, 319; M ercu riu s as, 235 u n a d a p te d n e ss, 18 u nconscious, 12/7, 24, 47/, 52, 101, 106, 143. l 46> fig· b 5> *79" 2° 1224, 242, 256, 265, 299; a n im a p e r ­ sonification of, 42; A q u aster close to co n cep t of, 140; a rc h e ty p a l co nfigura­ tio n s of, 253; a u to n o m y of, 328; C a u ­ casus of, 12; chaotic fra g m e n ts of, 84; C h rist as perso n ificatio n of, 333; co m p en sa tin g pow ers of, 335; com ­ p en sato ry tendencies fro m , 245; co n ­ flict w ith , 336; c o n fro n ta tio n /e n c o u n ­ te r w ith , 322, 341, 348; a n d conscious, d isso c ia tio n /sp lit b etw een , 34, 246; co n ten ts of, 36, 82, 91; darkness of, 23; n o t d eriv ativ e of consciousness, 42;

d isin te g ra tin g effect of, 29; fem in in e ch a racter of, 325; figures of, 38, 42/; in stin c tu a lity of n a t u r e ’s w isdom of, 333; in te g ra tio n of, 325, 346; in te r ­ p re ta tio n of, 341; in u n d a tio n by, 322; laws of, 21, 239; M e rcu riu s as a rc h e ­ type of, 247; — p erso n ificatio n of, 333; p a ra d o x ic a l re a lity of, 202; p e r ­ sonal, 348; p re d o m in a n c e of, 14; p r o ­ je ctio n of, 205, 211; psychology of, 90, 189, 268, 302, 348; ra p p ro c h e m e n t w ith , 170, 180; re a lity of, 42, 201; r e ­ gression, 260; r e g u la tin g im ages an d , 301; snake as sym bol of, 333; sp o n ta ­ n eo u s p ro d u cts of, 273, 299, 339, 346; — sta te m en ts of, 194; — sym bolism of, 282; sto n e as o u tc ro p p in g of, 242; stru c tu re of, 36, 69, 205; u n io n w ith conscious, 180; — fe m in in e p e rso n i­ fication of, 182; w a te r as, 1 5 m unconscious, collective, 3, 28f, 177, 205, 240, 266n, 334, 348; d efin itio n of, 11; M e rc u riu s id e n tified w ith , 222, 237; processes of, in m o d e rn m a n , 4; p ro jec tio n of, 229 unconsciousness, 89, 127, 171, 180, 194, ig6, 264, 280η, 299; b estial, 99; o v er­ com in g of, 333; p rim itiv e , 45; S ophia su n k in , 335 u n d e rsta n d in g , 89, 229, 296/, 320, 327, 346; b rid g e of psychological, 55; E ast­ e rn , 7; in te lle c tu a l, 264, 349; psycho­ logical, 49; scientific, 6, 159; s p iritu a l, 322 u n d e rw o rld , d rag o n s ch a in e d in , 242 u n ific atio n , 277; o f d o u b le dyads, 278; see also henosis u n ig e n itu s, M e rcu riu s as, 235 u n io n , 332, 348; w ith a n im a , 326; co n ­ scious/u n co n scio u s, 180; conscious­ n ess/life , 21, 24; w ith fe m in in e p e r ­ sonificatio n o f u n conscious, 182; fire / w ater, 255; w ith G od, 249η; h e r ­ m a p h ro d itic , 136; n a tu r a l/s p ir itu a l m an , 157; of o pposites, see o p p o ­ site/s); of perso n s, 278; — , in H o ly T rin ity , 277; w ith self, 263; w ith

INDEX s h a d o w , 326; w i t h s o u l , 155; t r e e / s n a k e , fig. 12; of T r i n i t y , 278n u n i t y , 26, 38, 169n, 182, 237, 305; of b e i n g , 28; c o n s c i o u s n e s s / l i f e , 23, 25; o r i g i n a l , 336; p r i m o r d i a l , 265; q u a t e r n i t y as, 151; t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a n d , of r o y a l p a i r , 326; a n d t r i n i t y of M e r c u r i u s , 221 ff universal(s): b e i n g , 40; controversy a b o u t , 288; m i d p o i n t , 271; m y t h m o t i f s , n , 273; s i g n i f i c a n c e of d r e a m s y m b o l s , 347 u n j u s t s t e w a r d , p a r a b l e o f , 243/ U p a n i s h a d ( s ) , 239; C h h a n d o g y a , 3 1 3 7 1 ; M a i t r a y a n a - B r a h m a n a , 240*1 Upa-Puranas, 206*1 u p p e r w o r l d , 256, 341 u p w a r d s d i s p l a c e m e n t , 265 uraeus, 303n u r i n e , 290 u r o b o r o s , fig, 17, 79, 8 2 n , 84, 103/, 132*1, 232; c i r c u l a r n a t u r e of, 233; d r a g o n , 223; as h i e r o g l y p h of e t e r n i t y , 259; m o t i f , 90 u r t i c a , 155*1 U r v a s h i , 178 U s e n e r , H e r m a n n , 283*1 u t e r u s , 73, 97 U t o p i a ( s ) : b l o o d l e s s , 244; p o l i t i c a l , 300 utriusque capax, M e r c u r i u s as, 348 •uvae Hermetis, 279N u v u l a , 61

V V a l e n t i n i a n s , 283 V a l e n t i n u s , B a s i l i u s , 208*1, 215*1, 217*1, 22Dn, 226*3 v a l l e y , 15 v a l u e ( s ) , 18; c o n s c i o u s , 13; e m o t i o n a l , 268; m o r a l , 185; — r e v e r s a l o f , 183*3 vapor terrae, 138 vapour, 20J V a r u n a , 268&71 vas: cerebri ( c r a n i u m ) , 86; circulatorium (vessel of c i r c u l a r d i s t i l l a t i o n ) , 441

316 (see also d i s t i l l a t i o n ; Hermeticum, 197; Hermetis, pellicanicum, 87 V e c e r i u s , C o n r a d , 178&71 V e d a ( s ) , 26771, 313 V e d a n t a - S u t r a s , 34071 v e g e t a t i v e p r i n c i p l e , 257 veil of M a y a , 38, 180 v e i n s w o l l e n w i t h b l o o d , 247 v e n o m , 7gn Ventura,

Laurentius,

235 N > 3°7> S

1 1

85/,

Pelican); 72/, 85;

215,

22671,

^ 323"/ 3 2 6

V e n u s , 13571, 155, 15671, i 8 i f f , 231, 275, 278, 3 1 0 / ; w i t h A d a m i n b a t h , 22671; c h a r a c t e r s o f , 174/, 187; d a y of (Frid a y ) , 249; h e r m a p h r o d i t i c , 18771; h o u s e o f , 155; M a g i s t r a , 187; a n d M a r s , 93; M e r c u r i u s h a s a t t r i b u t e s of, 226&71; s h i p o f , 15571; s l e e p i n g , 216; Venus armata, 187 Verus Hermes, 8371, 21471, 22071, 228; see also Prodromus Rhodostauroticus v e s i c a n t , 15571 vesicle, g e r m i n a l , see g e r m i n a l V e s p e r s , 29671 vessel(s), 73, 8a, 87/, 92, figs. B 4 , B6, 290; of c i r c u l a r d i s t i l l a t i o n , 316; dist i l l i n g , 88, 175 (see also P e l i c a n ) ; as f i r e , 85; a s foemina alba, 86; glass, 10571; w i t h g o d ' s l i m b s , 73; h e r m e t i c , 7 a / , 85; as L u n a , 86; " r o o t a n d p r i n c i p l e of o u r a r t , " 85; s y n o n y m f o r e g g , 82; w o n d e r - w o r k i n g , 73 V e t t i u s V a l e n s , 31271 " V i a v e r i t a t i s u n i c a e , " 20971 v i c t o r y of t h e s p i r i t , 335 vif-argent, 207 de V i g e n i r e , Blaise (Vigenerus, Blasius), 304&71, 305, 311, 312&n, 331 xnndemia, 27971; Hermetis, 31471 v i n e , 286. 306, 314, 318; t r e e o r , C h r i s t as, 338; t r u e , 27971, 306; of t h e wise, H e r m e s , 314 v i n e g a r , 77, 331; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 85; q u i c k s i l v e r as, 7771 Viola petraea lutea ( m o u n t a i n p a n s y ) , 135"

INDEX v i o l a t i o n , m o t i f of, 74 virgin(s), 100, 182, 298; f o o l i s h , 317; M e r c u r i u s , m o s t chaste, 226; m i l k , 290 ViTgin, t h e , 10371, 18471, 232 virgines velandae, 54 virgo, 178 viriditas- benedicta, 287n; gloriosa, 315 V i s h n u , 265, 267 "Visio A r i s l e i , " 6071, 6671, 6771, 93, 305, 32971; " A e n i g m a V I , " 6871, 9371, 1 0 5 7 1 ; see also A r i s l e u s vision(s), 62, 64, 66, 68, g6, 176, 179, ig7, 286; of A q u a s t e r , 166; of Arisleus, 306; c o n t e m p l a t i v e , 44; of D a n iel, Ezra, E n o c h , 132; of Ezekiel, 280; of H i l d e g a r d of B i n g e n , 27; of Isis, 81; of Urates, 83; of l i g h t , 27; M e l u sina, a p p e a r i n g i n m i n d , 144, 174; psychic, 177; s n a k e , 86, 2 1 7 7 1 ; t e r r i f y i n g , of G o d , 346; of Z a r a t h u s t r a , 332, 337; of Zosimos, 225 vis Mercurii, 13611 v i s u a l i z a t i o n , 17; of c r e a t i v e p o i n t , 25 " v i t a c o s m o g r a p h i c a , " 167 vitam aeream, 163 vitis, 27gn; arborea, 28671; sapientum, 28611 v i t r i o l , 287 vitrum, 198 viziers, f o r t y , 231 v o l a t i l e s u b s t a n c e s , 148, fig. B 6 v o m i t i n g , 231 V o u r o u k a s h a , 308; l a k e o f , 340 V u l g a t e , 71, 10371, 2 8 m , 30671

W W a c h s m u t h , K., a n d O . H e n s e , 33771 W a l d e , Alois, 28871 W a l d k i r c h , C o n r a d , 123, 27611 wallflower, yellow, 13571 W a l p u r g i s n a c h t of m i n d , g o w a n d e r i n g scholars, 119 war, 36 w a r m b l o o d e d n e s s , 243

w a s h i n g , m i r a c u l o u s , 68 Wasserstein der Weysen, 10571,

Der,

io4n,

106

water(s), 24, 44, 63, 67, 68n, 72, 7 4 f t 78, 8271, 88, 138, 145/, 162, 16371, 182, 194, 214, 216-19, 256, 278, 286/, 30971, 320, 324, 341, figs. 5, 8, 10, 32; a b o v e a n d b e l o w h e a v e n s , 151; b a p t i s m a l , 68, 84; blessed, 7871, 154; b o i l i n g , 60; b r i g h t , 227; celestial, 77, 150; c o m p o s i t i o n of, see c o m p o s i t i o n ; is d e s t r u c t i o n , 76, 227; d i v i n e , 64, 68, 102-105, 107, 208, 215, 284, 32271; — , of a l c h e m i s t s , 76; — , of t h e a r t , 73, — , d y o p h y s i t e n a t u r e of, 79; d r a g o n as d i v i n e , 8271; egg s y n o n y m f o r , 82; e t e r n a l , 227; e v e r - m o v i n g , 284; a n d fire, 74, 112, 20811; — , t h e u n i o n o f , 255; a b o v e t h e firmament, 77, 82; f o u n t of living, 10471; g e r m i n a t i n g , 149; of G r a c e , 83; h e a v e n l y , 151; l o w e r , 150; as Mercurii caduceus, 208; M e r c u r i u s as, 2 0 7 f t 309; m i r a c u l o u s , 67; m o o n r e l a t e d to, 139; of m o o n a n d S a t u r n , 227; n e t t l e , 155; of N i l e , 73; - n i x i e , 176, 182; - n y m p h , 143; oily, 319; of p h i l o s o p h e r s , 85; p h i l o s o p h i c ( a l ) , 6771, 27g n; p o w e r of r e s u s c i t a t i o n , 74; pure, 150; quicksilver as, 207; r e g i o n , 265; sea, 308; s e e t h i n g of, 6 i ; s h i n i n g , 73; silver, 284; as s p i r i t , 74, 76, 78; s p r i n g of p u r e s t , 64, 84; s t a r , 13871; s y m b o l i s m , 1 0 1 f t s y m b o l s of d i v i n e , 7311; s y n o n y m f o r s p i r i t , 197; t r a n s l u c e n t , 75; t r e e a n d , 3og; two, 27871; as u n c o n s c i o u s , 15171; as w h o l e ness, 284; w o n d e r f u l , 308; w o n d e r w o r k i n g , 79, 102; see also a q u a w a t e r y : aspect of Iliaster, 138; r e a l m , 142/, 179/ W a y ( T a o ) , 20; conscious, 20 W a y n e , P h i l i p , 12011, 18311 w e d d i n g , c h y m i c a l , 136, 257; see also Rosencreutz W e i P o - y a n g , 12671, 226&71, 32471, 325 Wells, H . G., 37 W e n d l a n d , P a u l , 23271

442

INDEX W e s t : d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n East a n d , 53; d o g m a t i s t s of, 50n; a n d East, 55; reaction against i n t e l l e c t in, 9; religious experiences o f , 53 W e s t e r n : alchemy, s a p p h i r i n e flower of, 269; a t t i t u d e of m i n d , 42; civilization, 8; c u l t of consciousness, 48; i m i t a t i o n , 8; intellect, d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of, 9; — a n d will, 48; L a n d , 308; — , tree i n t h e , 306; m a n , 8, 14, 18, 37, 5 m , 55; m i n d , 6, 42; p r e j u d i c e , 50; psychology) 40; science, 6; t h e o s o p h y , 265; see also E u r o p e a n w h a l e , 143, 303; s p e r m - , 15571 w h e a t , g r a i n of, 306

wise, stone of t h e , 320; see also l a p i s witch, 261; - b u t t e r , 15371; - c r a f t , 121, 143; - l a n g u a g e , 121 wolf, 141&71, 279 w o m a n ( - e n ) , 23, 4 of; b l u e , doglike, 232; d r e a m s of, 347; m a s c u l i n i t y of, 338; psyche of, 269; psychology of m a t r i a r c h a l , 40, 99; of S a m a r i a , 104; snake-, 144; t r e e in f o r m of, 338; w h i t e , 93 w o n d e r - w o r k i n g p l a n t , 253 w o o d of life, 339 woodcutter, ig3 w o r d / W o r d : creative, 222; of G o d , see G o d ; magic, 121; of renewal, 222 work, d a n g e r s of the, 329; see also Art w o r l d : air, fig. A4; of ancestors, 9871; -axis, 253, 2 g m , fig. 2; — , t r e e as, 339; b e y o n d , 337; c h t h o n i c , 337; - c r e a t i n g p r i n c i p l e , 132; of darkness, 265; of d r e a m s , g 8 n ; d u a l i t y in, a n d soul, 116; e a r t h - , fig. A4; -egg, 82; e m p i r i c a l , 51; e x t e r n a l , 43; f o u r q u a r t e r s of, 281; f u l l n e s s of, 44; of gods, 155; of ideas, 1 3 2 7 7 ; i n n e r , 1 8 0 7 7 ; i n t e r i o r , of t h e psyche, 2g7; i n t e r m e d i a t e , g i n ; of light, 336; — a n d d a r k , fig. A5; lower, 256; macrocosmic, 214; M e r c u r i u s as Logos b e c o m e , 222; m e t a p h y s i c a l , r i f t i n t h e , 244; microcosmic, 214; - m o u n t a i n , 2 g m ; o r d e r , d i v i n e , 127; physical, 91; p r i m o r d i a l , 243; p r i n c i p l e of, 77; Son of t h e G r e a t , 96, 292; soul of, see soul, mundi; s p i r i t of, 212; of anima t h o u g h t , 266f; -tree, 240, 253, 256, 258, 2 9 m , 305, 307/, 310/, figs. 2, 30; — , M e x i c a n , fig. 8; — , mystical, 312; t r e e as, 339; u n i t a r y , 116; u p p e r ,

wheel(s), 22, 281; f o u r , 167, 281; s u n , 25 w h i t e , 339; blossom, fig. 1; dove, 92*1; e l i x i r of silver, 13571; ghost, 39; m a n , 93; tree, 30577; w o m a n , g3 w h o l e : a n d c o m p l e t e m a n , 296; conflicting, 189; m a n , 325 wholeness, 139, 168, 180, 182, 195, 263, 268, 281/, 305; of body, 280; i m a g e o f , 283; o r i g i n a l , 284, 336; of p e r s o n ality, 240; r o u n d , 8g; of self, 263; s y m b o l of, 320, 337; w a t e r is, 284 W i c h i t a , 100 W i l h e l m , R i c h a r d , 1, 3, 4, 6, 11, 20, 38-41, 5071, 206 W i l h e l m , Salome, 1 will(s), 14, 21, 34, 50, 159; conscious, 12/, 16, 28; c u l t of, 45; d i v i n e , 188; m o r a l v a l u e of, 13 wind(s), 162, 268; b u f f e t i n g s of t h e , 314, 319; -gods, 22 I; M e r c u r i u s c h a n g e d i n t o , 212; as p n e u m a , 8771 W i n d i s c h m a n n , F., 30871 w i n d o w , t r a n s p a r e n t , fig. A 3 w i n g e d : f e m a l e genies, 281; tiger, 340 wings, f o u r , of t h e c h e r u b i m , 281 w i s d o m , 13, 77, 180, 314, 319, 334; of C a b a l a , 130; Chinese, 6; E a s t e r n , 11; M i r r o r of, 22; n a t u r a l , 271, 333; — , c e n t r e of, 151; O r i e n t a l , 7; q u a l i t y of, 338; t r e e of, 196

256. 3 4 1

w o r m , 146; i n t e s t i n a l , 14671 W o t a n , ig8; H e r m e s - M e r c u r i u s - , 202 w r a t h of G o d , 83 Wiinsche, August, 3177? wu wei, 16

443

INDEX y

Z

Y a j n a v a k y a , 248 Y a j u r - V e d a , 267 Y a k u t s , 340 yang, 9, 13, 25; p r i n c i p l e , 39 Yellow: M a n , 92; w a l l f l o w e r , 13571 Yggdrasil, 340Sen yin, 9, 13, 25, 324; p r i n c i p l e , 39; -react i o n , 13; tiger a s y m b o l of, 3 4 0 7 7 Y l i a s t r u m , see I l i a s t e r yoga, 38, 16511; B u d d h i s t d o c t r i n e s , 36; C h i n e s e , 4, 14, 29, 46; exercises, 5 i n ; I n d i a n K u n d a l i n i , 24; p r a c t i c e s , 7; T a n t r i c , 265; t e a c h i n g , 43 Y o l k a i e s t s a n , 98 y o u t h , n e t t l e a s y m b o l o f , 155

Z a d i t h S e n i o r , 8 2 n , 13871, 258n, 286n, 307n, 319/ Z a r a t h u s t r a , 128, 332; d r e a m of, 89; vision of, 337; — , t h e t r e e , 332 Zeus, 37, 97; t h e k i n g , 221; triops, 2 2 i n zodiac, 15511; r e l a t i o n of o p u s t o , 31471 zodion, spring, 3 1 m Zockler, O t t o , 33211 Zohar, 132 zone, s e v e n t h , 7 6 Z o s i m o s of P a n o p o l i s ( R i m a s / R o s i n u s ) , 59, 66, 90, 130, 1 3 m , 215, 220, 221, 2 4 0 7 1 , 274, 27gn, 284, 292, 314™, 3 2 g n ; conscious p s y c h o l o g y of, 68; d r e a m o f , 102; t e m p l e of, 85; visions o f , 5g, 2 i 5 n , 225, 329

444

T H E C O L L E C T E D W O R K S OF

C G. JUNG

JL

h e p u b l i c a t i o n of th e first c o m p lete e d itio n , in E nglish, of th e works o f C. G. J u n g was u n d e rta k e n by R o u tle d g e a n d K egan P a u l, L td ., in E n g la n d a n d by B o llin g en F o u n d a tio n in th e U n ite d States. T h e A m eri­ can e d itio n is n u m b e r X X in B o llin g e n Series, w hich since 1967 has been p u b lish e d by P rin c e to n U n iv ersity Press. T h e e d itio n c o n ta in s revised versions o f w orks previo u sly p u b lish e d , such as Psychology o f the U n c o n ­ scious, w hich is now e n title d S ym bo ls o f Transformation·, w orks originally w ritte n in E nglish, such as Psychology a n d R elig io n; w orks n o t previously tra n sla te d , such as A io n ; a n d , in g en eral, new tra n sla tio n s o f v irtu a lly all of P rofessor J u n g ’s w ritings. P rio r to his d e a th , in 1961, th e a u th o r su p er­ vised th e te x tu a l rev isio n , w hich in some cases is extensive. Sir H e rb e rt R e a d (d. 1968), D r. M ichael F o rd h a m , a n d D r. G e rh a rd A d ler com pose th e E d ito ria l C o m m ittee; th e tra n s la to r is R . F. C. H u ll (except fo r V olum e 2) a n d W illia m M cG u ire is ex ecutive e d ito r.

T h e p rice of th e volum es varies acco rd in g to size; they a re sold sepa­ rately , a n d m ay also be o b ta in e d on sta n d in g o rd er. Several of the volum es are extensively illu stra te d . E ach v o lu m e c o n tain s a n in d e x a n d in m ost a b ib lio g ra p h y ; th e final v o lu m e w ill c o n ta in a com plete b ib lio g ra p h y of Professor J u n g ’s w ritin g s a n d a g e n e ra l in d e x to th e e n tire e d itio n . I n th e fo llo w in g list, d ates o f o rig in a l p u b lic a tio n a re given in p a re n ­ theses (of o rig in a l co m p o sitio n , in brackets). M u ltip le d ates in d ica te revisions.

*1. P S Y C H IA T R IC S T U D IE S O n th e Psychology a n d P ath o lo g y o f So-Called O cc u lt P h e n o m e n a (1902) O n H y ste ric a l M isre a d in g (1904) C ry p to m n e sia (1905) O n M a n ic M o o d D iso rd e r (1903) A C ase of H y sterical S tu p o r in a P riso n e r in D e te n tio n (1902) O n S im u la te d In s a n ity (1903) A M edical O p in io n o n a Case of S im u la te d In sa n ity (1904) A T h i r d a n d F in a l O p in io n o n T w o C o n tra d ic to ry P sy chiatric D ia g ­ noses (1906) O n th e Psychological D iag n o sis o f F acts (1905) f2 . E X P E R IM E N T A L R E S E A R C H E S T r a n s l a t e d b y L e o p o l d St ein in c o l l a b o ra t i o n w i t h D i a n a R i v i e r e

(1904-7, 1910) T h e A ssociations of N o rm a l S ubjects (by J u n g a n d F. R ik lin ) A n A nalysis o f th e A ssociations of a n E p ile p tic T h e R e a c tio n -T im e R a tio in th e A ssociation E x p e rim e n t E x p e rim e n ta l O b se rv a tio n s o n th e F acu lty o f M em ory Psychoanalysis a n d A ssociation E x p e rim e n ts T h e Psychological D iagnosis of E vid en ce A ssociation, D ream , a n d H y ste ric a l S y m ptom T h e P sy ch o p ath o lo g ical Significance of th e A ssociation E x p e rim e n t D istu rb a n c e s in R e p ro d u c tio n in th e A ssociation E x p e rim e n t T h e A ssociation M e th o d T h e F am ily C o n ste lla tio n P S Y C H O P H Y S IC A L R E S E A R C H E S (1907-8) O n th e Psychophysical R e la tio n s of th e A ssociation E x p e rim e n t P sychophysical In v e stig a tio n s w ith th e G a lv a n o m e te r a n d P n e u m o ­ g ra p h in N o rm a l a n d In s a n e In d iv id u a ls (by F. P e te rso n a n d S T U D IE S IN

W O R D A S S O C IA T IO N

J«ng) F u r th e r In v e stig a tio n s o n th e G a lv a n ic P h e n o m e n o n a n d R e sp ira tio n in N o rm a l a n d In s a n e In d iv id u a ls (by C. R ick sh e r a n d J u n g ) A p p e n d ix : S tatistical D etails o f E n listm e n t (1906); N ew A spects o f C rim in a l Psychology (1908); T h e Psychological M e th o d s of In v e stig a tio n U sed in th e P sy ch iatric C lin ic o f th e U n iv e rsity o f Z u ric h (1910); O n th e D o c trin e o f C o m p lex es ([1911] 1913); O n th e P sychological D iagnosis of E v id ence (1937) * P u b lis h e d

1937:

2nd

e d n .,

1970.

+ Published 1973.

*3 - T H E P S Y C H O G E N E S IS O F M E N T A L D ISEA SE T h e Psychology of D e m e n tia P raecox (1907) T h e C o n te n t of th e Psychoses (1908/1914) O n Psychological U n d e rs ta n d in g (1914) A C riticism o f B le u le r’s T h e o ry of Schizophrenic N egativism (1911) O n th e Im p o rta n c e of th e U nconscious in Psychopathology (1914) O n th e P ro b le m of Psychogenesis in M en tal Disease (1919) M e n ta l Disease a n d th e Psyche (1928) O n th e Psychogenesis of S ch izo p h ren ia (1939) R e c e n t T h o u g h ts o n S ch izo p h ren ia (1957) S ch izo p h ren ia (1958) f4 . F R E U D A N D PSY C H O A N A LY SIS F re u d 's T h e o ry of H y steria: A R ep ly to A schaffenburg (1906) T h e F re u d ia n T h e o ry of H y steria (1908) T h e A nalysis o f D ream s (1909) A C o n trib u tio n to th e Psychology of R u m o u r (1910-11) O n th e Significance of N u m b e r D ream s (1910-11) M o rto n P rin ce, " T h e M echanism a n d I n te rp re ta tio n of D ream s” : A C ritical R eview (1911) O n th e C riticism of Psychoanalysis (1910) C o n c e rn in g Psychoanalysis (1912) T h e T h e o ry o f Psychoanalysis (1913) G e n e ra l A spects of Psychoanalysis (1913) Psychoanalysis a n d N eurosis (1916) Som e C ru cial P o in ts in Psychoanalysis: A C o rresp o n d en ce betw een D r. J u n g a n d D r. Loy (1914) Prefaces to “C ollected P ap ers o n A n aly tical Psychology” (1916, 1917) T h e S ignificance o f th e F a th e r in th e D estiny o f th e In d iv id u a l (1909/1949) In tro d u c tio n to K ra n e fe ld t’s "S ecret W ays o f th e M in d ” (1930) F re u d an d J u n g : C o n trasts (1929) SYM BO LS O F T R A N S F O R M A T IO N

(1911-12/1952)

PART I

In tro d u c tio n T w o K inds of T h in k in g T h e M ille r F antasies: A nam nesis T h e H y m n of C re a tio n T h e Song o f th e M o th •P u b lish e d

i9 6 0 .

% P u b lish ed

1956;

(c o n tin u e d )

f P u b lish ed 2nd

e d n .,

1967.

(65

p la tes, 43

1961.

te x t

fig u re s.)

5- (co n tin u ed) PA R T II

In tro d u ctio n T h e C oncept of L ibido T h e T ra n sfo rm atio n of L ibido T h e O rigin of the H ero Symbols of the M other an d of R eb irth T h e B attle for D eliverance from the M other T h e D ual M other T h e Sacrifice Epilogue A ppendix: T h e M iller Fantasies *6. PSY C H O LO G IC A L TYPES (1921) In tro d u ctio n T h e Problem of T ypes in the H istory of Classical and M edieval Thought Schiller’s Ideas on the T y p e Problem T h e A pollinian an d the Dionysian T h e T y p e P roblem in H u m an C haracter T h e T y p e P roblem in Poetry T h e T y p e P roblem in Psychopathology T h e T y p e Problem in Aesthetics T h e T y p e P roblem in M odern Philosophy T h e T y p e P roblem in Biography G eneral D escription of the T ypes D efinitions Epilogue F ou r

P apers o n

P s y c h o lo g ic a l T y p o lo g y

(1 9 1 3 ,

1925,

1931,

1936)

t7· T W O ESSAYS O N A N A LY TIC A L PSY CHO LOGY

O n the Psychology of the U nconscious (1917/1926/1943) T h e R elations between the Ego and the Unconscious (1928) A ppendix: New Paths in Psychology (1912); T h e S tructure of the Unconscious (1916) (new versions, w ith variants, 1966) +8. T H E S T R U C T U R E A N D DYNAM ICS O F T H E PSYCHE O n Psychic Energy (1928) T h e T ra n scen d e n t F unction ([1916^1957) A Review of the C om plex T h eo ry (1934) T h e Significance of C onstitution a n d H eredity in Psychology (1929) P u b lis h e d

1971.

P u b lis h e d

i9 6 0 :

t P u b lis h e d 2nd

e d n .,

1969.

1953:

2nd

e d n .,

1966.

Psychological F actors D e te rm in in g H u m a n B ehavior (1937) In stin c t a n d th e U nco n scio u s (1919) T h e S tru c tu re o f th e Psyche (1927/1931) O n th e N a tu re o f th e Psyche (1947/3954) G e n e ra l A spects o f D ream Psychology (1916/1948) O n th e N a tu re o f D ream s (1945/1948) T h e Psychological F o u n d a tio n s of B elief in S pirits (1920/1948) S p irit a n d L ife (1926) Basic P o stu lates of A n aly tical Psychology (1931) A n aly tical Psychology a n d W elta n sch a uung (1928/1931) T h e R e a l a n d th e S u rreal (1933) T h e Stages of L ife (1930—1931) T h e Soul a n d D eath (1934) S ynchronicity: A n A causal C o n n e c tin g P rin c ip le (1952) A p p e n d ix : O n S ynchronicity (1951) *9,

*g.

p a r t I. T H E ARCHETYPES AND T H E C O L L E C T IV E U N C O N S C IO U S A rchetypes o f th e C ollective U nconscious (1934/1954) T h e C o n c e p t of th e C ollective U nconscious (1936) C o n c e rn in g th e A rchetypes, w ith Special R eference to th e A nim a C o n c e p t (1936/1954) Psychological A spects of th e M o th e r A rchetype (1938/1954) C o n c e r n in g R e b ir th (1940/1950) T h e Psychology o f th e C h ild A rch ety p e (1940) T h e Psychological A spects o f th e K ore (1941) T h e P h e n o m en o lo g y o f th e S p irit in F airytales (1945/1948) O n th e Psychology o f th e T rick ster-F ig u re (1954) Conscious, U nconscious, a n d In d iv id u a tio n (1939) A Study in th e Process of In d iv id u a tio n (1934/1950) C o n c e rn in g M a n d a la Sym bolism (1950) A p p e n d ix : M a n d a la s (1955)

pa rt

it.

A IO N

(1951)

R E SE A R C H E S IN T O

T H E PH EN O M EN O LO G Y

T h e Ego T h e Shadow T h e Syzygy: A n im a a n d A n im u s T h e Self C hrist, a Sym bol of th e Self T h e Sign of th e Fishes

O F T H E SELF

(c o n tin u e d )

• Published 1959: 2nd edn., 1968. (Part I: yg plates, with 2g in colour.)

g.

(co n tin u ed ) T h e Prophecies of N ostradam us T h e H istorical Significance of the Fish T h e A m bivalence of the Fish Symbol T h e Fish in Alchemy T h e Alchem ical In te rp re ta tio n of the Fish B ackground to the Psychology of C hristian Alchemical Symbolism G nostic Symbols of the Self T h e S tructure an d Dynamics of the Self C onclusion

*10. C IV IL IZ A T IO N IN T R A N S IT IO N T h e R ole of the U nconscious (1918) M ind a n d E arth (1927/1931) A rchaic M an (1931) T h e S p iritu al Problem of M odern M an (1928/1931) T h e Love P roblem of a S tudent (1928) W om an in E urope (1927) T h e M eaning of Psychology for M odern M an (1933/1934) T h e State of Psychotherapy T o d ay (1934) Preface an d Epilogue to “Essays on C ontem porary Events” (1946) W o tan (1936) A fter the C atastrophe (1945) T h e F ight w ith the Shadow (1946) T h e U ndiscovered Self (Present an d F uture) (1957) Flying Saucers: A M odern M yth (1958) A Psychological View of Conscience (1958) G ood an d Evil in A nalytical Psychology (1959) In tro d u c tio n to W olff’s “Studies in J u n g ia n Psychology” (1959) T h e Swiss L ine in the E uropean S pectrum (ig28) Reviews of K eyserling’s “A m erica Set F ree" (1930) an d “L a R evo­ lu tio n M ondiale” (1934) T h e C om plications of A m erican Psychology (1930) T h e D ream like W o rld of In d ia (1939) W h at In d ia Can T ea ch Us (1939) A ppendix: D ocum ents (1933-1938) f 11. PSY CHO LOGY AND R E L IG IO N : W E S T AN D EAST W ESTERN

R E L IG IO N

Psychology an d R eligion

(T h e T e rry Lectures) (1938/1940)

* P u b lis h e d 1964; 2 n d e d n ., 1970. (8 p lates.) t P u b lis h e d 1958: 2 n d e d n ., 1969.

A Psychological A p p ro a c h to th e D ogm a of the T r in ity (1942/1948) T ra n s fo rm a tio n Sym bolism in th e Mass (1942/1954) F orew o rd s to W h ite ’s “G o d a n d th e U n co n scio u s” an d W erblow sky's “ L u cifer a n d P ro m e th e u s” (1952) B ro th e r K laus (1933) P sy ch o th erap ists o r th e C lergy (1932) Psychoanalysis a n d th e C u re of Souls (1928) A nsw er to J o b (1952) E A S T E R N R E L IG IO N

P sychological C o m m e n ta rie s o n " T h e T ib e ta n B ook of th e G reat L ib e ra tio n ” (1939/1954) a n d “T h e T ib e ta n B ook of the D e a d ”

(1935/ 1953) Yoga a n d th e W est (1936) F o rew o rd to S uzuki’s “ In tro d u c tio n to Zen B u d d h ism ” (1939) T h e Psychology of E a ste rn M e d ita tio n (1943) T h e H o ly M en o f In d ia : In tro d u c tio n to Z im m er’s “D er W eg zum S elbst” (1944) F o rew o rd to th e " I C h in g ” (1950) *12. P S Y C H O L O G Y A N D A L C H E M Y (1944) P re fa to ry n o te to th e E ng lish E d itio n ([1951?] ad d ed 1967) In tro d u c tio n to th e R elig io u s a n d Psychological P roblem s of A lchem y In d iv id u a l D ream Sym bolism in R e la tio n to A lchem y (1936) R elig io u s Id eas in A lchem y (1937) E p ilo g u e f i 3 . A L C H E M IC A L S T U D IE S C o m m e n ta ry o n “T h e Secret o f th e G o ld en F low er” (1929) T h e V isions o f Zosim os (1938/1954) P aracelsus as a S p iritu a l P h e n o m e n o n (1942) T h e S p irit M ercu riu s (1943/1948) T h e P h ilo so p h ical T r e e (1945/1954) +14. M Y S T E R IU M C O N IU N C T IO N IS AN

IN Q U IR Y

S Y N T H E S IS

The The The R ex

IN T O T H E

OF

P S Y C H IC

(1955-56)

S E P A R A T IO N O P P O S IT E S

AND

IN

C o m p o n e n ts of th e C o n iu n c tio P a ra d o x a P erso n ificatio n o f th e O p p o sites a n d R e g in a

ALCHEM Y

(c o n tin u e d )

* P u b lis h e d 1953; 2 n d e d n ., co m p le tely rev ised , 1968. (270 illu s tra tio n s .) f P u b lis h e d 1968. (50 p la tes, 4 te x t figures.) J P u b lis h e d 1963; 2 n d e d n ., 1970. (10 plates.)

14.

(co n tin u ed ) A dam an d Eve T h e C onjunction

*15. T H E S P IR IT IN M AN, A R T , AND L IT E R A T U R E Paracelsus (1929) Paracelsus the Physician (1941) Sigm und F reud in His H istorical Setting (1932) In M emory of Sigm und F reud (1939) R ich ard W ilhelm : In M em oriam (1930) O n the R elatio n of A nalytical Psychology to Poetry (1922) Psychology an d L iteratu re (1930/1950) “ Ulysses” : A M onologue (1932) Picasso (1932) j-16. T H E P R A C T IC E O F PSY C H O T H E R A PY GEN ERA L PRO BLEM S O F PSY C H O TH ERA PY

P rinciples of Practical Psychotherapy (1935) W h at Is Psychotherapy? (1935) Some Aspects of M odern Psychotherapy (1930) T h e Aims of Psychotherapy (1931) Problem s of M odern Psychotherapy (ig2g) Psychotherapy a n d a Philosophy of Life (1943) M edicine an d Psychotherapy (1945) Psychotherapy T o d ay (1945) F u n d am en tal Q uestions of Psychotherapy (1951) S P E C IF IC P R O B L E M S O F P S Y C H O T H E R A P Y

T h e T h e ra p e u tic V alue of A breaction (1921/1928) T h e Practical Use of Dream-Analysis (1934) T h e Psychology of the T ransference (1946) A ppendix: T h e R ealities of Practical Psychotherapy ([1937] added, 1966) + 17. T H E D E V E L O P M E N T O F P E R S O N A L IT Y Psychic Conflicts in a C hild (1910/1946) In tro d u c tio n to W ickes’s “Analyses d er K inderseele” (1927/1931) C hild D evelopm ent an d E ducation (1928) A nalytical Psychology an d E ducation: T h re e Lectures (1926/1946) T h e G ifted C hild (1943) T h e Significance of the Unconscious in In d iv id u al E ducation (1928) * Published 1966. t Published 1954; 2nd edn., revised and augmented, 1966. (13 illustrations.) X Published 1954.

T h e D e v e lo p m e n t o f P e rso n a lity (1934) M a rria g e as a Psychological R e la tio n sh ip (1925) 18. T H E S Y M B O L IC L IF E M iscellaneous W ritin g s 19. B IB L IO G R A P H Y O F C. G. J U N G ’S W R IT IN G S 20. G E N E R A L IN D E X T O T H E C O L L E C T E D W O R K S See also:

C. G . J U N G : L E T T E R S Selected a n d e d ite d by G e rh a rd A d lerj, in c o lla b o ra tio n w ith A n iela JafEA T ra n s la tio n s fro m th e G e rm a n by R .F .C . H u ll. v o l . 1: 1906-1950 v o l . 2: 1951-1961 T H E FR E U D / JU N G L E T T E R S T h e C o rre sp o n d e n c e b etw een S ig m u n d F re u d a n d C. G. J u n g T ra n s la te d b y R a lp h M a n h e im a n d R .F .C . H u ll E d ite d by W illia m M cG u ire