The Gnostic movement was interpreted as the emergence of elements repressed by
Christianity (Jung 1976:20). Jung sees in it ‘man’s unconscious psychology in full
flower,’ and ‘a belief in the efficacy of individual revelation and individual knowledge,’
and ‘the beginning of the path that led to the intuitions of German mysticism’ (Jung
1976:241–2).
The prototypes for many basic concepts in Jungian psychology are, indeed, to be
found in Gnosticism. As Coward (1985:13) aptly points out, Eastern thought and
medieval alchemy form a missing link between Gnosticism and modern psychology,
in Jung’s theories. We must, however, not overlook the fact that Jung failed to grasp
essential features of Gnosticism and misinterpreted or reinterpreted it. Segal contrasts
Gnosticism and Jung: ‘What for Jung is only a means to an end—return to the
unconscious—is for Gnosticism equivalent to the end itself. What for Jung is the end
—the integration of the unconscious with ego consciousness—is for Gnosticism the
present predicament: the association of divinity with matter. Conversely, what for
Gnosticism is the end—the severance of the link between divinity and matter—is
the Jungian predicament: the dissociation of the unconscious from ego consciousness’
(Segal 1992:25–6). This twist in Jung’s assimilation of Gnosticism was also to be
reflected in his approach to Buddhism.
Buddhism in Psychological TypesIn Psychological Types, Jung acknowledges Schopenhauer for his contributions to
Oriental studies and characterizes his own system as essentially Buddhist, a reaction
to the West as represented by Schiller (Jung 1976:136). This contrast of the East and
the West is further developed in his scheme of introversion and extraversion. Jung
counts Tibetan Buddhism as an example of a one-sided development of consciousness
(ibid.: 137) and mentions that in Buddhism everything is dissolved into consciousness
(ibid.: 247). In the same vein, he characterizes Christianity, Buddhism, and German
writers like Spitteler and Goethe as devoted to God, the self, and the soul (symbolized
by the Feminine) respectively (ibid.: par. 375). In this sense, Jung seems to regard
Buddhism as one-sided and lacking balance.
On the other hand, Jung points out that the East from ancient times has developed
a psychological view of salvation based on the process of mediating opposites, and
especially values Buddhism for its ‘redemptive middle way of magical efficacy which
is attainable by means of a conscious attitude’ (Ibid.: 326). Here he clearly links the
Buddhist Middle Way with his own concept of a transcendent function that
spontaneously produces a symbol of reconciling opposites. Thus, in Psychological
Types, Jung considers Buddhism as one-sided, namely as representing introversion in
the extreme, and also values it as synthesizing the opposites, a position that reveals
his ambivalent attitude toward Eastern thought.
SHOJI MURAMOTO 125