Narcissism – The Shadow of Transpersonal
-
". Most of us actually need to make all the errors - thinking this Self is the be-all and end-all; paying too much reverence to our own intellect, its words and its thought-children; thinking we have attained X when we haven't - in order to have the rug pulled from under us and realize how far we have to go."
thats my curse....
-
@Edward Mason said
"
I think the bigger mistake is trying to rush past the Lover stage, wherein the psyche has a very clear perception of itself as a Self, relating to an Other that it's convinced is other. To spend most of a life honestly exploring this stage would be a more-than-average accomplishment.Basically, I'm just not convinced that some degree of what we're calling narcissism is not necessary. Rather, it's a standard developmental phase for an evolving spiritual consciousness. Most of us actually need to make all the errors - thinking this Self is the be-all and end-all; paying too much reverence to our own intellect, its words and its thought-children; thinking we have attained X when we haven't - in order to have the rug pulled from under us and realize how far we have to go. We learn best by our screw-ups.
"Well said. I have to agree.
-
Frater Yod, 93,
"thats my curse...."
Deem not too eagerly to catch the promises; fear not to undergo the curses. Ye, even ye, know not this meaning all. (Cap 3, v. 16).
Every few months, it seems I have to re-learn for myself that it's about a learning process, not attainment. Those who actually undergo that process - and who continue with it - are the ones who attain.
93 93/93,
Edward -
"Every few months, it seems I have to re-learn for myself that it's about a learning process, not attainment. Those who actually undergo that process - and who continue with it - are the ones who attain.
"
Absolutely. I have had some serious problems when attaining certain degrees and then losing myself in those degrees....
These things can become all-consuming and the gift of a grade cane turn into its curse:(
Know what I mean......?
-
Alrah, 93,
I don't feel I'm in denial. I think you're in a highly upset mood, though, and not reflecting very coolly.
"Edward (you come off as a Moses type, sorry dear) - even slammed the paper and imagined that it devalued selfhood and was therefore 'old aeonic'. Actually, it did no such thing."
So what if I do fit his shallow typology? It's the personality I have, and accept, and use. I just don't think Mr. Walach is a deep thinker.
And that's my Mosaic self being more than kind to him.
93 93/93,
Edward -
93,
I'm hammering the point to death here, but I went over Prof. Walach's paper again. I re-read this passage several times to see if I was missing something:
"Heinz Kohut who brought the discussion within traditional psychoanalytical theorizing forward by focusing on the interplay between the self and its environment.
Kohut’s basic thesis is simple. He postulates that just as there is a fundamental need for food, shelter, warmth, protection, and later on sexual bonding, so, too, there is an equally fundamental need for affirmation, mirroring and respect for one’s own self. The term “narcissism” refers to this need.
Kohut points out that as adults we are still unable to fulfill this need ourselves and that we need our social environment for that. As infants and children we are dependent on our parents. As adults we can satisfy most necessary needs ourselves. But we are still dependent on others to give us support, affirmation of our value and mirroring of our self-image. Thus, we will remain narcissistically dependent for the rest of our lives, even if as a result of a sufficiently supportive developmental history we have a strong sense of self and self-value.
"In this definition, pretty much anything that I want or need for myself, in any way, is 'narcissism.' This directly contradicts the initial definition of narcissism Walach offers, quoting Jung. Since Kohut is referenced a number of times, Walach seems to admire the man's work, while I just hear warning bells.
Introversion is not narcissism, though there is an interplay between the two. I am extremely wary of people who disparage an introverted nature, missing the fact that the introvert is fixated on something that is NOT part of his or her ego-structure. This isn't the failing I find in Walach's paper, but in my life I wasted time castigating myself for being what I am - an introvert - and not making this distinction for myself.
I don't dismiss Walach's remarks on the dangers of narcissistic gurus, though he's hardly original in writing about that. For example, as an aside, I'm privately fascinated by Adidam, the movement started by Adi Da Samraj, who said a lot about Narcissus himself. Now that he's dead, and his spell is broken, many people are freeing themselves - or finding themselves unwillingly deprogrammed. But a number had already left and done their own deprogramming. A noteworthy example: **(http://bewareofthegod.blogspot.com/)
Despite this, I remain a firm believer in group work, precisely because being around like-minded aspirants offsets narcissistic traits in us, using 'narcissistic' in the sense of Walach's first definition, not Kohut's. And also because even a bad experience, such as Adidam, can offer profound (if unintended) teaching for someone who is serious about their quest.
In the end, it's all grist to the mill.
93 93/93,
Edward -
@Alrah said
"I mean - my god! ... you just dismissed a fundemental in western psychology without a moments thought because it didn't suit 'you'. lol. How narcissistic do you think that is? "
Alrah, there's a big difference between saying that personality traits are generally pretty stable over time, and saying they *can't * change, or saying that the relationship they have to our behavioral patterns can't be altered.
If this weren't the case, I'm having a hard time figuring out how western psychology could possibly validate treatment, or even mood-altering medications.
I didn't dismiss the findings of the study on the big 5 that you posted, since this is the first time I've commented since your posted it... (unless I really am in denial)...
But, if you want to actually look at what you linked to:
"Individual differences in neuroticism, social extraversion, and impulse control had** reasonably high levels **of longitudinal stability over a 19-year period."
(emphasis mine)Mistaking general patterns, for some sort of actual hard limitation, is a good way to bum yourself out. Any person has the potential to be an outlier in any study, not just narcissists in denial.
-
Alrah, it's not really helpful to try to make this about me (as opposed to the topic). So I'll bow out of this conversation.
-
I don't think it's anything special for this aeon - nothing different than for earlier times.
When Light hits, it inflames ALL patterns. In particular, an initiation into Tiphereth is going to impact the solar aspect. The natural, healthy naricissism is going to be inflamed in one direction or the other - "Lord of the Light or the Darkness," to paraphrase - psychic inflation is simply the only expected consequence of L.V.X. so impacting the personality matrix as to infuse a level of experience that overwhelms the entirety of the whole life prior. One reacts to this either by "going with the flow" of the inflation, by "dialling it back" with compensatory denial, or by some more balanced co-existence of the two (since, as mentioned, they are just different behaviors in response to the same type of inner experience; that is, they are essentially the same thing).
So... I really think it's just "business as usual."
-
Individual self-discipline seems a better choice than my having to keep track of when to come back and unlock it - don't you think?
-
Let's try this...
ADMINISTRATOR'S INSTRUCTION:
Please do not post to this thread before February 10, 2011.If you do, your post will be deleted and and the thread permanently locked.
This is at the request of the originator of the thread. Thelema is substantially about self-discipline. Practice it, please!
Thank you.