|
219. 티아레
|
2013-07-09 00:22:56 (화) |
|
사람이 남의 눈에 다르게 보이는 것이 아니라 그가 다르게 보는 것.
붓다는 인간 의식의 우주창조적인 품격을 보았고 그것을 알았다.
그러므로 그는 누군가가 의식의 빛을 끄는 데 성공한다면
세계가 아무것도 아닌 것으로 침몰해 버릴 것임을 분명히 알고 있었다.
도란 '말'이 아니라 체험이며 체험을 통한 하나의 경지이다.
그런 의미에서 도에 대해 아무리 말로 설명해도 체험이 따르지
않으면 그것은 공허한 개념에 불과하다.
체험에 필수적으로 수반되는 '감정'이여기에 결여되어 있기 때문이다.
나는 내가 소유하고 행하고 체험하지 않은 것으로부터 나를 해방시킬 수 없다. 진정한 해탈은 내가 무엇을 할 수 있었을 때, 그것을 했을 때,
내가 전적으로 헌신하며 전적으로 참여했을 때라야만 가능한 것이다.
그것은 자신의 모든 삶에 대한 참여이다.
자신의 숙명과 책임성과 의식과 무의식을 통튼 전적인 삶에의
참여를 말한다.
|
|
|
|
218. 티아레
|
2013-06-11 14:09:22 (화) |
|
Thus, Cupid dashes still with sagging diaper, bow and arrow. Arrows hurt, yet wounds quicken consciousness. To love the Other is to feel that wound, to care about what happens to and for that person. So many of our words, such as compassion, empathy, sympathy, come from passio and pathos, Latin and Greek words for "suffering". thus, to open to the Other is also a willingness to open ourselves to the experience of suffering. Who is not willing to so suffer, as Goethe suggested, is only a troubled guest on the earth. To be really here, on this earth, is to experience its gravitas.
To use relationship as an escape from one's personal journey is to pervert relationship and to sabotage one's own calling. To care for the other as Other is to open to pain as well as joy. Both emotions can be transformative. Though we may not hold or reify either, both may engender largeness of soul.
When relationship is not driven by need, but by caring for the other as Other, then we are really free to experience him or her. When we let go of our projections, relinquish the "going home" project, we are free to love. When we are free to love, we are present to the mystery embodied by the Other. Without such mystery we are prisoners of childhood, trapped in the trivial. Blake said he could glimpse the eternal in a grain of sand; so we lesser mortals may glimpse the eternal in and through our Beloved. This Other, paradoxically, is a sacred vehicle toward ourselves, not because we use the Other to serve our own narcissistic ends, but because he or she serves our deepest end by remaining Wholly Other.
Love and the work of soul are inextricably entwined. The Other is not here to take care of our soul, but rather to enlarge our experience of it. Such a gift is most precious to the one enlarged. Ego conciousness understandably seeks knowledge and the relief of suffering. When we live the symbolic life through relationship, we find some knowledge, a little understanding, much suffering and a deeper capacity to love. In reality, this deeper capacity to love is a greater capacity to serve mystery. It is the movement to agape.
|
|
|
|
217. 티아레
|
2013-06-09 23:50:16 (일) |
|
The Eden Project:
In Search of the Magical Other
- A Jungian Perspective on Relationship
by James Hollis
Author of
The Middle Passage: From Misery to Meaning in Midlife (1993)
Under Saturn's Shadow: The Wounding and Healing of Men (1994)
Tracking the Gods: The Place of Myth in Modern Life (1995)
Swamplands of the Soul: New Life in Dismal Places (1996)
The Eden Project: In Search of the Magical Other (1998)
The Archetypal Imagination (2000)
Creating a Life: Finding Your Individual Path (2000)
On This Journey We Call Our Life: Living the Questions (2003)
Mythologems: Incarnations of the Invisible World (2004)
Finding Meaning in the Second Half of Life (2005)
Why Good People Do Bad Things (2007)
What Matters Most (2009)
|
|
|
|
216. 티아레
|
2013-06-09 21:41:20 (일) |
|
For each sojourner the journey requires many deaths through departure, many losses of Other, many enlargements through suffering. As Goethe observed:
And so long as you haven't experienced
This: to die and so to grow,
You are only a troubled guest
On the dark earth.
Our task is wholeness, an impossibility given our fragile, finite natures. We will attain only a portion of that largeness of soul, that attainment of being, which nature seeks through us. If we were to attain that wholeness, would the two complete spheres need each other? We need not worry about transcending need, for we shall never be so strong, so evolved. Nor is it weakness or failure to need something of the Other. But when we recall that relationship which is dominated by need is also burdened by it, that we may infantilize ourselves, parentify the Other, and fail to love them as Other, then we realize that neediness must be confronted, and replaced, by consciousness. Thus Rilke worried, "How am I to withhold my soul/ that it not impinge on yours?" We need not worry that we shall evolve so much as to become wholly self-sufficient, but if we did, even then the otherness of the Other would facilitate growth and the enhancement of consciousness.
Our bodies, and minds and souls commune through conversation, sexuality and work. We share because friendship is a good thing on a long road, but we can also bear the weight of our own journey because our soul's desire is that important to us. The disinterested love of the Other energizes; it brings a restoration of wonder, girds us for the journey and affords us glimpse of the eternal.
|
|
|
|
215. 티아레
|
2013-06-09 21:15:59 (일) |
|
Love, Relationship and Soul
We need, then, to be clear about what relationship offers. On the one hand, the erosion and withdrawal of projections obliges us to recognize our parts unknown or disowned. On the other hand, the otherness of the Other obliges the inner dialectic which can stimulate, and is necessary for, the growth of both parties. ("I am more than me with you, because of you.")
Yet there is another element here which relationship also offers. The other as Other may prove to be a window on eternity, a bridge to cosmic immensity. Such are the gist of the words addressed to his Beloved by Friedrich von Hardenburg, the late-eighteenth-century poet who in time became Novalis, known especially as the seeker of the "blue flower" of eternity:
You are the thesis, tranquil, pale, finite, self-contained. I am the antithesis, uneasy, contradictory, passionate, reaching out beyond myself. Now we must question whether the synthesis will be harmony between us or whether it will lead to a new impossibility which we have never dreamed of.
In mythological language, the wonder of the Other brings intimations of the gods as we stand in the presence of mystery. God is the common word we use for that mystery, and we sense the presence of God in the encounter with the Other who embodies those sacred energies of the cosmos.
The experience of the Other as a Thou, articulated by Martin Buber for one, is the ultimate challenge of relationship. Through the grunt work of making conscious our projections, through the dialectical growth that accompanies the encounter with the Other, and from the glimpse of the Thou of the cosmos, we are enlarged by relationship without having to use it regressively.
At all moments, in any relationship, the tension of opposites is present. Where there is communion, there is separateness as well. One of the best formulations of this relational paradox was expressed by the Czech poet Rainer Maria Rilke: "I hold this to be the highest task of a bond between two people: that each should stand guard over the solitude of the other." We are always solitary, even in a crowd, even in relationship. We can bring no greater gift to any relationship than ourselves, as we are, singular in solitude. Similarly, there is no greater gift we may receive from the Other. A precious sharing, then, though not a substitute for our individuation.
This understanding of relationship requires never-ending vigilance. It is so easy to regress, to impose our agenda on the Other. We will do that anyway, willy-nilly, unconsciously, without meaning to, and can only hope later to recognize what we have done. Therein lies the ethical task of relationship. We say to ourselves, "The projection I cast upon the Other, this hidden agenda, needs to be withdrawn. It can be replaced by something richer." Through the enlargement which comes from the bridges of conversation, sexuality, the pooling of aspirations and "mutually-separate" journeys, one experiences the always evolving mystery of soul.
Soul may be defined here as that energy which wants something of us, which impels us to live up to who we potentially are. Its origin and aim are mysterious, but it manifests intuitively, instinctually, in moments of insight. Relationship is sacred as an arena for the enlargement of soul. Our quest for wholeness is archetypal in character, that is, programmed at the deepest level to find meaning in chaotic experience.
The seductive lure of romantic love, which so dominates Western culture, hooks us due to the profound confusion of a projection with what it is aiming toward. We fall in love with Love, and lose the growth which soul demands. As Dante suggested, the worst inferno is to be surfeited with what we seek. Like any addict, we long to die in the Other, to be subsumed, until we who would capture and hold the object of our desire are held captive instead.
We are travelers, all and separately. We are thrown by fate into adjacent seats on a flight to the coast. In our solitude we may enhance the journey of the Other, who may likewise enhance ours. We embarked separately, we disembark separately, and we head for our appointed ends separately. We profit greatly from each other without using each other. Our projections upon the Other are inevitable; not bad, really, for they enrich the journey, but if we hold on to them they become diversions from our individual task.
|
|
|
|