The Red Book, page 53
218.The Imitation of Christ, ch. 21, p. 124.
219.Image legend: “This is the golden fabric in which the shadow of God lives.”
220.Jung is referring to the Greek practices of dream incubation. See C. A. Meier, Healing Dream and Ritual: Ancient Incubation and Modern Psychotherapy (Einsiedeln: Daimon Verlag, 1989).
221.In Parsifal, Wagner presented his reworking of the Grail legend. The plot runs as follows: Titurel and his Christian knights have the Holy Grail in their keeping in their castle, with a sacred spear to guard it. Klingsor is a sorcerer who seeks the Grail. He has enticed the keepers of the Grail into his magic garden, where there are flower maidens and the enchantress, Kundry. Amfortas, Titurel’s son, goes into the castle to destroy Klingsor but is enchanted by Kundry and lets the sacred spear fall, and Klingsor wounds him with it. Amfortas needs the touch of the spear to heal his wound. Gurnemanz, the oldest of the knights, looks after Kundry, not knowing her role in Amfortas’s wounding. A voice from the Grail sanctuary prophesies that only a youth who is guileless and innocent can regain the spear. Parsifal enters, having killed a swan. Not knowing his name or the name of his father, the knights hope that he is this youth. Gurnemanz takes him to Klingsor’s castle. Klingsor orders Kundry to seduce Parsifal. Parsifal defeats Klingsor’s knights. Kundry is transformed into a beautiful woman, and she kisses him. From this, he realizes that Kundry seduced Amfortas, and he resists her. Klingsor hurls the spear at him, and Parsifal seizes it. Klingsor’s castle and garden disappear. After wandering, Parsifal finds Gurnemanz, now living as a hermit. Parsifal is covered in black armor, and Gurnemanz is offended that he is armed on Good Friday. Parsifal lays his spear before him, and removes his helmet and arms. Gurnemanz recognizes him, and anoints him king of the knights of the Grail. Parsifal baptizes Kundry. They go into the castle and ask Amfortas to uncover the Grail. Amfortas asks them to slay him. Parsifal enters and touches his wound with the spear. Amfortas is transfigured, and Parsifal radiantly holds up the Grail. On May 16, 1913, Otto Mensendieck gave a presentation to the Zürich Psychoanalytical Society on “The Grail-Parsifal Saga.” In the discussion, Jung said: “Wagner’s exhaustive treatment of the legend of the Holy Grail and Parsifal would need to be supplemented with the synthetic view that the various figures correspond to various artistic aspirations.—The incest barrier will not serve to explain that Kundry’s ensnarement fails; instead this has to do with the activity of the psyche to elevate human aspirations ever higher” (MZS, p. 20). In Psychological Types (1921), Jung put forward a psychological interpretation of Parsifal (CW 6, §§371–72).
222.Text in image: (Atmavictu); (iuvenis adiutor) [a youthful supporter]; (ΤΕΛΕΣΦΟΡΟΣ) [TELESPHORUS]; (spiritus malus in homnibus quibusdam) [evil spirit in some men]. Image legend: “The dragon wants to eat the sun and the youth beseeches him not to. But he eats it nevertheless.” Atmaviktu (as spelled there) first appears in Black Book 6 in 1917. Here is a paraphrase of the fantasy of April 25, 1917: The serpent says that Atmaviktu was her companion for thousands of years. He was first an old man, and then he died and became a bear. Then he died and became an otter. Then he died and became a newt. Then he died again and came into the serpent. The serpent is Atmaviktu. He made a mistake before then and became a man, while he was still an earth serpent. Jung’s soul says that Atmaviktu is a kobold, a serpent conjuror, a serpent. The serpent says that she is the kernel of the self. From the serpent, Atmaviktu transformed into Philemon (p. 179f). There is a sculpture of him in Jung’s garden in Küsnacht. In “From the earliest experiences of my life” Jung wrote: “When I was in England in 1920, I carved two similar figures out of thin branch without having the slightest recollection of that childhood experience. One of them I had reproduced on a larger scale in stone, and this figure now stands in my garden in Küsnacht. It was only at that time that the unconscious supplied me with a name. It called the figure Atmavictu—the ‘breath of life.’ It is a further development of that quasi-sexual object of my childhood, which turned out to be the ‘breath of life,’ the creative impulse. Basically, the manikin is a kabir” (JA, pp. 29–30; cf. Memories, pp. 38–39). The figure of Telesphorus is like Phanes in Image 113. Telesphorus is one of the Cabiri, and the daimon of Aesclepius (see fig. 77, Psychology and Alchemy, CW 12). He was also regarded as a God of healing, and had a temple at Pergamon in Asia Minor. In 1950, Jung carved an image of him in his stone at Bollingen, together with a dedication to him in Greek, combining lines from Heraclitus, the Mithraic Liturgy, and Homer (Memories, p. 254).
223.In Book 11 of the Odyssey, Odysseus makes a libation to the dead to enable them to speak. Walter Burkert notes: “The dead drink the pourings and indeed the blood—they are invited to come to the banquet, to the satiation with blood; as the libations seep into the earth, so the dead will send good things up above” (Greek Religion, tr. J. Raffar [Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987], pp. 194–95). Jung had used this motif in a metaphorical sense in 1912 in Transformations and Symbols of the Libido: “like Odysseus, I have sought to allow this shade [Miss Frank Miller] to drink only as much so as to make it speak so it can give away some of the secrets of the underworld” (CW B, §57n). Around 1910, Jung went on a sailing trip with his friends Albert Oeri and Andreas Vischer, during which Oeri read aloud the chapters from the Odyssey dealing with Circe and the nekyia. Jung noted that shortly after this, he “like Odysseus, was presented by fate with a nekyia, the descent into the dark Hades” (Jung/Jaffé, Erinnerungen, Träume, Gedanken, p. 104). The passage which follows depicting the prophet’s revival of the child paraphrases Elisha’s revival of the son of the Shunammite widow in 2 Kings 4:32–36.
224.See below, p. 448.
225.See above, note 135, p. 167.
226.Image legend: “The accursed dragon has eaten the sun, its belly being cut open and he must not hand over the gold of the sun, together with his blood. This is the turning back of Atmavictu, of the old one. He who destroyed the proliferating green covering is the youth who helped me to kill Siegfried.” The reference is to Liber Primus, ch. 7, “Murder of the Hero.”
227.The Draft continues: “I put many people, books, and thoughts aside for his sake; but even more, I withdrew from the current world and did the plain and simple, and what suggested it most immediately, to serve his secret purpose. By serving him, the dark one, I encounter another on the path of mercy. If intentions and wishes torment me, I think, feel, and do what lies closest. Thus what is most remote reaches me” (p. 434).
228.In 1944 in Psychology und Alchemy, Jung referred to an alchemical representation of a circle quadrated by four “rivers” in the context of a discussion of mandala symbolism (CW 12, §167n). Jung commented on the four rivers of paradise on a number of occasions—see, for instance, Aion, CW §§2, 9, 311, 353, 358, 372.
229.Inscription: “XI. MCMXIX. [11. 1919: This date seems to refer to when this image was painted.] This stone, set so beautifully, is certainly the Lapis Philosophorum. It is harder than diamond. But it expands into space through four distinct qualities, namely breadth, height, depth, and time. It is hence invisible and you can pass through it without noticing it. The four streams of Aquarius flow from the stone. This is the incorruptible seed that lies between the father and the mother and prevents the heads of both cones from touching: it is the monad which countervails the Pleroma.” On the pleroma, see below p. 509f. Concerning the reference to the incorruptible seed, see the dialogue with Ha in the note to image 94, p. 326, n. 157 above.
230.On June 3, 1918, Jung’s soul described Philemon as the joy of the earth: “The daimons become reconciled in the one who has found himself, who is the source of all four streams, of the source-bearing earth. From his summit waters flow in all four directions. He is the sea that bears the sun; he is the mountain that carries the sun; he is the father of all four great streams; he is the cross that binds the four great daimons. He is the incorruptible seed of nothingness, which falls accidentally through space. This seed is the beginning, younger than all other beginnings, older than all endings” (Black Book 7, p. 61). Some of the motifs in this statement may have some connections with this image. There is a gap between July 1919 and February 1920 in Black Book 7, during which time Jung was presumably writing Psychological Types. On February 23 he made the following entry: “What lies between appears in the book of dreams, but even more in the images of the red book” (p. 88). In “Dreams” Jung noted around eight dreams during this period, and a vision at night in August 1919 of two angels, a dark transparent mass, and a young woman. This suggests that the symbolic process continues in the paintings in the calligraphic volume, which do not appear to have direct cross-references to either the text in Liber Novus or the Black Books. In 1935, Jung put forward a psychological interpretation of the symbolism of medieval alchemy, viewing the philosopher’s stone—the goal of the alchemical opus—as a symbol of the self (Psychology and Alchemy, CW 12).
231.Inscription: “4 December MCMXIX. [December 4, 1919: This date seems to refer to when the image was painted.] This is the back side of the gem. He who is in the stone has this shadow. This is Atmavictu, the old one, after he has withdrawn from the creation. He has returned to endless history, where he took his beginning. Once more he became stony residue, having completed his creation. In the form of Izdubar he has outgrown and delivered ΦΙΛΗΜΩΝ and Ka from him. ΦΙΛΗΜΩΝ gave the stone, Ka the .” The final character appears to be the astrological symbol for the sun.
232.On Atmavictu, see note to image 117. On May 20, 1917, Philemon said: “As Atmavictu I committed the error and became human. My name was Izdubar? I approached him as just that. He paralyzed me. Yes, man paralyzed me and turned me into a dragon’s serpent. Fortunately, I recognized my error, and the fire consumed the serpent. And thus Philemon came into being. My form is appearance. Previously, my appearance was form” (Black Book 7, p. 195). In Memories, Jung said: “Later, Philemon became relativized by yet another figure, whom I called Ka. In ancient Egypt the ‘King’s Ka’ was his earthly form, the embodied soul. In my fantasy the ka-soul came from below, out of the earth as out of a deep shaft. I did a painting of him, showing him in his earth-bound form, as a herm with base of stone and upper part of bronze. High up in the painting appears a kingfisher’s wing, and between it and the head of Ka floats a round, glowing nebula of stars. Ka’s expression has something demonic about it—one might also say Mephistophelian. In one hand he holds something like a colored pagoda, or a reliquary, and in the other a stylus with which he is working on the reliquary. He is saying, ‘I am he who buries the Gods in gold and gems.’ Philemon has a lame foot, but was a winged spirit, whereas Ka represented a kind of earth demon or metal demon. Philemon was the spiritual aspect, ‘the meaning,’ Ka, on the other hand was a spirit of nature like the Anthroparion of Greek alchemy—with which at that time I was still unfamiliar. Ka was he who made everything real, but who also obscured the kingfisher spirit, the meaning, or replaced it by beauty, the ‘eternal reflection.’ In time I was able to integrate both figures through the study of alchemy” (pp. 209–10). Wallace Budge notes that “The ka was an abstract individuality or personality which possessed the form and attributes of the man to whom it belonged, and, though its normal dwelling place was in the tomb with the body, it could wander at will; it was independent of the man and could go and dwell in any statue of him” (Egyptian Book of the Dead, p. lxv). In 1928, Jung commented: “At a rather higher stage of development, where the idea of the soul already exists, not all the images continue to be projected. . . but one or the other complex has come near enough to consciousness to be felt as no longer strange, but as somehow belonging. Nevertheless, the feeling that it belongs is not at first sufficiently strong for the complex to be sensed as a subjective content of consciousness. It remains in a sort of no-man’s-land between consciousness and the unconscious, in the half-shadow, in part belonging or akin to the conscious subject, in part an autonomous being, and meeting consciousness as such. At all events it is not necessarily obedient to the subject’s intentions, it may even be of a higher order, more often than not a source of inspiration or warning, or of supernatural information. Psychologically such a content could be explained as a partly autonomous complex that is not yet fully integrated. The primitive souls, the Egyptian Ba and Ka, are complexes of this kind” (The Relations between the I and the Unconscious, CW 7, §295). In 1955/56, Jung described the Anthroparion in alchemy as “a type of goblin, that as πνευμα παρεδρον [devoted spirit], spiritus familiaris, stands by the adept in his work and helps the physician to heal” (Mysterium Coniunctionis, CW 14, §304). The Anthroparion was seen to represent the alchemical metals (“On the psychology of the Child archetype,” CW 9, 1, §268) and appeared in the visions of Zosimos (CW 13, pp. 60–62). The painting of Ka that Jung refers to has not come to light. Ka appeared to Jung in a fantasy on October 22, 1917, where he introduced himself as the other side of Ha, his soul. It was Ka who had given Ha the runes and the lower wisdom (see note 155, pp. 325–26). His eyes are of pure gold and his body is of black iron. He tells Jung and his soul that they need his secret, which is the essence of all magic. This is love. Philemon says that Ka is Philemon’s shadow (Black Book 7, p. 25ff). On November 20, Ka calls Philemon his shadow, and his herald. Ka says that he is eternal and remains, while Philemon is fleeting and passes on (p. 34). On February 10, 1918, Ka says that he has built a temple as a prison and grave for the Gods (p. 39). Ka features in Black Book 7 until 1923. During this period, Jung attempts to understand the connection among Ka, Philemon, and the other figures, and to establish the right relation to them. On October 15, 1920, Jung discussed an unidentified picture with Constance Long, who was in analysis with him. Some of the comments she noted shed light on his understanding of the relation of Philemon and Ka: “The 2 figures on either side are personifications of dominants ‘fathers.’ The one is the creative father, Ka, the other, Philemon that one whom gives form and law (the formative instinct) Ka would equal Dionysus & P = Apollo. Philemon gives formulation to the things within elements of the collective unc. . . Philemon gives the idea (maybe of a god) but it remains floating, distant & indistinct because all the things he invents are winged. But Ka gives substance & is called the one who buries the gods in gold & marble. He has a tendency to misprison them in matter, & so they are in danger of losing their spiritual meaning, & becoming buried in stone. So the temple maybe the grave of God, as the church has become the grave of Xt. The more the church develops, the more Xt dies. Ka must not be allowed to produce too much—you must not depend on substantiation; but if too little substance is produced the creature floats. The transcendent function is the whole. Not this picture, nor my rationalization of it, but the new and vivifying creative spirit that is the result of the intercourse between the consc. intelligence and the creative side. Ka is sensation, P is intuition, he is too supra-human (he is Zarathustra, extravagantly superior in what he says & cold. [CGJ has not printed the questions he addressed to P nor his answers]. . . Ka & Philemon are bigger than the man, they are supra-human (Disintegrated into them one is in the Col. Unc)” (Diary, Countway Library of Medicine, pp. 32–33).
233.Inscription: “IV Jan, MCMXX [January 4, 1920: This date seems to refer to when the image was painted.] This is the holy caster of water. The Cabiri grow out of the flowers which spring from the body of the dragon. Above is the temple.”
234.In Black Book 4, Jung noted: “Thereafter I walk on like a man who is tense, and who expects something new that he has never suspected before. I listen to the depths—warned, instructed, and undaunted—outwardly striving to lead a full human life” (p. 42).
235.These lines refer to the end of Voltaire’s Candide: “All that is well said—but we must cultivate our garden” (Candide and Other Stories, tr. R. Pearson [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1759/1998], pp. 392–93). Jung kept a bust of Voltaire in his study.
236.The Draft continues: “How can I fathom what will happen during the next eight hundred years, up to the time when the One begins his rule? I am speaking only of what is to come” (p. 440).
237.The scene in the landscape resembles one of Jung’s waking fantasies during his childhood in which Alsace is submerged by water, Basle is turned into a port, there is a ship with sails and a steamer, a medieval town, a castle with cannons and soldiers and inhabitants of the town, and a canal (Memories, p. 100).
238.January 23, 1914.
239.In Ecce Homo, Nietzsche wrote: “Every acquisition, every step forward in knowledge is the result of courage, of severity toward oneself, of cleanliness with respect to oneself” (tr. R. J. Hollingdale [Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1979], foreword 3, p. 34).
240.Inscription on top: “Amor triumphat.” Inscription at bottom: “This image was completed on 9 January 1921, after it had waited incomplete for 9 months. It expresses I know not what kind of grief, a fourfold sacrifice. I could almost choose not to finish it. It is the inexorable wheel of the four functions, the essence of all living beings imbued with sacrifice.” The functions are those of thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuition, which Jung wrote about in Psychological Types (1921). On February 23, 1920, Jung noted in Black Book 7: “What occurs between the lover and the beloved is the entire fullness of the Godhead. Both are unfathomable riddles to each other. For who understands the Godhead? / But the God is born in solitude, from the secret / mystery of the individual. / The separation between life and love is the contradiction between solitude and togetherness” (p. 88). The next entry in Black Book 7 is on September 5, 1921. On March 4, 1920, Jung went to North Africa with his friend Hermann Sigg, returning on April 17.
