[Buddha-l] freud jung

[Dan Lusthaus]

Thanks, Gary.

The sectarian sniping within the psychology community does get out of hand
at times. Not just the Freudian and Jungians, but analysts vs. behaviorists,
cognitive vs anti-cognitive (just kidding), etc. Hard to discern viable
insights from the dogmatic hierarchizings some engage in.

I do find it curious that on a Buddhism list, where many of the discussants
would insist that the proposition that we should not judge the Dharma
expressed by recognized Buddhist exemplars by how they live and behave in
their personal lives (actually a bone fide Buddhist stance, at least in East
Asia), is an unacceptable notion, nonetheless apply an entirely opposite
standard to Western counterparts who are supposed to be advising us on how
to clean up our mental apparatus, what "health" is, etc.

cheers,
Dan


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "gary.gach" <gary.gach at gmail.com>


> I'm grateful for the discussion. While it might seem off-topic (I.E., Dan
> did not connect the dots to Yogacara), it needs no defense in my mind.  We
> are here discussing BuddhaDharma thanx to a number of influences, one of
> them being the popular adoption in the West of psychology.  It would be no
> less *a propos* to discuss Heidegger, insofar as he's often considered in
> terms of BuddhaDharma, and vice-versa. And selflishly I'm growing more
> interested in the interface between psychology and BuddhaDharma as I've
been
> given a platform (soapbox) at *Psychology Today, *which is Buddhist
insofar
> as it's not psychology yesterday or tomorrow.