You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
In his book China on the Mind, Christopher Bollas argues that Western and Eastern frames of mind
developed from a mind that was once unified, and that this original unity offers precedence for the rejoining of the two mentalities. However, the polarities are usefully identified in order for us to see how far the two traditions have emphasized quite different aspects of human being, leading to profound differences in the way the world is viewed.
Thus, the importance of work such as that undertaken by Murray Stein in this paper goes beyond merely a matter of intellectual curiosity; rather it is another step in the essential work of healing a split in ways of thinking across humanity, by exploring where the links might be that can take us back to something more whole and rounded.
At the start, Stein rightly raises the question: ‘Is the net result of the individuation processes as engaged and facilitated by Jungian analysis the same as that attained through Eastern meditation practices such as Zen Buddhism?’ It is critical that this question stays in the mind throughout the exploration or we find our Western paradigm misappropriating Eastern concepts and making apples into colonised pears. However, it should not mean that we give up the endeavour and I am glad to see this paper here. His careful work linking the later stages of individuation with those of the Ox-herding pictures I found to be intriguing and thought provoking.
We have to be careful to recognise that, just as the term ‘the West’ covers a wide range of approaches, philosophical, religious, psychological, so too does the term ‘the East’. Confucianism, Hinduism, Daoism, Buddhism, all come within this umbrella, but they are not the same. Whilst Jung was fascinated,