The limitations of monotheism are further discussed in CW 9, Part ii, Aion beginning at paragraph 270: It implies on the one hand exclusion of the diversity and rich reality of life and the world, and on the other the practicality of realizing the ideals of the present and the immediate past, but it holds out no real possibility of human development. Monism, as a general psychological tendency, is a characteristic of all civilized thinking and feeling, and it proceeds from the desire to set up one function or the other as the supreme psychological principle … This psychological monism, or rather monotheism, has the advantage of simplicity but the defect of one-sidedness. The disposition to do this is encouraged by the monistic tendency, which always and everywhere looks for a unique principle. The mischief, then, lies neither with the collective psyche nor with the individual psyche, but in allowing the one to exclude the other. To further clarify what’s happening in any such situation, in an appendix to Two Essays on Analytical Psychology (par 482) Jung makes this comment about monotheism:
![thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image meaning thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image meaning](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/mT9Ca9lWxyM/maxresdefault.jpg)
These two tendencies are in constant warfare: sometimes there is only one God with countless attributes, sometimes there are many gods, who are simply called by different names in different places, and who personify one or the other attribute of their respective archetype, as we have seen in the case of the Egyptian gods.
![thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image meaning thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image meaning](https://i0.wp.com/footballpink.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/statues2.jpg)
The deity is divided into three parts, and on top of that come all the heavenly hierarchies. As he writes in Symbols of Transformation CW 5, par 149, the natural, innate movement of the psyche demands first the need to deal with the realities of the undeveloped aspects of ourselves (“gods” etc.) and therefore it creates an automatic resistance to any innately unbalanced form of “monotheism”:īut the striving for unity is opposed by a possibly even stronger tendency to create multiplicity, so that even in strictly monotheistic religions like Christianity the polytheistic tendency cannot be suppressed. I personally concur with Jung’s assessment that an ill-informed view of what monotheism really is about at its core can lead the ego in being swayed to leave the middle ground, as it were, where both good and evil are conscious, and to become too one-sided.
![thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image meaning thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image meaning](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MD5j1xRtoYA/UQdladIMmkI/AAAAAAAAMRM/9dj_wvvo1pU/s1600/10+commandments+gold+calf+lunch+bag+craft+1.jpg)
![thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image meaning thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image meaning](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3e/fe/52/3efe52dc7c2614a3b545314060b12a11.jpg)
into everyone, continuing to affect even the millions who are not members of any faith groups or of a specific philosophy etc., etc. As Jung pointed out, the zeitgeist breathes this kind of subtle but immovable prohibition etc. Or any likeness that is in heaven above Īny form, figure, portrait, or picture of anything or creature whatever, whether in the supreme, starry, or airy heaven as of angels, which some have gone into the worship of and of the sun, moon, and stars, the host of heaven and of any of the birds of the air, as the hawk by the Egyptians, and the dove by the Assyrians:Īs oxen, sheep, goats, cats, dogs such as were the gods of Egypt:Īs of fishes, such as were the crocodile of Egypt, the Dagon of the Philistines, and the Derceto of the Syrians: this is the second command, as the Targum of Jonathan expressly calls it that is, the first part of it, which forbids the making of graven images for worship the other part follows, which is the worship of them itself: Clemens of Alexandria F4 observes, that Numa, king of the Romans, took this from Moses, and forbid the Romans to make any image of God, like to man or beast.It could be that your understandable fear to allow in images of “pagan” gods is rooted even more broadly and deeply in the various edicts and beliefs of society as a whole because of centuries of their constant repetition by organized religions and other sources of all kinds. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven imageĪn image of anything graven by art or man's device, cut out of wood of stone, and so anything that was molten, or cast into a mould or form, engraved by men, and this in order to be worshipped for otherwise images of things might be made for other uses and purposes, as the cherubim over the mercy seat, and the brazen serpent, and images and impressions on coin, which we do not find the Jews themselves scrupled to make use of in Christ's time on that account though they vehemently opposed the setting up any images of the Caesars or emperors in their temple, because they seemed to be placed there as deities, and had a show of religious worship: however, any image of God was not to be made at all, since no similitude was ever seen of him, or any likeness could be conceived and it must be a gross piece of ignorance, madness, and impudence, to pretend to make one, and great impiety to make it in order to be the object of religious worship on which account, not any image or the image of anything whatever was to be made: