Chapter 4: First Prelude to Genesis: Antecedent Archetypes That

Describe Basic Psychic Energy and the Four Functions

   In Chapter 4, I will briefly identify, compare, and interpret cosmological, archetypal images concerning the mythology of ancient Sumer. The first image discussed is the fourfold structured myth of the creation gods of ancient Sumer: Enki, Enlil, Ki, and An, who can be compared with the Father God, the Serpent, Eve, and Adam in Genesis (see Figure 23). Both cosmologies can be seen as personifications of the four psychological functions of intuition, sensation, feeling, and thinking, in their conscious, introverted form. Nammu, the Sumerian mother goddess who precedes the four creating gods (actually three gods and one goddess) can be equated with the Void or Chaos (feminine) archetype, which also antecedes the creation in Genesis. Nammu, called the Primal Sea, and the Void archetypes can both be compared with the archetype of the Self in analytical psychology. I suggest that these five significant cosmological archetypes, in each mythology, are a metaphorical description of the four psychological functions as they differentiate out of the Self, and describe the universal, phenomenological experience of the individual child, as consciousness and unconsciousness begin.

    Another related Sumerian cosmological archetype worthy of note is the art image of the Serpent Lord (see Campbell, 1964, p. 10 or Figures 24 and 25 of this work). The Serpent Lord image, which contains two twin images, that of twin serpents and twin lion-birds, is seen as a variation of the Sumerian cosmogony and describes the same process of individuation (see Figure 24). The two sets of twins can be seen as the two sets of primal parents in the Sumerian cosmological material, both describing the birth of the hero archetype, the sensate ego. The Sumerian archetypes are comparable with similar personifications in Genesis, which also contain two sets of primal parents: first, as the Divine Void and the Divine Father God, and second, as Eve and Adam, our "human" parents. The tragic Hero archetype in Genesis is the Serpent, the bringer of light or consciousness and the bringer of darkness or unconsciousness. The dual Parents in all three images can be seen as personifications of the Self (Void) and Soul function of intuition (Father God) archetypes (the Primal Parents) as they give "birth" to the ego archetype, in the function of conscious, introverted sensation (tragic hero). The second set of parents (Eve and Adam) are the rational functions of conscious introverted feeling and thinking.

    I will also discuss Lucifer, the Fallen Angel archetype, as Hebrew mythology that preceded and is related to the myth of Genesis (see Figure 27). I suggest that the myth of Lucifer is describing a biological and psychological experience that is similar to the Sumerian cosmology that preceded it and that the later Genesis symbolism continues the myth. The Fallen Angel archetype can be seen in what I have described as level three (see Figure 11), the biological level and creation of the human child. Simultaneously it describes the psychological process of the soul and ego complexes as the functions of intuition and sensation differentiate (fall) from the Self (see Figures 12 and 13).

    The Divine Child archetype, the surface layer of the story, can be seen in what I have described as level one (see Figure 9). Moses, as author of Genesis, and representative of the Divine/human Child and Hero archetype, will also be briefly discussed.

Figure 23: Sumerian with Genesis - Four Creating Gods

Figure 24 Difference of Functions with Serpent Lord

Figure 25 Serpent Lord Image

Figure 26 Sumerian with Trinity

Sumerian Archetypes and Symbols as Personifications of Archetypal Energy Patterns

    Campbell (1976) states the following:

    The roots of the Genesis cosmology appear to be intertwined with the ancient Sumerian vision of the universe and had their beginning in the same soil. Elsewhere, Campbell (1964, pp. 16-17) describes numerous images and archetypes of Sumerian origin, antecedent to the archetypes in Genesis by at least several thousand years. Campbell suggests that the Creation/Paradise myths in Genesis utilize the same archetypes, and many were borrowed from earlier Sumerian mythology.

    "The Hebrew story of creation parallels the Sumerian account of "The Huluppu-Tree" in many ways" (Wolkstein and Kramer, 1983, p. 144). The twin trees in Paradise and the Sumerian Huluppu-tree symbol appear to be describing the same psychic experience in a slightly modified form. "For both cultures the tree represents the first living thing on earth" (Wolkstein and Kramer, 1983, p. 145). I suggest that the tree, in both cultures, symbolizes the human spinal column, which forms early in the living fetus and can be seen as "the first living thing on earth." (See Figure 44.) Wolkstein and Kramer (1983) state the following:

The tree also provides for both cultures a configuration of the forces of life and death and consciousness and lack of knowledge. It may be that the powers of the biblical trees in the center of the Garden of Eden, the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, are based on the joined powers of the Sumerian huluppu-tree. (p. 145)

Both mythologies, I would add, attempt to describe how conscious and unconscious sense perceptions, that is, intuition and sensation, work as separate functions that have a common source.

"One of the great puzzles of biology is the question of how each cell knows what it is to become" (Nilsson, 1993, p. 77). I suggest that this "knowledge" has often been attributed to God in the mythological literature, symbolizing the instinctual function of intuition. Since it is still a great puzzle in modern biology, one can understand the difficulty of cultures existing thousands of years ago, attempting to answer the same question. Their answer appears contained in the metaphorical descriptions of human origin, awaiting a biological interpretation. Although this sort of interpretation does not appear as part of the collective consciousness of modern society, it does appear in descriptions such as the following by Jordan Peterson:

The "tree" grows in the human mind and body and is necessarily part of the nervous system. The process that it represents symbolically is birth and two forms of consciousness, ego and soul, which ends the Paradise of the womb experience.

    One important distinction that many of the stories appear to have in common is a descent or fall-from-grace theme. I interpret this important theme as an attempt of the authors to describe the transition from the womb, symbolized by Paradise, to the experience of the opposites, as consciousness and unconsciousness are differentiated from the Self. The myths appear to be describing a circular process that takes place in the human psyche and body, the eternal return of psychic energy that is also biological, human experience.

    Campbell (1976) describes the Sumerian goddess, Nammu:

    Nammu is the Sumerian Serpent Queen archetype, an older version of the tail-eating uroboros, but appears to represent the same energy of the undivided Self. She divides (while staying herself) into Twin Serpents, who become Enki, her Serpent lover and Enlil, her Serpent child. Neumann (1949/1954)describes the same division when he says: "The uroboros as a ring-snake, for instance the Babylonian Tiamat and Chaos Serpent, or the Leviathan who, as the ocean, "twines his girdle of waves about the lands, later divides, or is divided, into two" (p. 49). Psychologically speaking, the two that Nammu, as a Self representation divides into, become the functions of intuition, her Serpent Lord Enki, and sensation, or Enlil, her Serpent Child. Thus, there are three psychological archetypes here, Nammu as the Self, Enki as the soul, and Enlil as the nascent ego.

    Neumann (1949/1954) goes on to describe the urorobos archetype: "when the Great Mother assumes human form, the masculine part of the uroboros--the snakelike phallus-demon--appears beside her as the residuum of the originally bisexual nature of the uroboros" (p. 49). And this is exactly what happens in the Sumerian cosmology; after taking the form of Enlil, Nammu takes the form of Ki, the Earth goddess, equivalent to Eve in Genesis. Nammu also becomes An, the Sky god and mate to Ki. Before Nammu becomes Ki, however, she mates with her spouse Enki, the god of the Waters, and together they give birth to Enlil, the god of Air. Nammu's Serpent child is the god of Air, Enlil, a Serpent Lord, equivalent to the Serpent in Paradise.

    Thus, Enlil has two sets of primal parents, the first set being Nammu and Enki (both symbols of the primal water and birth) and the second set being Ki and An or Heaven and Earth. The description of dual parents gives Enlil a special importance as a Divine male Child/Hero archetype. Enlil, or the function of conscious sensation, is the male child/hero who separates the World Parents. The undifferentiated Self, personified as Nammu in Sumerian mythology and the Void in Genesis, and the soul, personified as Enki, the Father God of Sumer and the Father God of Genesis, are the first primal parents who give birth to the ego, personified as Enlil. The second set of parents to Enlil are An and Ki, Heaven and Earth, and they are considered the creating gods in Sumerian mythology, while their equivalent in Genesis are the fallen Adam and Eve, our first human parents. An and Ki, Adam and Eve, are personifications of the conscious, rational, introverted functions of thinking and feeling.

    Consciousness does not rise up like an island from the sea of unconsciousness, dividing into the island and the sea or only two that are no longer one. Consciousness and unconsciousness arise simultaneously out of the primal sea of undifferentiation, which might better be described as twins born from the same mother. The Self is the Mother, one twin is (soul) consciousness and the other twin is (ego) consciousness. Or, before the soul becomes undifferentiated further, they are seen as the son/lover, in the Sumerian mythology and other myths with that symbolism. The Self, or Great Mother archetype, remains undifferentiated energy.

    Nammu, the Self, who was in a state of total undifferentiation, reflects Enki, the Father God, who symbolizes nascent consciousness (intuition), showing the equilibrium of undifferentiation has been changed or moved. Enki represents the ego in its primal form--soul consciousness--which is passive thinking, or the function of conscious intuition. Conscious intuition is the function out of which all conscious sense perceptions flow and as such, can be identified as unconscious body sensations of the human child. In the myths, conscious body sensations are seen as the Serpent Lord Enlil, or the Serpent of Genesis. In Genesis, conscious sensation is the Serpent, who has as his unconscious and dark side, the Father God, who has been "lost" at birth.

    Enki is represented as Father/Son god, who still contains the all as one in the one differentiated function of intuition. This is an important distinction and the same energy that is described in the Genesis myth. Out of the primal sea, the void archetype in Genesis, comes consciousness and unconsciousness, the god and the goddess, still merged but distinguished from Nammu, the void or the Self. The Father God of both religions now becomes the container rather than the contained. Self and Soul are mirror images of one another.

    Enki is the Serpent King, mate to Nammu, the Serpent Queen. The snake symbolism represents the world of primal instinct. Jung (1956/1912) calls the snake "representative of the world of instinct, especially of those vital processes which are psychologically the least accessible of all" (p. 396). That is probably why the Sumerians and numerous other people repeatedly use the snake as an archetype for cosmological material, and why it personifies the Self, the soul or the ego in their primal form. As a primal creature that renews itself by shedding its skin, which symbolizes rebirth, it is an excellent symbol of transformation. It can also be seen as an important archetype that represents the process of individuation as the instinctual life energy and the beginning of the four functions. As the initial instinct of superconsciousness, we can understand how intuition is represented in the mythology as the creating Father God, with sensation as the Child God or deceiving serpent, depending on the myth.

    The Earth Mother Goddess Ki and Earth Mother of all the living, Eve, represent the function of feeling, which, "allies itself with every sensation" (Jung, 1971/1921, p. 434). In this case, sensation would be the Serpent, either Enlil or the Serpent of Eden. On a psychological level, the numerous representations of the woman and the snake can be seen as representations of the functions of feeling and sensation in their conscious and introverted form. The appearance of Ki or Eve can be seen as the further differentiation of the functions as they separate from Nammu, the Void or the Self and become conscious. Eve becomes conscious before Adam in the myth of Genesis and the Serpent is already conscious (knowing) when he offers Eve the infamous apple. Eve, Ki, or the feminine principle (not any living woman) represent feeling as the first conscious, introverted rational function (in the human child) that is closely associated with the irrational function (in the human child) of conscious, introverted sensation or the snake.

    Nammu, superconsciousness or the Self, mates with the Father God, Enki (intuition), who is her spouse and son. Enki represents the first instinctual movement of life and the first form of consciousness, previously contained in the primal sea of undifferentiation (Self), which is not the same as total unconsciousness. In the human child, this would be the irrational and instinctual function of intuition that contains primal consciousness.

    Nammu and Enki, both archetypes of the primal waters, can be seen as personifications of the same primal energy that is described in Genesis as the separation of the primal waters. Nammu is the receptive water of the feminine and Enki is the creative water of the masculine, the human sperm that is symbolized by the serpent. The serpent who is "water," who connects with the living water, is in the water of the womb. Both describe psychologically the first differentiation of the functions as intuition separates from the Self. And both describe the biological conception and separation of the human child. It is necessary to understand my interpretation of the mythology, to see the human cell and body as containing an awareness of its own. "Our bodies are composed of energy and information" (Chopra, 1993, p. 14).

    Enki is the Father god, god of the Water, the god of Earth, and the god of Heaven, where he was one with Nammu. He is the Nammu's Serpent Lord and the god of Wisdom. Enki, after being awakened by Nammu and at her instruction, creates humanity out of clay (Campbell, 1976, p. 108). This is comparable with the symbolism of the Father God of Genesis, who creates Adam from the slime of the earth.

    Wolkstein and Kramer (1983) describe Sumerian deities:

    Out of Nammu or the Self, the four creating gods of Sumer are born: Enki, Enlil, Ki and An, which is the same fourfold pattern of Genesis and the archetypes of Father God, the Serpent, Eve, and Adam. "In practically all cultures, the division of the world into four, and the opposition of day and night, play an extremely important part" (Neumann, 1993, p. 108). This is what happens in the Sumerian mythology, as the four creating gods, what I consider to be the four functions in a state of conscious introversion, evoke the opposite positions that are unconscious. Light has been born and with it the unconscious or darkness, is also "born." In psychological terms, this darkness is the unconscious, extraverted side of the four functions.

    Of the four creating deities and as the spouse of Nammu, Enki appears to be the most important creating Sumerian male god and can be equated with the creating Father God in Genesis. Both archetypes can be seen to personify the psychic energy of the function of intuition and subjective or introverted intuition as the first movement of creation. Like Nammu, as the primal sea, Enki is the god of water, symbolizing the undifferentiated functions that exist as one in a primal state. Enki can be seen as the soul mate of Nammu, who represents the Self. Like a twin, the image used by the Sumerians when they describe the Serpent twins, he is a mirror image, the same yet different and this difference defines the beginning of the differentiation of the functions as they flow out of the Self.

    Heaven and Earth are the second set of parents to Enlil. In the Sumerian cosmology, they are Ki, the Earth goddess, and An, the god of Heaven. These two gods represent the further differentiation of the Self as the rational functions of feeling and thinking begin. Conscious thinking (Heaven) has unconscious feeling (Earth) as its mate. In other words, when thinking is conscious, feeling is unconscious, and when feeling is conscious, thinking is unconscious. Each reflects the other and both personify the conscious and the unconscious that has been divided, what Neumann (1949/1954) calls the "World Parents" (p. 103). In the Genesis myth, this energy is personified by Adam (thinking) and Eve (feeling), the first parents of humanity.

    Nammu and Enki and Ki and An are the dual parents. The Divine Child that they all give birth to is unmistakably Enlil, the god of air, who separates both sets of parents, causing the ego and consciousness, as well as the soul and unconsciousness, to begin. This would describe the function of conscious sensation (Enlil) as it awakens in the human child. This is represented as Enlil, who is asleep (unconscious) when Nammu awakens him. He is Enlil while asleep, still contained in the primal parents, and Enki when he awakens (becomes conscious), thus the Serpent Lord or mate of Nammu when awake and her child/son or Enlil when asleep. Enki, as intuition, is Nammu's spouse and Enlil or sensation is Nammu's child. Finally, Enki becomes Enlil, the son that separates the first parents (the Self). This is the function of conscious, introverted sensation. Neumann (1949/1954) describes the separation of the World Parents using Egyptian mythology; the meaning appears the same:

    Shu appears to be the same archetypal energy that Enlil represents, and both gods of air can be compared with the Serpent in Genesis, who appears to have been sleeping or absent until Eve's scene at the tree.

    Campbell (1976) compares Enlil with the Greek Kronos archetype: "An begot the air-god Enlil, who separated Earth and Heaven, tore them apart just as, in the well-known Classical myth of Hesiod, Gaia (Earth) and Uranos (Heaven) were separated by their son Kronos (Saturn)" (p. 108). A numerous pantheon was born in the Greek myth, just as the Sumerian pantheon comes into being with Enlil. The pantheon can be seen as symbolizing the numerous and powerful conscious sense perceptions of the human child. Enlil or Kronos (conscious sensation) will lead the group.

    An inversion can be seen at this point. In the Sumerian religion, Enlil is seen as a beneficial, divine creating son/child/god. He is twin Serpent to Enki, the Father God, the same but different, which describes the process of differentiation and the transformation that takes place as one function becomes two functions. In the Hebrew religion that followed, the same energy is seen as opprobrious, as the Serpent in the Garden who deceives humanity and causes the loss of Paradise. The inversion of the Hebrew mythology, however, occurs again in Christianity, where Enlil has his counterpart in the Christ archetype. Like Enlil, who is twin Serpent to the Father God and the spouse/lover of Nammu, Christ announces that he is the Son and one with the Father God. The Virgin Mary is Mother to the Son and Mother to the Father God, since they are one, in the same way that Nammu is Mother to Enki and at the same time Mother to Enlil.

    Neumann (1949/1954) describes the transition of Mother and Child as twin Serpents who later become the Madonna and the Christ Child, as something that develops over time. He states:

    What appears to have changed, from the Sumerians, to the Hebrews, to the Christians, was the perception of psychic energy or the function of conscious, introverted sensation as positive or negative. Genesis describes the loss of oneness with God, life as now separate from God, while Sumerian and Christian mythology describe the creative potential of energy that is like God or a Child of God or equal as a creating God. This is a description of the differentiation of energy from two perspectives, two opposite views that can be seen as having a common source on a depth level.

    The symbolism of the feminine principle, energy that flows out of Nammu, becomes the Earth goddess Ki, Queen of the Mountain. As an Earth Mother archetype, Ki can be compared with Eve and both represent the differentiated function of feeling, specifically introverted feeling (desire) that has become conscious, leaving its opposite of "no desire" in the unconscious. This is the creative energy of the introverted (subjective) feeling function.

    The sky god An is also a Father archetype and can be compared with Adam in Genesis. Both represent the function of introverted, conscious thinking. An and Enki are the two "father" archetypes in Sumer; Adam and The Father God of Genesis are the two "fathers" in Genesis. Adam is the first human father; God is the Heavenly Father. Rational, conscious, introverted thinking is the first function to give birth or create; irrational, introverted, conscious intuition is the first function to stir in the body of the human child as primal instinct. God is the instinct that creates the archetype (Adam) in His image.

    With the birth of consciousness in each of the rational functions, unconsciousness is also born, separating Heaven and Earth or creating the functions of feeling and thinking. These two opposites are portrayed in the Sumerian myth as the Lion-birds. Thinking and feeling and their alternating rhythms of consciousness and unconsciousness are one twin Lion-bird. The functions of feeling and thinking are opposites that in this symbol are joined as one powerful animal. In the Sumerian mythology, they are An and Ki or Heaven and Earth, separate archetypes when apart and mates when joined, which describes consciousness and unconsciousness in the thinking and feeling functions in the same way.

    Sensation and intuition, with the same oscillating rhythm, are the irrational functions that compose the other twin Lion-bird. Enki and Enlil, or intuition and sensation, like the Father God and the Serpent in Genesis, have been separated but are still joined in the image of one robust animal who contains both consciousness and unconsciousness and the power of both. The Lion-birds are personified as puissant, fabulous creatures whose primary task appears to be guarding and protecting the twin serpents and the open doors that lead back to Paradise or the Self. The guard/protector symbolism may describe the necessity of maintaining both the irrational and the rational functions in a balanced state. At the same time, they depict the process of differentiation out of the Self.

    The Serpent Twin image (see Figures 24 and 25) describes what I believe to be the same archetypal pattern contained in the cosmological image of the four creating gods of Sumer. Campbell (1964) describes the ancient image of the Serpent Lord:

    The winged dragons or lion-birds, which are equivalent to cherubs or angels (see Campbell, 1964, p. 12), link this image to the much later archetype of Lucifer, the favorite angel of God, who is transformed into the rejected child or angel and is seen as a serpent. Both images of serpent and angel appear in the later Paradise myth, the Serpent as the deceiver of Adam and Eve and the Lion-birds as the angels or cherubim who guard the entrance to Paradise with flaming swords. The same sword symbolism is present in the Sumerian image and possibly has a similar meaning. The open doors are the entrance back to Self, Void or Nammu. The copulating vipers are Nammu and her Serpent Lord, Enki or what Jung called the Divine Syzygy. Symbolized by an act of sexual love, they return to the original oneness, or if seen as coming out of the Self, which would be the case at birth, they are the first splitting of the Serpent Lord or primal energy into two, namely, the king and his queen or the ego and soul.

    The Queen Serpent Nammu, represents the undifferentiated Self, who contains the Serpent Lord and their child as one. The King Serpent represents the psychological function of conscious intuition, a reflection of the Self as an image of the soul. Thus, the Twin Serpents can be seen as the Self and the soul, followed by the soul and the ego or the two irrational functions of intuition and sensation, who now become the Serpent Twins. While in a state of unconscious sensation, Nammu's son/lover is Enlil. When unconscious sensation becomes conscious, it becomes Enki, the spouse of Nammu. The Self, the Void in Genesis, or the goddess Nammu, is always in contact with either the spouse, Enki or intuition or the child/son, Enlil or sensation. In this way, Nammu or the Self is spouse and mother simultaneously, which is often depicted in this mythology. Ego and soul have not yet been differentiated until Enlil is born, which represents the separation of the soul (intuition) and the ego (sensation) and the beginning of two separate functions in the human child.

    The bird/angel, the winged aspect of the lion-birds, represents the divine or that aspect of the creature closest to the Serpent King, God, Heaven, Spirit or the masculine principle. The body of the lion represents one of the most powerful animals on earth, often described as monarch of the jungle. The lion appears to represent the instinctual but royal nature of humanity, symbolized by being associated with the sun and the color gold, both symbols of the divine or the spiritual. The lion half of the Lion-bird archetype represents the feminine principle, being associated with Earth rather than Sky, just as the bird/angel is associated with Heaven. The dragon, lion, or serpent that has wings similar to the Greek caduceus appears to be describing the divinity of consciousness and unconsciousness that are differentiated but united in a new form as a powerful creature.

    The twin serpents of intuition and sensation stand alone as separate functions, as Jung described, and appear as opposites of one another. All extreme opposites necessarily depend on one another and are connected to one another; the psychological functions of sensation and intuition, as well as feeling and thinking, are no exception. Each of the irrational functions has a three -in-one motif that is the exact opposite of the other. I have previously described this as the unconsciousness of the functions of sensation, feeling, and thinking, while intuition is conscious. Sensation is the reverse, with feeling, thinking, and intuition unconscious (see Figures 22 and 24).

    As the first function of consciousness after birth, according to my hypothesis, sensation can be seen to stand alone. Intuition is unconscious like the two rational functions of feeling and thinking. I have previously stated the rationale for this description: From birth, feeling is the second function to become conscious because there is nothing to judge before body sensations are experienced. Thinking is the third function to become conscious, and intuition is the fourth function to become conscious after birth, which suggests a return to the first function of intuition, experienced in the womb. This is the theme of Maria's axiom, which states that one becomes two, two becomes three, three becomes four, and the fourth is a return to the first.

    In the newborn, but not necessarily later, conscious feeling would necessarily have thinking and intuition as unconscious, but sensation would be conscious and the object of all value judgment. Chopra (1993) appears to be describing the same thing: "Because there are no absolute qualities in the material world, it is false to say that there even is an independent world 'out there.' The world is a reflection of the sensory apparatus that registers it" (p. 11).

    Even though conscious feeling later "extends to every content of consciousness" (Jung, 1971/1921, p. 434), in the first round of consciousness in the ego functions, feeling would have no object of consciousness except for its own conscious, perceived body sensations. Conscious feeling would be contiguous with conscious sensation, and it might be said that conscious feeling thereafter could be defined as always containing conscious sensation even when it is seen as an independent function. Feeling is, as Jung (1971/1921) described, "allied with every sensation" (p. 434). Thus, the human infant would have one conscious rational function (feeling) and one conscious irrational function (sensation), whereas one rational function (thinking) and one irrational function (intuition) would remain unconscious. (I am describing the unfolding of the functions in the first moments of life, as I believe the myth does.)

    Jung (1971/1921), described the Syzygy archetype:

    Thus, the Divine Syzygy archetype of the Serpent Lord image can be seen as a moment frozen in time, either the Syzygy that is born out of the Self or the Syzygy before a return to the Self. The latter is what Jung describes as leading directly to the experience of individualization and the attainment of the Self.

    Sensation can be seen as negative and described as the Fallen Angel or Devil Serpent, or positive and described as the Divine Child, depending on the interpretation of the experience. In the old Sumerian myths when the consort of the goddess dies, the death describes a fall from grace and a transformation, birth as the death of oneness followed by a rebirth. If sensation is seen as positive, the myth describes the goddess and her Divine Child or the Virgin and Christ archetypes, which represent a return to Paradise motif by the reintegration of the infant back to its original state of oneness or the psychological function of intuition. Thus, the Divine Child, the psychological child and the biological child can be seen as identical experiences that occur simultaneously (see Figures 9, 10, 11, and 12).

    It is the conscious thought, for example, the god or the old thought that stands alone without its opposite, that dies, and this is necessary for a new thought to be born or created. When this sacrifice is made (often with pain and suffering as well as with unconditional love and joy), the goddess or the divine child or the father god, for they are all one and the same in intuition, gives a new thought or a new image. It is given or experienced as given by the function of conscious intuition because no effort is required after the sacrifice of the ego has been made.

    I suggest that the numerous mythologies and religions that attempt to describe this process by symbolic images and simple stories were describing, among other things, the making of an image and the process of imagination in the human psyche, as Jung was in his description of active fantasy as the product of the function of conscious intuition. That function so often referred to as the fourth is also the first, the alpha and omega of psychic energy.

    Radhakrishnan (1988) describes intuition beautifully:

    Creativity is often described as the ability to see as a child. There is every reason to believe that the human body and brain of the child are working much earlier and in most cases, in a more structured and organized manner than previously described in psychology. I believe that the process begins when life begins and is the same for an infant as it is for an adult, were we able to observe it directly. How and why a new symbol is given remains a mystery and a question to be asked. It may be that the new message given, like the message of an angel, comes from the depths of the Self, like a divine child waiting to be born. It may even be that this is the information stored in the genetic structure and human instincts of the body of the human child. If intuition is unconscious body sensation, which I believe it to be, the body would help construct the first image given to the human mind, and it would not be separate from the soul.

    The motif of the twin vipers or the Serpent's Bride that Campbell says originated in 2025 B.C. is an ancient image (see Campbell, 1964, pp. 9-10, Figure 1) that appears to be related to the much later image of an angel falling out of Heaven into Hell or the fall of Adam and Eve from Paradise to the earthly realm of human struggle. Lucifer will be discussed next, as another image of conscious, introverted sensation that falls out of Heaven (see Figure 27).

The Fall of the Divine Child/Angel, Lucifer: The Serpent Archetype and the Four Psychological Functions

    The monotheistic religions of Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Islam share a common belief in angels and demons. Most of the information concerning this archetype comes, as Godwin (1990) describes, "from outside the orthodox scriptures and canons of the four religions that believe in the existence of angels" (p. 9). Godwin (1990) says that "the term angel derives from a Greek translation of the original Hebrew Mal'akh, which originally meant the shadow side of God, but later came to mean messenger (p. 7). Both terms, Thompson (1991) also tells us, "refer to a function or status rather than an essence" (p.148).

    The four psychological functions can be seen in the same way, as messengers or angels of the human psyche or brain. The premise that I have previously presented, namely, that intuition is the first function to develop and begins in the womb as the undifferentiation of all four functions, can be applied to the myth of the Fallen Angel (see Figure 27). This is comparable to the archaic Sumerian myths that came before, as well as the Genesis myth, which came later.

    Schneiderman (1988), discussing Augustine's views concerning angels, states:

    The Serpent and Angel archetypes are both significant symbols in the Judaic-Christian religions; most of the important messages in the Old Testament come from God through the voice of an angel. Although Augustine thought it was the Lord himself speaking in the New Testament, angels are never far away on important occasions and appear to be the consequential method of communication between God and humanity.

    The myth of Lucifer and the Paradise myth in Genesis both appear to be variations of the same theme; both describe the transition of one state of being (Heaven in the first, Paradise in the second) to another state (loss of Heaven and loss of Paradise) by the symbol of a Fall (which represents a physical and psychological birth) from grace that separates first Lucifer, then Adam, Eve and the Serpent from God. Psychologically, both myths also appear to be describing the transition from the psychological function of intuition (Heaven, Paradise or being in the womb) to that of the function of sensation and ego consciousness (birth). Thus, they describe the biological or physical birth of the child and the psychological birth of the child simultaneously. This is in addition to the first level of the myth, in which the Lucifer as Divine Child myth is simply the loss of oneness with God after birth, while the Genesis myth, with Adam and Eve as the divine children, says the same thing but takes the story further.

    If the functions of intuition and sensation are mirror images or the reverse of one another (as are the functions of feeling and thinking), they would not function at the same time, although the transition from one to the other could occur expeditiously by human standards of time. To differentiate or become separate, it would be necessary for one function to become unconscious while the opposite function occurs in consciousness. This would be the beginning of not only consciousness, but also unconsciousness.

Figure 27: Lucifer

    The human child can be seen as being one in his or her individuality, while possessing two forms of consciousness, that of ego consciousness or the ability of the four functions to operate (apparently) independently of one another and that of soul consciousness or the ability of the four functions to operate as one undifferentiated function. This translates psychologically as consciousness and unconsciousness in Jungian terminology. The marriage of these two forms of consciousness can be seen as giving birth to what Campbell (1973, p. 259) describes as superconsciousness, a third position that would represent a return to one or the Self. The human child would thus be more than androgynous in nature, he or she would be tripartite or three-in-one: biological (body), psychological (soul), and spiritual (spirit). He or she could be said to possess consciousness, unconsciousness, and superconsciousness, the third being the result (child symbol) of the first two that are joined.

    In Judaic lore, Lucifer was the Bringer of Light (light being a primary symbol for consciousness), and he was also the Serpent of Darkness, symbolizing the unconscious. Peterson (1995) describes Lucifer:

    Lucifer can be seen as a personification of the human nervous system, which brings not only light, but darkness as well. He can also be seen as the bringer of consciousness, comparable with the Serpent in the Garden of Eden, with whom he is later associated. If, however, consciousness is seen as the loss of superconsciousness, light without darkness would be an opposite that lacked its other half, thus, consciousness can be seen in the pejorative way that Genesis describes. Light or consciousness and darkness or unconsciousness that has become divided would destroy Paradise.

    As the favorite angel, the Divine Child, Lucifer was one with God and lived in that middle place where consciousness and unconsciousness are not separated, but exist as one. For this reason, I equate Lucifer in his Divine Child aspect with the psychological function of intuition, which I understand to be all the functions existing as one undifferentiated function. When he falls from Heaven, Lucifer becomes the fallen angel turned Serpent, or the function of conscious sensation. The archetype or image representing this function is always subject to change, but it will always be an archetype representing the Divine Father, the Divine Mother, or the Divine Child, either as a person, animal, plant or stone, such as the philosopher's stone.

    The image of the Serpent as a deity is prevalent in cultures and religions throughout the ancient world, as is the association of the serpent with the body. Neumann (1949/1954) describes the body scheme in the following way:

    Mythology often appears to be describing body sensations when it speaks of serpents, as well as describing the human spine, which can be symbolized as the tree or twin trees or the serpent or twin serpents. The serpent image connected with the spine has its best-known representation in the Indian Kundalini mythology. Chetwynd (1982) describes body symbolism that is related to the serpent as "connected with the spinal column, which joins the physical nature (the genitals) to the spiritual nature (the head)" (p. 65).

    Because the Serpent archetype has been symbolized repeatedly in multiple and diverse religions as a god that creates humanity, or a devil who deceives humanity, I believe it can be seen as a symbol for either of the irrational functions. It is with the perceiving functions, followed by the rational functions, that the human child creates and sometimes destroys the world. If, as Freeman (1995) describes, "all knowledge originates within brains of individuals" (p. 2), the only thing known is what we ourselves create.

    The human spine delivers the message of sensation, whether conscious or unconscious. Those that come to consciousness can be seen as Lucifer after the fall, while those that remain unconscious can be seen as the Divine Child archetype, that is, unconscious sensation or intuition, still contained in God.

    It was Lucifer, angel turned serpent (or our human, animal nature, that is, the instinctual function of conscious introverted sensation), who offered the apple (consciousness) to Eve, which psychologically speaking, would mean that the function of sensation offers or introduces consciousness to the function of feeling, personified as the innocent Eve, who is still contained in God as undifferentiated energy.

    It is the subjective body experience of the human child that provides an object (of self-reference if the emphasis is placed on the subject (introversion) rather than the external object (extraversion), which would mean that the subject and object are not yet separated--the object is also the subject) on which a judgment of good or bad can be made. Eve does not use her feeling, she is the archetype that represents feeling in the human child. In the very first experiences of the human newborn, which is the topic explored here and what I believe to be an underlying theme of the cosmological material, sensation could not possibly follow feeling. Feeling that is undifferentiated is feeling that is still, like Eve, in a state of innocence. There must be an object of reference before a value judgment can be made and the only object present in the beginning is the body of the infant as it experiences body sensations stimulated by his or her experience of opposites in the world. After the first experience, and with many repetitions of sensuous or feeling experiences in the child or adult, feeling could follow sensation. How the mythology might appear to be describing that experience is another topic. The objective of this research, however, is the beginning experience of the infant (before and immediately after birth). I am not concerned with inferior or superior functions in any way. I do not believe that consciousness is superior to unconsciousness or the reverse. If anything is superior it would be the state of superconsciousness, which would describe a balanced Self.

    Western mythology usually assigns the masculine principle to consciousness and the feminine principle to unconsciousness. The subjective value judgment that states that consciousness is superior to unconsciousness has often been erroneously used and applied to living women, rather than the archetype and used against them in the most derogatory way. Not being able to see the archetypes as possible representations of psychic energy inherent in most human psyches, male and female, leads to a concrete, literal, and fundamental interpretation of the myth that has been used (especially in the Judaic-Christian religion) to subjugate and control women. That is not the fault of the myth but the shortcoming of those who interpret any literature in a rigid, simplistic, and concrete way, ignoring the implications of metaphor.

    It appears logical to me to assume that a pure phenomenological experience of the body can and does exist that is free of a value judgment, but the reverse does not appear to be logically true. No value judgment can be made that does not refer to an object of some kind. In addition, if sensation is an irrational and instinctual function, it would necessarily precede feeling as a rational function, and as Jung (1971/1921) stated, be "the matrix out of which thinking and feeling develop as rational functions" (p. 454).

    Conscious sensation seeks to divide and separate, giving specific knowledge of the object as perceived by the subject. It appears reasonable to me to assume that a function that gives a picture of the whole would precede a function that gives specific isolated information and that sensation would be the function that flows out of intuition, and not the other way around.

    Intuition may provide what is perceived as catastrophic and evil information; the function itself, however, has always been identified with a Divine God or Goddess or a variation of the Divine Child archetype, such as the angel. Because intuition appears to me to be the function that contains all the other functions, the Father God archetype in the Judaic-Christian religion appears to be the closest description of this energy. One function contains them all, just as one Father God contains everyone in Paradise. This, from my perspective, supports the premise that Paradise is in the womb, where all functions are contained in potential form, including the ego, which is first represented by the sleeping or absent Serpent.

    The function of sensation, unlike intuition, has not been associated with the divine, but just the reverse. Body knowledge, carnal knowledge has its best representative in the idea of sin and separation from God. This is my rationale for defining the Father God as an archetype for the function of conscious, introverted intuition and the Serpent as an archetype for the function of conscious introverted sensation. It is also my rationale for seeing the first function present in the fetus as the intuitive one and the second function present as that of sensation, which begins at birth and like Lucifer, brings consciousness, and at the same time, darkness or unconsciousness. He then becomes the angel or Prince of darkness. From my reading of the myth, this describes the split, which is not in consciousness, really, but in the superconsciousness or Self that preceded it. We can know little or nothing without a return to that state, which may necessitate first a return to the function of intuition. If it is the first function to flow out of the Self, the ego complex merged with what I am calling the soul complex, would precede the ego and ordinary ego consciousness. It would be the splitting of the merged ego/soul that creates them as separate functions and separate complexes, the soul being attached to the function of intuition and the unconscious, and the ego being attached to the function of sensation and consciousness.

    The image of the woman or goddess and the serpent together is described in numerous mythologies other than the Judaic-Christian one, and they are all probably attempting to describe psychic energy and the relationship of the two functions of conscious, introverted sensation and conscious, introverted feeling. (See Johnson, 1988 for numerous descriptions and images of the relationship of the goddess and the serpent.)

    The first cry of the newborn is negative feeling that judges (bad) when he or she perceives, by conscious body sensation, a lack of something, namely, the loss of the merged opposites, when conscious sensation is first experienced. This is knowledge (known by and through the body) of the opposites of good and evil and produces the first value judgment, which is followed by the first emotion (love that desires, that is, ego love) of the human child, the only animal on earth capable of shedding tears, a physical manifestation of the body functions of sensation and feeling. This is personified in the Genesis myth as the Serpent and Eve or in the myth of the Fallen Angel, simply as the Serpent or the function of conscious, introverted sensation, with the earth representing the mother or the feminine. The value judgment of the feeling function is pure phenomenological experience brought on by the first phenomenological experience of the sensations experienced in the body. Feeling is not identical with affect, as Jung (1971/1921) described when he said:

    Feeling that "allies itself with every sensation" is describing body sensation and what Jung did not say is that this is possibly because the body sensation precedes every possible feeling, which in turn would precede every possible affect. Without a perception of the sensation there would be nothing to judge or value and without the value judgment it could not turn into an affect. Jung (1971/1921) describes this when he goes on to say:

    In this short description, Jung distinguishes the difference between the feeling function and affect or human emotion and suggests that they are separate aspects of psychic energy, but aspects that are closely related, because it is the intensity of the value judgment given by the feeling function that creates or, as Jung puts it, turns into affect or human emotion. Obviously affect can be brought on by any of the functions in ordinary life. However, at birth or shortly thereafter, feeling will turn into an affect based only on conscious body sensations or perception of the body experience. If intuition and thinking are unconscious, as I believe them to be, they will not be evaluated; the conscious evaluation will be concerning the conscious sensate experience. Sensation will flow out of intuition and proceed to conscious feeling, which will register as an unconscious thought in the thinking function.

    I think that Jung's description of feeling is adequate in every respect and can be applied to the infant at birth, which the mythology is describing in another, more pictorial manner, using the images and archetypes as personifications of minute psychic energy that is difficult, but not impossible, to describe by other means. Lucifer, as the Serpent/Devil archetype and one of the important archetypes in Judaic-Christian mythology, appears to me to be the personification of the psychic energy contained in the function of conscious introverted sensation. If that is so, his importance as an archetype may be important to developmental psychology that attempts to see archetypes and mythology as instinctual patterns of energy that represent psychological experience.

    Godwin (1990) describes Lucifer, the Fallen Angel archetype, as the "Morning Star" (see Figure 33) archetype:

    Lucifer's image obviously did not begin with Hebrew mythology, but had its roots in other ancient, primitive religions. Serpent gods were prevalent in these cultures without the pejorative connotations of the Genesis myth. Campbell (1964) tells us: "In Eve's scene at the tree, nothing is said to indicate that the serpent who appeared and spoke to her was a deity in his own right, who had been revered in the Levant for at least seven thousand years before the composition of the Book of Genesis" (emphasis mine, p. 9).

    That the archetypes and, particularly, the archetype of the Serpent Lord, which was the probable prototype for Lucifer and the Serpent in Genesis, are repeated in numerous mythologies down through the centuries, indicates that they are universal and that they represent psychological and physical experience. Cosmological myths or any myth of beginnings, such as Lucifer, contain a description of primal individual experience, the microcosm contained within an apparent description of the macrocosm, mirror reflections of one another and identical. It is for this reason that the cosmological myths can be seen as an attempt to describe not only the creation of the world, but the creation of the human child, as she or he creates the world. They are, therefore, relevant to developmental psychology, which thus far has only hinted at this connection.

    The myth of Lucifer as the Fallen Angel may not be described in the orthodox scriptures, yet the influence of this myth upon those religions that describe angels cannot be underestimated. This is particularly true of Christianity, because without the Fall of both Lucifer and mankind, there would be no need for the redemption by Christ. If this is so, a psychological interpretation of the myth of angels, and especially the myth of the fallen angel as a prototype of fallen man, appears relevant.

Moses as Divine and Human Child: The Hero Archetype, Confidant of Angels

    The motif of the fallen angel and the motif of fallen humanity both appear to be related to the abandoned child/hero archetype, who usually is a divine or magical child, and like Lucifer or Adam and Eve, has lost his original parents or original home. The purpose of his journey is to find what was lost, what Campbell calls "his ultimate god." Campbell (1973) describes the hero thus:

    Moses is an archetype of the hero, expressing the dual nature of man (see Figure 29). Moses, as Divine Child and confidant of angels describes in Genesis how the human child creates or co-creates the world with God. Moses, as archetype for the human child, tells the world that he was once one with God, is now separated and must make his way back to the Promised Land, a symbol describing the Self. This describes the universal human attempt to reconcile the opposites of consciousness and unconsciousness, or soul and ego.

    The child lifted from the water represents the first separation of the four functions from the primal Self of undifferentiation. This is the first mother (parents) of Moses, contained in the Self and the soul. This is also another version of the separation of the primal waters, the Self personified as the primal mother and intuition personified as the primal father. From the separation of the Self to the soul or intuitive function describes the first instinctual movement of life and twilight consciousness or the beginning male God. The undifferentiated functions are contained in one function, intuition, which is the first light or form of consciousness (the instinctual and unconscious body sensations of the human child). Unconsciousness and undifferentiation that tips the scales on the side of consciousness represents the Father God, who is now the container, while the Self that remains (the equilibrium has been altered) is usually personified as unconscious undifferentiation or the Mother. In this way the primal parents have been separated by the Son, the Divine Child of intuition, who represents both parents but is a male child, showing himself to be a replica, a beginning aspect of the Father God or consciousness. The loss of both parents (the Orphan archetype) represents the transition from: first, the Mother (Self that contains All) to the Father (Soul that contains All) and finally to the experience of birth and the function of conscious sensation (the tragic and heroic ego). Consciousness and unconsciousness, the original parents, have been separated entirely, becoming the ego and the soul divided, with the Divine Child as the middle or connecting symbol, which can be called superconsciousness. The Divine Child's duty, as Campbell tells us, is to restore the unity in multiplicity that he once knew, by a return to the Mother, which is a return to the soul or Self, both being a state of undifferentiation. The soul (intuition) will come first, the first function to become conscious and the one necessary for a return trip.

Figure 28: Moses from Water

Figure 29: Hero Archetype

    Angels often appear to those who see or hear them, as something entirely other than their own psyche or as a gift from God. Intuitive knowledge that appears to come from outside oneself or which is not based on ordinary logic can appear as an angel, especially if this is in the belief system of the individual. This knowledge is then experienced by the feeling function and expressed by the thinking function in the form of an archetype that describes the experience of the received message. This is a similar view to that of Princeton psychologist Julian Jaynes, described by Springer and Deutsch (1981) concerning early Homo Sapiens:

    Whether gods or angels, the message appears to come from the intuitive function and is then expressed by the thinking function or active thinking, both of which could be described as the "executive part called god." The "follower part called man" would correlate with the functions of sensation and feeling. Consciousness is ego consciousness, however, and does not come about without its opposite, unconsciousness, which can be seen as the silent goddess. I find it difficult to imagine, however, that early man did not have body consciousness in much the same way that modern man does, and it is possible that he had thoughts that he did not attribute to the gods. Certain otherwise unexplainable thoughts could be supposed to come from something other than from himself, which describes intuitive knowledge in many cases.

    Identifying the human and psychological method of functioning does not refute the existence of God in any way, which the above quote might imply; what these ideas support is that God can only be known directly by individual human experience, which is a ancient idea.

    The Divine Child archetype or the Angel archetype fits the psychological function of intuition quite well since the message of intuition often appears as something given with no effort extended by the receiver. Jung's description of an attitude of conscious expectation would necessitate an already existing thought that a god or an angel would respond to the expected message.

    The impact of this can appear as a simple knowing, such as knowing who is on the other end of the ringing telephone, or as a Divine revelation, such as the ten commandments that Yahweh gave to Moses. Moses obviously expected God to reply and had an attitude of conscious expectation as he was given the message. This is how Jung described active fantasy as the product of conscious intuition. God or an angel of God gave the Word, but it was Moses (as Divine Child) who expressed that word by writing it on a stone and delivering the message to his people. In this sense, Moses was God's messenger. He is also reputedly the author of Genesis and several other books of the Old Testament, therefore, his archetypal influence upon the course of the Western world cannot be overestimated. Moses is the Divine Child and the story, the archetype that Moses gave to the world, is also the Divine Child. He personifies the human child, who creates his or her own reality, a reality based on the experience of the past, on what appears to be the known objective world, coupled with what is unknown, the message of God or angels from the inner world of the soul or Self. This describes the ego/body that is conscious, the soul, which appears unconscious, and the dynamics of human struggle to reconcile the opposites. The tragic Hero archetype, the ego/body that experiences the known world as separate from the subjective soul, overcomes the Dragon, which in the end is nothing more than himself, the innocent ego.

    Every creation depends first on a destruction: Time cannot exist without a concept of eternity: The word is born out of silence. What is visible was first invisible. The feminine principle was associated with the dark and shadow side of God, later personified as Eve, the Mother of all the living. It is the Divine Child, as a symbol of the middle, that connects these two opposites and represents them as two aspects, one masculine and one feminine, of one undivided God in the form of the Divine Child God.

    At this level, the Divine Child is Moses, Christ, Hermes, Mercury, Eros, or any archetype that represents a Divine Child, and psychologically, that part of every individual that is divine. The Divine Child also becomes the messenger, the angel of God or the Son of God, an idea similar to Thompson's (1991) description of angels. He says that "the idea of angels as gods, sons of gods, servants, ministers, watchers, holy men, appears throughout the ancient civilized world" (p. 148). The angel closest to God appears to be energy that is neutral and undifferentiated, energy that contains the opposites existing as one with God.

    Angels and demons are another splitting of the opposites, like the knowledge of good and evil, or the splitting of the Self (the unconscious body, soul or intuition) and body (the conscious ego) or an archetype that contains both in one, like an Archangel or a Divine Child. The hierarchy of angels described in Judaism and later in Christianity appears to replace the hierarchy of the Greek and Roman gods, who had only a few winged messengers, the most important ones being Hermes and Eros. When the multiple gods in Greek mythology became one God in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, angels flourished much in the same way as the old gods of Rome and Greece. Hermes, the Greek messenger of the gods, known for his double nature can be seen as the same energy as Lucifer and the Archangel Michael, or later Lucifer and Christ, a splitting of the archetype that would shape and define Judaism and Christianity.

    Hermes, as a Divine Child, represented a god of wholeness, and was associated with the number four, as Kerenyi (1990) shows us when he says that "the fourth day of the month was sacred not only to Hermes but also to Aphrodite, who is closely connected to him in other ways as well" (pp. 21-22). As an angel archetype, Hermes represents an angel of what would later be called the highest order; as a Divine Child archetype, he appears close to all the Greek gods and chosen to deliver their messages. Both Hermes and Eros can be seen as angel archetypes, and both are archetypes of the Divine Child. Both can also be seen as having a double nature or, put in another way, both possess two kinds of consciousness, soul and ego. In Judaism, the Divine Child/Tragic Hero is Moses.

    Moses appears in Judaism as the first important personification of the Divine Child archetype, who is also human and of humble birth, indicating his dual nature. Thus, Moses can be seen as an example of the child on all three levels, the Divine, the psychological, and the biological.

    Campbell (1964) says that "The name Moses itself is Egyptian. It is the normal word for 'child' and occurs among the names, for example, of the pharaohs of Dynasty XVIII" (p. 128). Moses also means to draw out (mashah), and it was his new mother, the Egyptian princess, who drew him out of the water and named him Moses, or Child taken from the water. Thus, it is the child archetype that leads the Jewish people out of Egypt and bondage, an idea that was to be continued in Christianity with the words of Christ. "Amen, I say unto you: whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a child, shall not enter into it" (Luke 18:16).

    Moses, who leads the people out of Egypt, does not enter the Promised Land and is only allowed to view it from the top of a mountain before he dies. The Divine Child gets a quick glance at the perfect place, but is denied entrance because of the sins of the earth child (his human nature) and then dies. This, I believe, describes his personification as the Divine Child of the introverted thinking function, which must "die" before a new thought can be born.

    His successor is Josue (Joshua), which is the same name as Jesus in Hebrew, and both mean saviour. It seems rather curious that Moses, who was the greatest prophet thus far and who labored so intensely for Yahweh should be denied the final victory of going into the Promised Land. As a Tragic Hero archetype that represents the ego, I believe the myth is describing the necessity of the withdrawal (a symbolic death) of the human ego nature, in order to return to God or the Self.

    This transition, from Moses as the old leader, to Josue (Joshua) as the new leader, is important for several reasons. It can be seen as a crossroads symbol, a place where opposites converge, as the old (Moses or ego) gives way to the new (Josue or saviour), and at the very point of convergence, they become identical. The death of Moses symbolizes the death of the Earth or human Child (ego) and can be compared with the death of Christ, who is also a Divine Child (ego as Hero) archetype. And Josue, who succeeds Moses, has the same name as Christ, Jesus or saviour. It is by death that the Divine Child enters into the Promised Land and becomes the saviour, which was the same experience of the crucified Christ many years later.

    Psychologically, this can be seen as the death of the ego and the differentiated ego functions, which return the human child to the state of original oneness or to the state of the undifferentiated functions of sensation, feeling, thinking, or intuition, the instinct that becomes archetype of Divine Child. Mystical experience described in all major religions appear to support this idea. The ego and ego consciousness, both reflections of the Father God, who says "I AM," reflect the worship of consciousness, which necessarily negates the opposite position or worship of the Goddess, who is now represented as the golden calf, another child symbol, this time connected to animals (instincts) and the feminine, as the cow was sacred to the Egyptians. The thinking function, as the end product of all the ego functions, was hailed as the one true God and associated with Adam and the masculine, while the feeling function, associated with Eve, desire, the feminine, and her close relationship with the serpent or the function of conscious sensation, were oppressed. The Word was the only true image, and all other images, seen to be worshipped as though they were gods, were to be forsaken. Thus, the archetype itself, especially as the written word, became a Divine Child. It told a story that necessarily contained the opposites and what was accepted as "true" negated the opposite position to "false." The conscious position negated the opposite position to the unconscious. The Goddess or the unconscious was destined to return, however, contained in the Divine Child archetype (her lover and her son), who expresses both principles, masculine and feminine, in one archetype. With the death of the ego in the conscious thinking function, the unconscious position can be seen, uniting the opposites by the Divine Child archetype.

    Campbell (1964), put it thus concerning the Earth Mother:

    This describes the hero unwilling to make the sacrifice or "die," that is, return to the mother, soul, or undifferentiated state.

    Moses has a dual nature, and the Divine aspect of that nature will appear as something outside himself in the form of an angel sent by God. God's angel appeared to Moses in a flame of fire, and many divine revelations in the Old and New Testaments are dreams or visions accompanied by an angel.

    It would seem that Yahweh gave the Word to a child archetype, who was to become the spokesperson for the Father God and the deliverer of God's message to His people. The myth of Moses appears to be telling us that the child, which his name suggests, creates the Word and the world. The psychological functions that Moses represents most are first, intuition (Divine Child), and second, sensation (human child and Tragic Hero or ego). That which he received and expressed through the conscious, subjective ego thinking function, with the suppression of feeling, was attributed to the Divine Father God.

    The Word, written on stone by God and given to Moses, represents the archetype itself, the manifestation of all instinctual experience given form by language and the thinking function. The first level of the story, indeed, the total myth itself is the Divine Child; it expresses the experience of its teller not only in the spoken word, but by the written word, a feat that no other animal on earth can duplicate. As a metaphor, the written word has the power to describe two or more seemingly unrelated topics that can on a deeper level be seen as the expression of one meaning. Fact and fiction, two opposites that appear divided, can be seen as having a single source, united by the archetype of the Divine Child.

    "And there arose no more a prophet in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face" (Deuteronomy 34: 10). As the greatest prophet in Israel, Moses as a Divine Child archetype, saw God face to face. I will conclude this chapter with the following idea: It is the child, like Moses, human and divine, who sees God (known by and through the body) and is co-creator of the universe, recording his or her experience, creating the archetype that was first an instinct.

    This takes place in the psychological and instinctual function of intuition, where mother, father, and child archetypes exist as one and the function of thinking, which seeks to express that oneness by the archetype. Active thinking is the fruit of passive thinking. Sensation and feeling are the root and tree that bears them both, the living experience that finds a voice in the archetype, records and gives form to history, literature, religion, art, and science.

---> On to Chapter 5 --->

<--- Back to Table of Contents <---