• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    YMLADRISJung - život, dílo, souvislosti, přesahy, ...
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    MYKO: moc pekne
    MYKO
    MYKO --- ---
    neco k synchronicitam (mimo jine) z emailovy konference o lucidnich snech ( http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/iasd-lucidity/?v=1&t=directory&ch=web&pub=groups&sec=dir&slk=14 )

    Hi Robert,

    This is a great conversation: thanks for starting it!

    I’ve spent some time around another Robert, Robert Moss, who advises that we ought to take dreams more literally and waking life more symbolically, and I’ve taken that advice to heart in many ways. He calls meaningful coincidences, “secret handshakes from the universe.” Sometimes I think of them as winks or, as Arnold Mindell might call them, flirts. As an example, in my most recent lucid dream the lucidity trigger came from an object. In the dream I was shopping at a clothing store and picked up a yellow sweater with a label that read “Lucid Dream Wear.” Wow, I thought in the dream, what are the odds of me, of all people, finding a sweater with this label—that’s it, I’ll have to buy it. And then it dawned on me that the odds were indeed too steep, and I was lucid, and went on to a second phase of dreaming with full lucidity. Now, believe it or not the next day, in waking reality, I went shopping, randomly picked up a sweater—the first thing I picked up—and the tag read, “Lucidity.” I chose not to reality test, but just smiled to myself and thought that the dream yogis are right: all of it is dream.

    So I guess with the “lucid living” idea, the idea of being “awake” in all states or levels of existence for me has lessened my desire to have lucid dreams for their own sake, and made me more interested in being conscious (in the depth psychological sense) and/or mindful (in the Buddhist sense) as much as possible in my life, whatever is happening and whatever I’m feeling about it. To distinguish the two somewhat, I would say what I'm calling consciousness tends to be more analytical in terms of the interpreting of events as symbols with meaning connections to past and future, while mindfulness is more experiential, grounding me in my sensory experience here and now: both seem to involve, for me, a capacity for “witnessing,” standing apart from myself with a second awareness of what’s going on. In lucid dreams I tend more towards a mindful, yet often still exuberant, experience of the senses—most recently a smorgasbord of cake and pastries! But I’ve also had, at least in one lucid dream, a curious instantaneous interpretation of a dream character as a part of myself (blocked creativity). This interpretation was a lot different from waking interpretation of night dreams though, as there was no puzzling out, maze-of-associations process to an “I think it means this” interpretation; rather it was just a simple, instant knowing—“Oh, you are this element in me.” The most curious thing was that I had a simultaneous and equally strong understanding that this character had an existence all her own, independent of me. There seemed to be no conflict of understanding in this paradox in the dream.

    A lot of my daytime “secret handshakes,” too, feel more like reflections of what is happening in my inner world. E.g. I was recently thinking about non-lucid dreams in which I’m venting anger, and pondering my waking behavior in light of this, and then it happened as I was stopped on a bridge while driving, in a sort of blank or mindful state of mind, I noticed that my gaze had fallen on a ship called the U.S. Naval “Assertive.”

    The difference, I guess, with this waking dream symbol is that it pertained to something I was consciously, actively thinking about, whereas the lucid dream figure was alerting me to something more "buried," a state of affairs I wasn't dealing with consciously. But in both cases the interpretation was more like instant translation versus laborious deciphering, so it seems to me that there is a state of mind, in both waking and dreaming life, that is conducive to this symbol fluency, if you will. As you may have guessed, these experiences make me less patient with traditional interpretation methods for dreams, although I still find value in these too when I lose my fluency.

    I will say that in general the more I stay alert to and acknowledge these sorts of nods and winks, and the more I pay attention to how waking and dreaming life intertwine, literally and symbolically, the more my perception of reality is altered.

    The question then becomes not “am I dreaming right now?” It’s a given that I am. If it’s important to me at the time, I may ask myself which dream is it, the one where I’m bound by gravity, or the one where I’m not. (I still love flying!) If the former, I may still ask myself what the psychic equivalents of gravity are (fear-based-patterns) that bind me which wouldn’t if I were awake in a general sense; and I may still regard the people in my life as fully separate entities and yet also projected aspects of my own being.

    Yours,

    Lisa Coté
    AGOG
    AGOG --- ---
    TRISMEGISTOS: Nevim jestli to tady uz padlo, ale podle vyzkumu sni kazdy. Leda by vyzkum vyzkoumal od te doby co jsem to cetl neco jinaho.
    NIKOPOL
    NIKOPOL --- ---
    TRISMEGISTOS: .. me se zda, ze se ceka na dalsiho prukopnika, kterej bude mit odvahu to zkoumat ..

    jak jung pise, zkoumani symboliky vedomi/nevedomi je celkem dlouho totalne kanalizacni prace a do toho se malo komu chce.
    imho tem, co dneska delaj "vedu", se nechce. ty by radsi meli rozumnou teorii ziskanou pokud mozno ze sterilniho odstupu. problem je, ze to neni pusob, jak se dostat ty nevedomi obsahy do vedomi.

    pride mi, ze se dneska s nevedomim pocita (jestli vubec tak) jako s takovym pandorinym vysavacem .. vejde se do nej celkem vsechno, ale nedej boze, aby to chtel nekdo otevirat.

    .. nutno poznamenat, ze nejsem v oboru uplne vzdelanej nebo zbehlej, rad si poslechnu nejaky protiteze
    LOOK
    LOOK --- ---
    taky se moc nechytam. 'mainstream' psychologie (tj. co se uci na skolach) Jungoviny spis toleruje, nez by na tom neco dal stavela. autori jungiani / analytici, kazdy si napise knizku na tema, ktere ho zajima a do ktereho vidi, ale zadna 'obecna teorie nevedomi'(snu) neexistuje. teda imho.
    DARJEEL
    DARJEEL --- ---
    TRISMEGISTOS: kazdej to vidi jinak. Tvrde vedekca teorie neni, nevi se, proc snime ani jakou maji sny funkci. Obecna psychologie se omezuje na nekolik malo znamych poznatku, jejichz vrcholem je to, ze snime pravdepodobne jen v REM fazi spanku. Se sny povetsinou pracuji terapeuti, coz je takova pofiderni odnoz vedecke obce a tam to kazdej asi jede dost podle sebe... psychodynamicti tak, jini zase onak, spis by bylo zajimavy zjistit (ale to ja nevim), ktery terapeuticky skoly se sny pracuji a ktery ne..
    TRISMEGISTOS
    TRISMEGISTOS --- ---
    TRISMEGISTOS: viz. Během procesu integrace nevědomých obsahů do vědomí je nepochybně důležité, abychom chápali, jak se snové symboly vztahují k běžným každoením skutečnostem. Ale v hlubším smyslu a z dlouhodobého pohledu tento postup nestačí, protože nedokáže odhalit význam archetypových obsahů. Ty sahají dolů, nebo nahoru, do zcela jiných rovin, o nichž nemá tvz. zdravý rozum ani tušení. Jako apriorní předpoklady všech psychických událostí jsou obdařeny důstojností, která nalezla nezapomenutelný výraz v božských postavách. Žádná jiná formulace neuspokojí potřeby nevědomí.. To volá po všeobjímající vizi mýtu. C.G. JUNG.


    DARJEEL
    DARJEEL --- ---
    LOOK: covece tak pekna synchronicita, neska uz mi to MTO cpal v kerajove CC auditku, pred ti jsem o te knize nikdy neslysel.. =)

    [ MTO @ Carodejove, carodejky, Carlos Castaneda - I'm a sorcerer, and death is my ally, not my enemy. ]

    asi se ji podivam na zoubek... =)
    LOOK
    LOOK --- ---
    DARJEEL: cool tak to ji prilezitostne dones Den svatého Ignora http://www.antik-fryc.cz/knihy/index.php?auth=439e666df22a862fa0ebaa52b8dc6268&cislo=75489
    coz je teda beletrie, ale psana jungianem :)
    DARJEEL
    DARJEEL --- ---
    LOOK: aano prosim, ona je velka intelektualka a knihomolka... nad sternem praska smichy...
    tatik zase dostal media, psychoanalyza... a bylo to poprve co sem ho slysel rict, ze je nekdo fakt dobrej, ackoliv s jeho "nazorama" nesouhlasi.. =) ten typos umi zazraky...
    LOOK
    LOOK --- ---
    DARJEEL: prateticce?! :)
    z me actual teticky nedavno vypadlo, ze nechtej o takovych vecech (psych. apod) nic vedet, protoze by se nahodou o sobe neco mohli dozvedet, coz nechtej :)

    OTZ: ne.myslim
    DARJEEL
    DARJEEL --- ---
    LOOK: hele luxus, thx, tohle jsem dal prateticce k vanocum a nestih sem si to v tom shonu poradne precist... juhuuuhuuu...
    OTZ
    OTZ --- ---
    takze (ve smyslu sync.) pokud budu neco delat sam bez neciho vedomi, zadny nasledky (pro ostatni) to mit nebude? a co treba (to uz me hloda dlouho) kdyz na nekoho myslim? pozna to? mysli na me taky? co myslis?:)
    LOOK
    LOOK --- ---
    Jan Stern - Analni vesmiry
    http://i.nyx.cz/files/00/00/02/00/200757_dfef1b5f496a6943e435.pdf

    nalezeno v nyxich utrobach ;)
    OVERSEER
    OVERSEER --- ---
    synchronicita se vztahuje na vedomi - resp. na interakce mezi bytostmi, takze az to ze si to sem napsal nebo nekomu rekl (banalitu se skrabanim na cele, to uz neni banalita - primelo me to totiz se zamyslet.. )
    OTZ
    OTZ --- ---
    jakej nasledek bude mit to ze se ted skrabu na cele?
    OVERSEER
    OVERSEER --- ---
    V podstatě všechno co děláme je synchronicita a bude mít následky, jako např. v připadě Armstrong-Gorski.
    OVERSEER
    OVERSEER --- ---
    SCHWEPZ: Freud by z toho měl radost :)
    LOOK
    LOOK --- ---
    pred par dny se mi zdal sen, ve kterem jsem usnul, zdal se mi sen, probudil jsem se, objevil se psychoanalytik a vylozil mi jeho vyznam :)

    vubec sny, ve kterych clovek spi mi prijdou zajimave. jakoby zrcadlovy opak/obraz snu, ve kterych se probudi, mysli si, ze je vzhuru, ale ve skutecnosti porad spi.
    STEPNI_VLK
    STEPNI_VLK --- ---
    LOOK: Citát poukazoval na to, že se točíte v kruhu (jako i ten citát už tu jednou byl), a že rozhodnout, co je a co není synchronicita, by koneckonců nejlépe dokázal jedině sám autor tohoto pojmu.. a to už bohužel nepůjde. ;)
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam