Zhenren: The Authentic Person

[Geof Nanto]

An addition to my previous post....

 

I personally relate to Jungian usage of the term ‘ego’ as meaning the centre of one’s consciousness. In juxtaposition to ‘ego’ he uses the term ‘Self’ to describe the totality of one’s being, embracing both conscious and unconscious content. Jung emphasises how important a strong ego is to be able to integrate previously unconscious content without going crazy. As more and more unconscious content is made conscious one slowly realises the comparative smallness of the individual ego; that is, one begins to see oneself his or her real size in comparison to the totality of existence. It takes a strong ego to fully accept this. He describes his usage of "self' as a borderline concept because it cannot be clearly delineated. In theory it extends indefinitely. Like all of this stuff, it only begins to make sense when one finds parallels in one's own experience. And even then different people find resonance with many different forms of conceptualisation as is obvious from discussions on this forum. 

 

In my interpretation, Scott Bradley is saying we become more authentic as our reality shifts towards what Jung describes as the self. Jung calls this process individuation and it's central to his work. He sees it as our chief goal as humans, especially in the second half of life. 

Edited August 22, 2017 by Yueya

[9th]

2 hours ago, Yueya said:

An addition to my previous post....

 

I personally relate to Jungian usage of the term ‘ego’ as meaning the centre of one’s consciousness. In juxtaposition to ‘ego’ he uses the term ‘Self’ to describe the totality of one’s being, embracing both conscious and unconscious content.

 

The wide variance of personal interpretations is usually the main problem with having in-depth conversations in general and especially when it comes to a technical context regarding methods, practices, analysis and so forth.  Typically it seems the idea of "egotism" is used to denote a narcissistic impulse towards obsessive self-reflection - and therefore by extension many people's use of the word "ego" refers to that very same self-reflection as it is objectified in such a process... rather than referring to the classical psychoanalytic view which coined the terms in the first place.  And in that respect we must remember that Jung himself took the term from his teacher, Freud, who originated the term as part of a tripartite describing the psyche, which consisted of "id" (or instinctual mind) and "superego" (or ethical mind) as well as the "ego" (or mediator between them).

 

The process of self-absorption which continually circles around the self-image created by an obsession with self-reflection is indeed often the central hub of the mind of many many people, but this is not necessarily an ideal situation, or even an effective one across many different contexts.  In fact it often turns out to be quite deleterious and harmful in a number of ways, both in the short and long term.  And I would add that this has nothing to do with the idea of "individuation" as proposed by Jung.  

 

Thats why I prefer to actually spell things out to a certain degree (in most cases), instead of using terminology which is open to a wide variance of personal interpretation.  In simple matters, simple terms will suffice.  But speaking in-depth seems to require an effort to make those depths as accessible as possible to give any kind of actual communication a chance of taking place.

 

However, it would certainly be ineffective to personally define a word in a way which is very much divergent from the consensus reference, and then use such a term in a conversation while expecting other people to forego their own interpretation based on the consensus and automatically relate to your personal interpretation instead, without actually explaining what it is in the first place.  So I think its good that you took some time to explain your own thoughts on it and give some background on your reasoning regarding this issue.

[Stosh]

Clouds moved in as the eclipse maxed out so I took some pix through the clouds 

[doc benway]

Ego may not be the enemy but it is often not our friend, either.

As long as we live, it will always be there with us.

My feeling is that we need to find a balance between identifying with the ego and other aspects of who we are.

Most of us identify with the ego as ourselves most of the time - far more than is necessary.

The problem is that the ego is a psycho-emotional, intellectual construct that changes constantly and is the product of societal and cultural conditioning. It is a useful tool that can be equally destructive when over-indulged.

 

The truth of who we are goes far deeper and wider and is far more stable than ego.

Most wonderful things in our lives generally come from a place other than ego - by this I refer to our creativity, generosity, openness, love (not romance or lust), humility, compassion, insight, instinct, and so on.

Sure, the ego can and does try to usurp these qualities as its own but that is just its hubris, its need to be dominant.

The ego has little role in Daoist practice and ritual, whether it be geomancy, yijing, qigong, taijiquan, neigong, magic, or even philosophy. Daoism is rooted in shamanism - the shaman must let go of the ego to connect with and channel the spirits.The great sages were wanderers, hermits, people who left everything behind - even knowledge. This is a metaphor for letting go of the ego.

 

Authenticity in the Daoist sense does not mean, for me, to be true to the fickle ways of the ego-identity. 

That is something we need to be aware of but that does not mean we need to indulge it or over-identify with it.

Rather it means, for me, to connect with something that is more stable, more expansive, and more genuine.

It is pointing to the unconditioned, the ineffable, that which cannot be named, the source.

 

Zhuangzi points to this in the parables of the empty boat and the archer among others.

It is a current that runs through Daoist thought and practice and, in my experience, is best approached through meditative practices rather than the intellect.

[blue eyed snake]

thank you Steve, I do not have such beautiful words, but it's what I feel too

[9th]

No words?  Use a picture instead.  And see if you can find any references.  Its a bit like a scavenger hunt - just without any rules.  And you even get to make your own prize!

 

[blue eyed snake]

grin, this would be my picture

 

[silent thunder]

letting go

 

letting go

seems a natural springboard

or more accurately... a vortex

when i release i fall into awareness

into mystery

and it's effortless... or no effort is involved, other than release

relaxation seems a prerequisite

 

seems ironic too

 

as to get to this point

it seems much effort was involved

in building to this point

 

hmm, did the effort create the foundation?

or was effort all along, creating a fog

that hid from my awareness

my innate connection

that is never apart

 

either way, it matters little to think on it

or to reason why, or how

 

release into awareness

it's like letting go of the stones in the basket

when enough stones are released

the balloon rises effortlessly

[9th]

Speaking of hunting prizes, sometimes a photo works even better than a picture.  You cant beat mother nature when it comes to raw beauty.  I guess the real question is: can she beat herself?  And again Im suddenly reminded of the odyssey of the brutal in "Zardoz".  Which is certainly apropos considering this topic, as well as the current thread of picturing things a certain way.  As they say: will wonders never cease?

 

[Brian]

http://nerdist.com/the-lab-where-lightning-always-strikes-the-same-place/

[Marblehead]

That place is a fifteen minute drive from my home.  I have been out there but not to see that.  Maybe I should try.

 

[doc benway]

[Rocky Lionmouth]

On 2017-08-21 at 5:27 PM, silent thunder said:

My ego, along with my monkey mind, have a useful purpose.  Excellent servants, bad masters.

 

and the rest of your post Thunder, love it.

 

That there part stood out in a special way and for my own personal thing i'd like to add that they pretty decent advisors or example-makers.

 

 

Been thinking a lot about this topic, the "Real" Human or Authentic Person, whereby that one resides and i really like Scotts take on it as a person in charge of their dynamic, transformation and all that. Beautiful stuff.

 

Ego though, and the ego-less ideal that many of us encounter in the spiritual talk, literature, tradition etc seems at odds with not just Thunder and my own (hard won) idea. In the last five years i've gotten to know my Sifu on a close level he always chose the english formulation "I am not egoist, this is for the people."

And it's true, he acts without egoism and gives freely of his treasures, spends sleepless night building tools and aids for our practice so that we might share it with our coming generations.

He speaks often about what i call certain methods (not glong to divjlge those until i gain a wider/deeper realization and understading, sorry) that we discuss and get quizzed on with practical or hypothetical examples, all of these things are from two categories "how to take care of your life" and "how to help build a man, a true man". Basics are: honesty and respect, the loving kindness, loving generosity and loving persistance. All of which can be very different in expression depending on the world, situation and context. Who decides the variables and result? The true person who tries to follow their Way. Simple as that. "Simple" right? Hard work if nothing else...

Its nothing special per se, some are obvious when they show up but all are seeds and many of them have found good soil with my brother and now me.

 

i think this is his teaching of Zhen Ren, or a preparatory stage of it. Take care of your life according to certain measures of pragmatic and systemic templates to help analyze or simplify a concept, build yourself through a set of ideals and illustrations that lead to an increased power AND virtue. 

As i said, the methods and milestones are very straightforward but attaining a skill not so much because they are aligned and designed to foster exactly what Crescent showed Scott had summarized so well. Zhenrhen isn't necessarily a Ordained Priest and transmitter of a lineage and ritual, not a Fa Shi, not some person in an identity crisis who has lost a sense of self, but a person who studies awareness of how their ego (among other things) affects their surrounding and then uses that to proceed with the cycles of prepping and planting, caring, harvesting, resting/prepping to speak in terms of argiculture, if you want astrology could fit by equinoxes and such, daily yimyang cycle or something else like that...

 

 

Loving this thread though, sorry for barging in late and blabbing like this, missed you guys and as always, it's a pleasure to read you Thunder my dear.

[Geof Nanto]

On 8/23/2017 at 2:48 AM, steve said:

Authenticity in the Daoist sense does not mean, for me, to be true to the fickle ways of the ego-identity. 

That is something we need to be aware of but that does not mean we need to indulge it or over-identify with it.

Rather it means, for me, to connect with something that is more stable, more expansive, and more genuine.

It is pointing to the unconditioned, the ineffable, that which cannot be named, the source.

 

Zhuangzi points to this in the parables of the empty boat and the archer among others.

It is a current that runs through Daoist thought and practice and, in my experience, is best approached through meditative practices rather than the intellect.

 

Adding to your comment......

 

Meditation certainly, but in Daoism working with the whole of life is emphasised. For me, and I think for most people, the first half of life especially is when we explore and expand into the outer world – relationships, sexuality, career etc. And it’s here that we find our limits as ego driven individuals.  This is essential – a healthy function of the ego. I know I’ve had to find and exceed both my lower and my upper limits in order to begin to really know myself – or more correctly, to find how little I really knew about myself. Here’s how Jung expresses it……  

 

“If no outer adventure happens to you, then no inner adventure happens to you either. The part that you take over from the devil — joy, that is — leads you into adventure. In this way you will find your lower as well as your upper limits. It is necessary for you to know your limits. If you do not know them, you run into the artificial barriers of your imagination and the expectations of your fellow men. But your life will not take kindly to being hemmed in by artificial barriers. Life wants to jump over such barriers and you will fall out with yourself. These barriers are not your real limits, but arbitrary limitations that do unnecessary violence to you. Therefore try to find your real limits. One never knows them in advance, but one sees and understands them only when one reaches them. And this happens to you only if you have balance. Without balance you transgress your limits without noticing what has happened to you. You achieve balance, however, only if you nurture your opposite. But that is hateful to you in your innermost core, because it is not heroic.” 

[doc benway]

14 hours ago, Yueya said:

 

Adding to your comment......

 

Meditation certainly, but in Daoism working with the whole of life is emphasised. For me, and I think for most people, the first half of life especially is when we explore and expand into the outer world – relationships, sexuality, career etc. And it’s here that we find our limits as ego driven individuals.  This is essential – a healthy function of the ego. I know I’ve had to find and exceed both my lower and my upper limits in order to begin to really know myself – or more correctly, to find how little I really knew about myself. Here’s how Jung expresses it……  

 

“If no outer adventure happens to you, then no inner adventure happens to you either. The part that you take over from the devil — joy, that is — leads you into adventure. In this way you will find your lower as well as your upper limits. It is necessary for you to know your limits. If you do not know them, you run into the artificial barriers of your imagination and the expectations of your fellow men. But your life will not take kindly to being hemmed in by artificial barriers. Life wants to jump over such barriers and you will fall out with yourself. These barriers are not your real limits, but arbitrary limitations that do unnecessary violence to you. Therefore try to find your real limits. One never knows them in advance, but one sees and understands them only when one reaches them. And this happens to you only if you have balance. Without balance you transgress your limits without noticing what has happened to you. You achieve balance, however, only if you nurture your opposite. But that is hateful to you in your innermost core, because it is not heroic.” 

 

Thank you for sharing that perspective.

I think it is very valuable and true.

 

Taking it a step further:

Once meditation begins in earnest, it is extended beyond the cushion and brought into the whole of life.

At that point, the limits we previously determined through living can be revisited and, perhaps, transcended?

Even on the path of meditation, that same advice to engage in life in all its richness and explore limits is equally valid, perhaps more.

The difference being that there is a broader perspective, perhaps a bit more wisdom and compassion - one foot in the game and one firmly rooted deeper. 

[Geof Nanto]

On 8/22/2017 at 10:25 AM, Yueya said:

An addition to my previous post....

 

I personally relate to Jungian usage of the term ‘ego’ as meaning the centre of one’s consciousness. In juxtaposition to ‘ego’ he uses the term ‘Self’ to describe the totality of one’s being, embracing both conscious and unconscious content. Jung emphasises how important a strong ego is to be able to integrate previously unconscious content without going crazy. As more and more unconscious content is made conscious one slowly realises the comparative smallness of the individual ego; that is, one begins to see oneself his or her real size in comparison to the totality of existence. It takes a strong ego to fully accept this. He describes his usage of "self' as a borderline concept because it cannot be clearly delineated. In theory it extends indefinitely. Like all of this stuff, it only begins to make sense when one finds parallels in one's own experience. And even then different people find resonance with many different forms of conceptualisation as is obvious from discussions on this forum. 

 

In my interpretation, Scott Bradley is saying we become more authentic as our reality shifts towards what Jung describes as the self. Jung calls this process individuation and it's central to his work. He sees it as our chief goal as humans, especially in the second half of life. 

 

Here’s a song from Leonard Cohen that’s an excellent example of what in Jungian terms is the self in dialogue with the ego.

 

 

And here's something similar from author Rumer Godden, expressed with Christian conceptualisation……  

 

Discussing writing, she once stated firmly that she never believed in self-expression. "All these young people, particularly women, say, `We want to express ourselves', but writing is not self-expression. The writer is simply an instrument through which the wind blows and I believe it is the Holy Spirit that makes the artist creative. My writing is something outside me that I've been chosen to do and I think that is what has enabled me to go on."
 

 

[Geof Nanto]

On 8/22/2017 at 10:25 AM, Yueya said:

I personally relate to Jungian usage of the term ‘ego’ as meaning the centre of one’s consciousness. In juxtaposition to ‘ego’ he uses the term ‘Self’ to describe the totality of one’s being, embracing both conscious and unconscious content. Jung emphasises how important a strong ego is to be able to integrate previously unconscious content without going crazy. As more and more unconscious content is made conscious one slowly realises the comparative smallness of the individual ego; that is, one begins to see oneself his or her real size in comparison to the totality of existence. It takes a strong ego to fully accept this. He describes his usage of "self' as a borderline concept because it cannot be clearly delineated. In theory it extends indefinitely. Like all of this stuff, it only begins to make sense when one finds parallels in one's own experience. And even then different people find resonance with many different forms of conceptualisation as is obvious from discussions on this forum. 

 

In my interpretation, Scott Bradley is saying we become more authentic as our reality shifts towards what Jung describes as the self. Jung calls this process individuation and it's central to his work. He sees it as our chief goal as humans, especially in the second half of life. 

 

Out of respect for Carl Jung, here’s a more comprehensive overview of Jung’s psychology…..  

 

ON THE NATURE OF THE PSYCHE

 

“The psyche is the greatest of all cosmic wonders and the “sin qua non” [indispensable ingredient] of the world as an object. It is in the highest degree odd that Western man, with but very few - and ever fewer - exceptions, apparently pays so little regard to this fact. Swamped by the knowledge of external objects, the subject of all knowledge [the psyche] has been temporarily eclipsed to the point of seeming nonexistence.”

 

(Jung understands psyche as the totality of all psychic processes, conscious as well as unconscious.  He uses the term ‘psyche’ rather than ‘mind’, since mind is used in common parlance to refer to the aspects of mental functioning which are conscious. Jung maintained that the psyche is a self-regulating system (like the body).   For Jung, the psyche strives to maintain a balance between opposing qualities while at the same time actively seeking its own development or as he called it, individuation.)

 

The following is an extract from C G Jung, On the Nature of the Psyche. It was originally written in 1947 when Jung was 72 years old and revised by him in 1954......

 

                As I have said [in the preceding parts of this essay], the psychology of complex phenomena finds itself in an uncomfortable situation compared with the other natural sciences because it lacks a base outside its object. It can only translate itself back into its own language, or fashion itself in its own image. The more it extends its field of research and the more complicated its objects become, the more it feels the lack of a point which is distinct from those objects. And once the complexity has reached that of the empirical man, his psychology inevitably merges with the psychic process itself. It can no longer be distinguished from the latter, and so turns into it. But the effect of this is that the process attains to consciousness. In this way, psychology actualizes the unconscious urge to consciousness. It is, in fact, the coming to consciousness of the psychic process, but it is not, in the deeper sense, an explanation of this process, for no explanation of the psychic can be anything other than the living process of the psyche itself. Psychology is doomed to cancel itself out as a science and therein precisely it reaches its scientific goal. Every other science has so to speak an outside; not so psychology, whose object is the inside subject of all science.       

 

Psychology therefore culminates of necessity in a developmental process which is peculiar to the psyche and consists in integrating the unconscious contents into consciousness. This means that the psychic human being becomes a whole, and becoming whole has remarkable effects on ego-consciousness which are extremely difficult to describe. I doubt my ability to give a proper account of the change that comes over the subject under the influence of the individuation process; it is a relatively rare occurrence, which is experienced only by those who have gone through the wearisome but, if the unconscious is to be integrated, indispensable business of coming to terms with the unconscious components of the personality. Once these unconscious components are made conscious, it results not only in their assimilation to the already existing ego-personality, but in a transformation of the latter. The main difficulty is to describe the manner of this transformation.

 

Generally speaking the ego is a hard-and-fast complex which, because tied to consciousness and its continuity, cannot easily be altered, and should not be altered unless one wants to bring on pathological disturbances. The closest analogies to an alteration of the ego are to be found in the field of psychopathology, where we meet not only with neurotic dissociations but also with the schizophrenic fragmentation, or even dissolution, of the ego. In this field, too, we can observe pathological attempts at integration if such an expression be permitted. These consist in more or less violent irruptions of unconscious contents into consciousness, the ego proving itself incapable of assimilating the intruders.

 

But if the structure of the ego-complex is strong enough to withstand their assault without having its framework fatally dislocated, then assimilation can take place. In that event there is an alteration of the ego as well as of the unconscious contents. Although it is able to preserve its structure, the ego is ousted from its central and dominating position and thus finds itself in the role of a passive observer who lacks the power to assert his will under all circumstances, not so much because it has been weakened in any way, as because certain considerations give it pause. That is, the ego cannot help discovering that the afflux of unconscious contents has vitalized the personality, enriched it and created a figure that somehow dwarfs the ego in scope and intensity. This experience paralyses an over-egocentric will and convinces the ego that in spite of all difficulties it is better to be taken down a peg than to get involved in a hopeless struggle in which one is invariably handed the dirty end of the stick. In this way the will, as disposable energy, gradually sub-ordinates itself to the stronger factor, namely to the new totality-figure I call the self.

 

Naturally, in these circumstances there is the greatest temptation simply to follow the power-instinct and to identify the ego with the self outright, in order to keep up the illusion of the ego's mastery. In other cases the ego proves too weak to offer the necessary resistance to the influx of unconscious contents and is thereupon assimilated by the unconscious, which produces a blurring or darkening of ego-consciousness and its identification with a preconscious wholeness ¹. Both these developments make the realization of the self impossible, and at the same time are fatal to the maintenance of ego-consciousness. They amount, therefore, to pathological effects. The psychic phenomena recently observable in Germany ² fall into this category. It is abundantly clear that such an abaissement du niveau mental, i.e., the overpowering of the ego by unconscious contents and the consequent identification with a preconscious wholeness, possesses a prodigious psychic virulence, or power of contagion, and is capable of the most disastrous results.

 

Developments of this kind should, therefore, be watched very carefully; they require the closest control. I would recommend anyone who feels himself threatened by such tendencies to hang a picture of St. Christopher on the wall and to meditate upon it. For the self has a functional meaning only when it can act compensatorily to ego-consciousness. If the ego is dissolved in identification with the self, it gives rise to a sort of nebulous superman with a puffed-up ego and a deflated self. Such a personage, how-ever saviour like or baleful his demeanour, lacks the scintilla, the soul-spark, the little wisp of divine light that never burns more brightly than when it has to struggle against the invading darkness. What would the rainbow be were it not limned against the lowering cloud?            

 

This simile is intended to remind the reader that pathological analogies of the individuation process are not the only ones. There are spiritual monuments of quite another kind, and they are positive illustrations of our process. Above all I would mention the koans of Zen Buddhism, those sublime paradoxes that light up, as with a flash of lightning, the inscrutable interrelations between ego and self. In very different language, St. John of the Cross has made the same problem more readily accessible to the Westerner in his account of the "dark night of the soul". That we find it needful to draw analogies from psychopathology and from both Eastern and Western mysticism is only to be expected: the individuation process is, psychically, a border-line phenomenon which needs special conditions in order to become conscious. Perhaps it is the first step along a path of development to be trodden by the men of the future—a path which, for the time being, has taken a pathological turn and landed Europe in catastrophe.

 

To one familiar with our psychology, it may seem a waste of time to keep harping on the long-established difference between becoming conscious and the coming-to-be of the self (individuation). But again and again I note that the individuation process is confused with the coming of the ego into consciousness and that the ego is in consequence identified with the self, which naturally produces a hopeless conceptual muddle. Individuation is then nothing but ego-centeredness and autoeroticism. But the self comprises infinitely more than a mere ego, as the symbolism has shown from of old. It is as much one's self, and all other selves, as the ego. Individuation does not shut one out from the world, but gathers the world to oneself.

 

Notes

 

1.       Conscious wholeness consists in a successful union of ego and self, so that both preserve their intrinsic qualities. If, instead of this union, the ego is over-powered by the self, then the self too does not attain the form it ought to have, but remains fixed on a primitive level and can express itself only through archaic symbols.

 

2.       Jung is referring to Nazism and the devastation of WW2. 

Edited September 3, 2017 by Yueya

[doc benway]

Wonderful quotation and apt.

Thank you, this will require some time and consideration to process.

 

[Geof Nanto]

4 hours ago, steve said:

Wonderful quotation and apt.

Thank you, this will require some time and consideration to process.

 

 

Yes, plenty to digest there. After all, he’s gifting us with a concise overview of key aspects of the insights he’s refined over his entire life. To my understanding, he’s describing in his psychological language the process by which certain people, given the right circumstances, flower as a Zhenren (or a similar state by different names in other traditions).  I like his description of it as becoming whole. As a supplement to translating Zhenren as ‘authentic person’ or ‘genuine person’ I’d add ‘whole person.’  

 

There’s a number of points – notably the warnings –  that stand out for me, but I’ll wait and see if you or anyone else would like to comment. I’m happy with slow; I relate very much horse & cart reality rather than the typical highway speeds of Dao Bums’ discussions. (And the horse regularly prefers to roam the landscape free and easy rather than be hitched to the wagon of conceptual reality and confined to the path of words.  )

[blue eyed snake]

well, there's more to Jung then I previously thought.

I'll let it sink in 

[Geof Nanto]

Some thoughts on the above discussion……

 

Contemporary usage of the word ‘ego’ is broad and fluid and in popular usage it’s strongly tinged by the hero archetype. It’s this hero aspect of the psyche – so vital when young –  that must die along the Way, not the ego in its entirety.  

 

Ego as the centre of consciousness as per Carl Jung’s conceptualization corresponds to the conditioned mind, acquired mind, or human mind in Daoist conceptualization. His use of the term ‘unconscious’ corresponds to the congenial mind, or mind of Dao. As humans we need both. 

 

Whilst such theory is necessary for sense making, in itself it can be as much a distraction as helpful. Knowledge is not realization. Knowledge can be quickly acquired by the intellect but is not stable unless accomplished by personal realization. Such realization is slow – a lifetime’s work – and usually involves much inner struggle, much trial and error.

 

The psyche as a natural living system is something that will grow in its own way by itself (ziran (自然, self-so). What hinders it are the many aspects of acquired mind that get in the way. It’s all about energies (氣 qi); what we focus on is where our energies flow. Hence most all spiritual traditions recommend withdrawing from the outer world at appropriate times to free energy for inner growth. This withdrawal is itself a healthy natural desire that manifests most strongly in the second half of life if our pervasive cultural conditioning that glorifies the energy dispositions of youth does not interfere.  

 

In Daoism, and for Jung, the process by which the ego transmutes into what Jung calls the self is an alchemical process. The self is born as the spiritual embryo. “Spiritual embryo is a term for the initial condensing of the unified being in which consciousness and reality, feeling and essence, vitality and spirit, are joined in one energy. It is also defined as the quality of correct balance of flexible receptivity, the beginning of consciousness development. This is the embryonic form of the ‘new human’ to be produced by Taoist practice.” (from Thomas Cleary, The Taoist I Ching.)  

 

The conception of the ‘new human’ marks the beginning of the ‘self’, the zhenren, the authentic person. The individual nature of authenticity is made clear by Scott Bradley’s article I’ve quoted in the OP, and by Jung in his naming of the process as ‘individuation’, meaning individual and whole yet intimately connected with the whole of existence. In contradiction, the ‘villain’ is someone who has attained a powerful yet static egocentric pseudo wholeness, an isolated ‘wholeness’ – a person without humility. 

 

Ego inflation is a HUGE trap that most everyone must continually deal with. True humility arises from within once ego inflation is felt for what it is. Otherwise humility can only be false, an act of the egocentric persona.  
 

[Marblehead]

Don't ask me to be too humble, Okay?

 

[Geof Nanto]

25 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Don't ask me to be too humble, Okay?

 

 

"Too humble is half proud." 

[Geof Nanto]

I can certainly understand why the term “humility” has such bad press. It’s a much maligned attribute because of its historical abuse by those in power as a means to maintain social hierarchies, and also because of the hypocrisy of false humility, especially notable in religious circles. Hence it has contradictorily connotations…..

 

"One may be humble out of pride" [Montaigne, Essays]

"He that humbleth himself wishes to be exalted" [Friedrich Nietzsche: Human, All Too Human]

"The first test of a truly great man is his humility" [John Ruskin, Modern Painters]

"For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted" [Bible: St. Luke]

 

For me, it’s a strong attribute in that humility allows harmony with the Dao, and that gives true strength.  There’s nothing meek about it, rather it’s a reflection of the natural order of things.

 

Quote

 

From Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections….

 

There is a fine old story about a student who came to a rabbi and said, "In the olden days there were people who saw the face of God. Why don't they anymore?" The rabbi replied, "Because nowadays no one can stoop so low."   

 

One must stoop a little in order to fetch water from the stream.

[Geof Nanto]

Damo Michell on Humility..........

 

Humility is an extremely Yin state of being. To be able to place yourself behind others is a difficult thing but important in Daoism. Energetically, this serves to create a powerful vacuum within your Xing, which draws spiritual learning towards you. When humbling yourself before a trusted teacher (or a deity in religious Daoism), you are manifesting the potential to draw teachings into the centre of your being. This is why so many practitioners in the past have had deep spiritual experiences when prostrating themselves before statues of Daoist immortals. In Daoist teachings, it should be one of your aims to be humble beneath the entire universe and understand humility before all beings. In this way the power of Dao, which flows through the cosmos, can enter you and make every aspect of life your teacher.

 

There are various difficulties here, though. First, humility cannot be forced upon yourself. If you try to be humble, you just create false humility, which is a very common facet of human nature. False humility is often a mask for arrogance, hidden by a verbal expression of humility.  

 

To become humble, you must understand that being humble is a very scary thing. Humility opens up the core of your being to the outside world, which leaves the acquired mind feeling extremely vulnerable. This feeling of insecurity then causes the acquired mind to try to strengthen itself through building more layers, more pieces of projected, emotionally based untruth, behind which the true self hides. Each and every time you have been hurt, made to feel small or stepped on by another, you have probably moved yourself further from a state of humility. It is for this reason that the early stages of any internal practice should really be to free yourself from as many tethers to the acquired mind as you can. By purging these emotional imbalances, your mind begins to feel more secure and therefore humility does not seem so scary a state of being. The vacuum opens and then the 'cup has been emptied'. Only at this stage can true teachings really be absorbed. 

 

Humility cannot be forced; it is a state of being that will grow naturally once the right level has been reached. This is a highly relieving state to reach — akin to a breath of fresh air for the mind. It is said that 'when the student is ready, the teacher will appear', and I believe this time is when humility is beginning to blossom within the student's Heart.

 

(from Damo Mitchell, White Moon on the Mountain Peak)