our self-preservation drive can also be twisted to be turned against us by our environment

I have always tried to find the vessel that is created for our psychic properties in my relationships with others with whom we alternately interact with simultaneously between us and others within ourselves. When such a vessel did not arose, there was no embodied relation to them, but I still remained there and participated in it dispite of that, and still had this connection between my inner person and the creative transcendent function that arises as a union of our opposites in the conversation we have there as our psychic reflection, and between the person within us and the function of the inner objective center. It is about our way of being towards others and towards life, its own inner teaching and not an attitude that we force people around us to confront and submit to. I learned early that this communication was not a given in my relations. But I found it natural to find one end of the opposites that revolve around our inner person to be complementary to those I found in others, so that an embodiment of the energy behind their various masks could have an outlet for us to interact with in the vessel we created for them. I learned a lot about our inner opposites and the energy they contained within us then. However, it took a long time to accept that others cannot, or will not, resume this conversation between us in our relationship to this objective source within us. What remained were mostly just references to collective thoughts and opinions with no personal connection to them, and this I felt was short-circuited because there was no embodied content behind them to relate to. Often also associated with a taste of bitterness, of missing out, or feel excluded if someone in there could not feel complicity because of the broken relationship they had between them and their inner person in its communication with it as a union of opposites. Because they will often accuse those around them of constantly satisfying their neglected needs for self-affirmation as they search for this type of embodiment of our psychic qualities. That provocation still occurs around me today, and its reality is most often an attempt to come to terms with the experience they have of not being in touch with their own inner person and its communication with it. So they feel compelled to disrupt or sever this connection between others in order for them to expel what they once abandoned within themselves. The compulsive aggressiveness of it often shocked me and broke my own communication with myself when I wasn’t aware of it. Which of course was the purpose of it. And it also developed a kind of constant awareness that kept me alert to its outbursts. It developed a kind of very destuctive self defensive function in me. Which turned into an obstacle to participate in my own communication with myself. Distorting it. These days it shows more of what is going on behind these eruptions for me, as its natural energy is to balance us and re-establish the relationship we must have with our creative transcendental function as a center of our inner life and as our sense of it as the greater whole in which we find ourselves.

the sub-personality behind our social conventions is a psychopath

I think all of us at some point have become diverted from the connection to our transcendent function out of pure self-preservation, and been forced to distance us from ourselves to adapt to the incapacious social norms and conventions of a public attitude both in our close family relationships, in groups we are related to, and in the society that surrounds us. To which moral consensus we have adapted and identified ourselves as a compromise for what its perfectionism threatened us with and exposed us to through the conflict it created between us and our inner person. Usually due to us being too young and innocent to deal with its influence on us. To counter this, we develop a sub-personality here, so that we can process the interruption this causes between us and ourselves in what we are exposed to and cannot come to terms with, or cannot recognize in ourselves and develop as part of us in our close relationships and in their silent unwritten rules. Which later on creates a distorted relationship between our inner person and the transcendent function that it conveys from its relation to our inner center. Something that causes us to create a kind of distorted psychopathological form of it. A grisly second part of us that form a silent relationship to what we cannot accept in ourselves or openly confirm as part of us. It prevents our inner person from interacting with our inner source as an experience of a intermediator to the unity we find in the sense of a wholeness that make us become self-observant and acknowledge the embodied content of our psychic reflection. This creates the type of psychopath we all carry within us. A compromise that arises as a consequence of a strict perfectionist public attitude and its references to psychic phenomena as merely material forms and values, and to the unspoken conventions of social behavior to which they relate. There is no inner world, no living set of relationships to a psychic context. Which then forces us to expel that within us that does not live up to our social requirements, and which we should never admit to publicly in order for us to gain access to various social contexts’, its bodies of opinions as the distorted vessels of unwritten rules they are, in spite of the fragile community and false security we sense in this kind of relations with others. This is a slow build-up that occurs in the tension between the conditioned images we have of reality and the psychic phenomena that lie behind them. We can also meet that sub-personality in the old Sami figure of Ruohtta who, when we have not restrained and nurtured our spontaneous impulses just to avoid having to face our compromises with ourselves, unleashes his pet wolf, which will then tear us apart. As long as we only see ourselves and our psychological needs through that sub-personality, we are struggling with the moral conflict that arises between us and ourselves in relation to the self-ordering and transcendent center of the mind that appears as an independent voice of psychic self-reflection, giving us the directions we need to feel whole and get involved as part of life in a deeper sense.

.. that center becomes manifest everywhere we make vessels

Throughout my life I have experienced an absence in relation to people around me between our presence and its relation to the psychic vessels we find ourselves in and to our inner person in its relation to the transpersonal source and its creative center. Because that has always been confused with the collective, or group mind, and when I tried I always felt cornered. I felt separated from myself. Something that I have never experienced in nature or together with animals. I trusted the psychic properties there that I dependent on, and constantly interacted with in all my relationships more. The reconciliation between them has always been accomplished there by my inner person who is also the person that nature herself seems to wants me to be, in all my relationships. It is these parties that formulates the conversation I have between myself and the vessels that are created for us in an embodied sense as a union between us and ourselves to manifest our inner objective source also in an external sense as part of the communication we have in relation to someone, or something else, in a kind of inverse relationship that also appears between them, and to that within, they experience between them and themselves. The content of the vessels that are created for us is what creates the communication that follows between us, and with others in relation to this objective unknown third-party source as an interpersonal function that we experience as an unknown third, and as something that we simultaneously interpret together and translate based on our personal conditions. This objective source’s intervention and guidance interacts with all the vessels that are created simultaneously and works as the androgynous source of a whole, and as the personality we make of it as a duality in which everything that exists is also included if we do not separate them and this then appears as a transcendental psychic wholeness, and most importantly, as something that is consciously experienced as separate from the one-sided perception that is incessantly referred to as the existing body of consciousness as mere references without a a sense of any personal context, instead of functioning as our personal relation to an inner mediator, and the creative guidance that the transcendent intervention it is in relation to each created vessel. As it independently acts between all living things. To people, animals, plants or insects alike, and in our relationship to nature as the great grandmother vesselmaker of them all that we are part of. The old Sámi conceptualization of this source is in the connection that arises between the content of that which is created by the transcendent function, as Rádienáhttje, and the embodiment of that which is the great vessel containing all other vessels, created by Rádienáhkká. But in our undeveloped relationships with them, they are usually only experienced as one. There is no conscious interacting with the two parts of our personality, and the outer reflection of them as an inner fact. In addition, they are natural forces and independent psychic properties that act on us in a similar way and sometimes also together with others. However, this interpersonal psychic space can only be formulated in our consciousness under conditions where we can in a genuine and humane way withhold the energy that arises between us and ourselves in the psychic vessel we create together with others. Otherwise, we just end up identifying with the patterns of opposites that, behind their masks, are in constant orbit around our inner person.

we don’t have compassion, it have us

Compassion is the steady gentle warmth that between our opposites and extremes constantly creates a transformation out of their friction. It creates all our psychic vessels as from an inner maternal feeling all around us. Compassion is also what allows us to relate to it in everything around us and nurture them as they arise there. That is what the primordial being of the Sami Máttaráhkká means to us as a cultural interpersonal sense of a genuine community. She creates belonging everywhere, between all the vessels she creates. When her gentle flame fades or ceases, we end up in Jáhbmeaimo’s unborn non-world of possibilities, of transformation and maybe’s, without any genuine participation in life itself. That is the other side, or what the dark absence of compassion means to the human being within us. It is about being able to apply the original meaning she has for us in the psychic space from which she operates in our lives. Self-compassion means we are attending some vessel created for us, not that we are rejecting other’s. Or being rejected by them. Vessels is her gift to us. Hostility on the other hand, comes from when we do not acknowledge Her, and its presence and defend ourselves from our participation in it and what it wants to show us.

suffering the light of realization

When we allow our inner person access to us while opening ourselves to his other irrational and uncivilized half, we will discover the absolute relationship that side of him has with nature, and the living identification he has with everything in it when it communicates itself as a spiritual vessel in all its relationships. For that half of him it means to be a part of all that is, as forces of the same kind as he is made of. But his opposite, the part of him which acts as the messenger of our inner self-regulating center, and which unites all opposites, is that which will bring them together independently of time in an external bodily sense. They turn into our personal whole, a collection of impressions we have of the ordering source acting on our inner messenger. Expressed and lived by the exalted other. The difference between them is their impact on us. One of them is completely related to nature itself, and is a complete inclusion of it and on the same basic moral terms. The other is entirely connected with the timeless origin of psychic life, and with the recurring and emergent representation it evokes in everything and which is constantly modified and conditioned by time but which at the same time exists entirely unaffected, and independently of its repetition and diversity. The animistic qualities we attribute to shamans in their dealings with our personal psychic layers are thus intertwined with the quest for enlightenment we find in Buddhist monks. The path to enlightenment in this way forces us to also go through, and become united with our embodied nature if it is going to be able to become a vessel for our path towards the greater whole. Both express deep compassion for all life as bodily vessels and soul migration as the recurrence of the enduring psychic qualities of the personality beyond the surface of the ego, but in two different ways. But for both, the self-organizing totality of our inner center is the moral guide that shows us the way, whether seen as a psychic abstraction or as the underlying force within which we are and to which we have a dependent relationship, as to a conscious biological self-regulating center of the world seen as a single ecosystem all life is subordinated to and governed by. To me they appear as the same inner source of a larger whole, although viewed from two different perspectives.

undercurrents constantly influence and change our perception

There is a threshold within us. When we step over it, we stop seeing ourselves only through time, but we begin to see ourselves also through space. We begin to be influenced by, and attribute psychic impressions as something that also appears with characteristics we otherwise only impute to bodily phenomena. Our inner person now also turns our vision into our non-material larger psychologically perceived whole. An omnipresent space in which our inner person acts as our messenger, along with his raw and impulsive second nature as his irrational uncivilized and impulsive twin. Which constantly challenge our personal psychic balance between them. And in this space we also interact with psychic phenomena in the same way as we do the material world. We begin to see bodily and material properties in an underlying way, and begin to treat non-material psychic phenomena as if they affected us and had the same influence on us as any other material external object, and that we begin to perceive qualities that affect us also as separate from the corporeal, and as something that goes beyond that in a psychic sense where we begin to function as vessels for it, which embody our inner person as our participation in it. Also, we suddenly become aware that we have to change our language and the way we express ourselves in order to also be able to convey the emerging way in which we now see the world around us. However, people around us also struggles, and often try to suppress the intrusiveness that arises by our inner person and above all his second Nature, in their attempts to make us not to pay attention to the influence they have on them. What we fail to recognise then is that our inner person and his still uncivilized and neglected impulsive advesary in his unbalanced relationstip to us, his irrationality, trickery, and evasive way of constantly thwarting the feeling of being present in a sincere, personal and participatory way in our psychic space, depends entirely on us. In recognizing our relation to both of them. Often in open conflict where one of the two is placed outside of us in some form. This is what we call life. Where there is always something else in a constant squabbling within us as an excuse for not accepting any participation in it, even though we are constantly part of it, interacting with them. In this way, it always turns into an argument of opposites between them within us, which we then transfer either as one or the other to people around us. Which makes us personally, as groups, or entire nations psychologically constipated. But behind it all is another voice, the voice of the inner center pushing us out of this, and into another kind of a purpose, and with its own self-regulating unity of opposites. Where we can become individual vessels separate from others in our own personal way and in relation to the greater self-organising whole that arises from the world of within that we constantly interact with together with them. Which is not possible until we have reconciled ourselves with the neglected second nature of our inner person.

metaphor is the energy that breathes life into perceptual reality

Of all those qualities that exert their influence and surround the source of our inner wholeness, some are at the same time also qualities that belongs to the companion of our inner person. The crazy impulsive and irrational other half and adversary, and the one that unites us with nature and travels through all psychic layers between the personal whole and its context in the greater unity it is part of between the earth and the sky. He is the one who leads us toward the greater self-organizing and ordering whole as our own personal part of the source of which all things are a part, and which unites all opposites. It doesn’t matter how much we toss and turn between his various opposing qualities, it is still the spark of the energy coming from the greater whole that formulates an image of itself in our consciousness as our personal whole that is our guide. It is the one that causes our inner potentiality to grow as we are constantly driven by its energy to connect with its timeless interpersonal origin, which is the singularity from which everything comes. A singularity within us that we simultaneously find ourselves being part of as the center of a psychic totality in its final state of being understood as matter in a metaphorical sense, with cosmos as its background. But both our inner person and his unruly sibling taken together, is about balance, not about a devil of some kind, whatever that is, be it in me or in others. If we exaggerate our rational side, we become corrective and bloody boring, and if we exaggerate our impulsiveness, we become reckless and incoherent. Still I think our relation to them is the moral battle we must follow to its conclusion within us. On our own, in the space of our oneness, and its center of a greater evolving singularity.

our masks constantly balance our relationship to a self-organizing greater whole

There is a knowledge that we cannot discuss until we have opened ourselves to it because it arises out of our relationship to the person within us. To its relationship to others and to life itself. And we learn about it by being initiated into it in a terrifying and overwhelming way. Because it basically restores our original cognitive ability. At some point in our lives we are suddenly faced with this and the journey begins. When that happens, all of our different personas, or masks that we have used for the inner characters we once identified with, now become significant in how they have been used in the past and in their overall purpose of making us trust the inner psychic self-regulation center that we experience in a sense of a spontaneous guidance. Which helps us navigate between all the contradictions that arise between us and ourselves in the relationship we have between our inner person and our immediate personal surroundings. In this way we share our origins with people of all ages in their acquisition of a structure in our inner psychic life. We become as “primitive” as them, even if it happens based on different conditions related to time. The characters behind the masks balance us as we are forced to act as their proxies, and on their behalf behind the masks we identify with, and confuse our inner person with their characteristics. In that way they educate us and force us into a renewed relationship with that inner source that exists within us and which at the same time also unites all opposites when it acts as our inner person’s guide. The union it constitutes is the underlying unifying principle which also creates the psychic atmosphere which our relationship to it also characterizes as the spirit of our time. Because even if it is suppressed, it always remains as the inner personal spark which is the light of our consciousness in its relation to the self-preservation principle which permeates our entire existence, simultaneously also in our relationship to the earth in an ordering physical and psychological sense. It is ever-present in the sense of the psychic wholeness we feel in our personal experience as part of the greater totality we are in in its relation to the world as soul. This experience of an inner and outer greater wholeness arises from the encounter we have in the self-observant trials we encounter in a number of different challenging female sub-characters on our way to becoming receptive psychic vessels that can embody our individual psyche also in an outer worldly sense, and then through these trials come to terms with the underlying energy which their various masks force us to face within ourselves. But they also act on us as psychic properties we interact with in the world we experience as from within this wholeness, or its soul, through which we can experience the underlying psychic patterns it creates in us as smaller individual parts of a significantly larger interpersonal whole. The world’s self-regulating ecosystem is in turn the center of the soul of the world we perceive ourselves in as parts of the natural world. And any interaction between the species in it has a direct effect on this soul of the species themselves and everything in it. Here the wind, the sun, the oceans, lakes and streams, the moon and the stars in the night sky, have their own characters, and masked behavior, as purposes and living opposites to the inner order of this whole. Therefore, our cosmos may also bear an reflection of its creational forces in our minds. The psychic forces behind our masks direct the same orbital pull around our inner core as the planets do in their orbits around the sun. And as such is something both our outer senses and their relationship to our inner source interact with as we alternately view our inner psychic energies in relation to our solar system, into which we have transferred ourselves over several millennia. Which in turn brings a deep sense of being part of nature and all its characters in an embodied way. I imagine that all the masks we use are our masked needs for inner knowledge and psychic balance, what we evolve from by our connection to this source in a psychic sense. Something the human within us has had access to in various forms since time immemorial. The masks are its psychic teachers and guides, whose significance has been lost in the rational materialism of today. But they have never disappeared. Their characters constantly continue to animate our relationships between us and the world without us realizing their real underlying purpose and meaning anymore. They remain within us as symptoms, and as masks for qualities we use but whose real meaning as figures for inner knowledge has fallen into oblivion. Which then confuses the relationship we have to our within with the relationship we have to that which also is its without.

the multilayered human spirit some of us must negotiate

As I process my inner pictorial world and its relation to my inner person, and our conceptualization of psychic life in my encounter with his environment, which in turn is surrounded in the same way by the unimaginable scope of the greater psychic world where everything exists simultaneously as separate participants in a timeless scope, where all is contained in all and everything originates from in relation to the same inner self-organizing center in its bifurcated personal and collective form. I am led to its source by the balance that occurs between us and the irrational impulsive side of our inner person. The one who is our inciting dark twin. But to journey with our own part in that larger psychic sphere without constantly being swallowed up by it through the insensible interference of others, that is quite another thing, because most people are completely unaware that their existence is only a minor individual part of many others that together form the content of a constantly renewing and creative experience far greater than ours in its own independent psychic space.

Alternatively, I also like to refer to this in a technical sense, where everything that we experience psychically before it is formulated and materialized in a linguistic relation, first appears as values in a subset consisting of attractors in the phase space of a psychic structure where the psyche over time tends to be limited to different individual variations of its attractors and the initial values and states of its structure. At this point they are experienced in identification with the psyche’s own inner dynamics, which means that we cannot leave them. In each individual attractor in this overall phase space, we go through its various states of individual conditions until, by formulating them into patterns of our experiences, we are led to a conceptualization of the attractors themselves as the ones that drew us into their phase space in the first place. It is only after this that we are able to conceptually formulate the overall influence this has on our original and unknowable psychic structure. And in the way that we personally find it most consistent in psychic reflection with our own experiences.

without the word everything becomes personal

There is a wonderful approach to our relationship with the infinity of the night sky and the influence of our nearest planets on our lives. In the inner conceptual thinking of Australian Aborigines, shooting stars are the cosmic spark that exists in everything, and are the energy that permeates all life in all its forms. When it hits the earth, it infuses it with that energy. Which then creates all forms out of the earth it entered. Every soul and our psychological beings. And if we see the sun as the light of the ego that creates consciousness out of the cosmic background with which we formulate the world using words, we move beyond it, to its great sparkling starry sky. This means that we become able to shift our focus to where we can look in from the outside of the limitations of our consciousness and allow ourselves to be absorbed by a cosmos in creative interaction with any singular constellation of stars and planets, and to a background source of influence on our psychic life that fills our interior with energy as we look out into the timeless space we have above our heads. From this perspective we follow the sun of our consciousness that descends each night into its vast unknown darkness, as it then rise again each morning before our eyes. And every time we name what arises in this meeting, this unknown interior becomes something that we constantly transform into the recurring and known world we enter again each morning. We are made of it and we embody the energies we are imbued with as it also are transferred to us by the nurishment we need and we provide it with. Life is energy, and the psychic energy we follow whose forces guide us whether we formulate them or not, and regardless of how we choose to formulate them, they still choose us through our inner life when we allow ourselves to interact with it in a way which also makes us transcend pure reason, and its one-sidedness and destructive influence on our inner being. We all need to spend much more time alone in ourselves to be able to consider it as something in others as well as in everything around us too without constantly placing ourselves in others because we have not yet found our own psychic configuration which is the personal constellation of how it interacts with us in a composite way. I am not saying that we should change our thinking to that of the Aboriginal world of thought, but what I am saying is that the timelessness we experience and feel within us is also the night sky we see ourselves in that has opened our inner person to what we have formulated for it historically in what we call our time, wherever we are in it. Aboriginal or not. It is still there as something independent of us, and whether we call it dreamtime, psyche or describe it through theoretical physics and astronomy, or the symbolic geometry of our interior life.

Because quote, ”the Western understanding of the cosmic order, discovering a non-empirical realm of the universe that doesn’t consist of material things but of forms. These forms are real, even though they are invisible, because they have the potential to appear in the empirical world and act in it.” Professor Lothar Schäfer from his paper, Carl Gustav Jung, Quantum Physics and the Spiritual Mind: A Mystical Vision of the Twenty-First Century. Read it here >>

It is indeed the source of the mystery that man has sought in many different forms and cultures, in this union of all opposites, its guiding principle and wholeness which seems to formulate itself from the same infinite psychic experience that we have tried to translate into language as long as man has existed. Where affect and irrationality in contrast to rationality and control in an self-observing way is our long and arduous journey to the “field of offerings”.

our inner person travels on a journey outside of time regardless of where we appear in it

Based on a dream I had, something has been going on for many years that, through that dream, very much mimicked the myth of Osiris. For as long as I can remember I have been filled with the sparkling vastness of the night sky as something I simultaneously experience within me. But also the deep inner physical and embodied communion I feel with nature, with earth, and the self-organized flow that guides me as their primordial androgynous underlying source of energy that in itself unites all opposites. Out of this my person was created and awakened within me, only to be torn apart and split into numerous conflicting pieces scattered far and wide by his belligerent and chaotic inner brother. But something within me and the one I always turned to in my inner conversation and saw as my inner person’s partner, has constantly brought together all the widely separated parts of me and put my inner person back together. The totality that all these separate events created has simultaneously also shaped events in my life because they have been the influence that has constantly existed within me as the underlying journey I make there. By being forced to descend into their underworld, and walk through the anguish and intense trials that follow as it feels like being emotionally devoured and chewed up, and then balanced and weighed against a sincerity and authenticity that must never be outweigh by the feelings I carry with me there, I then wake up to a world where this dream and my life, although experienced as separate, are one and the same, as my dream is a composite image of my dual experiences of being in both.
Strangely enough, the old Sami conceptual experience of our inner reality is more related to the original perception we have of our inner parent couple, and of our ancestors through the people around us and our interaction with the nature we are a part of in our experiences of the descent into the psychic realm of life.
This dream points to something even deeper within me that operates on a more abstract psychic level than that, affecting me in my existence in a more independent and indirect way by imagination.

the mental representation of our digital selves

We don’t just live in our mental representations of our digital selves, we confuse our inner person with it in its projected environment and begin to act as if we were that digital copy of our self in its imaginary context. Whether it’s an ideological one, or one we use in a gaming environment, or a version of it we use in social media or we just use to variously influence others to relate to us in a certain premeditated way. Either way, we then lose the inner psychic context which is the natural environment of our inner person. And in our physical life we lose the closeness and interaction we need to be able to experience it in the real context it has in everything around us. As a world inside the world. In that sense, our inner person is not different from who we physically believe us to be when we have not yet learned to consciously distinguish them as we experience them. If we cannot embody it, we force both ourselves and others to act in a way that is consistent with the ideas we have about the mental or digital environment we put it in. We make our own inner person and that of others one and the same thing in the mental atmosphere we put them in, and at the same time as we do this, how we perceive the concrete reality we share with others becomes distorted as we embed the digital representation we have of our mental self in the external imaginal reality without us even being aware that we are doing it. We fully immerse ourselves mentally in the digital personality with its thoughts, feelings and ideals that we have invented for ourselves as our connection to the world that differs a lot from the direct physical one in which we live. If we want to change our world to the better this is where we have to start. I believe that much of the hostility and resentment we create at all levels of our social environment consists of this misplacement of our inner person. Which then turns it into a disaffected piece of shit whose lack of integrity becomes the dark reality we then impose on everything around us. Regardless of whether it is about close relationships, work relationships, cultural differences or the aggressiveness that occurs between countries. It is still an act performed by a single person, even if performed simultaneously with others.

what personality tests don’t show you

Our current cognitive perception of what it really is that constitutes our distorted relationship to the world in and around us is probably that we force intuition to function as sensation. Because in our collective social contexts, it’s about learning to come to terms with, and agreeing that intuition should function as an apostle for society’s unspoken conventions where feeling and above all intuition is devalued to be recognized as subordinate, and as a disturbing noise in their relationship to sensation and thought. Let alone that feeling or intuition may be the natural cognitive functions we are actually born with and possess. They will nevertheless be disfavored and even devalued, with the result that our innate cognitive disposition will be distorted when we try to turn it into functioning as sensation, or into thinking, by trying to force them to act as the preferred modes that is used by our social environment to relate to our world from within. But regardless of this, we will still own these features, or ways of interpreting our experiences. Sensation tells us that something is, it serves as our reference to our ideas, conceptions, impressions, impulses and instincts. The thought speaks of what they are. Do they come from the within of the without and from our relationship to independent psychic factors, or do they belong to the concrete, tangible physical reality. They are still going to affect us in the same way. The feeling function judges the value of them according to its intensity. If we have to defend ourselves against its overwhelning intensity or let it show us the way. Whereas intuition tells us what the actual content of our sensations consists of. In the end, it is about the fact that everything originally arises in the psychic flow from one and the same immeasurable source. And how we interpret what it contains is determined by how our ego makes this possible for us. Myers Briggs and other test like it in this sense, as I have met them, is a blunt tool when it is used as a personality test, since our personality also relates to something that is timelessly repeated in man, and infinitely greater than any of the functions the ego uses to interpret and assimilate its content. This, of course, is also my innate way of relating and observing the collective consciousness from the outside, which my superego wants to articulate to me from within it as a desirable way to function by suppressing what my genuine emotions and independent psychological properties are and emerge from. Unless they clearly favor its numbing conventionality, and so long as our ability to grasp the relationship between us and the abstract psychic beings that involve our life in theirs does not call into question the status of the collective and its superego.

our inner life has a different goal in a different context

Our maternal attractor or archetype is a vessel, something that cares for and support the person we have within us, while our paternal attractor conveys the separation from the embodied and concrete to him, which then transforms the influence its energies have in all our relationships into abstract psychic representations. The phase space of them both contains several personal and unique states that must be experienced separately and lived through personally before we can face them as something we can collectively relate to as an psychologically independent influence on us. This is where the Sami Máttaráhkká and Máderáhttje as an example, or any of their counterparts, come in as important cultural mediators of the inner person’s relationship to the various psychic layers he alternates between as we follow him within us. When these parental attractors are recognized in themselves, not making others’ interactions with them our own, we can follow him independently, in our own way without others being involved or interfering in the chains of events in which we become participants when we follow him. But our knowledge of their meaning to us, and to our sense of genuine care and compassion for both our person within us and others, is in a terribly disintegrated and distorted psychological state today.

I follow an inner companion at night and he follows me during the day

When we begin to listen to our relationship with our inner person, we discover that he is a composite personality consisting of several opposing qualities that together form different phases in our growing relationship with him because it is he who mediates our relationship to the psychic world that he conveys to us from its center. He appears there as both a saint and villain, as a martyr and a savior, when he is not also exerting his influence on us with jokes and impulsive tricks, or as a haughty omniscient apostle of society’s unspoken conventions. It is with these characteristics that we are then confronted with the one who is his counterpart in the psychic reality to which they belong. She meets him here with her psychic perception, who perceives the differences in the conditions that this splitting and fragmentation of existence creates. Which will make him question both his martyrdom, his savior role and his saintly role, and the feeling of being a villain, an apostate or a fraud. But also his jocular gaiety and arrogant haughtiness. She does this with her implicit demand to face all these constant irrational inner shifts no matter how intense with courage and absolute sincerity. This is where our interior becomes a vessel for him. His integrity and support. Where our inner being is formulated together with the solicitude of the great mother on several different levels within a larger more unified psychic structure where all its inner independent figures together form the greater whole that aims to guide our inner person on his way to it, and get through the trials that we are faced with in order to take advantage of the lessons we learn with him along the way.

there are also female characters who simultaneously affect us in a self-observant sense

We carry all the different states of the great mother within us, who simultaneously appear on several different levels. On a fundamental level, we see no difference between her and our needs for closeness and security as a vessel for our inner person, with those she represents herself to with us. She also acts as the unpleasant dark background that we can sense in our early relationships. Or when they have stagnated and become practical compromises that suffocate our inner person, either in our professional or private life, or in both. At a higher level of psychic reflection, we see her as something separate from others that surrounds us and embodies the entire inner reality we experience with our inner person at its center as the mediator of our interpersonal connections. Here she also appears in the form of a carrier of our cultural relations in the sense of the psychic space that make sure to safely and considerately pay attention to the inner person also in others. But she also affects us at her highest psychic level where she conveys the insight that causes us to transcend the limitations of pure reason. When we enter her realm, we experience it as pure nature. She appears to us as nature itself, whose psychic space is experienced with our inner person in that which all potential forms of life consist of, and of which we are a part in a multi-leveled, embodied and constantly recurring sense as our mind’s own built-in learning process. In its constant rebirths, in all the different abstract living forms of life which undergo the underlying transformation that timelessly repeats itself to our reality. There is a wonderful description of her in Sami tradition when she ends up in urban environments. Outside of them, in their outskirts, her presence is perceived as a wise helping figure when we are having a hard time in relation to our inner person. But in populated areas she is seen as an intrusive and disturbing gossipmonger and blabbermouth!
But before we get to her, we must endure the trials that confront us as we find ourselves in the center of her cultural personality. We have to face some of the traits separated from her that have been passed on to her daughters, and experience the dichotomy it means to sense the moods of that psychic space that surrounds us is something that also emerges from within ourselves, and respect the expressions we are confronted with in it as if it too exist independently of us. And finally meet the feminine character that forces us to unconditionally face that irrationality we dare not express of them in ourselves. If we don’t, she will make our vulnerability vindictive and defensive, and even make us turn against ourselves and destroy us. If we just wave it all away and their presence is not consciously confirmed by us, they act as seducers and psychic tormentors corresponding to what the meaning of the Latin term succubus refers to as a composite experience. Its invisible influence and the intense anguish that results from it. Which all men in their adolescence have experienced. But few have realized as a psychic reality.

it is a fragile balancing act to constantly oscillate between our own inner psychic reality and that of other people

When we encounter the saints of the superego, within us or in others, there is a great risk that the person within us is short-circuited in its connection to the content that constitutes the source of its main relationship. We risk ending up in a kind of eternal trickery to its influence on us, and turn us into constant wisecrackers to its supercilious attitude together with an impulsive cunningness as a defense of the psychic integrity of our psychic person, if we slavishly conform to a society’s unspoken conventions. Where instead of relating to others in a genuine way, we end up in a relationship in which we create martyrs of ourselves in our relation to having our own emotional experiences, while we at the same time try to save others from their’s as saviors when we identify with their martyrdom as our own. Our imperious attitude will make ourselves saints which constantly seek out and provokes others to be villains. We identify our own personal psychic content with that of others instead of the influence that is derived from our objective psychic properties, and we force others to bear it like martyrs for us. In this way, the demands of the superego may turn us into constant jokers, or to adopt an attitude of being impregnable wiseacres that sacredly ally us with the commands of the superego that we then transfer onto others, that is, the total devotion we force ourselves to have to the inadequate connection that the collective consciousness has in its relationship to our inner person, so that it does not break the fragile vessel it represents to us and to people around us.
Just listen to how we treat each other in our own relationships. In our own society. Its relation to other countries and to our native cultures. We constantly push each other to become saints or villains. This is also the essence of all media. All in relation to that which relies solely on the superego, our tacit agreements with it and its commandments. We sacrifice what feels genuine and true within us and try to save others from their misdeeds so that they don’t have to see what they are doing as long as we can maintain a blind eye to our own role in it. We become its collaborators and peers in our sanctimonious attitude and arrogance towards the suffering of individual people. In this way, we can have our saintly relationship with the collective undisturbed and instead make others look bad in our own standoffish insensity, and then blame our own need to break the superego’s influence on us on others, while forcing them to play the role of the opposite of our saintly attitude. Have we not all been brought to earth, and reminded of this at some time or another in our personal relationships when we have become too rational and academically or politically haughty instead of maintaining our basic inner humans involvement in the collective consciousness, and the world as psyche or soul.

my mind with and without its concrete emotionality, and its ties to my body

When we fail to be vessels for our inner person embodied by Rádienáhkká, who is the one who is the prime cause for our inner person to be reborn by Máttaráhkká, that also transforms and transcend pure reason. We are not initiated by Máderáhttje into the inner self-organizing principle of life, there is no distinction made between them. The source of energy found in all there is of Rádienáhttje, and all its concrete connections to the corporeal that emerges from him as the one who unites all opposites in the psychic space we turn to with the person within us. Traditionally conceptualized in the old Sami world by Raediengiedte in his relation to the world as form in the space of Rádienáhkká. Besides being both the messenger, a villain and a saint, a martyr and a savior when he is undeveloped, and the one who guides us in there, and the person within us we travel with in a world whose background consists entirely of our psyche, and the original psychic androgyny that is made conscious by us, as that which is within us, and which surrounds all that is.

— —

When we fail to be vessels for our inner person embodied by its psychic space, which is the prime cause for all rebirth and transformation, which transcends pure reason, then we are not initiated into the inner self-organizing source of life, the energy and its forms found in all there is, and in all its concrete connections to the corporeal that emerges as a union of all opposites in the psychic space we turn to with the person within us. He is a messenger, but in his undeveloped state he is also a fool and an imperious bonehead. A villain and a saint, a martyr and a savior, besides being the one who guides us there. He is the person within us that we travel with in a world whose background consists entirely of our psyche, we are together in the original psychic androgyny that is made conscious by us when we accompany him in what is within us and that surrounds us at all time, in all that is.

opinions are a distorted perspective on thoughts and ideas as composite mental images

Thoughts and ideas are images that illustrate a given context, they are not opinions. Opinions identify us with selected parts of our collective body of knowledge and as such tend to exclude other perspectives and ideas even if they originate from the same primordial psychic experience. If we merely refer to ideas as something that exists in our collective consciousness, we are just confirming that it is there, pointing to its existence. The genuine connection we have to the psychic image is short-circuited and we are thrown out of it. It is cut short. There is simply no interaction between the image we refer to, and its origin as a psychic experience we share with others. Our perception of both our relationship to others and ourselves becomes distorted as our opinions, and their ties to a selection of collective ideals become what determines the conditions for how those relationships should look. Which ultimately also becomes what sets the standard for our behaviors. Not that we interact with an independent but common background experience with our inner person there.

archetypes, attractors and the psychic life of figurative speech

I have thought for a long time how to be able to translate the psychic patterns of my life experiences and transform its forms into terms that make them sociably accessible not only to me when I experience them, but also make them useful when I try formulate what it is that invoke them when I speak to others. Through a series of events seemingly independent of each other, I stumbled over the description of attractors. And if I use the mathematical field of dynamical systems and my mind as such a system, and the definition of attractors with jungian archetypes interchangeably, and merge that with the old Sami conceptualization of the world, I think I come very close to this. I am not saying that the psyche is applied mathematics, but what I am saying is that mathematics may well produce a kind of theoretical image that attempts to represent some of the psychic processes that go on in relation to our cultural conceptions of them within a person who is more of a thinking person I am. I am just connecting to the image here.
An attractor in this archetypal sense is as I now understand them within the experience of my own mind, a subset of a psychic structure’s phase space that the psyche over time tends to be limited to for certain individual variations of this structure’s initial values and states, and which the psyche’s own internal dynamics means that it cannot leave. In the attractors phase space we are going through the different states of an attractor until we, by the patterns of our experiences, are lead to a conceptualization of the attractor itself that pulls us in to its phace space. When I speak of Máderáhttje or Máttaráhkkáh, or Rádienáhttje and Rádienáhkká , Saints or villains, martyrs or saviors, I speak of them as the conceptualization of attractors and the different states our experiences are building up within us as our psychic maturization, and how we are closing in on a specific attractor as an aggregate of all of its personal states together with its own internal conceptual formulation. Sáráhkká, Juoksáhkká and Uksáhkká also represent states within their own phase spaces as attractors in themselves which lead to the experience of something greater than the states of their own attractors, and to the non-material psychic reality of Sáivu. Máttaráhkká and Máderáhttje serve here as initiators or guides to the primordial causes consisting only of energy and form, which we embody as psychic representations that unite the intellectual with the imaginal in Rádienáhttje and Rádienáhkká. But no matter how we describe them, what terminology we use, we do it from different angles, and from different states of the subset of a psychic strúcture, and in the phase space of an attractor whose different states are personally experienced. This means that we use the terms we find most appropriate when trying to explain similarities in what we perceive to be the same original experience. Regardless of whether it is a scientific or a cultural attempt to transform the concrete emotional connection to the body into less material and abstract forms of psychic images and representations of the mind.
I also believe that it is precisely here that we come to the realization that there is something that stands in opposition to the collective consciousness, of which our individual consciousness is only a part, and that its content originates not only in its opposite but it has arisen from something that we can only relate to with our direct experience of it. However we then choose to describe what that is. The strange thing about the scientific world in my opinion, is that it does not realize that it produces illustrations of psychic thought processes that are pictures of our psychic involvement with the world around us.

we don’t change anything through others, we have to do it ourselves

A child identifies with and is influenced by the psychological or physical experiences of others as if they were his own. It’s almost a definition of a child, and an experience we all share in our own way. An adult person embodies his own experiences and refers to them in words and abstract formulations that make them more psychically accessible in their individual and less material form independently of others. As long as we do not act like children, and confuse our relationship to the collective consciousness with that of others, then others will not have to be confronted with what we have to face of it in ourselves. Many difficulties and much suffering we encounter by our individual experiences of it originates from this confusion of where our own person ends and others begin. If we do not see and act on the basis of the limitation that our personal characteristics present, we are still children in relation to our psychic being, and others are forced to bear the relation we have to it as if it were theirs. Almost all personal disputes and suprapersonal wars between groups of people have their beginnings in this. For such people, neither Máderáhttje nor Máttaráhkkáh, or similar objective psychic properties like these in Sami, have any reality in their relationship to them or to other people. Functioning as attractors in a set of states against which an individual psychic structure develops in a culture. Their inner person is not yet present, or born, and cannot distinguish between what belongs to them and what belongs to others. They constitute some of the forms to which we are “pulled” as a result of a certain process and its influence on us in the psychic field of energy, experienced as the states or moods they create in it. That’s why it’s so destructive to think we can change others instead of going through the inner trials of changing ourselves. We only reinforce the righteousness of others in not doing it. We are just making them villains and ourselves saints in the service of the superego, and our saintly attitude makes us as big villains to them as they are to us. Acting as children, we are only instinctive lightning conductors for other people, for different social groupings, and the attitude of entire countries.

that which is not yet present or an unborn reality

If we are not in touch with our inner person as an intermediary and reference to the embodiment of all that is with Máttaráhkkáh, then we are in Jahbmeáhkká’s world of all that is unborn because she is still confused with a motherhood in the form of a parent or in one or more physical persons, things or ideas. Of all that is potential and without psychic or physical form in that which have not yet come in to being. She is the dark nightside of Máttaráhkkáh where we suffer as martyrs or see ourselves as liberators and think we can help others from here with the help of the consciousness of the collective, from where we also identify with the superego without the relationship it must have with our inner beingness. We make ourselves saints and thereby force others down into Jáhbmeaimo and make them feel like guilty apostates. Here, this sense of inferiority or its grandiose identification with the superego is forced upon us, which will make us oscillate between trying to be saints or taking the role of villains, outside of any genuine interpersonal contexts. But we are stuck in Jáhbmeaimo, and this is a pre-reality. This is where we meet our inner parent couple, our inner person and our ancestors. All those who never got out of here, or just arrived here trying to move on. We cannot do what they have to do for themselves, but we can show them the way with our inner person if we do it ourselves. Our coming to terms with the dual nature of Máttaráhkkáh, and the opposites we are forced to deal with there may serve as their guide. Because without that, we will have to stay. But there are those who still can help us. We have psychic ancestors who have the knowledge and insight we lack. They are our inspiration while we are in Jáhbmeaimo, and will come to our aid. Their voices come in very handy in desperate times of need.

about oscillating between our inner rascals and being saints

A couple of nights ago I followed my night ego down into his world where he showed me another companion of mine who I have kept at a distance for a long time to give me an opportunity to absorb the meaning of all his antics. Actually what he revealed to me was a pair of opposites where our scoundrel forms one end of two extremes. Our inner varmint and our inner saint. The saint is the adaptation we make to the morality that comes from the embodiment of the human being within us. Where we become vessels for its influence on us and our psychic reflection. The rascal is the one who is constantly on guard so that we do not become too one-sided and confuse the relationship to our saint with a society’s conventionalism and attitude to what the individual should accept in himself and not. If this becomes too restrictive and strained, the rascal appears who then draws attention to it for us. This pair of opposites was especially evident when I was young and their influence over me was instinctive. The power of their presence overwhelmed me and I could not yet resist them and develop my own relationship with them. Often it meant that I did something stupid which then, to avoid the shame and lack of responsibility that was required, identified myself with the saint to escape into a naive and holy innocence. The same thing happened if I encountered it in someone else. I just identified with them instinctively. Which may have hurt them or made them feel bad about themselves. Now I can clearly see them not only within me, but also as objective psychic figures operating within us all. Together they act as gatekeepers for me and lead me to those within me who collectively act as my inner cohesive psychic whole. Without them and my knowledge of their influence on me in our relationship to them I would just be a fool in any psychosocial context. A child who lives on pure instinct without any contact to my inner person and what it is in this place that acts on me, both in relation to myself and to others. This scallywag may even turn us into cattle, and make us completely enraptured. Because if we cannot be vessels for ourselves, we take from others what we need to fill ourselves up with theirs. My experience tells me that they are most often constellated in an environment where people have become too conventional in how they relate to our inner person. A too one-sided saintly identification with the superego and the universally recognized and accepted in the collective consciousness, provokes the rascal in us in its absence of genuine human relationships. Their constellation is always present when we blame others or underestimate ourselves, which violates both our own and other peoples self-esteem. But I also perceive it as if my interaction with them is what awakens the deeper and older animistic approaches to life that are latent within us. Which shows that the two have become detached from the whole of the original inner person, conceptualized as Raediengiedte in sami, and function as paradoxical sub-functions of it. That they are the ones that matures in us and become combined in a figure of what is referred to as noaidi’s, tietäjä’s or just schamans. Those slightly crazy, introverted wise old men and women within us who served as links to our inner selves, outside the conventional framework of our societies and its relationship to the people in them.

the martyr and savior within me as I see them through others

When will we stop electing people to public positions who portray themselves or those they serve under as martyrs. Which in a infantile way obviously inflates themselves, their own position, which aims to benefit themselves, their contributors or benefactors instead of those they are set to act for in their place. And who do not constantly compensate for their shortcomings against people’s real need for care and public service with messiah-like grandeur or personal shortcomings with martyrdom. Instead of just doing the right thing in the way that follows from their position. How far must we push this before it goes too far. When will people grow up and realize that it is like this because of each and every one of us. It is our martyr and messiah swings we see in others. Cheered as they are by us. Which makes them what they are. It is not the fault of either the state, the “public” or the “private sector”. They are what we make them. Between these violent emotional swings, we are human beings of flesh and blood. With everyday needs and human relationships that correspond to our lives. Martyrs or saviors is just an outward face. A mask we use to portrait ourselves and hide what our true personal characteristics are that is hidden behind it. Something we do to avoid our own responsibility to our inner person.

We have been repeating this for over two thousand years now. When have we had enough?
What I say in no way means that I am exempt from their influence on me. They affect me like everyone else as one of many pairs of opposites to the objective psychic properties we all have in common. But the ability to observe them comes from the awareness that we see them within us at the same time as they arise outside us, and that they act in the same way within us as they do in other people, but without us either praising them or condemning their objective existence. It is about the relationship between us and ourselves. About us being able to trust that we can safely relate to it in others too.

A similar comparison can be made with the money supply. It is also based on the reality of an opposite pair. For someone to have a shortage of money, someone else must have a surplus. Which simply means that we can have whatever opinions we want about it, but not realizing that the dark side of an excess is always someone else’s deficit, is to expose others to the suffering that it entails when people suffer from it. This is more about the money supply and its psychology than anything else. About how objective psychic properties interact with our thinking, our imaginings and our psychic reflection. And how they make us shape our relationship with it through our emotional life. While this strives for a paradisiacal sense of a freedom from psychological opposites and physical suffering, it also what prevents us from interacting with the world from within. Here, too, we constantly find ourselves oscillating between both messianic greatness and martyrdom in the moral conflict we face within ourselves when we encounter it.

how we relate to our own psychic boundaries is also how we relate to this in people everywhere, regardless of country or origin

One thing that happens when we begin to discover our own psychological boundaries is how frustrating it becomes for our surroundings that we both begin to trust, and at the same time translates our own psychological reflection as if it were somehow independent of the collective’s way of conceptualizing the psychological turbulence which are now interpreted directly by us in relation to the personal undercurrents that lie behind their formulation. This is something that affects us from all levels in all societies, and even between them, when individuals instead are absorbed by a majority that begin to act as one, based on our superego in its identification with a collective’s consciousness. Often supported by people who at the same time also lacks personal boundaries, but who benefit from supporting it in their own lack of psychological self-observation. This superego can then be made to act both terribly evil and devastatingly mad to those people or societies who have different kinds of active conscious behavior that differs from a certain collectives level of agreed upon behavior. Above all, this happens to those of us who grant ourselves access to others via our own personal experiences and thereby exceed both our own and others’ personal boundaries. Regardless of whether they are personal or societal. Most of us tend to do this, and favor the abuses that go on at the personal level where the individual is equated with the superego’s indulgence of individual differences, and the objective psychological actors that shape our individual characteristics, in favor of the ideals it imposes not only on the individual, but on everything and everyone in their environment. What this fail to realize is that in this way we are not only responsible for our own suffering and that of others within the boundaries of our own society, but also for the suffering our society creates through our superego for other people and societies by our failure to be present in our own personal conversation between us and ourselves. Nor can such a mind go along with a reasoning of this kind without falling into various kinds of defenses. Because they are perceived as a threat to the identification we have with the collective superego, and its fragile relationship to the surface of a moral well-being that it has patched together from loosely assembled ideas, opinions, and ideals that serve as a substitute for a more cohesive personality. Who lack the deeper human considerations that life itself confronts us with. Many young people of today have seen through this deceptive impersonal surface and are demanding a change from those we have appointed to serve all in our place, and the backlash its defense has sparked has also begun to have dire consequences for everyone. Both on a personal, societal and supranational level. Perhaps this is also a consequence of the fact that we have transferred the relation to our inner cultural parent pair, like the sami Máderáhttje and Máttaráhkkáh, to a collective consciousness and its preferred standards which has then split the ego into the opposite pairs which correspond to the personal and suprapersonal ego.

all things and all people are interconnected

The psychological representative of the father in a cultural sense, like the Sami Máderáhttje, is our relation to the stream of consciousness. The mother in this sense, Máttaráhkkáh, is our biological relation to its non-material psychic undercurrents. When we have worked our way through the relationships we have with them, we will realize that they only functioned as intermediaries for our inner person and the place from where we interact with the stream of the collectives consciousness, the superego, and with some of the upper layers of its psychic undercurrents. But we must always count on the power of what works in the deeper layers as they are inaccessible to us, but affects us most profoundly. The patterns they create when they interact with us appear in our mind and guide our imagination, our perceptions, our thinking and feeling. By imagination I refer to how they independently of us make make us interpret, illustrate and translate pure experience into language and form, into something tangible for our physical person. Something they do of themselves as well. Making consciousness and its undercurrents an interconnectedness of all things and beings and a connection of our minds. The Sami expression meacci refers to the practical experiences of this kind. When we perceive the ego as something other than just being absorbed and polluted by a multitude of itself.

it is our superego and not time that constantly repeats us when we enter it

The first experience I had of the underlying psychic realm of potentials in my adolescence, and the constant repetition of its contents that our superego makes of it, was a psychic shock. I was absorbed by it and realized that I was in that place where everything in it is shaped by the time that will embody its manifestation. Call it Sáivu, the collective unconscious, the dreaming, whatever translates our primal interpersonal qualities in a coherent way. We enter it without anyone giving us any instructions as to our connections to its origin, and the immaterial relations belonging to it will then be shaped solely by our superego. Our inner person is then disconnected from the original ties it has there, to the source that forms the inner connection it has to the self-organizing totality of intermediaries of which it is a part. The feeling of slowly losing the ability to be able to translate it into a given context is a kind of psychological devastation. It’s like stepping into a mental deforestation where life has gone silent. We also do not get access to what we need to be able to translate it so that we can resume the connection that our inner person has lost and must have between us and ourselves. In many ways, my life since then has constantly oscillated between reclaiming what was once lost when it appeared within me and in relation to others, and finding different ways to deal with the pressure of a superego that was never receptive to this psychic origin of an interpersonal space.

our relationship to the world from within in translation

Everything has its double in the traditional dimension of the inner world. A psychic source that acts as a kind of template that is embodied by its physical presence. In traditionally living aboriginal people in Australia, it occurs everywhere in all physical objects. In plants, trees, its leaves, in animals, insects and people as the dreaming. Everything is part of it. It is with our inner person that we interact with the world around us. It also strikes me that it is in this context that we talk about soul migration, and the role our inner person has as something that returns again and again in the stream of consciousness regardless of the time it appears in. I think this is why Buddhists have taken this very seriously, and with great care for how that person should train itself to encounter this content when we are confronted with our consciousness, and to be able to return and contribute with the psychic undercurrent that provides us with substance. In the old Sami inner world, conceptualized as Sáivu. People interacted with everything as part of the physical world, with both the living, with the return of our ancestors, and the dead. With nature and the underlying psychic presences that person encounters in it. We still do it without knowing it because we want genuine relationships that do not always refer to the superego. We want our relationships to be a person to person relationship with our inner doubles in our physical reality. Without it, we lack personal depth and become shallow, relying solely on the superego and its preferred reference to the world. In addition to this line of experiences, and considering the works of quantum chemist, professor Lothar Schäfer. Quote, the empirical world is an emanation out of a cosmic realm of potentiality, a non-empirical realm of the universe that doesn’t consist of material things but of forms. These forms are real, even though they are invisible, because they have the potential to appear in the empirical world and act in it. My point is that neither our stream of consciousness nor the source of its substream is ours. They don’t belong to anyone. We have a relationship with them through our ego, and under certain circumstances of our interaction with them we are provided with a kind of union of their content.

behind the patriarchal qualities of our traditional eyes

Fatherhood is the psychological quality that transcends the human context, something we turn into patterns of behavior when we transfer it to its tribal or cultural meaning as an all-embracing fabric of our societies. Here it will transcend our individual ego and often replace it entirely. Motherhood in that sense is our embodiment of the psychological qualities underlying our physical nature as an abstraction of our personal relationship to its content, and to our relationship between us and ourselves. It is the way we physically and emotionally connect to all life from within. They are our teachers. How we then come to relate to them depends a lot on how they were first transmitted to us. It can make a big difference for us if we have intermediaries like the Sami Sáivu and its inhabitants, and with parental relationships where Máderáhttje and Máttaráhkkáh are present as mediators and representatives of its psychic content. No human can carry this content for anyone else beyond adolescence without damaging consequences. What this means to our psychic reflection is that we are relieved in a way that allows us to interact with our surroundings from within and with our own unique conditions and with the orientation to the stream of consciousness with which we were created to do so, and not always with the superego of our surroundings. But in doing this we also expose ourselves to the psychic qualities that do not belong to other people from what we have otherwise endowed them. We undress the psychic superstructure of fatherhood from the man in the father and the motherhood from the woman in the mother. This is how they, and Sáivu, and our personal relation to the objektive psychic properties will come to reveal itself to us.

consciousness as a contemporary psychic affinity with the lives of our ancestors

When I think of the persona, the mash-up or attitude and character we put together for ourselves to personify our relationship to the emergence of, and to the existing collective content of our consciousness, I rarely see a difference between that and a narcissistically relationship to it. As when our ego identifies with it and takes over its independency in relation to us, and we begin to imagine that this content is somehow our own. Something we have come up with ourselves. Not that it comes about independently of our ego and from the psychic patterns that our interaction with objective psychic properties creates, and that it is something that crop up from our inner self-organizing center that is also the union between all the opposites we confront it with. Or as a content that transforms our experiences into a physical sense of a relationship with a collective’s common psychological properties. Behind it we sense this notion of a cultural or tribal father acting on us. With whom we interact with apart from our physical reality and try to live up to behind our mask. Conceptualized as Máderáhttje in Sami he also has his counterpart as an embodied experience of nature’s own self-organizing whole, with rebirth, transformation and soul migration, which is referenced to our inner person by our cultural, or tribal mother, Máttaráhkkáh. The experience of her in that sense is the physical experience of a whole that both surrounds us and interacts with us from within everything that exists. But through a mask they are both perceived as actions performed by the ego instead of in a relation to it, as the objective psychic content we visualize in our self-observation and psychological reflection that handle us a perspective that allows us to partake in it while we are sharing it at the same time. Together with our personal translations of its influence on us. What we are conveyed is not ours, or something belonging to the ego, but something we relate to which is our common objective psychic content. Over time we lose our connection to our physical parents and the character we have created for ourselves in our relationship with them, and the objective psychic properties we have attributed them become visible to us in a social and cultural sense. We may then begin to interact with them for what they are. The intermediants behind our mash-up, mask or attitude, and what we have always had in common with everyone else, all the time. Isn’t the content of our collective consciousness in that sense something of a belonging that everyone has a relationship with at the same time as we experience it, and articulate what it is to us, so that we can meet its content in our own personal way. But without the concepts of the influence our cultural parents have on us, we lose our interaction between us and ourselves. We become what our masks are, unaware of the patterns of influence that our psychic intermediaries have on our actions. We do not even perceive them in our naive relationship to the empty characters we have created for ourselves to escape their presence in the objective psychic stream of consciousness which we are constantly part of. I imagine that when they end up in a contemporary context, they have been transformed into our superego or collective ego, and its relationship to the notion of an ecological system that we, through its idea, are aloofly part of, and that we have thereby lost our personal relationship to the direct experience they are to us. This is probably by far the single biggest reason for the way things are in the world today. It is not a given that our individual egos orient themselves in the same way as the collective superego does it when we translate our own personal experiences in their relation to our objective psychic properties, and the psychic stream of consciousness, as has been the case in our social constructions thus far. The fear of this realization and the fragmentation it entails for the collective personality is discernible everywhere and at all levels in our societies. Not to mention what it implies for the individual in the first place. To be engulft by the superego when we are not yet attuned to our own is a terrible experience. Which must have consequences for the relationship between us and ourselves, and for the relationship with that which transcends reason in the center within us that is everywhere, referred to as Rádienáhttje in a traditional Sami context, and it is transformed and given form by Rádienáhkká.

the unconscious design of not being you

Everywhere in life I have found myself in situations, and in environments, that are both smaller and larger than the scope of my personality. I think it is an experience that starts from birth and then being part of us as a timeless practise of a constant inner development to which we are invited. It is also something that makes us feel guilty for being forced to transgress its limitations or made us feel inferior for not fitting in. We can similarly end up in many different relationships that affect us in the same way. Which will lead us to seek our expression for that which does not fit in to them somewhere else. Or lead us to those who cause us to cultivate what is already within us of our objective psychic properties, and support a context of that for it to begin to grow and become a reality to us. This creates a constant conflict between opposites within us as we mix them up. We often blame one of our relationships for not being large enough to accommodate us too, or that they reduce us too much so that we or someone else cannot also fit their person in it, which will exclude us from ourselves. But there is no moral guilt in either giving vent to our psychic development or to our reluctance to allow ourselves to be diminished. Both we and others change all the time. If we don’t allow ourselves to grow, our relationships won’t grow with us either. Here life have its own moral within itself, and I think this is what the traditional teachings of Sáivu was all about in Sami, and the concept of what individuation is today. Something that forces all parties in any relationship to grow in step with the larger scale that each individual change creates within them together. Guilt arises naturally if one party in any relationship diminishes the other’s growing or greater psychological scope. There is no guilt in giving our inner person the genuine psychic nourishment it needs to be able to move us closer to what nature wants us to be. Sometimes it has to happen outside the frameworks others set up for us and the ones we set up for ourselves. That’s how we extend the scope of our reality.

that something that seems to be uniquely available as another perspective

Maybe our attention to the relation between us and our self, and its integrity, informs our inner koncentrical center of the value its direction have to us, in that the objective psyche as a whole relates to what it is that is constituted by it within us in a way that we as individuals cannot, thus saving us from endless cycles of repetitive repercussions and pain for ourselves and others.
We observe ourselves and others simultaneously from a different perspective that simultaneously formulates everything in it as if we were participants in the same objective psychic background at the same time, and with the same intensity in the interactive patterns they create. It becomes a kind of constant communication with the underlying psychic current and the social influence it has on our personal and cultural life. But related to and formulated in every person as our own connection to how our experiences are constellated when it interacts with us. It’s not about whether we prefer one over the other, as it’s more about our ego and its place between our conscious attention and our psychic reflection when it acts as an intermediary to them, perpetually oscillating back and forth between them through many different layers of our objective psyche. Which we have to formulate for ourselves, and on our own. Because no one else can come between us and ourselves and the objective patterns we formulate through our personal experiences of them in our lives. Doing the right thing in our lives is not the same as forcing myself between someone else and their psychic reflection with my own communication between you and how you have formulated your relationship to our objective psyche. It’s about doing the right thing regardless of how my version of our inner source formulates my union of our psychic opposites to me personally. Having this perspective is very confusing and when I was growing up it was not openly expressed as something that connects us to our inner reality. And the feeling of emptiness it required of me in my relationships with my surroundings almost drove me crazy at times. To almost never have a feeling of a direct connection to this with others but only to nature. The general approach to our experiences and our objective psychic background, to how this connects us to what is happening around us would simply not be put together with our inner context. Out of pure self-preservation, I did manage to find different ways of my own where this could still somehow be a hidden connection to this within me, and do as others did, but not in the order they did it. It would have put me under far too much strain.

another way to get into the Christmas spirit

I wrote this about 10 years ago and I still find that its content is relevant, now and then I’ve added a little to it and reformulated other things as the sense of its inner totality has changed in me over the years, and it’s still changing. It is above all Louhi who makes it so complicated. She is changing all the time. But on the other hand, is it not that which makes us seek our inner source, and to find that space between all there is that unites all opposites. Since it’s Christmas and all, I am doing it again. Thinking about both my own, and her relation to its time.

In contradiction to what christianity had led us to believe, and later our materialism and shopping addiction, I suggest that Santa Claus origin is rather to be found in the northern folklore figure of Väinämöinen, the hero creator of our world anew. And in the stories about him where he is viewed as the bringer of conciousness. A seer and creator. A bard, and the spirit of chants, songs and poetry. When I say materialism, I mean it in the absence of an active individual self-observation and psychic reflection in a cultural sense.

Väinämöinen is thus very far from the figure we invigorate our children with today. And he has nothing to do with our present day view of Santa Claus or its Christian substitution Saint Nicholas. But still, I think the exaggerated search for, and the original purpose of Christmas gifts can become understood in a new way again through old northern beliefs, because it reveals another meaning to the procuring and giving of gifts. Since this old view got distorted and lost, the original intention of acquiring them was turned into our present materialism. However, no wish list can ever replace the connection that has been lost to our original sense of a wholeness.

Väinämöinen is connected to the foundation of the world pillar, also thought of as the “world tree” that in turn was thought to rest on the Pohjantähti or the North Star holding up the world. This is the very star that we put at the top of the christmas tree. It can also be seen as a vertical passage between our world and the source of its objective center present to us everywhere at the same time.
The north star and its position in the sky is also what guides the tietäjä’s, and noadi heroes to seek marriage with the daughters of Pohjola. Here in Pohjola, or the underworld, the female Louhi is the powerful and evil witch Queen ruling over this northern realm with her ability to change shape and weave mighty enchantments. She appears as raw Nature, as the intoxicating opposite of consciousness. A Queen of great powers, and she request a payment for the hands of her daughters in marriage. She seduces us into pretending her to be her daughters. But it’s her way of being enchanting, hiding who she really is. It is deception through imagination, by magic. Being aware of this is the entrance to pass beyond our psychic intoxication. Without payment she will not reveal who she really is. We have to give something up for her to change, to show herself. Louhi also sets difficult to impossible tasks to perform in order for the seekers to get hold of the objective psychic content they so intensely desire, which leads to the forging of the Sampo.
The sampo is one such payment, a magic mill of plenty which churns out abundance. And abundance is what we feel when we are connected to this axis or tree holding up the sky. Separating out a worldly conscious space between her realm and our instincts. Its churning lid have also been interpreted as a symbol of the celestial vault of the heavens, embedded with stars, revolving around a central axis. It can also be seen as the eternal sum of all time and our experience of being in its constant course, the relentless circling around its axis and the churning of our inner work, observing the timeless forms revealed to us in the ordeals we have to go through to enter her world in between. Her name Louhi also refers to this space as it is connected to the modern word “lovi” which in Finnish means cleft or crevice, or the gap between the different layers of the world. By giving her gifts, like the sampo, can be seen as an act of being attentive in our personal work, of sacrificing ourselves and subjecting ourselves to the experience of her in that space where we will get to know her true character. We have to earn her acceptance before she gets visible to us and show us some of her benevolent, transformative and helpful aspects. The hero or Tietäjä has to give something up to gain entrance into Pohjola. To be able get himself this kind of a wife. Which is done with chants, songs and poetry. By developing his psychological reflection, his creative and imaginative skills. Otherwise her magic influence will seduce him by using his own imagination against him. Which is what true magic is all about in our everyday life. But if he can cope with this, she might come to his support, and give up some of those magical abilities in return for the efforts as he get access to the celestial world of the heavens through her. But first the noadi must help to keep the world up on its pillar by some sacrifice. Because if there is no pillar, there is no wife. And there certaintly is no world.
There is also a good reason for doing all this at the time of “Christmas”. Christmas is celebrated on the winter solstice when the pillar seems to be at its weakest, and almost broken on the longest night of the year. Christmas was originally a ceremony linked to the winter solstice. It is a recognition of rebirth, of creating and balancing up the world again with the help of the spirit of Väinämöinen. We are trying to assemble back the lost gift. The Sampo that has been lost when stolen by Louhi, and broken into pieces. Which we can seen as the fragmentation of our senses. Our psychic consciousness that has been lost by her magical ability in her use of our imagination. On the winter solstice we want to show that we have submitted ourselves to the search by bringing back the pieces of the sampo in our giving of Christmas gifts, to help the spirit of the noadi-tietäjä-hero to enter into this purely abstract place, a foreboding forever cold land far in the north. And to meet with Louhi. To get our souls back, and then find our way back to the world of consciousness.
By celebrating Christmas, we are actually trying to bring her and her magic back with us, with the abundance of her interpersonal space, and to access what is inside it by putting the lost and broken pieces of our psychic reflection back together again, and go through the trials required in trying to interact with Louhi in a ceremonial way. We do not celebrate “christ-mass”, we pay tribute to the sun, to the creation of the world between worlds, and celebrate the winter solstice. We are asking the spirit of Väinämöinen to help us find our way back to nature, to our within in the without.

suffering a cultivation of reflective self-awareness

When we have for a long time been exposed to various objective psychic properties and endured what they conveyed of their meaning to us, we become so used to have them close to us that we seem almost unaffected by them. We may even seem callous to the suffering others have from their interaction with us. Although in reality it means that we have a renewed insight and a different kind of involvement in our relationships that is more intimate, albeit on several internal layers at the same time. We’ve seen through the physical person’s impulse-driven way of interacting with them, and the attitude we’ve used in their place to instead allow us to face them directly, head on. We no longer depend on others’ approval or disapproval for how we relate to our person within. Something that those around us will always blame us for as long as they haven’t gone through the same personal trials. Since we do it more directly, with a different kind of connection to the present’s own terms. We observe ourselves and others simultaneously from a different perspective that simultaneously formulates everything in it as if we were participants in the same objective psychic background at the same time, and with the same intensity in the interactive patterns they create. It becomes a kind of daily communication with the underlying psychic current and the influence it has on our personal and cultural life. One general term used for referencing the content of these experiences that we interact with here is the Sáivu in Sami.

our vulnerability is what makes our inner person accessible to us

We all follow the hearts and beats of our own inner drum. And walks in the paths and patterns that the drum’s figures and different levels illustrates. Below our invulnerable surface and its attitude we accompany our inner person on that journey, and as we follow along, our physical person change because he discovers that the psychic properties the ego encounter in his world does not originally emerge from it. It becomes slowly and increasingly obvious to us that the content it interacts with do not originate from our consciousness alone. Although our physical person experience them as if they do, and are present to him in that sense. They function as proxies for the psychic activity he embodies as an intermediary to our interpersonal reality. We use many words that express something we cannot tolerate of the tension within us that does not really exist outside of our minds. Often in a condescending way. Words that only exist as opinions and judgments that belong to our way of preventing certain content from being recognized by our ego in its relation to our consciousness. Only to make our self-defense impregnable. There it stands as an antithesis to our inner persons approach to us, distancing us from that in our personal world that is opposed to what we can allow ourselves in our participation with it. And we will constantly defend the kind of psychic exile this creates by supporting it as an external enemy, because that is what we have made of everything that is not acceptable to our physical personality. And our inner person is then forced to encounter not only this but in addition he also interacts with other objective psychic properties as their intermediate. So to reduce the pressure of this tension within us, we simply turn this conflict with ourselves into a conflict with others to free ourselves from the psychological discomfort this creates. We turn our life within inside out.

those other things that my senses convey that I know nothing about

Just because we see our world from many different perspectives colored by our biographical material does not mean that we are not also shaped by multiple levels of independent objective properties in our psyche. We formulate some of these properties in many different ways, but we also observe them as an expression of the same primordial psychic experience. Our cultures are littered with this, no matter how our biographical background prefers to deal with these experiences when they enter our consciousness and our egos make their own sense of them. They still relate us to something beyond our ego that transcends the reality it has created out of it in our contemporary consciousness. In that way, are they both its origin and direction. Who also give us both meaning and advice in our encounters with them. This is why sometimes in meeting with others when we refer to the same experience, we can be completely incomprehensible to others’ way of experiencing the same thing. Although their objective origin is the same, we describe them depending on our personal makeup and the way we relate to their influence on us. This is also why we find it so difficult to correlate the content of consciousness to the materialized equivalent of the objective psyche in our science and culture.

without our inner parent couple as an intermediary, the world goes astray

The impulse or psychic disposition in our Western mind to separate, examine and reassemble, is closely associated with our inner psychic family. To the Sami Sáivu, and especially with our cultural father. Conceptualized in traditional Sami and referred to as Máderáhttje. As such, he still exists within us as part of our inner parent couple, but in a distorted way that has very little to do with his function in relation to the content that comes from the opposite of our consciousness. From where it constantly provides our consciousness with new material. His mate Máttaráhkkáh here, in her sense of psychic embodiment cannot be overstated enough. Máderáhttje’s relationship to our inner source, and the guidance that this, our objective center mediates as a union between all our opposites is lost without him as an intermediary. We turn him into an unquestionable authorarian oppressor. It is as if we cannot accept his form of influence on us, and that he is functioning independently of us and in his own relation to our ego. We imagine in our psychic naivety that he and the ego are one and the same. But such a relationship between us and ourselves, to our opposites, is what makes it difficult to distinguish between our own consciousness and the original source of its content, and the personal relationship that others also have to it without our involvement. By implication, how their own life experiences have been organized in their personal encounter with them. Our entire world of consciousness becomes one-sided and will only be about how we can allow or discern what we accept in it from others. Or turn people into us. Accepting only the content that our own ego has allowed to enter into its relation to our consciousness. Not that we are talking about the same thing from different points of view. Or that we respect the source that, regardless of the ego’s biographical attitude, brings about a reconciliation between our consciousness and its opposite within all of us. Two things come to my mind in relation to Máderáhttje, the superego and the collective conscious. And both of them act like a big stupid and sluggish giant in iron clothes. A dangerous and impregnable man-eater. Which I also like to refer to as the Sami giant stallo.

androgyny within the original sense of a whole is missing around me

Something I don’t often encounter, and many don’t care about, or suppress because of the view of ourselves we inherit from our cultural environment, but which is there within us all the time, is that we were all once children and gender neutral, and as in a traditional sense of the Sami, we were also considered girls in relation to this until this original psychic androgyny was revealed and made conscious within us. Something we are all aware happens to us at some point during the transition from our childhood to our youth. It is then that we discover that our interior is divided, and that in our opposite there is a part that functions as a psychic container for what is constantly going on within us, and which also finds its outlet with the psychic energy that through it discharges its content. But for this to become apparent to us, we need to be able to observe how in a practical sense we interact with this content as it is expressed. Something we do through people and places in our immediate vicinity. Not only on a personal and cultural level. But also on an abstract interpersonal psychic level close to the unimaginable in a conceptual sense. It is especially charged with energy in the transitions that occur between them within us as we simultaneously perceive the tension independently of ourselves in their transferred form. But its origin is still from the other, opposite side of us. From our counterpart to a consciousness that emerges from our inner center, which through the inner person conveys its content as a union of all opposites to our consciousness, and to our ego as its center.

initially, it is a long, lasting and intense psychic hell that never seems to end

Many years after I went through the initial ordeals of not allowing the opposite of my consciousness, my interpersonal life and that which transcends reason to be confused with someone else, it is still something that happens to me when it wants to. It’s as if this opposite side of me, and the other person within me needs to remind me that they are always there, that they are the one’s that transfers new content to me, and that they are responsible for creating new psychological conditions for me to deal with even if I can’t interact with what it means to me on a conscious level. That there is a constant psychic reciprocity between all life which we have met and spent time with and which were already there even before we ever got there, and it is my ego’s relation to that content that my inner person and his surroundings transfer to my consciousness, even though I may not be consciously present there. I usually notice it in the form of someone or something that suddenly start acting as an intermediate authority, with qualities that does not belong to them. Sometimes when it happens it may struck me that people identify themselves with it and think they can become an inner psychic substitute for this relationship. To me, or to others as a conditioned relation without them even knowing that they are doing it. Anyway, it is the way we use to be able to check that no one else formulates or adds new psychic content to the relationship we have between us and the opposite to our consciousness independently of the personal experience we have of interacting with what it wants from us. It’s about finding our personal boundaries and paying attention to both our own and others’ psychological integrity.
When there is an association between our psychic reflection, this other view of the world, and our everyday reality, it may well happen that it first chooses to appear to us in a traditional context, as well as in a real woman whom we confuse with the qualities that belongs to that reality which transcends pure reason, as in the Sami notion of Uksáhkká and in the sense of a threshold to another view of the world. Founded on the inner sense of personal experience. Which is something other than what we are used to and know as our consciousness. Like a first time visible psychic atmosphere that surrounds us which we can touch with our senses by her presence. We may also meet Sáráhkká in the same way. Who conveys our inner division and make us consciously experience our inner person through a woman, and face her with the true person we have within us. She brings together this psychic content inherent in all there is to be embodied by our cultural woman mother, Máttaráhkkáh. Since all people traditionally were considered to be girls until Juoksáhkká took upon her to discern the psychic quality that was the separating force in us, Juoksáhkká was then responsible for separating Máttaráhkká, the cultural expression of psychic life from physical life, and make it comprehensible to us. In this sense, it is she who makes Máderáhttje, our cultural father, visible to us, and relates him to our inner person. Along with our counter-sexual qualities that her power violently forces us to face and develop. A more contemporary view might be that every encounter with a woman by a man that we identify with her will make the psychological demands that turn boys into men, and for women, her absolute presence, sincerity and directness becomes the force that turns girls into women. In other words, she will challenge us, and force us to create the courage we all need to be able to separate our conscious life from its psychic opposite, and accept our role in both worlds.

that which alternately functions as my interior in transferred form

From the standpoint of psychological reflection, this interpersonal center of reference within us, from which we learn the right way, about sincerity, and existence itself. Is both the past, present and the future all in one. It is also the explanation of existence and that which governs our behaviour. Consciousness in this sense becomes materialized psychic reflection. Which refers us to the place of that within which is not conscious, but its opposite and the continous unfolding of psychic events that is everywhere around us. Also, from the standpoint of consciousness, it is the other, the underworld, a place of transformation and rebirth. Of soul migration and the experience of psychological exaltation that trancends the limits of pure reason. Which is the realm of Sáivu in sami. It is a multileveled experience of the world and we move between these psychic levels as we interact with the content we simultaneously transform to something we can understand in the encounter our consciousness have with it. It is not about what my ego believe in, but how I am able to convert and transfer this content to consciousness as a personal reference to my life as a whole. How it is related to other people and to life itself. Too much of the other when we are not prepared for what it means for us, when we cannot address it. Hurts us as it overpowers us and causes us to hurt others. We cannot distinguish what is our part of it, and what is somethings or someone else’s. We have no way of being part of its constant act of creation. To turn its content into a way for us to interact with it in a coherent way.

events as another kind of reflection, and as a counterpart to consciousness

Being related only to the content of consciousness and not also to it as a relation to what is added to it by the opposition that arise between our consciousness and the psychic reflection that also forms its background, and only allow us a connection to what is already in our consciousness, leaves out what our inner source or interpersonal transcendent center of being brings into it. In that way, we will constantly just oscillate between the opposites that this renders between the ego and the content of our consciousness, and we will be trapped in an eternal conflict between those two, constantly arguing, and having opinions about that content within us without ever having a genuine conciliation between them. We need look no further than ourselves to discover it. But we also see it in others, and in the leadership that exerts its influence on us. Without their interaction with each other, we find ourselves in ever-recurring and idealistic narratives with the arguments we create out of them in our attempts to control and prevent any new psychic elements from entering our consciousness that might challenge our current narrative. We will never allow ourselves the experience of the union between them that our objective transpersonal source conveys to us through our inner person which transcends the one-sided relationship our ego has with our consciousness alone. We will not only lose the independence of our psychic reflections in relation to us as an internal opposition to our consciousness, but also as its very origin and fatal companion. By being fateful, I mean how our relationship with our psychic reflection is, where it leads us. In Sami, this encounter was traditionally referred to as between Rádienáhttje and Rádienáhkká, whose embodiment and nature we where personally connected to by Rádien Niejta. And in this intermediate sense, also as Saivo Niejta. That is, as in a greater sense of being involved in everything around us, which is also referred to with the concept of meahcci.

my embodied relationship to that which is not consciousness

Missing out on any expression of a cultural female parent like the psychic concept of Máttaráhkká in Sami makes us insensitive and impenetrable, and impervious to sincere human emotions. She may no longer become observable to us through our personal mothers, our grandmothers, or through one of our distant great grandmothers. But she usually acts in the hiddenness of a woman with whom we have a relationship anyway. If she are not allowed to interact with us directly and separate from an existing woman, we may lose her as the greater reference she is to the psyche as a living reflection of that which transcends reason. In that sense, as a cultural entity like the mother figure Máttaráhkká she is experienced as a kind of relief from the confusing psychic entanglements we experience with her when we lack a separation between her, the world of consciousness and our interpersonal psyche. When she is present she is part of the discrimination between them, and can act as a communion with Rádienáhkká, and also to places where transcendence is particularly auspicious. It is traditionally in accession with them that we find the Sieidi’s that reveals to us where this connection is particularly obliging. When Rádienáhkká is present in the realm of that which is the within of the without, which gives us a deep connection of recognition to a place, she gives warmth, gentleness and care to those who recognize her and to those who are in her vicinity. Embodied in all living things, she is felt in the earth, in the forests, in the stillness of a mountain lake. She surrounds us at all time. People in a society acting as one, or a culture without a relationship to her, has no genuine human concern for those who live in it or for those who will be affected by its actions. Our consciousness does not allow it as pure reason will distance us from our human relationships.

the judgemental power of past experiences on consciousness

Almost everywhere in the West, when we attend to the experience of the essence of our individuality and its center as the sense we have of a greater whole, to the source of which the inner personality is related, its energy, and the origin of that who acts as a counselor between all opposites. The cultural aspect of our inner parents are always ignored, which confuses the original experience of them with the unification of opposites and with other kindred personal psychic experiences. But above all, with the cultural aspect of the interpersonal father. Or the concept of Máderáhttje in sami. His role and function as the one who distinguishes between all opposites, who discerns that which arises when it is embodied nature by his counterpart, who refers to the wisdom and that exaltation that transcends pure reason, our psychic reflection and transformation when its contents is brought to consciousness and then related to our ego by him there. That dynamic always ceases when they are blended together as a single inner figure of some universally overarching all-inclusive kind. We are never able to interact with them. With their involvement. We act on their behalf and don’t know why. Which distances us from other people and even make them hostile to us because we interfere with their own unique and personal relation to its influence, and what they try to convey to them. As our cultural inner parents they are there to help and guide us, to stand our ground, but under these circumstances, this does not make any sense to us because we think that we are what they are. We experience what they are trying to show us as if it were something we invented ourselves, as a product of our own ego, and not something that is coming from them. From the dynamics of our psychological parents and what they try to refer us to. This is, and has always been confusing to me.

traditional thought and structure in a psychic sense

Unlike a natural or more intuitive approach to our psyche, it seems to me that today academic psychology in a cultural sense is about control, not about allowing new psychic factors to enter our lives. Something whose needs may instead be expressed in compulsive love, drugs, sex and alcohol. In various types of work-related or adventurous obsession. In our addictions and needs to control new psychic factors that try to enter our lives and expand it as we immerse ourselves in it beyond that which goes on above the ego. Beyond our biographical level of life. Often also in outbursts of violence and anger where we force others to mold themselves to us and our needs to prevent them from questioning our undeveloped and naïve notions of ourselves and the personalistic products of the mind. Such an approach to the psyche as a whole is only destructive and forces us to find other outlets for what interacts with us in our interpersonal world. On a more adult level than the purely biographical psychic material in which the ego will otherwise constantly repeat itself, which adapts us to our biological parents and the environment they relate to, as when we separate our consciousness from its paternal aspect of constant opposites and relate it anew to our inner psychic reflection, we can relativize the ego from its habitual ways and it will instead relate to the content of consciousness as it arises when we attend and observe the activity that our psychic reflection then creates in the tension to consciousness as its inner or psychically based counterpart. A union of them then occurs between them. Something we cannot prevent from happening because they always interact with each other whether we observe it or not. It will participate with us by itself, from its own source and in its own form and energy. Then what emerges transforms embodied matter from within, thought and feeling is turned into psychic abstractions and representations that allow us to interact with them. They often become cultural aspects and inner experiences of our psyche that we then convey between us in an inner new and more personal sense of meaning. If we think of the world and what happens in it as a result of what also happens within us, and which we share with everyone else, we come very close to understanding what we are exposed to in it. Both through various psychic groups and by individual people around us. The lack of a cultural expression for our inner parent couple, like Máderáhttje and Máttaráhkká in Sami is quite obvious. And their relationship to our inner guide and unconscious prefiguration in Rádienáhttje as a supraordinate psychic concept out of which everything evolves, and our relationship to nature, to the unknown, the source of all embodied life in Rádienáhkká cannot be overestimated enough.

consciousness and psyche as activity and substance in relation to our ego

It is always first a profoundly fundamental personal psychic experience that we then together give a cultural expression that makes it common in relation to the interpersonal experience we have of its origin.
And this is exactly where our cultural parents come in, like Máderáhttje and Máttaráhkká in Sami, and their reference to the supreme psychic conceptualization of our interaction with the energy and experience of disembodiment in Rádienáhttje and Rádienáhkká. As a connection to the primal experience of our psychic dualism, to consciousness, its source and union of opposites, its directions, and its embodied relation to nature as a whole, and as a counterpart in itself to a within in the without. Without them, we will lack an interactive relationship with life as nature and to other living beings. We become a jumble of conflicting opinions and arguments that do not relate to our own inner person and those he interacts with there along with other people. There is no connection, no interpersonal psychic experiences that we interact with on a personal level with them, where we consciously and considerately transform our psychic activity into a living reality as adult human beings.

the real person within

In Sami, there is the psychic concept of albma-olmmos, or the real person, who in that sense throughout my upbringing was more or less consciously present in all contexts. Most often as the one who decided a kind of community between people who were otherwise strangers to each other. He was either there or he wasn’t. If not, there was no real interrelation and you were still strangers. I perceive it as nowadays the real person has almost completely disappeared, which means that everyone then continues to be just strangers to each other. The real person is also described in other ways. Like the greater man within man, purusha in India or anthropos in Gnosticism. In its broader sense, that person within us is also deeply connected to nature as something alive, and there is an interpersonal psychic space where this inner person relates us both to people, places and other things around us that are not human, which are also part of the social dialogue we have with them and each other all the time in the environment we share with all that which we encounter there. They therefore interact with us in everything we do, and to exclude them as part of our inner context with the person we have there, makes us sick and depressed and stuck in a kind of logic of material loneliness. I think this is because we must participate through him with everything in our environment, and with those in the relationship that arises in the mutual context that constantly arises between us and everything in it, on which we also depend for our psychic balance and health. Otherwise we isolate the inner person and exclude him from the participation of this greater human interaction to which he relates us, and we do not participate in the psychic environment in which he and his inner, or our saivo family involve us. I also think that’s why we talk about personal time. Getting to spend time alone, with ourselves. Why relationships sometimes fall apart. We all need time to evolve, and release the directions involved that unite opposites and learn to associate them more closely with our relationship with this inner person, who then shows us the relationships it has with the source and energy of the greater psychically experienced whole. Something that can’t be done without also sharing his cultural aspect. Nowadays, we have other names for them, as they are somewhat acknowledged as part of our psyche, if we even notice them and recognise how much they interfere in our relationships. But as psyche or saivo, or whatever name that we are accustomed to use culturally to give expression to our interpersonal psychic life, our need to interact with them are never the less the same.

absence do not trancend duality

If we completely ignore, withdraw or omit our interaction with our external world and imagine it as non-existent, as not part of our life, there would be no difference between us and anyone else in that original psychic world from which everything evolves, and which we will still embody. We may temporarily cease all opposites that we encounter in that conflict between the world and its within, and we may come to some sort of settlement with it because we do not find that we are related to what it want from us. What their original intentions are. But then we become too narrowed down to our ego, to our impulses, instincts, stream of thoughts and whatever ideals we make of them as they act on us and we are imagined by them, and we become nothing else. There is no world. Or real person yet that articulates the confrontation it has with what it encounters there. Only this original psychic content that is also the coherent whole that unites everything that arises from it, and then becomes the world we create from our relationship to how it is put in context. But it is never in itself the dualistic approach we have to it. It is what we make of it. That is our world.

encounters with the suffering of dualism

Spaciousness, non-duality, or nowness is something that is separate from tomorrow as a mere consequence of yesterday, from its constant division between opposing opinions within its own opposites of ever new opinions. The self-regulating balance that arises there, in the psychic dimension that meets us on our own terms as the place of that which is the within in without. Or the world as reflection, its psychic dimension embodied as an introspective principle in the encounter with our inner objective other. Its source and preconfigured reference to life as its inherent potential. It is like the spatial experience of psychic life in itself from which all that is evolves. It is from here all forms and concepts has its own beginnings. Where our tumultuous stream of thoughts, impulses and instincts get separated from our ego to once again become their own primordial origins in their own right, disconnected from what we want them to be as we ourselves try to balance all the inner contradictions this creates that constantly arise in what is, between what has passed and that which has passed may lead us to. Where we discover that life has built a kind of track-record of personal directions of this nowness which has educated us up to a certain moment of realisation as this eternal psychic dimension of the present in an absolute sense, but sprinkled throughout our life. However, most of us do not connect these experiences with the others in a relational way, or share its origins with people around us, since very little in our world promotes living and acting from such an accumulation of them in this place. Unless it is about its absence in the form of the psychic confusion, inhuman behavior or the atrocities they create, and in whose place they are constantly divided again and again into ever more opinions of yesterday, our past, and our tomorrows as its consequence. But neither our past nor our tomorrow is changed by a dualistic consciousness of time. Because our tomorrow consists of these scattered bursts of an introspective dimension of non-dualistic psychic events outside of it. Without a relationship to this psychic undercurrent, we identify with its content and become whatever appears within us. We do not even perceive that we must allow others to develop their own relationship to it as something separate from themselves and yet what they have in common with everyone else as life itself, as nature and soul. Or Meahcci in Sami.

a sense of being in the presence of now

We can have any opinions about others and what others do as one without it ever changing anything. No opinions we have about the past will change anyone or anything here and now. Likewise, we also do not change anything with our opinions about anything in the future with them. No opinion ever changes anything in the present, in what is happening here and now. The only thing they do is that they constantly create more and more opinions that constantly divide the present anew into what was and what may be conceivable as its future, but nothing ever changes here and now because we do not change. Having opinions do not change us or what was or what will be. Which should have been obvious to us a long long time ago. Our individual part in suffering this seem to be about learning to see the difference within us. And understand that there is a place within us that our opinions do not reach, and that we are governed by a different kind of reflective principle where we are judged and suffer for the opinions we hold in its stead there.

the place of the dissolution of conventional adaptation

We cannot allow ourselves to be included in other people’s biographical material, to become their counterpart in the ongoing conflict that it is between them and this content. Just as I cannot concern myself in that way with the psychic background beyond that which causes both them and me to act upon events that originate in relation to it. The person we create for ourselves for this, the nauseating compromise that has become the one who sees himself there and exists in this way is not who I am. The limitlessness it creates in that space instead functions as my relationship to both what that is, and as a balance to the opposites it creates there. But that limitlessness is not who I am either. I am not its transgressive power. It is independent of me and of others. If I surrender to its impulses and its instinctive nature and identify myself with it, I start to believe that I can be someone else from within this place in some other person. I also begin to allow others to imagine that they have that ability when it comes to me too. The inner psychic place where I meet and react to the instincts and impulses that have this influence on me turn it into something that I then personify there. This is the place where we confront each other, me and this personification, and where I see it in others as well as I see it in myself. Where we get absorbed by it and and lose our human qualities. In this place interpersonal psychic events always have a relation to us. It is also where the here and now gets lost. Where it turns into a jumble of personal biographical material, our shortcomings and excesses gets mixed up with others. But we also discover that we think that we are all that emerges in this place, even though it is not of our own making, and we have to face it by ourselves and confront the challenges we meet with here, and not let what is happening to us move it somewhere else, and allow ourselves a total loss of who we are. The integrity that we have painstakingly tried to create in our relationships with that other, which affects us and exerts its pressure on us, can easily slip away into someone else’s collective oblivion. But it is still in this, in this interpersonal space that we can see past our own perceptions and into the content that reflect what it want us to recognize. Here, Nature always gives this place the sanctuary it needs when it risks being overpopulated by the conflicts that arise between others and their biographical content, when we risk being dissolved by their encroaching limitlessness with which this interpersonal impulsive force tries to affect us, so that we abandon the reconciliation we may have achieved in our own relation to it.