Thursday, 5 February 2026
A X CJ
A
Love this comparison — these two are circling a lot of the same mountain from different sides. Here’s a clean table:
Advaita Vedānta vs. Carl Jung
| Theme | Advaita Vedānta | Carl Jung |
|---|---|---|
| Ultimate Reality | Brahman — nondual, infinite consciousness; the only true reality | The Self (archetype) — the totality of the psyche, including conscious + unconscious |
| Individual Self | Ātman = Brahman (your true self is identical with ultimate reality) | The ego is the center of conscious identity, but not the whole Self |
| Core Problem | Avidyā (ignorance) — mistaking the ego/body/mind for the true Self | Ego identification and repression of the unconscious create imbalance |
| Goal of Life | Moksha (liberation) — realization of nonduality | Individuation — integrating unconscious contents into conscious life |
| Nature of the Ego | Illusory construct (useful but not ultimately real) | Necessary psychological structure, but must not dominate the psyche |
| Unconscious / Hidden Depth | Not framed as “unconscious,” but Māyā veils true reality | Personal + Collective Unconscious containing archetypes |
| Archetypes / Universals | Cosmic principles expressed as deities, symbols, and myths | Archetypes are innate patterns of the collective unconscious |
| World / Matter | Māyā — real as experience but not ultimately independent | Psychic reality is primary in experience; psyche shapes how reality is lived |
| Method / Practice | Self-inquiry (“Who am I?”), meditation, renunciation of false identity | Dream analysis, active imagination, symbolic integration |
| Attitude to Opposites | Opposites dissolve in nondual awareness | Opposites must be consciously integrated (shadow, anima/animus) |
| End State | Realization: “I am not the doer; I am pure awareness” | Realization of the Self as inner wholeness, but ego still functions |
| Mystical Experience | Direct knowledge of unity beyond subject–object | Encounter with the Self often symbolized as mandala, light, divine figure |
| View of Death | No real death of the Self; only the body-mind drops | Ego may dissolve; deeper psyche (Self) not reducible to the body |
| Metaphysics vs Psychology | Metaphysical doctrine about reality itself | Primarily depth psychology, though with metaphysical implications |
| Final Liberation vs Wholeness | Transcendence of individuality | Transformation and completion of individuality |
Big Difference in One Line
Advaita: You are already the Absolute; realize it by seeing through illusion.
Jung: Become who you truly are by integrating the unconscious.
Big Similarity
Both say the ordinary ego identity is not the deepest truth about who we are — and both see symbols, myths, and inner experience as doorways to a larger reality.
If you want, next we can do “Advaita vs Kastrup vs Jung” — that triangle is 🔥
BK
A
Here’s how Bernardo Kastrup — a contemporary philosopher known for analytic idealism — would interpret Carl Jung’s “final visions,” especially Jung’s ideas about death, consciousness, and the transformation Jung described late in life:
1) Reality is fundamentally consciousness, not matter
Kastrup starts from the view that the physical world and bodies are appearances within a universal consciousness — not independent, material objects. Jung’s late-life sense of a cosmic perspective resonates with this because Jung was hinting that the psyche isn’t reducible to the brain. (bernardokastrup.com)
2) Jung’s views on death fit idealism naturally
Kastrup would see Jung’s final reflections — e.g. the ego dissolving while something deeper remains — as consistent with the idea that death is the end of the ego’s dissociation, not the end of consciousness itself. Kastrup often uses similar language: the body “stops being imagined” by mind, but mind persists. (bernardokastrup.com)
3) The “Self” Jung talked about = universal consciousness
For Jung, the Self archetype represented a deeper organizing principle in psyche. Kastrup interprets this metaphysically, not just psychologically: the underlying consciousness Jung pointed to is literally the ground of all being. (SEO KIOSK - digital phenomenology)
4) Death as waking up, not annihilation
Kastrup explicitly compares the death process to waking from a dream — your ego fades, but conscious awareness doesn’t disappear. He relates this directly to Jung’s idea that the Self would persist beyond the ego. (bernardokastrup.com)
5) NDE-like experiences are credible glimpses, not illusions
In his essay on consciousness and death, Kastrup suggests that near-death experiences (NDEs) may reflect a loosening of ego boundaries and an expansion of consciousness — something Jung’s final visions also hinted at. (jcer.com)
6) Jung’s visions aren’t just symbolic — they’re ontologically real
Where Jung might see visions as psychological phenomena, Kastrup frames them as pointers toward the true nature of reality: mind-as-fundamental. He believes such experiences can’t be dismissed as “brain artifacts” because reality itself is not brain-generated. (bernardokastrup.com)
7) The ego dissolves but consciousness remains
Kastrup reads Jung’s late-life emphasis on ego dissolution (less fear of death, more cosmic unity) as a literal description of how consciousness transitions: the particular egoic pattern fades while the underlying, undifferentiated consciousness continues. (bernardokastrup.com)
8) Time and identity are dream-like constructs
Like Jung’s sense of non-linear experience near death, Kastrup holds that time and individual identity are features of the dissociated ego-perspective, not fundamental structures of reality. After death, these vanish or are transformed. (bernardokastrup.com)
9) Personal identity survives only as a pattern within universal consciousness
He speculates that some aspects of the individual (memories, personality traces) might linger as patterns within deeper levels of consciousness, similar to Jung’s idea of the unconscious continuing beyond the body’s death. (bernardokastrup.com)
10) Jung’s mystical themes gain a philosophical grounding
Kastrup effectively philosophically grounds Jung’s mystical end-of-life insights: it’s not biological death that ends being, but rather the memory/ego loop dissolving within the ever-present universal consciousness. (jcer.com)
In short
Kastrup doesn’t just treat Jung’s final visions as symbolic psychology. He interprets them through analytic idealism — the view that:
Consciousness is fundamental,
Bodies and egos are temporary dissociated patterns within consciousness,
Death is the end of dissociation, not the end of awareness,
And what Jung described cosmically reflects actual ontological continuity of mind rather than mere neurobiology. (bernardokastrup.com)
If you’d like, I can turn this into a side-by-side comparison of Jung’s own words vs. Kastrup’s interpretation.
CJ
A
Here’s a clean, high-level snapshot of Carl Jung’s “final visions” period (mainly from Memories, Dreams, Reflections and accounts from his last years):
1. Life as a completed pattern
He felt his life had formed a meaningful whole — like a design finally visible from above rather than from inside it.
2. Death as transformation, not annihilation
He described dying less as an ending and more as a shift of state — a continuation of psyche beyond the personal ego.
3. The soul’s independence from the body
In later reflections (including his 1944 near-death experience), he sensed consciousness could exist apart from physical form.
4. Earth seen from cosmic distance
He reported a vision of viewing Earth from space, which made personal concerns seem tiny compared to a vast, ordered cosmos.
5. Encounter with a great temple or structure
He described approaching a monumental, sacred space — symbolizing entry into a deeper level of reality or the collective psyche.
6. Dissolution of the ego
He suggested the personal “I” fades, while a deeper, more universal self remains — aligned with his idea of the Self archetype.
7. Unity of opposites
Life/death, light/dark, matter/spirit felt like paired aspects of a single underlying reality rather than conflicts.
8. Meaning over morality
In the end, he emphasized not moral perfection but whether one had lived in alignment with one’s inner truth (individuation).
9. Time felt non-linear
He hinted that from the psyche’s perspective, past and future coexist — echoing his interest in synchronicity.
10. Profound peace and detachment
His tone in later accounts carries calm acceptance, even curiosity, rather than fear — as if returning to a larger home.
If you want, I can connect each of these to Jungian concepts like the Self, individuation, or archetypes — that’s where it gets really interesting.
GS YT
POEM BY GS DISCIPLE
It’s Okay
Waking up happens for me
and suddenly I am here again
inside a body
inside a world.
The first thought rises:
Oh no.
Once again I have woken up.
Then guru voice comes and says,
“Do what you feel you should do.”
I bow down to God
for sending me back into this prison.
And I tell myself:
Now I don’t want to do anything,
not even get out of bed.
Yet the body rises.
I find myself moving,
answering nature’s call
I did not make.
I say, It’s okay.
I didn’t choose this.
Then hunger comes,
hands reach for food
and eating happens.
And again I say,
It’s okay.
This too is not in my control.
But now I don’t want to do anything.
Then thoughts appear,
and with them work.
I watch myself doing,
deciding,
acting.
I say again,
It’s okay.
I can’t control this either.
But now I don’t want to do anything,
really.
Then tiredness arrives.
I find myself resting.
Then boredom follows,
and suddenly there is walking,
singing,
dancing—
life entertaining itself.
Slowly I see it:
Just as I cannot control myself,
the universe cannot control itself either.
Evening falls on its own.
Night comes without asking.
I whisper,
It’s okay.
I couldn’t control the day,
but now I don’t want to do anything.
Then sleep arrives.
Body fades.
World disappears.
And one last thought remains:
It’s okay.
I can’t control this either.