1 2 S p i r i t ua l i t y S t u d i e s 2 - 2 Fa l l 2 0 1 6 rather than discouraging or suppressing them are actually very promising (Perry 1974; Grof and Grof 1990). The manifest content of many psychoses, as well as the material emerging during experiential work with them, shows preponderance of perinatal and transpersonal themes, such as experiences of diabolical torture, eternal damnation, hell, and no exit, identification with Jesus Christ, sequences of death and rebirth or destruction and recreation of the world, satanic and demonic elements, messianic ideas, encounters with archetypal beings, or past incarnation experiences. These are in no way occasional mysterious “infusions” or “transfusions” of archetypal material, but essential and integral parts of the psychotic process. This is evident in the already mentioned work of John Perry who conducted systematic psychotherapy with people undergoing acute psychotic episodes untruncated by tranquilizing medication. He was able to show that the major themes and motifs emerging in their experiences were identical with those that played an important role in royal dramas performed in New Year’s festivals of a large number of ancient cultures at a particular period of their history, the “archaic era of incarnated myth” (Perry 1974). This was a period when these cultures saw their kings as incarnate deities, as it was the case with the Egyptian pharaohs, Peruvian Incas, the Roman emperors, kings of Israel, Japanese rulers, and many others. Perry’s work clearly reveals the important role that archetypal dynamics play in such episodes and shows their meaningful connection to the evolution of consciousness. The essential role of archetypal elements and the collective unconscious in many psychotic episodes has also been demonstrated by many other Jungians and Jung himself. The two categories of theories of functional psychoses entertained by mainstream psychiatry and by the psychoanalytically oriented systems of psychotherapy fail to provide a believable explanation for these disorders. The advocates of biological schools of psychiatry propose that the nature and content of psychotic experiences can be understood as resulting from the interaction between a yet unknown organic process and the brain. Such an explanation might account for disorganization of mental functioning seen in schizophrenia simplex or hebephrenic schizophrenia and similar disorders. However, the idea that a yet unknown pathological process could by itself produce in the brain the often elaborate and comprehensive systems of “hallucinations” and “delusions”, including perinatal and transpersonal experiences, is highly implausible. As Jungian psychology, as well as the work with psychedelic substances and powerful experiential psychotherapies have clearly shown, these experiences belong to deep dynamics of the human psyche. Although they are not ordinarily available for conscious experience they can easily be made conscious with the use of various ancient, aboriginal, and modern techniques. Representatives of many psychologically oriented schools believe that the dynamics of functional psychoses can be understood in psychological terms. The approaches that are acceptable in academic circles use for this purpose models limited to postnatal biography and the individual unconscious. The theorists in psychotherapeutic schools that Ken draws upon are trying to explain the psychotic process as a regression to early stages of the development of the libido and of the ego. However, psychodynamic explanations limited to postnatal biography cannot possibly account for the nature and intensity of emotions and the rich and intricate content of many psychotic experiences. There is a long way from the mind of a lonely or hungry infant to elaborate experiences of the sacred marriage (hieros gamos), identification with the death and resurrection of Christ, or a shattering vision of the Apocalypse and of the Last Judgment. A comprehensive approach to functional psychoses, mysticism, and their mutual interrelations requires a vastly expanded cartography of the psyche that includes the perinatal and the transpersonal domains. As the work with NOSC clearly shows, the current academic understanding of psychoses and their relationship to mysticism is superficial and needs a radical revision. However, Ken’s conceptual framework in its present form does not offer a viable alternative. With his linear understanding of the pre/trans fallacy, he sees psychotic states as essentially regressive and mystical states as progressive. This is in clear conflict with clinical observations that show a much more complex and intimate relationship between many psychotic episodes and mystical states. David Lukoff (1985) speaks in this regard about at least four possible combinations: mystical states, mystical states with psychotic features, psychotic states with mystical features, and psychotic states. In my experience, the problem of the mystical versus the psychotic is often a problem of coping with and integrating perinatal and transpersonal experiences. The success of this integration seems to depend more on the history and personality structure of the individual than on the nature of the experiences themselves. In one place, Ken himself interprets schizophrenic break with religious content as a result of influx of material from the subtle level meeting the “false self” of an individual whose personality structure was developmentally compromised (Wilber 1980, 157). Traumatic experiences of the early stages of postnatal development that in various psychodynamic schools are
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=