[Opinion] The Divine Woman, Anima

[Magpie]

• Plato's "other half" - presupposing a human is an androgyne with half missing e.g. if you are a man, you can be say 80% male and the remaining 20% female is your hidden missing part, so if you found a woman that was 80% female and 20% male, it would be your "other half"
• Germanic Valkyrie, sleeping beauty, fetch of the opposite gender
• Greek Apollo and Artemis
• Hindu ascetics referring to a woman inside them
• Jung's anima
• And many other traditional or modern concept regarding a hidden female power/person inside a man

You get the idea, there is something of an opposite gender related to the being we are. I don't want to get into details of specific traditions, as the thread is not meant to be comparative analysis or a lecture on myths or philosophy, but instead I want it to be practical. I see in most traditions, that a unity with that "divine woman" is a prerequisite for further progress along the path. Many of you probably saw her in dreams, fleeting encounters, not being able to find her and "settle".

What do you think, what is that "anima" (let's call her that) and what does it mean to find her? What practice is required to unity with her?

 

[deci belle]

It is possible to conjure such primordial elemental distinctions in order to experience their dissolution (by using them together as a tool of sorts) in a process of reversion arriving at selfless knowledge of inherent wholeness.

Experiencing such Virtue of Receptivity might unavoidably be termed an understanding of the Creative, as the Creative's primal organization encompasses particulate polar distinction subsuming within wave energy [This is knowledge itself; there is no thing]. So, you might typify the Creative in terms of femme, as such, but yin and yang swirling about within her vortex are what they are (created, and therefore a polar relationship in action). It's just the way it is and no one knows why it is the way it is or why it is possible to experience reversion in terms of any realization (beyond the OPs subject), to experience selfless nonorigination. Upon returning, one must become its living expression.

Furthermore, it is possible to project categorical typification in the aftermath of realization, for the purposes of recreational philosophical speculation as to what sex nonorigination is, ie: progenitor/progenitrix. But let's not, because it is not. Why? Because there is always that which is beyond.

Since, per the OP, there is a decided (and properly) discriminatory distinction towards the femme aspect, it should be noted that "getting there", requires seeing a referential sameness "drawing from below", in order to blend (as milk and water). This is because knowledge is truly being, and knowing such, exacts that much, in terms of the process of reversion to seeing the nonorigination of human spiritual potential, as is.

So there is a necessary reason for employing the polar aspect in the first place, in terms of its (the Creative's) functional organization, not due to any sexual bias per se, and neither can we discount (or forget) its inherent potential, because the Creative, as well as the created, are, by virtue of an ineffably living aware potential, an inherently inconceivable selfless knowing, awake without beginning.

All such devices, as per the subject of the OP, are signposts along the way. When you see a stop sign or an arrow, wouldn't it be sheer foolishness to fixate on the sign itself? But I wouldn't begrudge the culturally derivative scenery along the way either.

 

[Magpie]

It is possible to conjure such primordial elemental distinctions in order to experience their dissolution (by using them together as a tool of sorts) in a process of reversion arriving at selfless knowledge of inherent wholeness.

Experiencing such Virtue of Receptivity might unavoidably be termed an understanding of the Creative, as the Creative's primal organization encompasses particulate polar distinction subsuming within wave energy [This is knowledge itself; there is no thing]. So, you might typify the Creative in terms of femme, as such, but yin and yang swirling about within her vortex are what they are (created, and therefore a polar relationship in action). It's just the way it is and no one knows why it is the way it is or why it is possible to experience reversion in terms of any realization (beyond the OPs subject), to experience selfless nonorigination. Upon returning, one must become its living expression.

Furthermore, it is possible to project categorical typification in the aftermath of realization, for the purposes of recreational philosophical speculation as to what sex nonorigination is, ie: progenitor/progenitrix. But let's not, because it is not. Why? Because there is always that which is beyond.

Since, per the OP, there is a decided (and properly) discriminatory distinction towards the femme aspect, it should be noted that "getting there", requires seeing a referential sameness "drawing from below", in order to blend (as milk and water). This is because knowledge is truly being, and knowing such, exacts that much, in terms of the process of reversion to seeing the nonorigination of human spiritual potential, as is.

So there is a necessary reason for employing the polar aspect in the first place, in terms of its (the Creative's) functional organization, not due to any sexual bias per se, and neither can we discount (or forget) its inherent potential, because the Creative, as well as the created, are, by virtue of an ineffably living aware potential, an inherently inconceivable selfless knowing, awake without beginning.

All such devices, as per the subject of the OP, are signposts along the way. When you see a stop sign or an arrow, wouldn't it be sheer foolishness to fixate on the sign itself? But I wouldn't begrudge the culturally derivative scenery along the way either.

Your post requires further thought to properly respond to, but there is one thing I must touch now - creative vs created dynamic. Are you saying that "the Creative" - so the same "thing" as I called the anima, is what conditions the material self?

I am asking that, because during my own meditations today, it occurred to me that the anima is simply the daimon, the double, the genius, whatever the traditional word for it is, in order words, the soul. The entity that takes that is bound to the material organism and through which the material organism is shaped. Which would also explain why alchemical mercury is neither male nor female, but instead is "dynamic". The soul would be the double. Which would make sense, as the knowledge of the "subtle body" or the soul is necessary for further progress...

 

[deci belle]

Oh great to hear from you, Magpie~ sure, well there is a bit to define, since I am so unfamiliar with Greek/Roman/Egyptian cosmology/mythical tradition. In spite of the content of my response/reply, the overarching thrust of my intent was to see if others who (in spite of being fans of yours), might still wish to dive into this seeming abyss of women's studies>>> hahaha~ I hoped to break up any jammed logs/stigmas and open it up a bit further per your introduction/invitation, by stripping off a bit of the femme atmosphere.

I'd would be willing to go with your momentum here, in terms of Anima and the aspect you've presented in picking up on "creative" vs "created dynamic". It might be a far reach, in retrospect, but at least we tried❤︎

 

[Magpie]

Oh great to hear from you, Magpie~ sure, well there is a bit to define, since I am so unfamiliar with Greek/Roman/Egyptian cosmology/mythical tradition. In spite of the content of my response/reply, the overarching thrust of my intent was to see if others who (in spite of being fans of yours), might still wish to dive into this seeming abyss of women's studies>>> hahaha~ I hoped to break up any jammed logs/stigmas and open it up a bit further per your introduction/invitation, by stripping off a bit of the femme atmosphere.

I'd would be willing to go with your momentum here, in terms of Anima and the aspect you've presented in picking up on "creative" vs "created dynamic". It might be a far reach, in retrospect, but at least we tried❤︎

I re-read your earlier reply. Good that you bring up yin and yang. So obvious. It hints at the fact too - ying has a drop of yang and yang has a drop of yin, on top of perfectly fitting each other as a circle.

I appreciate the push towards stripping the mystique away, even though in this case, I must admit I like that aspect. Makes it sound much more romantic and interesting, than most of our magickal workings.

Don't mind the definitions or traditional framings, we don't want to mythologize it. I was doubling down with the second post, but let's take a step back. Let's focus on practice. Perhaps a working centred around invoking the opposites to what we are day-to-day and then trying to merge with then? Obviously a person of opposite sex would be a good candidate. - any ideas here?

And a good point about retroactive categorisation of that "thing" we call anima as female. Someone who "got there" would see that opposites are irrelevant, so it is natural to categorise them as female to get the point across...

 

[deci belle]

Makes it sound much more romantic and interesting~meeoowww!

Not only that, the spark of the erotic in psycho-sexual fusion is knowledge of the first water that goes all the way through (relatively speaking).

As far as practical application goes, conjuring (nondifferentiated) merging of polarized yin and yang that is being perpetuated in one's own mind by self-reflective psychological momentum is the means to…?

I posit the question, because, as is, in terms of the Creative, yin and yang are already merged in action, yet cooperatively intact, selfless and pure, in perpetually fluid subsumption. This is the model of the created constituting time.

Creation itself being the living karmic formula modeled on the Creative, such as it is, is all we have to work with.

The Creative symbolizes the working dynamic of its organization from which there is no escaping, yet the means to actualizing the fusion of the elemental distinction-in-motion, is also intact due to the fact that the Creative, being the model only, is not fallen into Creation. I capitalize Creation here because the Absolute, the Creative, and Creation form the cosmic relationship, illustrating Padmasambhava's device that recapitulates the ontological order: Absolute/potential; Creative/dynamic; Created/conditional(ly) poised for return by its inherent essential nonoriginated undifferentiated immaterial spiritual potential.

The "spiritual" is not a referent to the psychological capacity. The spiritual is purely nonpsychological awareness, denoting that which is the means to transcendence (enlightening activity) in the midst of, and by virtue of the essential nature of Creation's conditional relative duality.

Since Creation is already situated as embryonic nonoriginated essence (upon turning the light around), it is possible to revert karmic (differentiated energy) momentum back through the "go-between" (the mysterious female of taoist origin, ie: the Creative), to experience one's own mind as is before the first thought. "Turning the light around" is a term from The Secret of the Golden Flower teaching.

As far as practical application goes, conjuring (nondifferentiated) merging of polarized yin and yang that is being perpetuated in one's own mind by self-reflective psychological momentum is the means to…? That is, what would be the point of authentic effective transcendent praxis?

Summarizing the above: the Absolute is darkness; the light first appears as the Creative emerges as a pinpoint of illumination in the vast dimness of space, revealing the cosmic model of Creation's dual aspect. The return to functional application of unified consciousness in the midst of temporal existence is to "turn the light around", pointing it back at its source, in a process of natural inconceivable reversion.

For anybody interested, taoist spiritual alchemy's teaching tradition is based on sexual terminology, but that is (not) only a device to get people's attention. Even so, the southern school of Complete Reality IS geared to exploit sexual cultivation for gathering erotic energy for the purpose of observational concentration only because of the need for those of advanced age who do not have powers of concentration that younger people still have access to.

Just my two cents~ I hope this much is not too overwhelming for the purpose of Magpie's topic, and that there is conceptual fodder being introduced to further the intent of her OP.

 

[Sedim Haba]

• Plato's "other half" - presupposing a human is an androgyne with half missing e.g. if you are a man, you can be say 80% male and the remaining 20% female is your hidden missing part, so if you found a woman that was 80% female and 20% male, it would be your "other half"
• Germanic Valkyrie, sleeping beauty, fetch of the opposite gender
• Greek Apollo and Artemis
• Hindu ascetics referring to a woman inside them
• Jung's anima
• And many other traditional or modern concept regarding a hidden female power/person inside a man

You get the idea, there is something of an opposite gender related to the being we are. I don't want to get into details of specific traditions, as the thread is not meant to be comparative analysis or a lecture on myths or philosophy, but instead I want it to be practical. I see in most traditions, that a unity with that "divine woman" is a prerequisite for further progress along the path. Many of you probably saw her in dreams, fleeting encounters, not being able to find her and "settle".

What do you think, what is that "anima" (let's call her that) and what does it mean to find her? What practice is required to unity with her?

I don't know Plato's Other Half well enough, can anyone explain in simple terms? I'm standing on one foot... as the saying goes.

As to your question at the end, well I have a ... unique perspective, but I've caused enough trouble for one day.