Jagat

[ This is a rump article. I started it some years back, but never finished it. It seems though that the time is right for some anti-romantic propaganda. ] A couple of years ago I published an article here about Tristan and Iseult based on a Bengali version of the medieval legend. The story has also been analyzed by the Jungian psychologist Robert A. Johnson , The Psychology of Romantic Love . Although I am not that familiar with the overall body of Johnson's work, he is the author of numerous books on various aspects of archetypal psychology and clearly a man of deeply spiritual inclinations, as are many Jungians. This is a particularly important work as it deals with the interface of cultural products like myth and legend and the effects with human psychology and in particular the influence it has on creating unrealistic expectations in people. For Johnson, romanticism means "an idealized attachment to something unattainable." When that kind of illusory sentiment b...

I can't help but get the feeling that a lot of people are going, "What on earth is he on about? What do Freud and Jung and all the rest of it have to do with Krishna consciousness? Didn't our acharyas already give us a foolproof and time-tested method for attaining Krishna consciousness? What does all this have to do with that?"

This article was first sent on the short-lived Garuda  list serve run by Rocana Dasa, most probably in 1997. It was available on line on the Wise Wisdoms site for a while, but was taken down. On rereading, I find it still relevant. Reason and scriptural interpretation We are human beings endowed with reason, with which we try to make sense of our experiences in life and learn from them. In Krishna consciousness we have been indoctrinated to mistrust reason and even our direct experience to the benefit of authority-based learning. The argument is, of course, cogent: You cannot invent your own language, and there is no point in reinventing the wheel, and if we wish to see far, it is advisable to stand on the shoulders of giants. But even when standing on the shoulder of a giant, it is with our own eyes that we see and with our own brains that we process the sensory or extrasensory information our eyes give us. Thus, where scripture is concerned, we state the following: C...

For the course in Rishikesh, we reviewed Freud and Jung's models of the psyche. Looking first at these two, we then looked at three others, that of the Tantra-yoga and two others represented by the  Rāsa-līlās in the  Bhāgavata  and Gīta-govinda . Freud's model Freud's psychic model sees the instinctual urges as id or libido , an unconscious energetic force that in its attempt for gratification strikes the external world, the reality principle. This shock then creates the intelligence, which becomes internalized as the superego, conscience, etc., and is projected outward as God. Freud sees the economy of the psyche as essentially one of sublimation: libidinal energy is syphoned off for the strengthening of superego, which through self-discipline then produces all the gains of civilization. For Freud, God was perhaps necessary for the beginnings of civilization to strengthen such self-discipline, but has now outlived his usefulness. Human beings should through self-a...

A look back on the Rishikesh classes As I mentioned in my previous post, I have been in Rishikesh the past two weeks, teaching a dwindling number of students an impromptu course that I spontaneously entitled, "Bhakti, rasa and psychology." There are three subjects in one which, when taken together, form the basis of my philosophy, but it was a pretty big chunk to get across in ten classes, especially to an audience that for the most part was not conversant with any of them. It is said that a good teacher is one who can explain a complex subject matter simply, and I am working towards that goal. As always, my primary objective was to try to integrate the three subjects as best I could, in short, to come to a better understanding of the subject matter and put it into words; and, if it could be communicated to others, so much the better. Some parts of the course naturally worked better than others. Many of these subjects are well represented on this blog, though not in a ...

Radha and Krishna are simultaneously Love and the symbol of love. Some people seem to think that I am saying that Radha and Krishna are some kind of "role model" for human lovers. That is not what I think. The question is complex and one has to have a real close understanding of the psychology of myth, symbol and archetype and their relation to spiritual experience. We start from the premise, based on our faith, experience, and reason, of the reality of God. God is represented psychologically in many ways as an archetypal reality. People think that you can reduce psychological realities, like myths and stories, to the realm of falsehood or fiction, but in fact they are  functioning realities and remain so even when repressed. For Jung, archetypes are equivalent to the instincts. The archetype of God, according to Jung, is simply the "Self", a realization that no doubt came to him from Indian thought. But Jung also recognized the Syzygy, or Divine Couple, ...

This article was first posted on Audarya Forums, 07-02-2001, and I have reposted it once or twice with minor alterations. Since there is currently some interest in the themes that have been touched on in it, I thought I would make it available again, since I do not believe that it is available on-line anywhere at the moment. I have made some small changes in the concluding section. Part I I was recently censured by someone on the Dharma Mela list in the following words: "This is so very Western to have this fear of anger, and emotions in general, Jagat. ... Maybe it's time you did shed some of that hard skull and get a bit thinner skinned. What do you think? I would love to see a softening in your heart, and see that shining devotee emerge. Enough dryness. Sorry if this offends anyone but why pussyfoot around it?" Even though I have some sympathy for this assessment of my character, it got me thinking, as I have long thought about the dialectic nature of opposites li...

In an earlier post, Bankim Chandra and Sri Krishna Charitra , I started a discussion on a rather good book on Bankim by Sudipta Kaviraj, T he Unhappy Consciousness . Kaviraj is a historian and political scientist who teaches and writes mostly on Indian and Bengali politics. He is an excellent writer--dense in ideas and insight, and eloquent in expression. I hardly expect to do justice to his work and will have to be selective in what I quote and what I discuss. Kaviraj's primary interest is understandably Bankim Chandra's political thinking, but since Bankim was not actually a political actor, but a novelist and essayist, Kaviraj has done a great deal of thinking about literary theory, both Western and Eastern, in order to better understand his subject. The main theme is Bankim's imagining of history in the name of creating a vision of India. What is primarily interesting to me, and us, in all likelihood, dear readers, is Bankim's reshaping of the character of Kri...