Looking for thoughtful Muslim dialogue partner

[Craz]

Yes, with regard to science and psychology, Yes Jung first got me thinking in terms that the ground of reality is actually, image/imaginal, and symbolic before it is embodied and material.

And Jung had a number of essays on eastern spirituality that were very informative to me. He is often clear about writing from a "westerner" perspective and yet stays very grounded in my reading. I read that commentary of his a while ago, but I have not read the actual treatise itself, but I think I understand what Jung takes to be the intention of the text, which is profound to say the least. Do you feel he opens up the text and initiates the reader into it, or do you think he ends up psychologizing something that was originally intended as a spiritual discipline?

I haven't yet studied both the text and Jung's comments enough, however from some of the reading which I have done, I get the feeling that Jung doesn't fully get, (what he calls) 'the Eastern mind'. He does hint that he thinks psychoananlysis can arrive at the same 'destination' as the meditation referred to in the text.
Regarding the text, I decided to dive straight in myself because I didn't want to be too influenced from Jung.
So far, parts of it are clear in that I understand the English and it does invoke inner archetypes just like the mandalas I told you about in my early years of meditation.
In other parts, I am having difficulty in understanding the English. The writer uses many words I just have never heard of and it is not always easy to understand the meaning by the context.
I'll need to put in a lot more effort to get a better understanding.

 

[DerekhHikmah]

I haven't yet studied both the text and Jung's comments enough, however from some of the reading which I have done, I get the feeling that Jung doesn't fully get, (what he calls) 'the Eastern mind'. He does hint that he thinks psychoananlysis can arrive at the same 'destination' as the meditation referred to in the text.

So, I started reading his commentary again, and I think Jung is quite intentional about the fact that he is not standing within those Eastern cultures which produced these texts, and equally a bit worried about someone from outside them trying to imitate them in a wholesale sort of way. So, you are probably right, although I also think his caution carries wisdom and is warranted as a sort or preface.

So far, parts of it are clear in that I understand the English and it does invoke inner archetypes just like the mandalas I told you about in my early years of meditation.
In other parts, I am having difficulty in understanding the English. The writer uses many words I just have never heard of and it is not always easy to understand the meaning by the context.
I'll need to put in a lot more effort to get a better understanding.

Have you gotten any further in this since we last spoke? I started reading the text, I found a pdf of it, some parts stand out to me, and others I still need to sit on more.

What do you make of Tao? Is it intrinsic to nature and life in your view? And the diamond body, the text mentions it in the beginning, what do you take that to be exactly?

 

[Craz]

So, I started reading his commentary again, and I think Jung is quite intentional about the fact that he is not standing within those Eastern cultures which produced these texts, and equally a bit worried about someone from outside them trying to imitate them in a wholesale sort of way. So, you are probably right, although I also think his caution carries wisdom and is warranted as a sort or preface.

I have been wondering about how much time I want to spend on Jung. The reason being that when I originally picked up The Secret of the Golden Flower, I had no idea that Jung had made any contribution/commentary. I just wanted to read the text.

My initial thinking was:
(Of course) I am impressed, after all, if Jung commented on this book, I must be going in the right direction.
But now, I am wondering why I thought that ↑.

Earlier on in life, I did a course in modern psychotherapy and after practising it for a year, decided that it wasn't for me. I felt it was was a sophisticated ruse to feign trust/friendship ( and hence create a channel for making money).

Anyway, this is my long-winded way of saying that I don't reallly want to discuss Jung. It has been a distraction that I'm not really interested in.

Have you gotten any further in this since we last spoke? I started reading the text, I found a pdf of it, some parts stand out to me, and others I still need to sit on more.

I am still on the first few pages, bearing in mind that I am reading a translation of the German which was a translation of the original Chinese.
I am also aware that Richard Wilhelm originally went to China as a Christian missionary and wonder how much this has influenced(if any) his translation. Here's a interesting link about his work in China https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/16/8/997 .

What do you make of Tao?

...that existence is self-evident

From the first paragraph:
"That which exists through itself is called the Way(Tao). Tao has neither name nor shape"

Is it intrinsic to nature and life in your view?

Yes, it is simply a way of describing our existence, i.e. life-force/energy.

And the diamond body, the text mentions it in the beginning, what do you take that to be exactly?

I can't find diamond body in the text.
I googled it anyway and got the result I originally thought, that according to the author, if a person performs all the meditations(inner alchemy) as described previously then their spiritual(inner body) becomes perfected, the diamond body.

I am thinking that it maybe my eye-sight, I have a paperback version where the text is quite small.
You said you had a pdf version. Where did you downlaod it from?

 

[DerekhHikmah]

I have been wondering about how much time I want to spend on Jung. The reason being that when I originally picked up The Secret of the Golden Flower, I had no idea that Jung had made any contribution/commentary. I just wanted to read the text.

My initial thinking was:
(Of course) I am impressed, after all, if Jung commented on this book, I must be going in the right direction.
But now, I am wondering why I thought that ↑.

Earlier on in life, I did a course in modern psychotherapy and after practising it for a year, decided that it wasn't for me. I felt it was was a sophisticated ruse to feign trust/friendship ( and hence create a channel for making money).

Anyway, this is my long-winded way of saying that I don't reallly want to discuss Jung. It has been a distraction that I'm not really interested in.

No problem at all. For me personally, without Jung's commentary I don't think I'd be able to make much headway in understanding what the text is trying to communicate, but that's just me. I am all for approaching original texts and seeing what unfolds from there.

I am still on the first few pages, bearing in mind that I am reading a translation of the German which was a translation of the original Chinese.
I am also aware that Richard Wilhelm originally went to China as a Christian missionary and wonder how much this has influenced(if any) his translation. Here's a interesting link about his work in China https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/16/8/997 .

Thanks for the link, I read a little of it. I want to come back and read it more carefully later, it looks interesting. From what I did read, I came away with a positive impression of Wilhelm. It seems like he genuinely immersed himself in Chinese language and culture rather than simply trying to impose a Western framework onto it.

That said, I think your question is a fair one. Every translator inevitably brings something of their own background and framework into the work of translation, I would imagine. And like you mention, for us it is an English translation of a German translation of an old Chinese text.

Language itself has an internal structure and coherence and unique form of expressing itself. That is why I am so interested in going back into the Hebrew around Biblical scripture. It often reveals nuances of meaning that are difficult to carry over into another language, like for example, when you pointed out the idea behind korban and sacrifice, with its sense of "drawing near." I find that stuff fascinating.

...that existence is self-evident

From the first paragraph:
"That which exists through itself is called the Way (Tao). Tao has neither name nor shape"

I have a question here, but I have to sit on it some more. I keep trying to reply, but I'm finding it difficult to express what I'm seeing. I don't think I've fully understood this part yet.

I can't find diamond body in the text.
I googled it anyway and got the result I originally thought, that according to the author, if a person performs all the meditations(inner alchemy) as described previously then their spiritual(inner body) becomes perfected, the diamond body.

I am thinking that it maybe my eye-sight, I have a paperback version where the text is quite small.
You said you had a pdf version. Where did you downlaod it from?

I am sorry, I went back and realized it was actually about halfway through the PDF, in The Book of Consciousness and Life. I had lost my place, so it wasn't your eyesight, it was me. Sorry about that! But yes, that makes sense to me.
I have tried attaching the PDF, but it is too big of a file it won't let me attach it. There are a few different translations if you just google it.