Posts by hiddenhound3

Jeremy Palmer said:Aside from the Jungian canon, I haven't read much regarding symbols. I was truly captivated when I learned how he consciously stepped into psychosis, guided by instructions from the Tibetan Book of the Dead—essentially choosing to fracture his own psyche just to navigate what lies beyond the reach of the logical mind.

Personally (as I’ve mentioned before), as a spiritual traveler, I use symbols as signposts along the way. As an artist, I let them work through me, allowing my subconscious to express itself via symbols. When I'm feeling lost, I might pull some Tarot cards, or I simply track and record the symbolism appearing in my dreams... For me, that's a practical way to learn their language. I don't think extra intellectual study of literature is strictly necessary. It can be fun, sure, but it isn't a requirement.

The more a person moves away from the intellect—which we naturally do during meditation, spirituality, any kind of creative flow, art, or even in romantic relationships—the more we tap into a form of communication with the "other side" that bypasses the linear, logical mind entirely. This is a visual language where symbols and archetypes serve as the grammar. An image doesn't need an explanation; it is understood instinctively. So, I’m with you on this: symbols should be experienced, not just intellectually dissected.

In fact, an intellect that tries to force everything into a rigid mental grid—into a system that is tidy, clear, and logically consistent—often just gets in the way of the awakening process. This internal psychic evolution happens through the language of symbols and archetypes, yielding insights that are often fluid, weaving together subtle psychic and spiritual truths that tend to defy logic altogether...

I share a very similar experience to yours. Occasionally, through my dreams, the symbolic language presents the reality of my life in a remarkably direct manner—situations that I otherwise perceive as chaotic or confusing due to social complexities and intellectual frameworks. Furthermore, my attitudes toward myself and others frequently manifest in much clearer forms through these symbols. Many of the insights I have recorded were presented to me with striking clarity through symbolic language, whether within my dreams or during semi-lucid states.

My own fascination with symbolism deepened as I encountered the Bible, Christianity, and various other religions that crossed my path. I could never simply take the contents of holy scriptures, myths, fairy tales, or fables at face value, yet I found it impossible to ignore the profound messages they convey. Consequently, I began to study symbolism more deeply, finding that Carl Jung resonated with me most profoundly because he refuses to overlook the emotional dimension of our relationship with religious and transcendent phenomena.

Edward Flores4 said:Exactly. For some people, Carl Jung is the ultimate starting point for everything, while for others, he’s just one piece of a much larger puzzle. I'm not entirely sure which specific texts you're looking at that don't include someone like Joseph Campbell—whose work builds directly on Jung's foundation, but actually dives much deeper into the subject matter after spending a lifetime expanding on things Jung only scratched the surface of.

Anyway... now that you're interested in the symbolism tied to religion, mysticism, mythology, and history, at least you know the name of the one author who has tackled this seriously and successfully over the last fifty years. Because, honestly, there aren't many other sources quite like him... regardless of what anyone else might say. Of course... feel free to try and prove me wrong by listing your own sources... maybe you've stumbled upon something I completely missed, and if that's the case, I'd genuinely love to know what it is.

take it however you want; it'll be best for you and all of us if you just do what you want to do.

That’s what I thought too... which is why I was so thrown off by your attempt to lecture me on what, how, and why I should write, or even how exactly I should communicate with you.

semiotics and linguistics aren't things to be ignored—not at all—but in this instance, you were simply uninformed. That's why I intentionally cited Jung, just to show you that I wasn't making stuff up on the fly (heaven forbid I actually use my 🤣), but even that has nothing to do with what you were trying to convince me of—that Christ is an icon.

I'll be polite and skip over that part because I have no desire to insult or belittle you... even though a comment like that almost deserves it. Look, if you can reflect on the past and just acknowledge that little lapse in judgment, we can probably avoid some awkward exchanges.

And if that doesn't happen... I'll be more than happy to dive into your "intentional" use of Jung, and the fact that since his time, the sheer volume of knowledge and our models for understanding it have expanded significantly. We don't just treat every single thing Jung wrote as the absolute final word anymore. Especially considering that Jung's work actually PRECEDED the formalization of semiotics as a discipline—the field that systematically studies symbols, icons, and indices and draws clear distinctions between those three categories. The reality that symbols and icons can switch roles led to the development of parallel analyses of the syntagm and the paradigm; basically, when we talk about symbolic meaning, we're establishing the syntagm, whereas iconographic meaning falls under the paradigm.

Unfortunately, Jung didn't live to see those disciplines evolve, which is why his writings don't cover them. However, thinkers like Noam Chomsky, Joseph Campbell, Marshall McLuhan, and others certainly do.

I find myself unable to agree with your perspective; I believe that Jung delved incredibly deep, perhaps even profoundly so, as his observations were born from his own lived experiences. He was never a mere theorist who simply organized information and paraphrased existing ideas; his books were not compiled through study, but rather through direct experience. This distinguishes him fundamentally from the theorists you mention, which is why Jung remains my absolute cornerstone in these matters. While I do not intend to diminish the validity of your sources, my primary source is actually the very origin of your authorities, making it both more immediate and more essential.

Furthermore, there are other scholars who have engaged quite seriously with symbolism, imagery, and visions, such as Mircea Eliade.

Edward Flores4 said:So, we'll just have to wait and see how people react... no need to play guessing games here.🙂

Everything can function as a symbol. I’m not talking about the physical figure of Christ, but rather his ontological significance.

Whatever.

But let's not get bogged down in nitpicking trivialities—like whether Christ is a symbol or an icon right now.

Is that a polite request or more of a demand...? I'm having a hard time deciding.🤷

Anyway... those "trivialities" are actually what we call semiotics and linguistics, and personally, I find them pretty vital to the conversation. It feels a bit off to me when people skip over those details, especially since the topic is already on the table. Don't take this the wrong way, though—on a forum like this, there aren't really "people"... it's just a massive collection of ideas and perspectives floating around.

We will see, though I am not entirely certain if such distinctions even matter; I write as the thought carries me, without any specific agenda. My only aim while spending my time here is to clarify the subject matter—though, for the record, I have mastered the material and completed my assignments quite thoroughly, even if it seems we have been drawing from different sources. Those who feel inspired should certainly write or read as they please, and besides, wiredbear2 and Jeremy Palmer have already contributed some rather insightful points..

Is that a request or a demand...? I find myself somewhat undecided 🤷

Interpret it however you wish; it would be best for both you and the rest of us if you simply acted according to your own inclinations 😉

Regardless... those "minor details" are actually known as semiotics and linguistics, and I consider them to be quite significant. It felt unnecessary to withhold my perspective when the topic was already being discussed. Please do not take this personally, as there are no actual individuals on this forum... there is only a collection of ideas and various opinions. [

Semiotics and linguistics are by no means subjects to be overlooked, but in this instance, you were simply misinformed. I intentionally cited Jung to demonstrate that these concepts are not merely my own inventions—heaven forbid I should attempt to use my own brain 🤣—but even that remains entirely irrelevant to the point you were attempting to make regarding whether Krist is an icon.

Water stands as an incredibly potent element, carrying a vast spectrum of symbolic interpretations. It ranges from themes of purification and transformation to the concept of rebirth, serving as a profound magical and religious symbol throughout the sacred texts of various global cultures.

Perhaps most significant is the interpretation of water as a symbol of renewal, which imbues it with a distinct initiatory function. In American Christianity, for instance, this is beautifully illustrated through the rite of baptism, which is essentially nothing less than an initiation into the faith.

Beyond water, the egg also serves as a powerful symbol of rebirth. This connection is likely why creatures such as birds, snakes, turtles, frogs, and fish hold such vital roles within our mythologies and folklore.



In this particular Dalí painting, we see a golden egg surrounded by a multitude of butterflies, which represent the soul.

wiredbear2 said:It is precisely the unspoken symbols that hold the greatest power. By that, I mean they aren't "logos"—visible, material things that everyone recognizes, such as a cross, a pentagram, or other drawn icons.
Both Jesus and Buddha function as symbols. Of what? They represent their respective belief systems and the philosophies they anchor. This holds true for all the other myths and traditions found within our history. Every story concerning creation and the essence of humanity is told through symbolism. The entire Greek pantheon is essentially pure symbolism. For instance, the god Pan serves as a symbol of nature within the Roman pantheon. What matters is the narrative behind them. All the central figures in these stories are symbols of certain phenomena, endowed with human qualities. Isis represents creation, motherhood, transformation, change, intuition, and femininity. Osiris symbolizes strength, initiation, reason, light, and stability. Horus is the promise of life returning, the victory of light over darkness. Through these figures, one symbolically explains the duality of nature, the constant flux of life and death, and the cyclical movement of everything, whether we are looking at the Earth or the vast cosmos...
In this way, humanity has woven its own myths regarding life and death, creation and decay, chaos and order—all through the medium of symbols.

As I have previously stated, it is my firm conviction that Christ and Buddha carry identical symbolism—specifically, the symbolism of the Self, a concept which Jung himself explored extensively.
(The Self, or the "true self" of an individual, acts as the transcendent center of the psyche that paradoxically contains it. Jung explicitly equated this with the Atman from the Chandogya Upanishads, the nature described in Zen Buddhism texts, the Philosopher's Stone, and the Nous of Plotinus. Within various traditions, according to Jung, the Self most frequently manifests as the primordial man: Adam Kadmon in Kabbalistic Judaism, the Mahapurush in Hinduism, the Anthropos in Gnosticism, Christ as the Logos in Christianity, and Buddha in Buddhism.)

When interpreting this metaphysically, the Sun—and by extension, gold—along with the various deities in different religions that follow the path of the Sun, serves as the element within visions, allegories, and dreams that points toward the Self.

For instance, God Pan represents nature within the Roman pantheon. The underlying narrative is what truly matters here. All the primary figures in such stories function as symbols for certain phenomena, merely being endowed with human characteristics.

I appreciate you reminding me of Pan. He also possesses incredibly potent symbolism; he is, in essence, a symbol for everything that surrounds us—nature itself—which is precisely where the philosophical teachings of pantheism originate.



Jeremy Palmer made several profound points, observations that had crossed my mind as well, though I have struggled to articulate them into a coherent piece of writing.😬

Edward Flores4 said:The topic itself feels a bit too broad to just patch up like this—honestly, I doubt most spiritual seekers would find this approach very engaging.

I'm not confused.

An icon (derived from the Greek εἰκών, eikōn) is a sacred piece of art, typically a painting, rooted in Eastern Orthodoxy. More broadly, the term is applied across various fields to mean an Image, a picture, or a representation; it acts as a sign or a likeness that stands in for an object by signifying it either through direct resemblance or by analogy—kind of like how we use semiotics; furthermore, in our modern world, "icon" is often used more generally to describe a symbol—think of a famous name, a face, a landmark, or even a person who is instantly recognizable because they embody specific qualities: essentially, it's one thing—a visual or conceptual depiction—that represents something much deeper through literal or metaphorical meaning, often tied to religious, cultural, political, or economic importance.

As you can see... your definition is describing exactly what an icon is. 🙂

And as for Christ, he doesn't necessarily have to be an icon. Many theorists don't view him strictly as a historical figure, interpreting him instead as a symbol of the self (like the Sun or the cross), which implies that each of us carries that Christ within.

An icon doesn't require the subject to be a real or even a fictional person. The "My Computer" icon on your desktop was never a living breathing being, yet it's still called an icon. You, unlike "my Computer," are a living person, but a photograph of you is still your icon.

Symbolism is incredibly layered, and without a basic grasp of semiotics, it's going to be pretty tough to navigate this.

I disagree; dreams and phobias speak the symbolic language of the subconscious, and the subconscious remains a deeply fascinating realm for anyone on a spiritual path.😉

An icon does not necessitate that the subject was a real or unreal person. The "my Computer" icon on your desktop was never a living being, yet it is still referred to as an icon. You, unlike "my Computer," are a living individual, but your photograph serves as your icon regardless.

Symbolism is a complex field, and without a foundational understanding of semiotics, one will find it difficult to navigate.

Anything can serve as a symbol. I am not merely discussing the figure of Christ, but rather his ontological significance (as we all know, language can sometimes clarify and at other times obscure). It is not solely Jesus Christ who represents the self; there is also Buddha, and the Sun (along with all other solar deities). Beyond that, the intellectual level alone will never suffice to grasp the true nature of symbols. You possess a very strong capacity for intellectualization, but that is simply not enough and as a result, I find myself unable to convey my thoughts to you, or perhaps you are unable to grasp what I am attempting to explain.

Therefore, if you wish to contribute to this thread, please do so; I have no objection, and perhaps it might provide me with a clearer insight into your concept. However, let us not bicker over trivialities or insignificant details regarding whether Christ is a symbol or an icon, when to the entire American Christian population, Christ stands as the symbol of the way, the truth, and the life... so, shall we proceed? 😉

Edward Flores4 said:I’m happy to welcome this topic, but honestly, I think you might be skipping a few steps here!

If you’re actually interested in symbols, you first have to figure out what they truly *are*—how they affect people, why they work the way they do, and specifically why certain shapes trigger certain responses instead of others.

Just cataloging symbols without answering those fundamental questions isn't going to get you very far... at that point, it just becomes a hobby, kind of like collecting postage stamps where the designs are basically arbitrary.

Until you understand why some road signs use an inverted triangle, others use a square, some are circular, and others are octagonal... trying to interpret symbols is pretty much meaningless.

Plus, you tripped up on a mistake right at the start... maybe even two. 🙂

The Swastika is a SPIRAL... it's not a cross. A Swastika represents dynamic energy, whereas a Cross is the complete opposite... it symbolizes stasis, literally "fixing" things in place. Think about it—gravestones were being marked with crosses long before Christianity took hold, because the dead don't move anymore—so their resting places are marked with a "non-dynamic" symbol.

The second mistake is that you're blurring the line between icons and symbols. Sure, icons can carry symbolic weight, but their primary purpose is to carry specific connotations. Ganesh and Jesus on the Cross are ICONS, not just symbols. What you described were essentially the connotations associated with those two figures—Ganesh and Jesus. There is a massive difference there, and failing to see it is a major pitfall.

In other words, symbolism is something I’d be pretty hesitant to try and explain to someone else, so just be careful that you aren't accidentally spreading misinformation to other members of the forum, even with the best intentions. 😉

Fair enough, but perhaps you could greet this discussion by helping me fill in the gaps that have emerged in my own understanding.

The Swastika is a SPIRAL... not a cross.

Indeed, you make a valid point; the Swastika is more accurately interpreted as a 'wheel,' specifically the wheel of fortune.

Another error lies in your conflation of icons and symbols.

I am not conflating them. When I referenced Ganesha, I was speaking of him as a figure with whom the Swastika is intimately linked, often depicted right there upon his palm.

As for Christ, he does not necessarily have to be viewed strictly as an icon; many theorists do not perceive him merely as a historical figure, and accordingly, they interpret him as a symbol of the Self (the Sun, the Cross), implying that the Christ resides within each of us.

In other words, symbolism is something I would also be hesitant to attempt to explain to someone else, so please be careful not to inadvertently misinform forum members, even with the best of intentions.😉

On the contrary, I would very much welcome hearing your specific perspective on this matter.🙂

Eric Lopez2 said:Thelemic vibes!
Any thoughts on how to weave all these together—69, 8, infinity, the Cross and Sun, sun and moon, pentagram and hexagram, yin and yang, circle and dot, IO, spear and chalice—into one coherent narrative?
Agape!

Even if I wanted to, I couldn't possibly tackle all of those at once; please, give me a slightly more manageable task.🙂

Swastika also functions as one of the many variations of the Cross = Sun.



It appears most frequently within Hindu traditions and maintains an incredibly close connection to the deity Ganesha.



Ganesha is revered as the God of wisdom, righteousness, and prosperity, serving as the divine protector of all beginnings.

He is honored at the commencement of all ceremonies, prayers, weddings, or any other significant life events. It is believed that he was the scribe for the epic Mahabharata, which was dictated to him by the great sage Ved Vyasa. The image of Mr. Ganesh graces the entrances of many homes because it is believed to invite good fortune and robust health. Devout followers pray to Ganeshi with deep faith and dedication, asking him to clear all obstacles from their path. They offer him sweets and observe fasts in his honor. There are numerous fascinating legends surrounding his birth; here is one:

Ganesha was born from the divine essence of Shiva and Parvati. Parvati fashioned him out of clay and breathed life into him. At that time, Shiva was deep in meditation, and upon emerging, he intended to enter Parvati’s private chambers. However, she was bathing at the moment and instructed Ganesha to permit no one entry. Shiva remained quite persistent, yet Ganesha would not yield. A conflict ensued, resulting in Shiva severing Ganesha's head. Upon witnessing this, Parvati implored Shiva to restore him to life. Shiva complied by placing upon him the head of the first creature he encountered, which happened to be an elephant. Seeing this, Parvati promised Ganesha that he would be the first to be worshipped, and granted him the power to remove all impediments.

Ganesha is regarded as a benevolent being who delights in assisting those who call upon him. He brings both spiritual and worldly success. His iconography depicts him in standing, seated, or reclining positions, always facing directly forward. On his elephantine head, there is a missing portion of the trunk, which he sometimes holds in one of his four hands. In another hand, he may hold an axe, symbolizing the cutting away of illusion and false teachings. A third hand holds a small whip, much like those used by mahouts, representing the logic used to puncture illusion. He invariably holds sweets—which he is fond of—in one hand, while another hand is typically held in the mudra of strength. Around his waist, he holds a serpent. Beside him sits a mouse, his vehicle. Just as a mouse can squeeze through any crevice, Ganesha removes all obstacles, no matter how insurmountable they may seem.

Ganesha holds immense significance, and his birthday is celebrated in August. He is married to Siddha (success) and Buddhi (intellect). Furthermore, he is the father of two sons, Ksem (prosperity) and Labh (gain). In traditional art, he is often depicted sitting between Siddha and Buddhi.

His massive physical form represents the Universe, and his trunk symbolizes Om, the symbol of the unmanifested God. The elephant head signifies superior intelligence, while the serpent around his waist represents cosmic energy. The sheer scale of his body teaches us that outward appearance is not linked to inner beauty or spiritual perfection. The noose in his hand symbolizes worldly attachments, whereas the hook serves as the tool to guide humanity toward the path of righteous action. The beads of a rosary emphasize the vital importance of prayer, and his broken tusk stands as a symbol of wisdom, as it is believed he used it to write the Mahabharata. The sweet in his hand serves as a reminder of the sweetness of the inner self. By riding upon his vehicle, the mouse, he demonstrates that in the eyes of God, the smallest creature is just as important as the greatest.

Beyond the symbolism mentioned above, the Cross is essentially synonymous with the Sun—representing life itself. In Mexico, there is a certain tribe whose traditional, non-Christian symbol features a Cross similar to this one, where they have fused the image of the Sun with the image of man. To them, the Cross equals the Sun; in other words, Man equals Life.

The symbol that appears most frequently across the widest variety of disparate religions is the Cross=Sun.



In this context, the horizontal line of the cross represents the linear flow of time, while the vertical axis signifies the Tree of Life.

When considering the Christian symbol of the Crucified, one can go even deeper; its very shape serves as a profound foreshadowing of the simplest possible representation of a human being, who is itself a living symbol. The intersection point on this cross can be interpreted as the source of life within man—the heart:

As someone who finds immense fascination in the study of symbolism, I would like to collaborate with the members of this forum to compile a comprehensive directory of symbols that have surfaced throughout various traditions, cultures, and faiths across America.

Please feel free to post images of symbols here, along with their established meanings or perhaps your own personal interpretations.

placidcrane61 said:Quincy:

I don't know what to tell you. Florine is just... Florine. There’s no point in dancing around it. Some people just have that energy, and frankly, I'm too tired to deal with it today. It is what it is. James Allen2 says: Get out there and wander through the wild. Go extreme. Seek out the freezing cold, trek through the pitch black—whatever it takes. Honestly, nothing cures loneliness quite like the great outdoors. 🙂

Alright. I'll give it a shot.
Maybe I’ll just head out into the wilderness and disappear. Get as far away from civilization as possible. Just vanish. 🙂
And what about all that meditation, tantra, and mantra stuff? All that spiritual fluff people swear by?
Honestly, I wish I could just mutter some magic word and make all this nonsense disappear. Just one little spell and boom—problem solved. Life would be a hell of a lot easier if that were actually an option.
I don't know about you, but I’m feeling a bit better after getting that tax filing done. Honestly, just glad that's over with. 🙂
I'm just messing with you guys. Mostly.
Anyone else dealing with this same mess? Or am I just out here fighting this battle alone?
Someone needs to tell me how she actually deals with him. Seriously.

Magic words are entirely ineffective unless you have already achieved a "magical" state of mind.
I have already shared my own method for handling loneliness; one simply heads out into nature—into the deep woods or the wild—and that provides a sense of replenishment that no other activity can possibly match.

placidcrane61 said:A little better, 🙂but not exactly great.
It’s like all that scenery is just shouting at me: "Hey, relax."

But now it's winter. I'm basically stuck indoors most of the time.
Between home and work, the anxiety, depression, and rage just take turns hitting me
in waves.
I need to find some kind of therapy or I'm going to lose my mind.
And I've got my whole life ahead of me. 😢

One should wander through the wilderness—the more extreme the conditions, the better. Whether it be through the biting cold or the deepest shadows, nothing offers solace in solitude quite like the great American outdoors.🙂

placidcrane61 said:I think the title pretty much
says it all.
I didn't want to drop this thread over on lonely sca
because I seriously doubt anyone there would actually have an answer for me.

Here’s my issue: loneliness. Pure, unadulterated solitude.
Some people would probably just say, "Hey, go find a girlfriend" or "Hang out with your buddies more."
But that’s not what I’m getting at here.
Look, I get it—humans are social creatures, blah blah blah, marriage, community, whatever.

What I actually want to know is if there's some kind of alternative way to deal with
or at least take the edge off this feeling of being alone.

Are we talking specific prayers, mantras, or meditation techniques?
How do those desert hermits or monks pull it off?

And tell me, how do you feel when you are out in nature?

Edward Evans9 said:How long do these dark nights actually last? I mean, could they seriously drag on for years? Because if so, that would be a total nightmare.

They persist until they have finally passed.
Some individuals simply never find their way back, much like Vincent van Gogh, Charles Baudelaire, or Friedrich Nietzsche...

wiredbear2 said:I have to tell you, Florin, that I always feel a sense of warmth whenever you bring up Bel Hamvas in your posts 🙂 It truly feels as though he managed to encompass every vital dimension of existence and spirituality within his writings.
It isn't any surprise that he had so much to say about the "darkness," considering he was composing much of his work during the years of World War II.
It reminds me quite a bit of how Tolkien approached the concept of evil through the shadows of Mordor.

Every one of us experiences this struggle; perhaps our specific circumstances vary, but fundamentally, I have navigated my own seasons of malevolent thoughts, bottomless pessimism, jealousy, the loss of existential footing, restlessness, anxiety, and even suicidal ideation. Having faced it all, I find these themes deeply personal, and I believe that suffering and darkness are things we should never judge, as everyone possesses an Abyss that is uniquely deep, dark, and seemingly inescapable.

Regarding the dark night of the soul, Hamvas writes in his Cup of Curse about a state defined by festering wounds, dark imagery, anxiety, jealousy, envy, one's own internal toxins, the constant barking at one's own doorstep, chaos, an unmoored heart, and a mental turbulence bordering on madness... all resulting from a shift in consciousness and a loss of the vision of the Great Being. He describes this as a moment in life when one's very foundation is incinerated. He suggests that some people remain trapped in that void for half of their lives.

Edward Flores4 said:Exactly. Meditation is basically a constant resistance against the hypnosis that most people spend their entire lives stuck in. It’s this hypnotic state—whether they’re inducing it themselves or just falling under the spell of some social group, a religion, a cult, a guru, a politician, an ideology, or even just the mass media.

Meditation is pure perception—stripped of all ambition, stripped of any kind of measurement (you know, that habit of using "metrics" as the foundation for all supposed "spiritual growth" or "progress"), and stripped of that separation between the thinker and the thought. When someone splits themselves into the thought and the thinker, and then that thinker tries to control the thoughts... well, they just end up in a state of total paralysis. That isn't meditation at all.

I find it quite amusing when a friend comes to me claiming they have meditated for two hours. How can a person in such a state possibly maintain any sense of time? 😕 It is as if they believe they have simply completed a chore and are now free to move on. 🤣

Quincy:

Edward Flores4 As specified by Edward Flores4: Krishnamurti describes the core dilemma of meditation quite brilliantly, and his perspective aligns perfectly with my own understanding of the issue.

I find myself in general agreement with the notion that meditation is far from being merely a matter of dedicating a few minutes or even several hours each day to sitting in silence and attempting to clear one's thoughts. Rather, every single moment of the day can be lived through a meditative lens; in fact, I shall be bold enough to assert that meditation is, in essence, an overall state of mind.