stripping the gurus - Brahma Kumaris Info

200 STRIPPING THE GURUS
At any rate, short of believing that Aurobindo’s and the Mother’s
vital roles in WWII were exactly what they themselves claimed
those to be, there are only two possible conclusions. That is, that
both he and she were wildly deluded, and unable to distinguish
fact from fiction or reality from their own fantasies; or that they
were both outright fabricating their own life-myths.
So: Do you believe that one “world’s greatest philosopher-sage”
and his “infallible” spiritual partner—who herself “had live contacts
with several gods,” teaching them in the process—in southern
India radically changed the course of human history in unparalleled
ways, simply via their use of metaphysical Force and other
occult faculties?
I, personally, do not.
* * *
As with his probable misrepresentations of Aurobindo’s work, Wilber’s
understanding of Carl Jung’s ideas regarding archetypes has
been seriously questioned by the Jungian psychologist V. Walter
Odajnyk, in Appendix A of his (1993) Gathering the Light. Indeed,
Odajnyk there explicitly regarded kw as having an “erroneous
view” of Jung’s position:
Wilber’s criticism of Jung’s notion of archetypes is misinformed.
Contrary to what Wilber states, Jung does refer to
the archetypes as “the patterns upon which all other manifestations
are based”....
[Further,] contrary to what Wilber claims, Jung does not
locate the archetypes only at the beginning of the evolutionary
spectrum—they are present both at the beginning and at
the end....
The spirit Mercurius is the archetype that expresses the
notion, stated much too generally by Wilber, that “the ascent
of consciousness was drawn toward the archetypes by the archetypes
themselves.” Far from being a criticism of Jung,
this was Jung’s discovery and not Wilber’s....
[Likewise,] it is Jung and not Wilber who first proposed
clear distinctions among “collective prepersonal, collective
personal, and collective transpersonal” elements of the psyche
[cf. Wilber’s celebrated “pre/trans fallacy” insights].
I am aware of no response by Wilber to Odajnyk’s concerns.
And I personally am in no informed position to evaluate who of