Because I believe that the Divine is within each of us, not a separate entity out there somewhere, I believe -- in fact, I know, because I have had that revelatory experience that I call "My French Silk Connection" (Installment 16) -- that I can tap divine wisdom by being open to it as it comes to me in intuition, imagination, inspiration, and dreams. It is my awareness through these "transrational" ways of knowing that gives me access to the inner forces for authenticity and wholeness that I recognize as "the voice of God," which is a metaphorical name for my own (our own) inner wisdom.

        But, let's face it, for anyone who believes that we have access to divine wisdom, whether from external or internal sources, there is a problem: how do I know whether the voice I hear is in the service of authenticity and wholeness or is perhaps the expression of some psychological complex, born of early childhood trauma, that would distort my view of reality and inhibit authenticity and wholeness?

        This was the question that Dr. Richard Sweeney, Jungian Analyst, discussed recently with a group of us, though without the theological overtones. He called these life-shaping forces, Daimon (a spirit-force that brings to consciousness the impulses that would move us toward wholeness or authenticity) and Demon (the destructive forces that distort and inhibit healthy growth). Both of these forces seem to well up within us and demand our attention and govern our responses to life. In good Jungian fashion, he spoke of Daimon as expressing the archetypal wisdom of the collective unconscious, a great well of archetypal wisdom to which every person is connected at a level beneath consciousness. Down at that deep level within resides the Soul or Spirit or, in Jungian terms, the Self.

        The Demon, on the other hand, is much more closely rooted in one's personal history, as an expression of fear, anxiety, anger, depression, despair, guilt, or shame, internalized as the result of a difficult childhood and often reinforced by societal influences. (As Matthew Fox tells us, we have all been hurt by those who love us.) Both Demon and Daimon bring what is unconscious up to consciousness, though the message may be hidden in dream symbols or manifested in body responses or relational conflicts.

        The question is one of discernment: which are "old tapes" and which are expressions of universal wisdom? Complex or archetype? Demon or Daimon? My dysfunctionality or the voice of God? It is easy to think, superficially, that of course I can tell which impulses are healthy for me and which ones aren't. But consider whether a new and strong attraction to another person, or a strong nudge to change careers, is a distraction to the direction of our lives, and thus to be resisted, or is a push in the direction of being who we really are. Is the urge toward an action that would disrupt our lives necessarily bad, or could it be the best thing that ever happened to us? Do I meet it with denial and resistance when perhaps I should welcome it, or at least give it serious consideration? Sweeney notes that what appears to be evil sometimes is a factor in producing good, as what appears to be good may have a role in producing evil.

        It seems to me that life is much too ambiguous for any of it to be categorized as fully good or fully evil. Leave it for the televangelists to oversimplify those matters. I know that I would give anything to have had some facets of my life work out differently, yet my life, every facet of it, has brought me to where I am now, and, overall, I find myself to be in a good place. The good and the bad, intermixed, have brought me here.

        We are guided, in the words of Joseph Campbell, toward "our bliss," by what Jung called "invisible hands." We have some choice in the matter; we can resist it or flow with it; and our choice is better informed, Dick Sweeney says, when we am aware of how the characteristics of the Daimon differ from those of the Demon. As we grow in awareness, the complexes have less power over us. Thus, in therapy, as we come to recall and understand those childhood experiences that continue to haunt us, we can place them in a non-mysterious perspective where their power to affect us is limited.

        But denial and resistance, of either Daimon or Demon, are barriers to consciousness. Sweeney, echoing Jung, says that the only way to the Self is through the complex. It is not enough, then, to choose to listen to the voice of Spirit and to ignore (as if that were possible) the nudge or urge of the Demon. The latter must be acknowledged and accepted as part of who we are, though not all that we are, and we must learn as much as we can from it.

        So what are the characteristics of Demon; what are the characteristics of Daimon?

        Demon first: Demon/complexes may be readily identified with family members, even personified, for family members had a hand in forming the complexes that are part of who we are. The complexes will often express conventional or familiar viewpoints. They may evoke strong emotional reactions that seem to oneself or others to be disproportionate to immediate reality. They are repetitive; they say the same old thing. In dreams and fantasies, the images from the complexes are often attacking, criticizing, threatening, or preventing.

        Daimon, on the other hand, is archetypal and may be shrouded in dream symbolism, thus may seem more mysterious, more foreign to our experience. It is more likely to move us in new directions, to encourage change, in opposition to the resistance to change which the complexes usually promote. Archetypes have a sense of the universal about them, as sources of cosmic wisdom and power.

        In the tradition in which I was raised, the "Methodist Quadrilateral" is suggested as the means of discerning spiritual truth. One tests the insight or alleged truth against scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. From my perspective, these categories are useful, though my interpretations are, I hope, more universal than Methodist.

Scripture: I believe the scriptures of the world's religions, taken together, contain more universal wisdom than does any single collection of scripture, and thus I try to be familiar with the sacred writings of Eastern as well as Western religions. I believe that scriptures are never to be taken literally, but are to be understood as metaphors for the human condition and journey.

Tradition: In my belief in my oneness with all, in the unity of human and divine, I take as my tradition the contemplative, transreligious tradition that includes the Gnostics and the mystics of all faiths. By reading the words of the mystics, we discover whether we are in their tradition, and we find guidance for following the mystical path.

Reason: Rationality is only one of the ways of knowing, and one that is not particularly useful for a mystical faith. Its use as an empirical tool for defining in an "either/or" mode is nearly irrelevant to a "both/and" faith. Nevertheless, reason is helpful in identifying consistency, which is basic to our process of discernment of spiritual truth.

Experience: Trust in our own experience with Spirit comes slowly as we practice our own chosen yoga -- as we meditate, study, work with dream symbols and their meanings for us, carry out acts of compassion, always building awareness of levels of reality more deeply within. We can reach the point in awareness where following the Daimon "feels right."

Lest it appear that in all of this we are somehow passive recipients of the activity of forces from beyond ourselves, I want to stress the active role we may play in seeking spiritual insights. It is our choice to study, to meditate, to journal, to be open to inspiration, to engage in active imagination, to work with dreams. It can also be our choice to ally ourselves with a variety of other sources for authenticity and wholeness -- in the people who care about us, in the activities we choose, in healthy attitudes.

        Although it is possible to be overwhelmed by an archetype, to identify ourselves too completely as "hero," or "caretaker," or "victim," the healthy way is to develop a process of conscious reflection that incorporates the wisdom and power of the archetype into one's way of life.

        In the words of Dick Sweeney, "If one is following the daimon/archetype, life will seem, however slightly, newer, freer, more challenging, more authentic, more meaningful."

(Copyright 1998 by C. Grey Austin, all rights reserved.)

   

Click here to return to Grey's Musings menu.