Psychology Freud Jung And Krishna Consciousness
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
Chapters
Integrating subconscious and Krishna consciousness
So there's another psychologist, uh, Carl Jung. He's also a very important follower of Freud. He followed Freud to some extent, I mean chronologically.
Whereas Freud's idea was that unconscious processes are invariably infantile, animal, or pathological, Jung said that some unconscious energies are sources of positive and creative activity, that the unconscious is important for the growth and development of the mature and well-adjusted personality.
Freud, uh, investigated the unconscious and found that the negative side, that our unconscious life is always, uh, threatening us, that it is the cause of pathological... "What do you mean by unconscious life?"
Subconscious, subconscious, that which we are not consciously aware of. It is always consciousness, but it is covered. Yes. He says that that unconscious part of our mind is dangerous, infantile, animalistic.
But Jung says there that the unconscious can also be positive and helpful to a growth of our personality, that it can be an asset to understand this unconscious light.
I think that the subconscious status, as it is covered by the present consciousness, similarly it can be covered by Krishna consciousness, and so that those subconscious states will no more be able to react.
He sees a positive or a creative function of this unconscious. About sex life. The subconscious status is there, sex life. But because he has got Krishna consciousness, he's fighting over it.
That means the subconscious state cannot overcome.
So our policy is that you become fully Krishna conscious, and then all the subconscious status which is gathered from life to life— and they are stored, they are in stock— they will not be able to overcome.
He sees that the mind is composed of a balance of conscious and unconscious, just like light and dark, there's an equal amount.
But that the function of the personality is to integrate the conscious and unconscious functions.
For instance, if one had a strong sex desire, somehow he were able to cultivate or channel that into a creative art or creative value, just like this brahmacārī, that sex impulse is channeled into higher thinking about Krishna.
That is our process. Just like sex impulse is natural for everyone in the material. But if we think of Krishna embracing Rādhārāṇī or dancing with the gopīs, then our sex impulse becomes, uh, subdued, like no more strong.
Bhaktiṁ hṛdi-rāgu-kāmām apahinoti. Hṛd-roga-kāma. This is a heart disease, to be lusty.
But if anyone hears about the pastimes of Kṛṣṇa and the gopīs through the right source, then this hṛd-roga, this lusty desire in the heart, will be suppressed and will develop devotional service.
This is an example of what Jung would call individuation, where the energies of the unconscious sex impulse are channeled into a conscious and creative activity of God-realization.
So those energies are being utilized in a proper way. This is what he would call integration or individuation.
Krishna as the supreme enjoyer
That, that this thing I was explaining, this prakṛti, uh, this is very scientific. Kṛṣṇa is the only puruṣa. And he, every one of us have the propensity of helping in his enjoyment. That is our environment.
That is our environment. Just like a crude example, it is not exact, that uh, husband wants to enjoy wife, and the wife voluntarily helps him in that enjoyer, the wife also becomes enjoyer.
Similarly, the supreme enjoyer is Kṛṣṇa. And if we help him in his enjoyment, then automatically we become also enjoyer. Predominated enjoyer and predominator enjoyer. Both of them enjoy.
But one is predominated, one is predominator. So predominated, when uh, he helps to the predominator, a reciprocation of enjoyment. Śrīla Prabhupāda, there's one thing.
I think if I understand that Jung is saying that from the, the man or the living being, he's conceiving of him having biological sex desires, then from the body comes sex desire.
He says then that sex desire can be elevated for self-realization. Or for some kind of higher—not some, no—but for some kind of higher pursuit, that same sex energy can be channeled in a, what he would call, a higher way.
Now, don't we say that originally there is desire to enjoy coming from the soul? If it's channeled toward the body, it becomes sex lust. But then if it's channeled higher, it becomes higher aims or aim for advancement.
It's not coming from sex, it's coming from the soul. Is that correct? The desire to enjoy? No. Try to understand. Sex desire is there in everyone. So, uh, one sex desire is bhoktā.
Then the male sex desire and female sex desire. The sex desire is there in both male and female. But from impartial views, it appears that the male is the enjoyer and the female is the enjoyed.
So both of them have sexual desire. So the female, if she agrees, uh, to be predominated, enjoyed, then naturally she also becomes enjoyed. So living entities are described as prakṛti.
So when the living entities agree to help Krishna's sense enjoyment, then they will become happy. But isn't that like Krishna's satisfaction? What is the meaning of the words "Krishna's satisfaction"?
Krishna's satisfaction. Yes. Sense enjoyment, you can say, sense enjoyment. Krishna is the supreme Hṛṣīkeśa, provider of the senses. So when we help Krishna for His sense enjoyment, then naturally we also enjoy. For example,
just like, uh, rasagullā. Rasagullā is to be enjoyed. So the hand takes it and puts it into the stomach. The hand does not enjoy it directly.
And when it is put in the stomach, the hand does enjoy, the stomach enjoys, the eyes enjoy, everything enjoys. Direct enjoyer is Krishna and all others indirect enjoyers.
By satisfaction of Krishna, others will be satisfied, not direct. Just like a beloved wife, when she sees the husband is eating nicely and is enjoying nicely, she becomes happy. She becomes happy.
So there are two, uh, different categories: the predominator category and the predominated. So by seeing the predominator happy, the predominated becomes happy.
That is so. So in one sense you could say that the conscious mind is the predominator and the unconscious mind? Both of them are conscious. And the what? Predominator and predominated. Both of them are conscious. Yes.
Without consciousness, there's no life. But in the individual personality, if there is an unconscious and a consciousness, then the unconsciousness or the unconscious state should be predominated by the conscious state.
The conscious state. This is a practical being done. Unconscious or subconscious states sometimes come out. Yes. They're not always present. Yes. But, uh, consciousness is always there. Yeah.
But if the consciousness is not the predominator, then sometimes a person's activities will be irrational or, uh, unconscious. No, there's no cause unconscious. Subconscious, that is the subconscious.
What is that meaning of the term subconsciousness? Consciousness? I understand the principle of consciousness, but what is the exact meaning of the word subconscious? Subconscious is not acting and it isn't moving.
But it comes out sometimes. Psychologists say that quite often the unconscious is acting through the conscious, only we don't know it. Yes. That is, the subconsciousness is there, but they're not manifest.
But sometimes they are manifest. All of us are manifest. There is no connection. Just like a bubble in the, uh, in the pond, all of a sudden a bubble comes out.
So the coming out of the bubble, the energy was there within, all of a sudden it comes out like that. And you do not trace out why it came. But it is to be supposed that it was in the subconscious state.
All of a sudden it has manifested. That bubble coming up is a sort of a proof that there is a subconscious which is holding that bubble and then it's released it.
But what is posited by these psychologists is that the subconscious uh nature is moving subconsciously. What it means is that we're not conscious of it. It's acting at a subconscious plane. Oh, the shadow.
And so our consciousness can be modified by our subconsciousness without our being consciously aware of it. Not necessarily. That is their idea. Not we're unconscious of the activities of the subject.
Some kind, some subconscious state manifest, which has no connection with my present conscious. Can we say that those subconscious states which sometimes reveal themselves, are like stored impressions on the mind?
Stored in place. They are laying there, they can potentially manifest. But they don't have to. But they would posit that there... It's just like a photograph. He takes so many snaps. But not all of that immediately needs...
So they would posit that there's a mental functioning going on, a thinking functioning going on which we are not conscious of. I think we don't agree with that. Is that correct? We say that there is one mind.
Sometimes mental impressions come that are stored. Yeah. But that in that storage area—is that correct? The unconscious mind is not thinking like the conscious mind. No. But the impression is there. Yes. Uh, suddenly done so.
Archetypes and universal spiritual traditions
So, uh, Jung says that there are two types of unconscious processes. The first... Why does it say unconscious? Two types of unconscious, or subconscious. Subconscious, that is the right term.
Why does it say even in psychology? They call it subconscious. Why is he speaking? The German word is unbewusst, which means unbeknown. So we have translated it as "unconscious," but it means more like "subconscious."
So better just say subconscious then. Unconsciousness. Of course, there is, uh, there is also the same thing that is not manifest, unconsciousness, but it will manifest.
He says that there are two types of subconscious states.
The first one is the personal unconscious, or those personal items which are highly individual from one's previous, uh, from his infantile history; certain things occurred, they were repressed, and so on.
These are stored in our own unconscious state, and they are aroused into consciousness in dreams and through psychoanalysis.
But he also posits another type of unconscious or subconscious state called the collective unconscious.
And he says that evolution has predetermined the human brain to react in terms of basic principles derived from the experience of many generations.
In other words, that my ancestors have left impressions in my brain from the time of my birth how to react according to their experiences. Is this true? That there is a collective experience which is passed on?
Yeah, in that collective experience we say paramparā. Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam. That is collective experience.
He would be meaning more like we would say that there's a German mentality, Russian mentality, English mentality, that by generations they develop the way of the—right? Cultural? No.
He says that these archetypal tendencies are tendencies to react in a certain manner originating from the remote past, which are true for all humans, whether they're primitive savages or whether they are modern men.
Just like, well, any tenants. But we don't take any experience from the primitive savages. That is not possible. He would say this cannot give us any advice on this fact.
Just like when we investigate different folklores, different mythologies all over the world, we find certain symbols which are the same, for instance the swastika.
You find that in the Indian mythology and you find it in māyā or Inca, Western Indian mythologies as well.
And different symbols which are common to man all over the globe, whether they are primitive or whether they are advanced, he says that these are archetypal images which for thousands of generations have been passed on in men's consciousness.
So that we are composed not only of our own individual thoughts and ingredients, but also the ingredients of our ancestors. Is this a fact? Yeah, that is called tradition. That is called tradition. But that is not paramparā.
Paramparā is different. Paramparā means we get the right knowledge from śruti. It is not something—it's called what you have said. Acquired. Archetypal means the original type.
My acquired knowledge can be changed by understanding. I'm superior. But just like generally, we have got bodily concept of life. But Krishna says, "No, you are not this body."
So this knowledge is not coming to me by tradition. But I learn it from a great authority. Thank you.
But he would, for instance, say that our Our way of understanding Krishna as a Supreme Father, as our cause, and so on, is an archetypal tendency that is shared by all living and all human entities, that they have the same tendency to react in that way, to understand someone as their father, as their cause.
And they will, they will represent him in different ways, but always, always similar. Yeah. Similar. Exactly similar. Rather, this vada is imitation. Krishna, our God, is the Supreme Father. It is similar.
As a father has many sons, similarly Krishna has many sons. You can say it is similar. As sons are born, children are born of a father, simply we are born of Krishna. It is similar.
For instance, in the dream life, our dream life, in the dream life of savages or anyone else on this planet, certain common occurrences take place in the dream.
Sometimes we feel we are flying in dreams, or sometimes we, we feel that, uh, there's a disruption coming from below, or certain symbols are there, common to all men.
He calls these archetypes or, uh, collective, the collective unconscious, that all human beings share these propensities. Universal emotion.
Is it possible, or is it confirmed, that the similarities in symbolism and cultural relationships which are similar in civilizations all over the world...
Can that be due to the fact that they're all coming from the same source? Five thousand years ago, there was one culture? Yeah.
So you'll find the same symbols in the South American Incas and as, as you find in India, as you'll find in the Pacific Islands, because they're coming down from the original Vedic culture.
Different states of, uh, Vedic culture or no Vedic culture, there are so many similarities. It doesn't matter. Because you are a living being, these similarities are there. That's why every living being eats.
It is similar to everyone. Every living being sleeps. It is similar to everyone. Every living being mates. It is similar to everyone. Every living being fears. So we have to take the greatest common factor.
He would say so in a similar way. He would say also that every, uh, human being may draw a circle to represent something which is whole and complete.
But that is really... four principles are similar to every living entity. But when you come to the human platform, there is really a lot in the animal. That is the distinctive function of the human being.
So human being, without any religious principle, is similar to animal. Therefore, in every group of civilized human society, there is some sort of religion. It may be Hindu religion, Christian religion, Buddhist religion.
But the tendency is to accept some religion. Yes. And religion means understanding our God and our relationship. So the modern civilization, according to Darwin's theory, they're advancing to become animals.
Therefore they're claiming our forefathers, they're coming from monkeys. There's somebody said on the other day. Vivekananda was asked that why your Hindu forefathers did not come long years ago.
He answered, "Because your forefathers were jumping on the tree." Our forefather did not come because your forefather was jumping on the tree.
So this investigation by Jung opened up a new kind of universality in philosophy because it was seen that the same symbols are common to all men. All in all.
And as far as you come to the platform of a human being, there is one similarity, really. It may be under different names. Even in the, uh, aborigines, there is religion. Just like Red Indians. Yes. They have religion.
And they have the same symbols, many of them. What do we have? There is a common choice to accept some type of religion. This is common. Now that type of religion may be different from me, but the principle is there.
Just like eating, principle is there. Sleeping principle is there. Similarly religious principle is there.
And he said that each culture, civilization, religion, they have the same understanding of the duality of existence, that there's an equal amount of dark, an equal amount of light, which he calls the yin and yang aspect or the anima and animus aspect.
Different name, under different names, the same understanding is there in all the darkness. Darkness and lightness, the duality of nature, that for unconscious and conscious calls these two things.
Everyone understands these are equal and balanced, these two stages, states, which is not necessarily equal. Sometimes it may be imbalanced. One side may be heavier than the other.
Actually, he says that most personalities are imbalanced and that the goal, the goal of life is to become balanced or integrated with the mind.
So he says that not only individual analysis and dream interpretation are there, but also we must examine folklore, myths, religions, symbolisms, and all these to get a better psychological insight into the unconscious process.
So better psychology is that, first of all, human beings and lower than human being. Lower than human being, they have got four principles: eating, sleeping, mating, and fearing. And human being, extra million?
Now, which religion is higher? That is studying. That answer is given in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The religious system developed for loving God identity.
Because by loving God, automatically your unconscious and conscious states are all balanced, brought together. The loving propensity is already there, but instead of loving God, somebody is loving Mr. Pride.
So loving propensity is there. But the loving propensity is misplaced. Therefore you become frustrated. Instead of loving pride, if we love Krishna, then our loving propensity becomes perfect.
This Jung, Carl Jung, I studied with his disciples in Zurich for six months, one winter. And he came, toward the end of his life, he became very religious. At the beginning he was an atheist.
But after this study, he began to understand that the perfect end of psychology is to integrate or become balanced, the personality. And the best way and the only way, the time-tested way, is to be a religious person.
So to become a religious person means to become a lover of God. Did he love God or something else? Yes.
He became very much religious and all his disciples are very religious, but in sort of a mystic way, not so much an organized religion. But a little bit of hodgepodge.
But they lean toward the East, toward this Krishna consciousness in the end. Buddhism and Krishna consciousness. Buddhism? Tibetan Buddhism. And Tibetan Buddhism.
It's a mystical understanding of good and evil forces, embodied good and evil forces, demonic forces, demonic persons, so that at the time of death the person is supposed to be floating for some time and he can fall into the prey of demonic or be helped by good forces to achieve some liberation or a higher birth.
That means in one sense that I said things of the womb and the tomb. Uh, yeah.
Actually, this Jung has had a great impact on modern thinkers because he took psychology out of the laboratories and made it more a human science, a personality science, that it involves unconscious states, mystic states, religious states, not just something analytical and cold.
And especially younger people are very much fond of Jung in these days. They might be getting off the point, but this Carl Jung drew a picture of what he thought the face of a realized soul might look like.
A person in perfect knowledge. And that picture was printed and it looked like Prabhupāda. Another big body position in the mouth and eyes.
His investigation of symbols around the world, he found that the symbols most used for someone who has realized the self are the jewel and the child; these two symbols, these are symbolic of someone who has attained the ultimate perfection: a jewel and child. Jewel and the jewel, jewel,
jewel and the child is... Who's? How child has attained perfection? The same kind of innocent happiness that a child has. When he grows, he deteriorates. If you have that inner part fixed on the highest Krishna idea...
The Christian idea that the persons who become like children should be. No, it's just a symbol of someone who has achieved perfection, that they are childlike, that they are happy, jolly, innocent, that is radiant.
But the child is not perfect. No. It's only a symbol. His faith and love and natural devotion. Like Jesus said, "Unless you come to me as little children, you can't enter into the kingdom of God."
Even Krishna, Krishna is always often as a child. Sixteen years old. But they don't require the symbol. They could have Gaurāṅga or yourself or Krishna, then why do they require to have a symbol of a child?
They have the actual person. Then it couldn't actually apply. Symbol can be applied universally.
Psychological types and modes of nature
Anyway, another one of his ideas is that the unconscious material in a person's personality sometimes emerges in the form of a complex, what's called a complex.
This complex has the ability to initiate and organize behavior.
Sometimes we say someone has a superiority complex or an inferiority complex or this complex or that complex; it means that they tend to act in a certain way.
Inferiority complex means I consider myself inferior to others and I react in a very inhibited fashion. Or if I have a superiority complex, I act in a very arrogant fashion like that.
These are these observations that people act in certain ways which are called complexes. So we are what we are interiorly, should be yet. Mr. Counselor, we think ourselves Allah. Is that inferior or sufficient?
Well, our process is not unconscious. Huh? Our process is not unconscious. No. We are conscious. We are conscious. So we do not rely upon a complex to guide us or an unconscious impulse to guide us. No, no.
We are not guided by impulse. No. We are guided directly by instruction from the superior. Yes. Yes. Our process is to acquire knowledge from the superior. We are not guided by the complex.
He says that there are two basic attitudes: an extrovert attitude and an introvert attitude. An extrovert has an outgoing orientation, always very friendly and sociable.
An introvert has an inward withdrawal from his environment and is always very quiet and meditative. These two types of personalities he sees existing everywhere. More or less we are one or other of these personalities.
Muni, which is called muni. Introvert? I think in a kind of, yeah. When you say introspective... The difference between an introspective person and an introvert.
An introvert simply is concerned with his false ego, turning in on himself. But he doesn't express himself outwardly to others. "Vert" means to turn. So he's turned in upon his own personality. He's there with personality.
Self-centered—well, an extrovert is also self-centered because he sees himself as a center of the large social structure. But he only considers his own personality without reacting with others.
Also, the extrovert tries to push their personality. Yeah, they're mixed also with more or less one... But how do you say that man is a social animal? How can you have society?
Well, the introvert doesn't avoid society, but in all of his activities he doesn't relate to others actively. He'll go to school, he does the things that he has to do, but he's always very quiet and timid, shy.
A mouse is an introvert and a tiger is an extrovert. Tiger is an extrovert; he does not care for anyone. He's just on his own. He's like that? Yes. But in a very limited way, he's... well, he's a small extrovert.
He's a small extrovert, it seems like. His introverted personality actually covers two different personalities. One is like the type of people who are dreamers and who are retreating from the world.
And the other kind of people who are actually introspective, who are looking for truth. They can be two people within that category, it seems. Silent introvert. Silent. Yeah, that's the same classification.
Everywhere people are one or the other of those? Active or passive. It seems like the extrovert would be rajas. The extroverted person's in the mode of passion. Active rajas.
But the introverted person could be either in tamas-guṇa or in sattva-guṇa. So that is not there. Yes, it looks like that. That's like paramahaṁsa and ajagara. The paramahaṁsa is not under any rules and regulations.
And the mleccha ajagaras, they're also under no rules and regulations. Like Śukadeva Gosvāmī, they thought he was a madman, which would be tamas, but actually he was transcendental. Transcendental. Yes.
So it's time from saṁyama. So today we'll finish what today we'll finish that, uh, psychologist Jung, Carl Jung, that we were discussing before.
This idea is that there is a collective unconscious, there's an unconscious state of mind, and there's a conscious state of mind.
These are the inner— the working between these two, conscious and unconscious, determines the personality of the living entity.
The behavior of the living entity is determined by the interaction between his unconscious and his conscious, or jāgrati, svapna, and suṣupti. When you are fully conscious, that is called jāgrati. Then dreaming.
That time there was consciousness. And another stage, suṣupti, no consciousness. What is— like what is called operation? Anesthesia. Anesthetic. This dreaming state he calls unconscious also. No, that is conscious.
I am being unconscious. That is not unconscious. Says that in this dream state, suppose a tiger is coming to attack, I have a cry. If the people are hearing, how do you say it is unconscious? I think it's in other terms. Huh?
The subject matter of which one is unaware in the waking state is termed by him the unconscious. But there is consciousness there, and because of that the terminology is not—
Does the contents of the unconscious come into, uh, our conscious mind during dreams? All of our suppressed— that is consciousness. That is dream, they can say dream. Dream, dream is not unconscious.
In other words, that anesthetic stage is unconscious. When if your throat is being cut, you don't know. Yeah. But in sleeping state, if there is a pinch, immediately you come— that is not unconscious.
In other words, he says that there are many factors which are unconscious which determine our personality that we may not be aware of.
Many hopes, many fears, many contents of our unconsciousness that play upon our personality, but which we are not aware of. Yeah. Dharma, that's like when we are in the womb of our mother.
At the same time, the dead may remain unconscious for seven months. That is death. Living entity does not die. He remains unconscious for seven months. That's actually suṣupti. This is death.
Just like after an operation, anesthesia, when the medicinal effect lasts, to come: dreaming stage. Then conscious. These are three stages: conscious, dreaming, and unconscious. So he does not know that we should be.
He is simply considering the dreaming unconscious. When you see a dream, see things, mind works, then it's not unconscious.
His idea is that because there are so many unconscious factors that govern our personality, our behavior, that unless a person becomes aware of these unconscious factors, then he is more or less a slave to them, to his unconscious life.
So the whole point of psychology is to point out to a person all of his unconscious contents so that he becomes aware of them and faces them face to face. That's what we are teaching.
That he was so, but he is in an unconscious thing. That is what we say, that we are teaching. We are simply loudly speaking: “Please wake up, please wake up.” “You are not this one.” “You are not this one.”
This has been said, that's like a tree, you cannot raise him to be conscious. He's so much packed in matter that it is not possible. But he has also consciousness. That is proved by Sir Jagadish. You apply a machine.
In a remote form, he is feeling the pain when you cut. But it is not very manifest. Just like children, they are not so conscious to operate. I have got experience: my eldest daughter, she got a boy.
And she was, say, about less than one year. Not about six months. The doctor was operating. He like that. He is not crying. The operation is done very nicely. It's a minor operation.
So the human form of life is the developed consciousness of the other forms of life; they are more or less in a dreaming state or unconscious. But as living entities, the consciousness is... we are in different states.
He finds in all mythology and religion and all of the folklore, he finds different symbols for the conscious state and the unconscious state. Just like for the unconscious state, it is often represented as an ocean.
The unconscious state is often represented or symbolized by the ocean or a mother. Whereas the ocean as a part of the matter...
Well, as a symbol of the unconscious state, they often represent it as an ocean or as a female, or call the anima. Anima. Female is an animal? No, called anima. It's a Greek word for the female aspect of nature.
And the male aspect is often represented by, say, the sun, or the sun in the sky, or father, called the animus, animus, the father aspect of nature. Yes, we also compare the sun as the full pleasure knowledge.
Just like we compare Krishna with the sun and māyā with darkness. And māyā is a woman. Māyā is a woman; we sometimes compare her like darkness. How māyā on the path...
So as soon as there is sunshine, there is no more darkness. Similarly, as soon as there is Krishna consciousness, there is no more that state of unconsciousness of dreaming.
He says that all living or all human entities have a mixture of divine and demonic tendencies. Yes, he is divine by nature. He is covered by an undivine māyā that is our pleasure.
He is in a forgot... just like this same example: the man who is living, there is breathing, but he has no concern. Just like you put anesthetic injection. So you cut your throat, he will just protect.
Similarly, by the influence of māyā, we have forgotten ourselves, our spiritual relationship.
Well, he says that this unconscious state or this, uh, I don't know, maybe we would call it māyā, the unconscious life has also a beneficial effect. That it, it, uh, what
is that beneficial effect? That it is also a reservoir of creative energy which, if it is utilized properly, can be, uh, an asset, one can be utilized.
A person where he is under the influence of anesthetic, what he can do? We cannot do anything. He has to be brought again to consciousness platform, then he can do it.
Cleansing contamination and false identities
He says that behavior is classified under different functions. For example, there's sensory behavior, thinking behavior, feeling or emotional behavior.
That we find because an animal, the consciousness is not developed, then the animal behavior is different. Similarly, if a man is not in Krishna consciousness, his behavior is different.
Krishna conscious person will not act anything like killing one animal. But another who is not Krishna consciousness, he is saying, "Animal feeling, my food, I must kill."
But the same man, when he's brought into Krishna consciousness, is it too... Just like the shikari hunter. He was killing animals, half-dead, and he enjoyed.
The same man, by grace of Nārada, when he became vaiṣṇava, he was not prepared to kill even one ant. So the man is the same. Yes. The consciousness is different.
So our process, therefore, can bring man into Krishna consciousness, he becomes perfect.
He says that these different functions, uh, people can be typified or classified as being more or less in one of these types of functions. We describe a man as a thinking man or a feeling man, sensory man.
That's like brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, śūdra in terms of different stages of consciousness. And the high stage is the vaiṣṇava. How does the vaiṣṇava concept...? How does vaiṣṇava act?
What are his vaiṣṇava acts? He listens, says "Krishna". So he is both, he's all these things. He's thinking, he's feeling.
Vaiṣṇava means fully Krishna conscious. his idea is that everyone adapts to their environment either as an—according to one of these, uh, three things: extroversion, introversion, or a dominant function.
So either—so that we also say, yeah, according to material condition of life, uh, they differ, they are classified. The highest is the Vaisya, is completely transcendental in material condition.
And the next the Brahmana, the next the Ksatriya, the next the Vaisya, the next śūdra. And next means less than śūdra, all candalas. So they are classified.
But Krishna consciousness, because that is natural, even from the candala stage, one can be brought to the highest transcendental state of Krishna. So would you say that the lower stages of life could be termed irrational and the highest stages of life termed rational?
Yes. Right, rational. So the consciousness becomes more and more developed as we proceed higher. Uncovered. There are different layers of material contamination. So that has to be cleaned.
That has—you can come this side without touching the wall. The more the layer is cleansed, his original consciousness comes out.
That is, Caitanya Mahāprabhu says: "Ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam," cleansing the dirty things accumulated on the heart. So consciousness is not developed, it's already there.
Consciousness—as soon as the soul is there, consciousness is there. That is the symptom of living condition. So even the consciousness of a fire. There is fire. Cover it, cover it. Cover it.
And if it is too covered, you don't get the heat and light. But you cleanse the covering, remove the covering, the fire— Yeah. Oh. So even the consciousness of a tree is originally highly developed? Yes. It is simply covered.
The potency is there. Just like a flower in the bud state. The potency is there to become a rose flower. So the covering by gradient becoming—coming out and uncovered. Very beautiful road.
Someone would say that that bird is developing into flower. That is only jñāna-lagi. It's like we say that we are changing bodies. They say developing.
So anyway, either you say developing or changing, the original body is not there. That left it. The child's body, either you say it has developed into youth's body, and either you say that it has developed into huge body.
I say the child's body is gone, it is another body. So in both cases, the child body is no longer existing, that you have to accept. And then you call devalu or dev.
He says that the personality which we manifest in our social life, in our family life, at work, etc., is called our persona or our mask.
We have to present a certain personality in our family and social and our working life, which is not this mask. It's like your face is covered with some mask. That mask is taken off, uncovered. Then your real face is same.
So it is not development. It is covering. Ah. You cannot say that I saw you just like the monkey face, but when the mask is taken off, it becomes a beautiful gentleman's face.
This gentleman's face is not simply — it was covered by the mask, and you take it off and you see your real face. That is our process. Ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam.
The mirror is covered with dust, and it cleans it and you see your face like it. So it is not the developing process, it's a cleansing process. So he says that we show ourselves to the world not as our total self.
We show a picture of ourselves that we call ignorance. Ajñā. That ajñā is removed by the spiritual mantras. Therefore, the spiritual master is worshiped.
I was covered by the darkness of ignorance and the spiritual mantra has removed that darkness by giving knowledge. So this
persona or this mask that someone wears and shows to their family, to their friends, is not the whole self.
He says that behind that mask there is what's called a shadow or those repressed dispositions which a person has which he does not show. That is explained in Bhāgavatam: apaśyatām ātma-tattvaṁ gṛheṣu gṛha-medhinām.
Those who are not seeing the position of himself as the spirit, so they are so much attached in this family life, adorable life, national life, human social life, his life, that life. There are faults.
But because he has no knowledge of his soul, he is attached to all this. Apaśyatām. Ātma-tattvam means the science of soul; that he does not know. Therefore he is attached, gṛheṣu gṛha-medhinām.
These are different types of view. That's like a man who's not very much advanced in his nationality. He thinks, "This my house is everything." And one developed, like Gandhi. His family life developed into national.
And that is also gṛha. He asked, I would say, English go. It is fine. But that mahātmā, that greatness is simply expanding. Gṛha-medhī is... Is he still gṛha-medhī?
We don't say like that, "Ah, you English man, we cannot have Krishna consciousness." Therefore, those who are Krishna conscious, they are mahātmā; their heart is expanded after suffering.
These are called mahātmā; they are not mahātmā. They have given me... But they have been given the title, false title.
It's like in Bengal, it is a mother who loves her child, and the child is blind, and she still says, "My child's eyes are just like lotus petals." Padma-locana. I don't know. Please be careful at this moment.
So in other words, Jung is saying that we have our personality that we show to the world, but we also have a personality which we don't show to the world, which is a secret, which is repressed, which we don't like to reveal; that is, that is called cheating.
Yes. In Sanskrit, it is called bhrama, pramāda, vipralipsā, karaṇāpāṭava. Vipralipsā. That is one of the tendencies of the conditioned soul: he wants to cheat others. So that controversial thing.
For instance, someone may have some kind of desire which he does not like to reveal to others. So he keeps it suppressed, unconscious. So Jung says that is politics. That is diplomatic.
Chanakya Muni has advised: "Don't manifest your intention by your word which you are thinking now." These things are required because this is material world. Chanakya Muni has advised: "Śaṭhe śāṭhyam samācaret."
The people are cheaters, so you have to become cheaters. Otherwise you cannot live. What can you do? Just like a shopkeeper, everyone knows that he is making profit. But he wants to make bargain.
So shopkeeper says, "I am taking now, you are my friend, I'm not taking a single paisa profit." He believes that it's so high. But he should know that he is making business. He must make profit.
But he's cheated because he wants to be cheated. That's all. That's how my guru used to say, "This is a society of cheaters and the cheated." Sometimes this shadow personality, he says, is not even known to myself.
I don't even know my... what I don't know. You are being... I mean, my own personality. I think I am this. Actually, I have that.
That is also true because when one is not Kṛṣṇa conscious, he thinks this body as the self. Dehātma-buddhi is in habit. Okay, so I have a go-khara.
So such persons who identify the body as the self is no better than the ass and the cow. For instance, I may think that I am like this, I am like that, but I don't realize that I'm also like this.
There's some other part of me which I'm not aware of which is guiding my behavior. So I've written that I am like this, I am Indian, I am American, I am brāhmaṇa, I am this, I am that.
But when he is fully conscious, he knows that I am eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa. That is the final understanding. Otherwise he simply theorizes, "I am this, I am that, I am this, I am that." Here's an easy example.
Śyāmasundara told me one actor he knows in the West. The actor, he takes parts in cinema productions.
He says whatever part he takes, he practically becomes that actor; then he takes a different part, and in the process he actually forgets who he is or who he thinks he is.
The best actor is he who forgets his real identity and plays lines. That is best at it. He forgets. He creates such emotion that he forgets that he is Mr. So-and-so.
So secretly, unknown to him, there may be something about him which he does not know himself. We are acting under the influence of māyā.
That we have forgotten ourselves and we are identified as this and that and this and that. Vṛtti. Identified with vṛtti. Vṛtti, yes. So vṛtti is created. Occupation.
So he says that the purpose of psychology is to come to grips with our unconscious or our shadow personality, and we must know who I am completely. Well, that is the analogy.
That is real searching out, just like Sanātana Gosvāmī presenting himself to Lord Caitanya: "Please let me know what I am." This is the business. We require the assistance of guru to understand our real identity.
Constitutional position and mental concoctions
For instance, he says that all male personalities, in their shadow personality, there is a bit of the female. And in all females, there is a bit of the male propensity.
So often we cover these up and they become repressed and we do not understand our actions. And that is our pleasure, because every living entity is by nature a female, prakṛti. As I was discussing this morning.
Parā-prakṛti. Living entities. But it is prakṛti. Prakṛti means female, and puruṣa means man.
So here in this material world, although we are prakṛti, we are posing ourselves as... foolish, this male-female dress, that is image. Our consciousness is now male consciousness, a female, the so-called female, here.
She also wants to enjoy a male. And male also, she also wants to enjoy a female. Both of them have the same propensity of enjoying. So this enjoying propensity is for men. That was, jīvātmā is sometimes described as puruṣa.
But actually the jīvātmā, the living entity, is not puruṣa. It's prakṛti. Prakṛti means predominated and puruṣa means predominator. So we are all predominated and the only predominator is Kṛṣṇa.
Therefore, originally, by constitution, we are all females. But in any male species, so-called male species, there's a different temperament. There's dominance, there's aggressive. There is no different temperament.
The female has also the same temperament. There's like in your country it is visible very clear. Why suddenly not to treat as exactly like men? And this same thing is coming in our country also.
And the men also want to have long hair and, actually, the real position is that every living entity is female, original. But also is imitative to become a male in God. This is called māyā.
He actually is prakṛti, but he's thinking it as the supreme, like Kṛṣṇa. That is karma, which is not fact. Our proposition is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then you come to the original stage. Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
You are not predominator. You are predominated. That means female. So, for instance, in nature he sees male and female characteristics.
For instance, a mountain, we see a mountain and we give it a male characteristic because it is strong, it is dominant, is sitting there like this; and the sea, which is passive and calm and deep, we give a female aspect.
He sees all these in nature. These are all mental concoctions. I mean, it has no scientific basis. You can think of something in your own idea, but that is not the real identity.
Then when you say that all things are created out of the water of origination, so the ocean, the Kāraṇodaka, out of which all these worlds are generated, that is something, the primeval ocean is from which ocean of the...
Not from the ocean it is generated. Everything is generated from the breathing of Mahā-Viṣṇu. Viṣṇu is lying in that ocean. So I am lying on this bed and something is coming out of my breathing.
That does not mean it is coming from the bed. That's like... what is the reference to the ocean of the womb? Huh? The ocean of the womb. Well, the womb that embryo is full of water on the bed. Huh. You can say that.
Because the child is floating in the water. So are there not certain characteristics that are particularly male and certain characteristics that are particularly female? Male is only God. That is the characteristic.
Male means enjoyer. Uh-huh. And female means enjoyed. So except God, except Krishna, nobody is male. I see. So it's a false idea to think of anything that is masculine besides God. Masculine is a different masculine gender.
That is called liṅga-śarīra. Symbolic. But a real man is Krishna. And what is masculine? Masculine, that means the symbolic representation in the material body is called masculine.
Just like we recognize... just like in Bengal, it is when you see a cow, whether it's male or female, just raise up the tail and you will understand. So with the... the vagina is covered by the tail.
So if you fail to understand a cow, simply by raising the tail, you can understand whether it is a male or female. So these signs is a representation of the mentality. Oh, the mentality of God. Not God.
So to say that, for instance, the ocean is female, has female characteristics, and the mountain has masculine characteristics? Very well, I do not know why they would say that, female characteristics.
Well, they say mother, mother ocean. They sometimes say "mother ocean." That is just like because also, uh, um, gifts within are covered, so many animals. Yes. Aquatic animals. Yes.
And the female keeps the child covered within the abdomen. Yes. See, in that comparison you can say that. But similarly, in the mountain also, there are so many minerals, so many jewels, and so many nice stones.
But simply by seeing, it is very strong, but generally male is strong and female is weak; in that sense you can give it that in a line. So he gives a definition of the self.
Spiritual psychology and material cure
He says that the self is a center or an organization within the personality which seeks to develop towards a goal of maturity and integration, the harmonious balance of conscious and unconscious dispositions.
So he says that within the personality there's a center which strives to organize the personality in such a way that everything is integrated, unconscious and conscious.
Unconscious and conscious states are all integrated in harmony. This is the self. What is the experiment?
And how it's just... well, soul at the present moment as we take it, at the present moment, his real consciousness is covered. That we have always discussed.
But he doesn't see a soul per se; he sees a personality or a makeup. Why is that personality? As soon as they come to be personality... Entity. That we call so: individual entity having personality.
That is so... You would call a personality a set of behavior which is organized. But how do the personality comes? Because you are a living entity, you have a separate identity, therefore I recognize your personality.
So without individual soul, how you can think of personality? There is no question of personality unless there is an individual being. Is
he saying that the self is an entity that tries to coordinate the conscious and unconscious? Yes. Or is the self the interaction of the conscious and the unconscious?
No, he says that the self strives for the integration or the harmonious balance of the conscious and unconscious dispositions. That can be explained in this way.
The life as a whole is now in sleeping stage; it can be brought into Krishna. So that unconscious, which he says unconscious, is the sleeping state. And that is interesting. In that way.
Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu says: «Jīv jāgo, jīv jāgo, Gauracāndra jāge». You living entity, just wake up, wake up, wake up. How long you shall sleep in this way under the lap, on the lap of māyā?
Yeah, I think of some śarīra, my material body. This is the process, pariṇāma, gradually bringing the sleeping man to the real concept.
Like that is integration, yes, integration. So actually he is defining the soul, but he doesn't call it... no definite idea of the self. No. He calls it the center. He's missing the point.
He says that the self is very rarely complete or unified. Very rarely do we find someone who has unified their or balanced their life, integrated their life.
So his idea is that everyone must strive to achieve the self, but they must realize the self. This is the purpose of our life. Uttiṣṭhata jāgrata prāpya varān nibodhata. Now you are a human form of life.
We can understand your position. That is our repeated request, repeated request. We don't waste this opportunity. But it's interesting because he says this: the self is rarely completely balanced or integrated. Yes.
See, we say the self is always stable. The self is always existing, always balanced, unchanging. So he's considering... he is in influence... māyā is imbalance. It is imbalanced in ignorance, not in knowledge.
That way it is called māyā. The consciousness is... consciousness is there. Consciousness is always there. As soon as there is soul, there is consciousness. But this consciousness is colored.
Just like generally water is transparent, but if you mix with color, it becomes reddish. Just like rain falling from the sky. It is distilled water, clear water. But as soon as it touches the earth, it becomes muddy.
Similarly, the soul is clear consciousness, Krishna. But when it comes in contamination of the three modes of material nature, it becomes a different color.
So at that time, the fight: "I am Hindu," "You are Muslim," or "You are Christian." I know we are there.
Because he has been contaminated by different colors of the material modes of nature, he is identified with that colorful position, with the body.
So if someone is given knowledge of their unknown self or their shadow personality, then they're able to integrate that knowledge in their conscious life and to act as a unified personality.
That man who's giving knowledge, he's the guru. So this type of knowledge has to be done, he would say, through a psychologist or a psychoanalyst. Anyway. Some idea it's a guru. So the guru is our psychologist.
So he says that potential potentialities which are hitherto unexploited and which lie uncovered or lie covered in us can be brought out by the knowing self and utilized. Yeah. That is our process.
And the knowing self, Caitanya Mahāprabhu is acting as guru and he's asking everyone, "Jīva jāgo, jīva jāgo."
Therefore, the conclusion should be that in order to come to the real position of our life, we must approach a guru, a person who knows what is what.
So that person can see us for what we are more than we can see ourselves. Yes, just like here is a physician. He knows simply by feeling this pulse beating, he can understand what is his position.
And he gives medicine according to that. Ayurvedic system. One has to learn how the pulses beat. Then immediately diagnoses, there are medicine.
These psychologists like Jung, they have different processes for finding out a person's unconscious mind.
For instance, interpreting his dreams or by sometimes they put a picture. But he does not know what is the standard status of the mind. He doesn't. He is a psychiatrist. He is also not insane, mind. Physician, heal thyself.
Because he's—he is identifying himself with his body. So he is also insane. So that therefore that treatment is not perfect. How a diseased man can become a physician?
That what the English word is, "Physician, heal thyself." So this Jung sees a positive aspect of psychology, not just the negative aspect.
Whereas Freud saw that the goal of psychology was to restrict and rechannel these powerful primitive instincts in order to mitigate troublesome symptoms, which is a rather pessimistic or negative philosophy.
Jung says that man is capable of changing positively into something better through the use of psychology. Otherwise, why you are making this problem unless there is a chance of making it better?
And actually we see that becoming better. So actually this is—this Krishna consciousness is also psychology, because that is the topmost psychology. That's what Krishna recommends: yoginām api sarveṣāṁ.
Of all the yogis, the Krishna devotee is the highest. The topmost of all psychologists. A person who is Krishna conscious is the best psychologist. Mystery. Mystery. Transcendent.
Everyone is within the modes of the material nature. But Krishna conscious person is above, transcendent. Sa guṇān samatītyaitān brahma-bhūyāya kalpate.
In one sense, yoga is very optimistic that he sees that everyone has divine and demonic potencies within them, but that the divine potencies can be of everyone. That we are trying. That we are trying.
We are trying to make the demon divinity. Actually there is two positions: the divinity and the divine, and the asura. The demon and the divine. The divine means Krishna conscious.
And just opposite, he is not Krishna conscious, he is demon. That's all. Demon and divine, this is the division. So one who is not Krishna conscious, he is demon.
These tendencies, demonic tendencies that inhabit a personality, Jung sees them often as external beings that entered into us. Yeah, just like to become uh humans. That is not my natural state. It's become what? Feverish.
Feverish. It is under certain, under certain circumstances I have become a victim of malaria fever. But that is not my natural condition. If medicine is given, the fever is gone. That's called mukti.
Mukti, liberation, means liberation means to get out of this feverish condition. There's a śloka, and transcript is coming. Roga is not natural. It comes, disease comes.
So not only disease, that what Bhagavad-gītā says, janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi, all these four things are diseased, external things. Otherwise the living entity has no birth, no death, no disease, no old age.
Nityaḥ śāśvato 'yam. How there can be old age? These are external things. But people are so ignorant that they do not know how to drive away this external feverish condition. They think it is natural. Let me say.
One of Jung's favorite techniques for uh improving a person's personality was to force that person to bring up the demonic force in himself and treat it as another person, that the demon within me is not really me, it's another personality which is not very important.
How one become, how one is uh uh affected by some disease. But when the disease is there, the treatment must be there. That is necessary. In this law, tracing out the history, what is the use? Yeah.
But the disease is there, make treatment and make cure. But this, this demon that haunts me, that is another personality besides my real personality. That is not a personality I am. Just like delirium.
The same personality, but he's talking nonsense in delirium. So he removes the delirium condition, then he becomes the original person. Delirium is not personal. Asaṅgo hy ayaṁ puruṣaḥ ity-ādi-bhūtiḥ śrit ...ravaṇat.
So, uh, when we say that a person is ghostly haunted, does that mean there is another personality which is inhabiting, influencing? Influencing. Yes. So that's like a man is hypnotized. Another man is hypnotizing him.
So that other personality, that foreign personality, can be