Jon Marshall: Jung, Alchemy and History
Jung and Alchemy
Jung attempted to explain the obscurity of alchemy, the drive of its
marked and colourful symbols, and the reality behind people’s reporting
the discovery of things, like the Philosophers’ Stone, which we might
regard as chemically impossible.
Basically Jung argued that the alchemical work acted as a kind of
dynamic Rorschach blot in which the equally dynamic processes of the
psyche were projected onto the substances the alchemist was working
with.
Alchemy was a kind of a collective conscious dream.
Alchemical works were so obscure, not because the alchemist was inherently trying to conceal something (although this possibility was largely ignored by Jung as irrelevant), but because of the difficulty of representing both the psychic processes (which were unclear to begin with) and the work on substances, at the same time.
Furthermore, during this work, Jung implies that alchemists sometimes did reach a kind of enlightenment in which they had worked through (unbeknownst to themselves) their psychological problems and became aware of, and went into dialogue with, their Self.
Thus the claimed discovery of the Philosophers’ Stone was the discovery of a symbol for the Self.
The alchemical work expressed the individuation process as well as the chemical process.
In particular Jung argued that Christianity was in many ways incapable of
dealing with such psychological processes and, in some cases, actually
generated the pathological ego for which alchemy (or the alchemical
dream) was a compensation.
In this case he apparently forgot that there were non-Christian alchemies, or never made any comparisons.
Jung emphasised how some aspects of alchemical practice as
mentioned by some alchemists, such as entering the work in
imagination, having dialogues with imaginary figures, or praying to God
could further this individuation process.
More controversially still, Jung argued that the symbols revealed in
alchemy are ‘archetypal’ and universal found in all human beings.
To anticipate an argument later, I would suggest that Jung’s method
confused possibly universal processes in the psyche, which is probable,
with the presence of universal symbols which seems less so.
Jung himself seems also to have believed that some texts themselves
could generate useful processes in therapy.
Jaffe writes about an analytical session with Jung in which he simply discussed with her a late 17th century text, the Mutus Liber which consists entirely of illustrative plates (1989: 55).
In this paper I am going to expound Jung’s theories of alchemy by
subject area, even though this imposes a rather explicit order upon his
original texts.
Alchemy and Christianity
Jung opens his book Psychology and Alchemy by stating that within
the psyche there is a process which seeks its own goals independently of
external forces (CW 12: 5), and this is in some ways a religious
function.
However this function can be disrupted by religious dogma which detracts from experience (ibid: 13).
In particular Christianity has made the antinomy of good and evil absolute, so that it is impossible to use Christian symbols to unite these opposites.
This means that what is considered evil (however vital to the human) must always be expelled (ibid: 19, 22).
As well as ‘overcoming’ the division between whatever is defined as good or defined as evil, alchemy also reminds us of the body and the world of instinct, and how this is not separate from spirit while
on earth (ibid: 123).
The Philosophers’ Stone acts as a symbol for the Self which complements the image of Christ and arises from defects in the Christ image. It is “the culmination of Christs work of redemption”
(CW13: 95-6).
Alchemy should perhaps be considered heretical to Christianity – the
alchemist is completing the unfinished work of redemption in Nature
(CW 12: 306, 355), postulating an eternal and uncreated matter (ibid:
322), or rescuing a trapped God within matter, as well as obviously
implying a connection between alchemist and God unmediated by a Priest, not to mention regular hints of incest. In the Paracelsus paper (in
CW 13), Jung attempts to show that there was a conflict between
Paracelsus’ alchemy and orthodox Christianity, which Paracelsus
himself was not aware of.
All of these points, except perhaps the last, could do with historical
illumination, as well as could the question of the relation of
transubstantiation in the Mass and transmutation in alchemy – both
require a human to produce the result7.
Strangely, despite arguing at length on the inadequacies of Christ as a symbol for wholeness, and the Philosophers’ Stone as compensating for its deficiencies8, he devotes much time to showing that some alchemists implied that Christ was analogous to the Stone9.
For example Khunrath writes, “the Stone of the Wise… is the symbol of Christ Jesus Crucified” (CW 14: 265 see also 327-9), and in the Water Stone of the Wise, the anonymous author writes “Jesus Christ is compared and united with the earthly philosophical stone of the Sages, whose material and preparation… is an outstanding type and lifelike image of the incarnation of Christ” (ibid: 345).
Sometimes the evidence for this parallel seems simply to amount to the
familiarity of alchemists with scripture and their ready quoting of it –
perhaps as a familiar metaphor for aspects of the work, or as attempts to
justify their hope of receiving God’s help or inspiration in their
difficulties with the work, or perhaps by demonstrating that alchemy is
not incompatible with Christianity despite its possibly heretical
implications.
As well, the associations may arise because, for some
alchemists, alchemy seems to have been a science of everything. It was
used to explain all forms of generation, and could thus be extended to
explain the mysteries of Christianity and of God’s actions in the world.
There was no necessary distinction between the problems of Natural
Science and of Theology.
Perhaps more to the point, as Jung admits, the term stone as in
‘corner stone’ was used in the New Testament apparently as a reference
to Christ or the church (i.e. Mat. 21:42-4, Mark 12: 10, Luke 20: 17-18,
Acts 4: 10-11, Eph. 2: 20). The term ‘living stones’ was used of
believers (1 Pet 2: 4-8). Revelations (2: 17) mentions a “white stone” in
conjunction with a “hidden manna”.
So consequently it is not really surprising that alchemists saw a possible correspondence between their wondrous Stone and the Stone of Christian doctrine.
Such correspondence does not necessarily need an archetypal explanation10.
The use and spread of the Christ Lapis parallel also require more
historical work to explore its ramifications, although Jung suggests that
alchemy’s movement from ascent to descent and its conflict with the
Christian movement of descent and ascent, would eventually lead to
theological problems for alchemists, and thus “those who identified the
lapis absolutely with Christ stopped working in the laboratory, and those
who preferred laboratory work slowly gave up their mystical language”
(CW 14:221-3).
So the alchemists “made the world conscious that the revelation was neither complete nor final” and thus instigated the division between faith and knowledge (CW 14: 254-5).
The Philosophers’ Stone is not the only alchemical mandala according to Jung, and there are others such as the Ouroboros, squaring the circle (CW 12 124-6, 128-), and the quaternity or the recurrence of the number four.
We are never told why there might be so many different and recurrent mandalas, or if some might be more appropriate for some stages of the work than others. ~Jon Marshall, Jung, Alchemy and History A Critical Exposition of Jung’s Theory of Alchemy, Page 21-24
Carl Jung Depth Psychology Blog
#AnalyticalPsychology #DepthPsychology #CarlJung #TheUnconscious #JungianPsychology #Psyche #JungianConcepts #PsychologicalType #Archetypes #Individuation