in a lonely cottage in the country
surrounded by many favourite books
which I've collected over a number of years
and as I look up at the shelves
I see that there's a very large space
occupied by the volumes of one man
Carl Gustav Jung
who left this world
not more than a few weeks ago
and I'd like to talk tonight
about some of the great things
that I feel that Jung has done for me
and also the things which I feel to be
his enduring contributions
toward the science of psychology
of which he was such a great master
I began to read Jung
when I first began to study Eastern philosophy
in my late adolescence
and I'm eternally grateful to him
for what I would call
a sort of balancing influence
on the development of my thought
as an adolescent
in rebellion against the sterile
Christianity
in which I was brought up
I was liable to go absolutely overboard
for exotic and foreign ideas
until I read the extraordinarily wise commentary
that he wrote
to Ricard Wilhelm's translation
of a Chinese Taoist text
called The Secret of the Golden Flower
and it was Jung
who helped me to remind myself
that I was by
upbringing and by tradition
always a Westerner
and I couldn't escape
from my own cultural conditioning
and that this inability to escape
was not a kind of prison
but was the endowment of one's being
with certain capacities
like one's arms and legs
and mouth and teeth and brain
which could always be used constructively
and I feel it's for this reason
that I have always remained for myself
in the position of the comparative philosopher
wanting to balance east and west
rather than to go overboard
with enthusiasm for exotic imports
but there are aspects of Jung's work
far beyond this that I want to discuss
and first of all
I want to call attention
to one fundamental principle
that underlay all his work
and that was most extraordinarily exemplified
in Jung himself as a person
and this is what I would call
his recognition
of the polarity of life
that is to say
his resistance
to what is to my mind
the disastrous and absurd hypothesis
that there is in this universe
a radical and absolute conflict
between good and evil
light and darkness
that can never, never, never
be harmonized
this conflict has come up to us
in a very vivid way
in recent days
with the trial of Adolf Eichmann
with Arthur Koestler's
passionate denunciation
of any sort of philosophy of life
and he's thinking in mind
he has in mind
particularly eastern philosophies
like Buddhism and Hinduism
which so slur
the absolute differences
between good and evil
that in their name
one could justify
the sort of crimes
which were committed
in the concentration camps
of Germany
and it's interesting too
certain people accused Jung
also
of Nazi sympathies
because
he too
would not subscribe
to
the absolute state
of a war
between good and evil
going down to the very roots
of the universe
obviously
when certain
crimes
and catastrophes
occur
human emotions
are deeply
and rightly
aroused
I would
for myself
say that
were I
in any situation
where
an Eichmann
was operating
I would be
aroused
to
a degree
of fury
that I can hardly
imagine
in my present existence
but I know it would
come out from me
I would oppose
those sorts
of villainies
with
all the energy
that I have
and if I was trapped
in such a situation
I would
fight it to the end
but at the same time
I would recognize
the relativity
of my own
emotional involvement
I would know
that I was fighting
a man like Eichmann
in the same way
shall we say
as
a spider
and a wasp
insects
which
naturally prey
upon one another
and fight one another
do so
but as a human being
I would not be able
to regard
my adversary
as
a metaphysical
devil
that is to say
as one
who represented
the principle
of absolute
and unresolvable
evil
and I think
this
is the most
important thing
in Jung
that he was
able to point out
that
to the degree
that you condemn
others
and find
evil in others
you are to that
degree
unconscious
of the same thing
in yourself
or at least
of the potentiality
of it
there can be
Eichmanns
and Hitlers
and Himmlers
just because
there are people
who are unconscious
of their own
dark sides
and they project
that darkness
outward
into say
Jews
or communists
or whatever
the enemy may be
and say
there is the darkness
it is not in me
and therefore
because the darkness
is not in me
I am justified
in annihilating
this enemy
whether it be
with atom bombs
or gas chambers
or what not
but to the degree
that a person
becomes conscious
that the evil
is as much
in himself
as in the other
to this same degree
he is not likely
to project it
onto
to some scapegoat
and commit
the most
and commit
the most criminal
acts of violence
upon other people
now this is to me
the primary thing
that
Jung
saw
that
in order
to admit
and really
accept
and understand
the evil
in oneself
one had to be
able to do it
without being
an enemy
to it
as he put it
you had to
accept
your own
dark side
he had this
preeminently
in his own
character
I had a long
talk with him
back in 1958
I was enormously
impressed
with a man
who was obviously
very great
but at the same time
with whom everyone
could be
completely at ease
there are so many
great people
great in knowledge
or great in
what is called
holiness
with whom
the ordinary
individual
feels rather
embarrassed
he feels inclined
to sit on
the edge
of his chair
and to feel
immediately judged
by this person's
wisdom or sanctity
Jung managed
to have wisdom
and I think
also sanctity
in such a way
that when other
people came
into its presence
they didn't feel
judged
they felt
enhanced
encouraged
and invited
to share
in a common
life
and there
was a sort
of twinkle
in Jung's
eye
that gave
me the
impression
that
he knew
himself
to be
just as much
a villain
as everybody
else
there's a nice
German word
hintergedanker
which means
a thought
in the very
far far back
of your mind
Jung had a
hintergedanker
in the back
of his mind
which showed
it showed
in the twinkle
in his eye
it showed
that
he knew
and recognized
what I've
sometimes called
the element
of irreducible
rascality
in himself
and he knew
it
so strongly
and so clearly
and in a way
so lovingly
that he would
not condemn
the same
thing
in others
and therefore
would not be
led
into those
thoughts
feelings
and acts
of violence
towards others
which are
always characteristic
of the people
who project
the devil
in themselves
upon the
outside
upon somebody
else
upon the
scapegoat
now this
made Jung
a very
integrated
character
in other
words
here I have
to present
a little bit
of a complex
idea
he was a
man who
was thoroughly
with himself
having seen
and accepted
his own
nature
profoundly
he had
a kind
of
unity
and absence
of conflict
in his own
nature
which had
to it
this additional
complication
that I find
so fascinating
he was the
sort of man
who could
feel anxious
and afraid
and guilty
without
being ashamed
of feeling
this way
in other
words
he understood
that an
integrated
person
is not a
person
who simply
eliminated
the sense
of guilt
or the
sense of
anxiety
from his
life
who is fearless
and wooden
and a kind
of sage
of stone
he's a person
who feels
all these
things
but has no
recrimination
against himself
for feeling
them
and this
is to my
mind
a profound
kind
of humor
you know
in humor
there's always
a certain
element
of malice
there was a
talk given
on the
Pacifica
stations
just a
little while
ago
which was
an interview
with Al
Capp
and Al
Capp
made the
point that
he felt
that all
humor
was fundamentally
malicious
now there's
a very high
kind of humor
which is
humor
jokes at
the expense
of others
it's always
jokes at
the expense
of oneself
and of course
it has an
element of
malice in it
it has
malice towards
oneself
the recognition
of the fact
that behind
the social
role that
you assume
behind all
your pretensions
to being
either a good
citizen or a
fine scholar
or a great
scientist
or
a leading
politician or
physician or
whatever you
happen to
be
that behind
this facade
there is
a certain
element of
the unreconstructed
bum
not as
something to
be condemned
and wailed
over
but as
something to
be recognized
as contributive
to one's
greatness
and to
one's
positive aspects
in the same
way that
manure is
contributive
to the
perfume of
the rose
Jung saw
this and
Jung accepted
this
and I
want to
read a
passage from
one of his
lectures which
I think is
one of the
greatest things
he ever wrote
and which has
been a very
marvelous thing
for me
it was in a
lecture delivered
to a group of
clergy in
Switzerland
a considerable
number of
years ago
and he
writes as
follows
people forget
that even
doctors have
moral scruples
and that
certain patients
confessions
are hard even
for a doctor
to swallow
yet the
patient does
not feel
himself accepted
unless the
very worst
in him is
accepted too
no one can
bring this
about by
mere words
it comes
only through
reflection
and through
the doctor's
attitude towards
himself and
his own dark
side
if the doctor
wants to
guide another
or even
accompany him
a step of
the way
he must feel
with that
person's
psyche
he never
feels it
when he
passes
judgment
whether he
puts his
judgments into
words or
keeps them
to himself
makes not
the slightest
difference
to take the
opposite position
and to agree
with the patient
offhand is
also of no
use but
estranges him
as much as
condemnation
feeling comes
only through
unprejudiced
objectivity
this sounds
almost like a
scientific precept
and it could
be confused
with a purely
intellectual
abstract attitude
of mind
but what I
mean is
something quite
different
it is a
human quality
a kind of
deep respect
for the facts
for the man
who suffers
from them
and for the
riddle of
such a man's
life
the truly
religious person
has this
attitude
he knows
that God
has brought
all sorts
of strange
and inconceivable
things to
pass
and seeks
in the most
curious ways
to enter
a man's
heart
he therefore
senses
in everything
the unseen
presence of
the divine
will
this is what
I mean by
unprejudiced
objectivity
it is a
moral achievement
on the part
of the doctor
who ought not
to let himself
be repelled
by sickness
and corruption
we cannot
change anything
unless we
accept it
condemnation
does not
liberate
it oppresses
I am the
oppressor
of the person
I condemn
not his
friend
and fellow
sufferer
I do not
in the least
mean to say
that we must
never pass
judgment
when we
desire to
help and
improve
but if the
doctor wishes
to help
a human
being
he must
be able
to accept
him as
he is
and he
can do
this in
reality
only
when he
has already
seen
and accepted
himself
as he
is
perhaps
this
sounds
very simple
but simple
things are
always the
most difficult
in actual
life
it requires
the greatest
art to be
simple
and so
acceptance
of oneself
is the
essence
of the
moral
problem
and the
acid test
of one's
whole
outlook
on life
that I
feed the
beggar
that I
forgive
and insult
that I
love my
enemy
in the
name
of
Christ
all
these
are
undoubtedly
great
virtues
what I
do unto
the least
of my
brethren
that I
do unto
Christ
but what
if I
should
discover
that the
least
amongst
them
all
the
poorest
of all
beggars
the most
impudent
of all
offenders
yea the
very fiend
himself
that these
are within
me
and that I
myself stand
in need
of the
arms
of my
own
kindness
that I
myself
am the
enemy
who
must
be
loved
what
then
as a
rule
the whole
truth
of
Christianity
is reversed
there is
then no
more talk
of love
and long
suffering
we say
to the
brother
within us
raka
and condemn
and rage
against
ourselves
we hide
him from
the world
we deny
ever having
met this
least
among the
lowly
in
ourselves
and had
it been
God
himself
who drew
near to
us
in this
despicable
form
we should
have denied
him a
thousand times
before a
single cock
had crowed
you may think
the metaphors
rather strong
but I feel
that
they are not
so needlessly
this is a
very very
forceful passage
and a
memorable one
in all
Jung's works
trying
trying to
heal
this insanity
from which
our culture
in particular
has suffered
thinking that
a human
being can
become
hale
healthy
and holy
by being
divided against
himself
in inner
conflict
paralleling
the
conception
of a
cosmic
conflict
between an
absolute
good and
evil
which
cannot be
reduced
to any
prior and
underlying
unity
in other words
our rage
and our
very proper
rage
against evil
things which
occur in this
world
must not
overstep itself
for if we
require as a
justification
for our
rage
a fundamental
and metaphysical
division between
good and
evil
we have
an insane
and in a
certain sense
schizophrenic
universe
of which no
sense whatsoever
can be made
all conflict
Jung was saying
all opposition
has its
resolution
in an
underlying
unity
you cannot
understand the
meaning of
to be
unless you
understand the
meaning of
not to be
you cannot
understand the
meaning of
good unless
you understand
the meaning
of evil
even St.
Thomas Aquinas
saw this
for he said
that just as
it is the
silent pause
which gives
sweetness to
the chant
so it is
suffering
and so it
is evil
which makes
possible
the recognition
of virtue
this is not
as Jung
tries to
explain
a philosophy
of condoning
the evil
to take
the opposite
position
he said
and to
agree
with the
patient
offhand
is also
of no
use
but
estranges
him
the patient
as much
as condemnation
let me
continue
further
reading
from this
extraordinary
passage
healing
may be
called
Jung
says
a
religious
problem
in the
sphere
of social
or national
relations
the state
of suffering
may be
civil war
and this
state
is to be
cured
by the
Christian
virtue
of forgiveness
and love
of one's
enemies
that which
we recommend
with the
conviction
of good
Christians
as applicable
to external
situations
we must
also apply
inwardly
in the
treatment
of neurosis
this is
why modern
man has
heard enough
about guilt
and sin
he is sorely
beset by
his own
bad
conscience
and wants
rather to
know how
he is to
reconcile
himself
with his
own
nature
how he
is to
love the
enemy
in his
own
heart
and call
the wolf
his brother
the modern
man does
not want
to know
in what
way he
can imitate
Christ
but in
what way
he can
live his
own
individual
life
however
meager
and
uninteresting
it may
be
it is
because
every form
of
imitation
seems to
him
deadening
and sterile
that he
rebels
against
the force
of tradition
that would
hold him
to well
trodden
ways
all such
roads
for him
lead in
the wrong
direction
he may
not know
it
but he
behaves
as if
his own
individual
life
too
ego
too
has
already
lost
his
confidence
and
rightly
so
for that
person
has
driven
him
still
further
into
his
neurosis
if I
wish to
effect a
cure
for my
patients
I am
forced to
acknowledge
the deep
significance
of their
egoism
I should
be blind
indeed
if I
did not
recognize
it as
a true
will
of God
I must
even help
the patient
to prevail
in his
egoism
if he
succeeds
in this
he estranges
himself
from other
people
he drives
them away
and they
come to
themselves
as they
should
for they
were seeking
to rob
him
of his
sacred
egoism
this must
be left
to him
for it
is his
strongest
and healthiest
power
it is
as I
have said
a true
will of
God
which
sometimes
drives
him
into
complete
isolation
however
wretched
this state
may be
it also
stands
him
in
good
stead
for
in
this
way
alone
can
he
get
to
know
himself
and
learn
what
an
invaluable
treasure
is
the
love
of
his
fellow
beings
it
is
more
over
only
in
the
state
of
complete
abandonment
and
loneliness
that
we
experience
the
helpful
powers
of
our
own
natures
end
of
quote
this
is a
very
striking
example
of
Jung's
power
to
comprehend
and
integrate
points
of view
as well
as
psychological
attitudes
that seem
on the
surface
to be
completely
antithetical
for
example
even
in
his
own
work
when
he
was
devoting
himself
after the
study
of
eastern
philosophy
he
had
some
difficulty
in
comprehending
the
let's
say
the
buddhistic
denial
of the
reality
of the
ego
but
you
can
see
that
in
practice
in
what
he
was
actually
trying
to
get
at
he
was
moving
towards
the
same
position
that
ego
just
for
example
as
the
hindu
will
say
that
the
I
principle
in
man
is
not
really
a
separate
ego
but
an
expression
of
the
universal
life
of
Brahman
or the
godhead
so
Jung
is
saying
here
that
the
development
of the
ego
in
extent
that
one
fulfills
the
function
which
this
you
might
say
temporary
illusion
has
in
man's
psychic
life
for
he
goes
on
and
says
here
when
one
has
several
times
seen
this
development
at
work
one
can
no
longer
deny
that
what
was
evil
has
turned
to
good
and
that
what
seemed
good
has
kept
alive
the
forces
of
evil
the
arch
religious
experience
demands
what
we
observe
here
is
a
fundamental
law
of
life
enantiodromia
or
conversion
into
the
opposite
and
it
is
this
that
makes
possible
the
reunion
of
the
warring
halves
of
the
personality
and
thereby
brings
the
civil
war
to
an
end
of
quote
in
other
words
he
was
seeing
that
as
Blake
said
a fool
who
persists
in
his
folly
will
become
wise
that
the
development
of
egoism
in
man
is
not
something
to
be
overcome
or
better
integrated
by
opposition
to
it
but
by
following
it
it's
almost
isn't
it
the
principle
of
judo
not
overcoming
what
appears
to be
a
hostile
force
by
opposing
it
but
by
swinging
with
the
punch
or
rolling
with
the
punch
and
so
by
following
the
ego
the
ego
transcends
itself
and
in
this
moment
of
insight
the
great
westerner
who
comes out
of a
whole
tradition
of
human
personality
which
centers
it
upon
the
ego
upon
individual
separateness
by
going
along
consistently
with
this
principle
comes
to the
same
position
as
the
Easterner
that
is to
say
to
the
point
of view
where
one
sees
conflict
which
at
first sight
had
seemed
absolute
as
resting
upon
a
primordial
unity
thereby
attaining
a
profound
unshakable
peace
of the
heart
which
can
nevertheless
contain
conflict
not a
peace
that is
simply
static
and
lifeless
but a
peace
that
passes
understanding