Understanding the Religious-Mystical Experience within the Framework of Analytical Psychology: Refraction of the Universalist Paradigm

Shugurov Mark Vladimirovich ORCID: 0000-0003-3604-3961 Doctor of Philosophy Professor of the Department of Philosophy, Saratov State Law Academy 410028, Russia, Saratov, Volskaya str., 1 shugurovs@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Mozzhilin Sergei Ivanovich ORCID: 0000-0001-6078-3252 Doctor of Philosophy Professor of the Department of Theoretical and Social Philosophy, Saratov National Research State University named after N.G. Chernyshevsky 410012, Russia, Saratov, Astrakhan str., 83 mozhilinsi@list.ru

The research was carried out with the financial support of the RFBR within the framework of the scientific project No. 21-011-44095 ("Diversity of theological, philosophical and scientific approaches to understanding the phenomenon of Christian religious and mystical experience: horizons and limits of interdisciplinary synthesis")

At the very beginning of the formation of the psychology of religious-mystical experience at the turn of the XIX–XX centuries. as a special direction within the framework of Western psychology of religion, the tendency to reduce the content of mystical experience to psychological experiences of an individual nature and to put their ontological content out of brackets has become noticeable. In essence, the psychologization of the phenomenon of mysticism was largely a consequence of the strengthening of the subjectivist mystical tradition. This was especially noticeable in the example of Protestant mysticism, starting from the XVII century. According to M. Certeau, subjectivism was the consequence of the decline of religious and institutional mysticism in the West ^{[1, p. 10]}. Note that institutionalism here should be understood as the inclusion of mystical experience in the church tradition and correlation with it. Despite the divergence of mystical traditions in Western and Eastern Christianity in the Middle Ages, the problem of correlation of mystical insights and dogmas of faith is characterized by the same increased urgency. However, in Protestantism, the individualization of mystical experience and the strengthening of its autonomous character took place in a noticeable way, which became a prerequisite for treating it as a purely psychological phenomenon.

Against this background , it is quite understandable that U. 's attention is focused . James based on an individual mystical experience, which seemed to him free from a particular religious context and possessed specific universal criteria, such as spontaneity, ineffability, change in personality status, etc. ^[2]. However, it is very difficult to carry out a meaningful interpretation of this experience outside the context of religious tradition. And sometimes it is impossible due to the fact that mystical experience can have a quasi-religious or non-religious character. In particular, the acuteness of the problem of interpretation is characteristic of the mystical experience peculiar to new religious movements. However, the subjectivist phenomenology of modern mystical experience continues to be of interest not only for psychological science, but also for psychiatry. Be that as it may, and M. Certeau is right in this, we live in a post-Christian world, when a new interpretative structure is needed to decipher and explain a new mystical experience.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, psychologists, relying on the methodological and experimental arsenal of modern psychological science, in the process of studying and interpreting mystical experience, deal with contemporaries who are far enough from a clear following of the religious-mystical tradition. In addition, the classic examples of Christian mysticism turned out to be in the distant past. But there are also exceptions here, represented by the manifestation of the propensity of some religious psychologists to study mystical traditions and mystical practices ^{[3; 4]}. In turn, this indicates the relevance of an interdisciplinary approach. It seems that the latter enhances the interpretative potential of the psychology of religion in general and the psychology of mystical experience in particular.

One of the laboratories of thought for the search and testing of new interpretative structures of the experience under consideration was the deep psychology of C.G. Jung, for which, as it turned out, psychological reductionism was alien. But here it is necessary to understand that the significance of the analytical branch of deep psychology is not limited to the formation of interpretive structures of traditional and non-traditional mystical experience. Here there is the realization of the role of a factor transforming the spiritual culture of the modern era, at least in its Western version. 

In the light of the above, the purpose of the presented article is to reveal the content, directions and results of the conceptualization of religious-mystical experience within the framework of the psychological theory of religion characteristic of analytical psychology, as well as the substantiation of the universalist paradigm as the basis of this conceptualization.

The following tasks were aimed at achieving this goal:

1) analyze the conceptual model of K.G. Jung's psychology of religion and reveal its specifics through the prism of contradictory relations between its scientific and mystical components;

2) to reveal the significance of K.G. Jung's personal mystical experience as an empirical basis of analytical psychology;

3) to determine the prerequisites of the universalist character of K.G. Jung's mystical theology;

4) analyze the content of the interdisciplinary dialogue of analytical psychology and theology;

5) to establish the directions of understanding the phenomenon of mystical experience in the works of the followers of C.G. Jung;

6) to assess the potential of Jungianism for solving the problem of the spiritual crisis of European humanity.

 The methodological base of the research is represented by general scientific and special scientific methods. Analysis and synthesis, abstraction and generalization were used as general scientific methods. The systematic approach became the basis for a comprehensive reconstruction of K.G. Jung's mystical-psychological theology as a special kind of phenomenology of religious-mystical experience existing at the junction of science and mysticism. An important role was played by the comparative method, based on the use of which the specificity of the approach of analytical psychology to religious and mystical experience was established, in contrast to the approach characteristic of psychoanalysis. In addition, this method made it possible to understand the difference between the mystical doctrine of C.G. Jung and the content of Christian mystical theology. The use of the hermeneutic method has become the basis for reading the meanings and intentions of analytical psychology, concerning, firstly, a new interpretation of religious and esoteric truths, and, secondly, suggesting unique ways out of the crisis spiritual situation of the "death" of God.

The novelty of the research lies in the substantiation of the fact that the approach of analytical psychology to the phenomenon of religious-mystical experience correlates with the universalist paradigm in religious studies, according to which all mystical traditions, both religious and non-religious, contain certain invariants. The authors found that, unlike religious studies, analytical psychology, involving theology and new religious movements in a dialogue, strives to solve the practical problem of resolving the spiritual crisis of modernity on the basis of a new interpretation of mental health achieved with the help of appropriate psychoanalytic practices leading a person to revive his mystical experience, which has a syncretic and trans-confessional character.

               1. Psychological theory of religion by C.G. Jung: analysis of the conceptual modelAs you know, Jung is considered a mystic among psychologists.

Actually, that's how Z. described him. Freud. Responding to R. Rolland's criticism of psychoanalysis about the insufficient validity of the distinction between "extraversion" and "introversion", he wrote that this distinction "... comes from C.G. Jung, who himself is also to a large extent a mystic and has not belonged to us for many years" ^{[5, p. 163]}. Let's ask ourselves what does the phrase "he (i.e.) Jung no longer belongs to us" mean? It seems that with this phrase Freud wanted to say that Jung ceased to be a Freudian with all the consequences that follow from this. Thus, there is a statement that he "slipped out" of the embrace of adherents of the exclusive mission of scientific reason, which should dispel such a fundamental illusion of the human race as religion by proving that spirituality is nothing more than a morbid interest. As it turned out further, Jung managed to combine in his personality the figure of a scientist researching religious cults and mystical practices, and the role of a mystic who was an adept, paradoxically, of all the most significant mystical practices. And, finally, he approached the phenomenon of the unconscious in a new way, seeing in it a powerful collective layer and, in addition to this, an archetypal phenomenon that has an essential, and not just an apparent mystical nature.

The split between Freud and Jung was partly predetermined by their different approaches not only to understanding the phenomenon of the unconscious, but also mystical experience. Despite the fact that Freud, being an expert in the cultures of ancient civilizations and being aware of the various variants of mysticism and their impact on the human psyche, was formally an opponent of mysticism. He saw it as just an element of the functioning of the archaic human psyche in phylogeny. Psychoanalysis was seen as an instrument of liberation from this "atavism". Freud's attitude to religion in general as one of the brightest illusions is also well known.

Against this background, Jung understood religion as a symbolic expression of the meaning of life and saw in it a therapeutic purpose. In other words, psychological health, in his opinion, is hardly possible in the case when consciousness loses its intrapsychic connection with regulating religious factors. From Jung's point of view, mystical, as well as religious experiences are initially contained in the collective unconscious as an image of God (Imago Dei) and can become conscious through unconscious concentrations of libido.

Let us briefly note that Freudian psychoanalysis rejected the spiritual and even more mystical understanding of the unconscious, although, of course, mysticism, including Jewish, as modern research shows, had a certain influence on Freud in general and on the algorithms of psychoanalysis in particular ^[6]. In recent decades, psychoanalysts have begun not only cautiously, but also quite openly to include mystical and religious thinking in their search for essential aspects of the human psyche ^[7]. Nevertheless, neither Freud himself nor his followers, who are characterized by the intensification of mystical searches, did not create an original concept of mystical experience. However, they did not set themselves such a task. In particular, the followers of Freud (M. Milner, D. U. Winnicott, V. R. Bion, J. Lacan, M. Eigen, V. Meissner) paid attention to the saturation of the psychoanalytic praxis proper with mystical elements, eventually departing from the original plan to implement it as an exclusively project of scientific reason. Of course, this project initially had a revealing pathos for Freud, although there were "trickles" of inconsistency in this pathos, which, as we have just noted, intensified among his followers. Freud, actively using the patterns of rationalistic thinking of his time and being committed to rationalistic reductionism, which he guarded and defended with desperate conviction, shook the pillars of scientific rationalism, showing in a clear form the limits of reason. At the same time, pointing out the limits does not mean a complete rejection of reason, because otherwise it is not possible to talk about the preservation of science as the most important achievement of European civilization.

Unlike Freud, the study of the "numinous" dimension perceived in mystical experience became Jung's prerogative. As V.M. Kuimova notes, having studied Freud's theory and distanced himself from it, Jung "expanded his ideas about the content and structure of personality. Jung was one of the first to recognize the positive contribution of religious, spiritual and mystical experience, which led to the development of the idea of the collective unconscious and the archetypes that fill it" ^{[8, p. 190]}.Attaching a decisive role to the analytical distinction between ego-consciousness and the archetypal content of the collective unconscious in the process of individuation, he called his psychology analytical, thereby emphasizing its difference from psychoanalysis.

In principle, Jung fits into the general mainstream of the psychology of religion and mystical experience. He should be regarded as a scientist who has contributed to the understanding of religion and mysticism. His most important works on the psychology of religion are: "Psychology and Religion" (1940), first known as "Terry's Lectures" (1937), "An attempt at a psychological interpretation of the dogma of the Trinity" (1940/41), "The Symbol of Change in Mass" (1941) and "The Answer to Job" (1952). However, he was not only a psychologist of religion.

In particular, the literature suggests that the Jungian concept of individuation was a synthesis of the psychology of religion and the science of religion, presented by M. Muller and K. Thiele ^{[9, p. 76]}. Similar views are expressed in Russian literature. Thus, O.K. Mikhelson emphasizes that "the author of the theory of the archetypes of the collective unconscious, K. G. Jung, made a significant contribution to the interaction of psychology and religious studies, creating theories that are still one of the most interesting foundations for the interpretation of religious phenomena" ^{[10, p. 83]}.We should fully agree with this position. Indeed, Jung can be regarded as a religious scholar and even a philosopher of religion, because at the center of his questions was the desire to understand the essence of religion and the sources of its origin, and not a simple desire to study and describe the psychological expression of religious and mystical experience. According to his views, religion is a psychological response to the unknown, located in the soul, as well as in the world around a person. Here we are talking about religion as an experience of the numinous, expressed in various symbolic forms ^{[11; 12]}. It is on the basis of this idea of religion that he creates his theory of the psychology of religion, thus demonstrating an interdisciplinary synthesis.

The substantial diversity of religious experience and the corresponding diversity of the content of religions is set by the universal mythological themes underlying certain religions. These types ultimately originate from archetypes as extrapsychic and dynamic numinous principles of psychic and instinctive life, performing structuring and organizing functions.  On this basis, mental health is understood by Jung as a consequence of maintaining and acquiring an intrapsychic connection with archetypes. But it does not follow from this that he reduced both mental health and religion to archetypes. In general, his approach to understanding the meaning of mythological and religious symbolism was phenomenological and hermeneutic. In his Psychology and Religion ^[13], he describes the religious function of the unconscious, using rich material from ancient and medieval Gnostic, alchemical and occult literature, and also discusses the religious symbolism of unconscious processes and the continuity of religious forms that have emerged over the centuries.

Due to the scale of Jung's creative personality, his teaching fits perfectly into the mainstream of mystical theology, but one characterized by the absence of a clear confessional affiliation. This is largely due to the blurring of his religious identity and the attraction not only to research, but also to direct contact with the phenomenon of the numinous, whose experience is inherent in esotericism and occultism. At least, this can be judged by his latest work "Mysterium Coniunctionis" ^[14], in which, in the context of alchemical psychology, he describes the stages of individuation leading to the union of opposites, which culminates in the "maturation" of the small I (ego) into a greater integrity of the Self.

Of course, we cannot say that his mystical theology had a philosophical character, as, for example, S.L. Frank's and was based on a religious-philosophical algorithm of sophisticated ignorance, which, of course, had not only Christian roots. In general, Jung's mystical theology turned out to be equally removed from identification with one or another religious-mystical tradition. Let us hypothesize that analytical psychology was characterized by religious-mystical universalism. This means that it presents a synthesis of occult-esoteric mysticism and the basic structures of religious-mystical traditions. In the person of Jung, an amazing phenomenon arose: the conceptualization of the phenomenon of mystical experience was carried out by him not on the basis of reading books, as is typical for religious scholars, and not on the basis of the usual laboratory work of a psychologist, but on the basis of reflection of his own mystical experiences, which were interfaced with various traditions of mysticism. In other words, his concept is the interpretation of his own experience and meaningful being within the framework of this experience in close correlation with historical material. That is why his personal mystical experience did not have a purely subjective coloring due to the fact that he sought to be embedded in mystical traditions, although this was carried out in a rather eclectic way and sometimes post factum. Moreover, the approach of analytical psychology itself is important here, which allowed us to see the scale and ontology of mystical experiences and, most importantly, their irreducibility to individual experience and subjective psychological experiences. Thus, there was a solution to the cultural task of returning mysticism to its collective character, as well as the task of returning modern spiritual searches to mystical traditions. This is directly evidenced by his correspondence with the Dominican V. White ^{[15, p. 71-72]}.

 But it is impossible not to take into account the fact that the solution of the problem of the disciplinary formalization of analytical psychology while simultaneously solving the just mentioned cultural and religious problem had correlations with the philosophical context, and, consequently, assumed a philosophical interpretation. Thus, M. Nagy emphasizes that Jung's call for "inner life was based not on the ethical value of recognizing an alternative to an objective, scientific view, not on the preventive value for the patient, but on the epistemological assumption that the only certainty we have is our knowledge of the inner world" ^{[16, p. 14]}.

In addition to this, Jung recognized that we cannot know anything objective about the soul, since this knowledge is psychological, i.e. a kind of internal. But that's the whole paradox, that psychological truth in no way excludes metaphysical truth, although psychology, as a science, should stay away from all metaphysical statements. Against this background, it is not possible to talk about analytical psychology as a "purely" psychological science, and also only as a science. It seems that it represents something more. Moreover, we are facing a kind of scientific work when research efforts are based on visionary revelations. They form the empirical basis of his teaching. As you know, psychological science is based on empirical elements, but in this case they do not have an external character, but are represented by experiences and experiments conducted in their own secret world, mainly in the occult areas of their own unconscious. And this is already a kind of spiritual and even more mystical experience, and often not identical to the mystical experience of traditional religions.

 This is determined by the fact that, unlike the desire of religious theorists to understand the psychological essence of religion, Jung took steps towards the transition from the frozen forms of religious experience and ideas about them into the element of this experience, unwittingly following the distinction proposed by Fr. Schleirmacher between religious experience and its intellectual translation into dogma. But unlike the model of subjectivist Protestant mysticism, Jung, relying on his own religious and mystical experience, sought to conceptualize the universal process of individuation. To this end, he sought parallels in world traditions. And since religion in its institutional forms is a living experience, any theological formulations that have a speculative nature were recognized by them as insufficiently representative and even unscientific in comparison with psychological conclusions. Consequently, there is an approach here, according to which the experience of the supernatural prevails over any interpretation of it. Immersion in this experience and abstraction of the results obtained does not imply experimentation in the usual sense of the word, but it fully allows the use of the method of active imagination, which expands the possibilities of contact with the numinous. Despite this, such a scientific criterion as consistency is implemented here. This was expressed in the development of a systematized body of knowledge obtained on the basis of observation, study and discovery of the principles and meanings underlying the subject area of his research with the involvement of scientific standards of objectivity, including the analysis of his own dreams ^[17]. This manner of scientific creativity was also found in Freud, who turned to the analysis of his own dreams. 

In both cases, both Jung and Freud did not avoid, but, on the contrary, sought communication with occultists and non-traditional mystics. But, as we pointed out above, Freud positioned himself in a purely formal way as a denouncer and exterminator of such spiritual practices based on the use of a reductionist approach, which gives reason to characterize him as a consistent rationalist. But, to be more precise, we have an irrational rationalist in front of us. In contrast, Jung, deliberately and openly plunging into those zones of experience that are removed from the rational principle and on which this principle cannot influence, combined the traits of a mystic and a scientist. Therefore, it would be quite correct to characterize him as a rational anti-rationalist who seeks to penetrate into the innermost recesses of the human soul and draw his wisdom from there. In this case, we are dealing with an epistemological program unusual for science and scientific cognition, when the source of higher knowledge is perceived by the unconscious, located on the other side of the boundaries of time and three-dimensional space. This kind of program gave an impetus to the discussion of the problem of the scientific nature of deep psychology, at the same time stimulating the clarification of norms, ideals and values of scientific knowledge ^[18].  

Due to the fact that Jung turned the numinous experience into the subject of his research, the positivist paradigm of scientific cognition was not appropriate here. At the same time, bypassing the positivist paradigm did not deprive him of the elements of scientific research. But it seems that the paradoxical combination of scientific and mysticism has largely become a prerequisite for the impact of analytical psychology on the meaningful reconfiguration of European spiritual culture, opening the prospect of a new era of spiritual search, as spiritual and intellectual resources of which were actualized ancient mystical layers of the sphere of the collective unconscious. These layers shone through in the analytical psychology he created, but for a long time they were shrouded in mystery.

More or less distinct guesses about the secret basis of his constructions were expressed by representatives of the Theosophical tradition, who saw the mystery code at the heart of the Jungian model of psychopractics. For example, M. Serrano, in his small but very capacious work "K.G. Jung and Hermann Hesse", expressed the idea that behind the purely scientific language of Jung there is a second language that has a mysterious character ^{[19, p. 129]}. From the point of view of such an interpretive approach, the psychoanalyst presented himself as a hierophant of the mysteries, and his patient was seen as a neophyte figure. Hence, illness was understood as a split state of the psyche, while health was thought of as a state of spiritual wholeness.

In the context of the above clarifications, the question arises about the scientific status of analytical psychology, which is closely related to mysticism. Before us is a psychological, not a religious discipline, which would study mystical experience in a "detached" mode and in a completely "objective" way. But analytical psychology grew out of mystical experience, while claiming to be scientific and possessing the features of a mystical doctrine. At first glance, the mysticism of the analytical version of deep psychology is extremely eclectic and, therefore, not original. But it's not just at first glance. In fact, a specific mystical doctrine can be traced here, which arose on the basis of the concept of deep psychology and, moreover, was an integral part of it, the opposite is also true. In order to test the hypothesis formulated by us, we will undertake an analysis not only of Jung's views, but also of Jung's individual mystical experience, which relatively recently became available to the interested public and scientific circles.    

2. The mythopoetic transformation of K.G. Jung's personality as the basic mystical basis of analytical psychology

The sources of Jung's scientific constructions have been the subject of speculation for decades during his lifetime and after his death. The fact is that the thinker hid the origins of his theoretical constructions, which sometimes resembled a kind of conscious hermetic concealment. Of course, he considered it possible to communicate some things to his like-minded people. But, of course, the volume of his experience was much greater. At the same time, he adhered to the position that his theoretical conclusions are not the subject of speculation, but the result of generalization of empirical data. But he did not disclose what kind of data it was. Although it was possible to guess that the quite clearly expressed esoteric and mystical elements of his teaching about the collective unconscious are far from accidental and come from an appropriate source, namely from his own spiritual experience. This source has aroused and continues to arouse the interest of researchers of his work. One of the famous books on Jung's analytical psychology, written by M. Stein, presents the principles of Jung's analytical psychology and the system of his conceptual ideas (the concept of ego, psychological complexes, libido theory, shadow, anima/animus, individuation, synchronicity). It is important to note that recognizing Jung's creative approach to comprehending the mysteries of the individual and collective human psyche, M. Stein substantiates arguments in favor of the empirical foundations of the theory under study. The most important foundation is the experience of exploring oneself, i.e. one's unconscious ^{[20, p. 19; 21, p. 4-9]}.

Historically, the worldview of mystically minded thinkers has been significantly influenced by their introduction to certain religious doctrines or mystical practices. Even in the case of their deliberate denial in the course of subsequent intellectual development, for example, as was the case with Freud, they somehow germinated in certain seemingly purely rationalistic ideas. However, in the person of Jung, one can see not only the continuity of the vector of mystical aspirations laid down in childhood, but also their development and enrichment throughout life. In particular, Jung's family was fond of the occult. His paternal grandfather was a grandmaster of the Swiss lodge, and on his mother's side there was a tradition of participating in spiritualistic seances. The thinker's biographer is J. Kerr notes that he actively participated with his mother and two cousins in hypnotic sessions, which subsequently formed the empirical basis of his dissertation ^{[22, p. 50, 54]}. This kind of mysticism is a reflection of the general atmosphere of fascination with various forms of mystical aspirations at the turn of the XIX – XX centuries. Note that the mysticism of early Jung is removed from the traditions of religious mysticism, in particular, Christianity. Of course, his father was a Swiss pastor, but he was going through an intellectual crisis of faith. Therefore, it was hardly possible for the father to participate in the initiation of Jung to the sacrament of the Christian faith. What separated them was Christian theology.

According to the facts of Jung's biography, he was quite tightly integrated into the doctrine of spiritualism as a kind of "scientific" religion, which later led to the "hanging" of analytical psychology between science and mysticism. According to F. His fascination with spiritualism influenced his later ideas about autonomy, personification and the quasi-metaphysical nature of the archetype, the central concept and one of the foundations on which he built his psychology."As a rule, spiritualists were disgusted with Christian Orthodoxies with their lagging perception of the deity as a trinity, as well as the Calvinist doctrine of predestination, vicarious atonement performed by crucifixion, the last Judgment, and especially the belief in eternal hell. Heaven, according to spiritualists, was just a continuation of the present life, and Jesus Christ was indeed a highly developed being who had reached a higher state. God, instead of being personified, was considered a force that controls all life on this planet, as well as on higher planes, including in the sphere of morality. This was not something that could be dictated by the formulas of the creed and imposed by the whispers and penances of the army of priests, being a matter of personal development and self-realization" ^[23].

However, Jung did not stop in the wake of the usual spiritualism for that time and continued his spiritual development, which became the basis of the scientific program of analytical psychology.  A special place in his creative quest was occupied by the experience that he witnessed in the famous "Red Book", which is a diary entry of 2015-1930. The manuscript, written in 14th-century calligraphy and decorated with illustrations made using paints made according to the recipes of past centuries, was bound in red leather and stood in a place of honor among his belongings. It laid the foundations of his main theoretical constructions concerning archetypes, the collective unconscious and the process of individuation. Just as the "Phenomenology of Hegel's Spirit" was the secret and source of all Hegelian philosophy, so the visionary experiences and the flow of contacts with the numinous principle, captured in the "Red Book", became the basis of all subsequent works of Jung. The book was first published in 2009 ^[24], which marked the beginning of a broad reassessment of Jung's place not only in the history of culture, but also created the prerequisites for a new look at his work. The thinker himself considered the "Red Book" his most important work, but since it was a handwritten manuscript, only a few could see it with their own eyes. Those who only knew about it were waiting for the time when the heirs would allow its publication.      

The period of writing diary entries was marked by sharp breaks between the scientist and his environment. So, he left the post of president of the International Psychoanalytic Association, and then the psychoanalytic movement as such. As a result, he sought to move to a new page of his work. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the authentic name of the "Red Book" is "New Book" ("Liber Novus"). What is this new page? In its content, it consists in an expanded self-exploration, which he aptly called "confrontation with the unconscious." On the basis of this confrontation, his theoretical constructions concerning archetypes, the collective unconscious and the process of individuation were formed. Since the content of the "Red Book" is a watershed that sheds new light on the origins of modern psychology, one can see the constant appeals of commentators to the content of this book, as well as an attempt to interpret his teaching by referring to the intuitions that were expressed in it. At the same time, it should be understood that such appeals have a twofold meaning.Firstly, it is an extension of the subject area represented by the Jungian version of depth psychology. In this spirit, such an appeal is presented in the article by M. Stein ^[25]. The "Red Book", in his opinion, can and should be read in different ways and used for different purposes. For his part, he suggests considering its content from the point of view of three aspects: personal / biographical, literary and cultural-religious. M. Stein, in fact, opens the door to the second meaning of this kind of reading, focusing on the fact that this is not only a new page of Jung's own work, but also a new page in the Western spirituality, i.e. the beginning  New Century (New Age).  L. Owens thinks in a similar vein, believing that in addition to the individual psychological revelation, this book also reflects an epochal revelation ^{[26, p. 24]}.

As a result, the publication of the "Red Book" created all the necessary prerequisites for the formation of more distinct ideas about the source and content of Jung's ideas related to the subject field of deep psychology, and also set the vector of modern ideological searches. Regarding the first line, it can be stated, for example, that the "Psychological Types" published in 1921 ^[27], according to Jung's own admission to the Dutch poet Roland Holst, were written almost entirely on the basis of the material contained in the "Red Book". In the second case, it is necessary to keep in mind the emergence of a whole galaxy of researchers who consider the "Red Book" as an intellectual resource for soul searching in the postmodern era. Often the directions of its comprehension indicated by us are often intertwined. In particular, this is noticeable in the joint book by J. Hillman and S. Shamdasani, who attempted to reassess psychological science and the directions of its development through the prism of Jung's "Red Book" ^[28]. The focus of their attention is on the consequences for modern culture and thinking that the plots of the "Red Book" may have, such as images of dreams and fantasies, the nature of creative self-expression, the attitude of psychology to art, the legacy of Christianity and our attitude to the past.

We will point out that the "Red Book" became a kind of offshoot from the "Black Book", which, like the "Red Book", had a diary character. Its contents became known to the general public only two years ago. You should pay attention to its name – "Transformation Notebooks" ^[29].It was written between 1913 and 1932. Note that the "confrontation with the unconscious", or "journey to the other pole of the world", was carried out on the basis of deliberately evoked fantasies and visions (mythopoetic imagination), which further constituted the content of the method of active imagination, built on the dialogical principle. In the Black Book, Jung not only appeals to his soul, but also does not let go of the figures he encounters until they tell him why they appeared to him.

As well as the "Red Book", the "Black Book" attracted the attention of researchers. P. Bishop, in his article investigating the origin and meaning of the "Black Book", comes to the conclusion that, in principle, the nature and content of this text problematizes the view of it as a scientific text ^[30]. Most likely, this is a literary work that reflects creative insights of a searching nature, having a mythopoetic character.

 No less important for understanding the nature of Jung's mysticism, which, in fact, has a mythopoetic nature, is the collection of autobiographical letters and notes published after his death, "Memories, Dreams and Reflections", exuding bold revelations ^[31]. From the contents of this collection we learn that in 1912-1917. he experienced an intense period of experiences, which represented a flood of his consciousness by some internal forces, which he called archetypal. This term denoted those forces that were previously designated as divine and demonic in mystical and religious traditions.  It should be noted that Jung made an attempt to identify this experience, which, as we have just seen, he reflected in the "Red" and "Black" books by referring to symbolic figures of antiquity. As such an identifier of his mysterious experience, he resorts to the term "nekyia" (nekyia – Greek). In Homer, this term was used to denote the descent of Odysseus into the underworld.  It is quite understandable that during the period of intensive deepening into himself, the thinker limited the implementation of most of his external activities. The exception was psychiatric practice, and even then it was minimized. It is interesting to note that during this period of time he practically stopped reading the book. As in the case of the "Red" and "Black" books, the descent to the collective unconscious was not only experienced, but also recorded in the form of diary entries. For our part, we note that this behavior clearly traces the algorithm of detachment, which is very common among mystics, visionaries and ascetics. This allows you to focus on your inner experience. Moreover, in Jung's mystical experience there were not only elements of passivity, but also elements of activity due to the use of the method of active imagination. Activism has found its manifestation, for example, in the theurgic invocation of gods and the goetic invocation of spirits. In general, this is a kind of magical-mystical praxis that characterized his spiritual transformation.

The received experience of spiritual transformation could be used by him in order to join the ranks of occult thinkers headed by H.P. Blavatsky and R. Steiner. But he remained within the framework of the chosen scientific discipline, namely deep psychology, while further actively using the mysterious material of archetypal revelations in the course of his scientific work, driven by one of the main intuitions captured in books about his spiritual transformation and concerned the anticipation of the onset of a new aeon as an epochal turning point in the development of human consciousness. This intuition was graphically captured on the first page of his manuscript "The Red Book". Under the sign of this intuition passed all his further work. Another refraction of spiritual searches was the firm desire to turn psychoanalysis from a practice related to the treatment of patients into a means necessary for the spiritual development of the individual.

This kind of connection will become a key feature of his creative biography: throughout his life, Jung maintained constant contact with mysterious sources that inspired him to scientific and spiritual searches. Therefore, his scientific work was always immersed in the mystical component of his personal existence, which was constantly pulsating and developing. In turn, these two sides of life were in a fairly stable balance, which made it possible to articulate the hidden "messages" of archetypal gods and demons. In this connection, it is impossible not to draw attention to the fact that this was nothing more than the realization of the principle of coniunctio oppositorum (union of polarities), which was at the heart of his universalist mystical theology. The noted principle has its roots in the period of immersion in the element of the archetypal unconscious, when two layers of his inner mystical experience took shape – light/angelic and dark/demonic. From a conceptual point of view, he considered such dualism as an essential attribute of the infinite element of the unconscious life of the collective soul.

Of course, deep psychology is aimed at analyzing archetypes and their symbolic expression. However, not all mystical experiences have an archetypal basis, which imposes limits on the possibilities of their interpretation within the framework of deep psychology. But Jung's merit lies in the fact that he went beyond this kind of explanatory scheme and believed that mystical experiences can hardly be reduced only to manifestations of archetypes. Recall that the latter are understood as the dominants of the psyche, which control consciousness and are based on the most ancient spirits, displaced into the unconscious. Therefore, he was attentive to phenomena that did not fit into the archetypal theory and the nature of which could not be scientifically explained, for example, cases of manifestations of catalytic exteriorization or synchronization of actions of people who do not have direct physical contact with each other, as well as prophetic dreams.

3. The universe of mystical intentions by K.G. JungAs one could see, not only Jung's personality itself, but also his scientific constructions were rooted in the deeply individual and multifaceted inner mystical experience of his soul.

His desire to correlate this experience with the collective experience of mystical traditions required a lot of effort to study the content of the latter. In particular, he studied Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Spiritualism, Gnosticism, alchemy, dream interpretation, mandala symbolism, theosophy, Greek mythology, etc. As a child, he gravitated towards the Hindu gods. Later, he explained this by a vague sense of their kinship with his own "initial revelation" ^{[31, p. 17]}. As you know, he spent some time in India studying Oriental religion and folklore. In addition, he collected one of the largest collections of spiritual writings ^{[32, p.28]}.It is also noteworthy that he – within the framework of a wide range of mystical practices, including the methods of divination and Ching, idolatry, astrological horoscopic calculations, meditation, communication with spirits, clairvoyance, sessions, dreams – sought to communicate with spirits and pantheistic "all-pervading force". Moreover, he generally regarded his book "Seven Sermons to the Dead" as dictated by spirits. In addition, under the influence of one of his most consistent students, Erich Neumann, Jung, as L. Owens shows, came into contact with the depths of the Jewish mystical tradition. This allowed him to draw analogies between the female archetype of divinity, traditionally understood in the Gnostic tradition as  Sofia, with Shekhinah in the Kabbalistic tradition ^[33]. His passion for astrology is also well known. In the letter that was addressed to Z. To Freud, he emphasized the following: "My evenings are mostly occupied with astrology. I made horoscopic calculations to find the key to the core of psychological truth. ... I dare say that one day we will discover in astrology a lot of knowledge that was intuitively projected into heaven" ^{[34, p. 385]}.

All this once again testifies to the eclecticism of his personal mystical experience and his esoteric hobbies. The reason for this is the desire to go beyond identification with a particular tradition and penetrate into the mystical core of all religions and mystical practices, including non–religious ones. It seems that the purpose of such penetration was to transform the human self in the direction of revealing the true dimension, which at the same time would mean harmony with the Divine. But there is also no doubt that the God whom Jung aimed at existentially-mystical communication with was not the God of the Bible. There is every reason to assert that this was a kind of universalist God, who is the common syncretic moments that take place in almost all religious traditions of the world. As noted by J. Dorley, Jung believed that Jesus, Mani, Buddha and Lao Tzu were in the same way "pillars of the spirit", which he could not, and, however, did not seek to give preference to ^{[35, p. 65]}.

The interpretation we have proposed, of course, is the result of applying a religious approach to the Jungian concept of God. But at the same time, this is just an analogy. Here it is necessary to take into account the general content context of analytical psychology, which includes the concept of archetypes. As convincingly shown in a special study by H. Brooks, the concept of God in analytical psychology is based on the theory of the collective unconscious and its archetypes ^[36]. As a result of applying the theory of the collective unconscious to the study of the phenomena of religious life, including the most central of them, namely God, Jung interprets the latter as an archetype expressing itself in other archetypal images or symbols.  From this point of view, the content of Revelation is the manifestation of the archetype of God from the collective unconscious. In addition to this, the attribute of the archetype God is "integrity" or "completeness". In the light of the principle of the union of opposites noted by us, God is both good and evil, and also contains both darkness and light (Of course, this is a completely different understanding of God as Light and Darkness, grounded in Christian mysterious theology). And finally, according to Jung, God is quaternary, not threefold. In principle, these are the main postulates of Jungian psychological theology. Of course, in such a vision there is a metaphysical essentialism based on the concept of archetypes. And, nevertheless, such an idea stems from a living mystical experience of immersion in the unconscious, which does not allow us to consider these conceptual ideas as scholastic.

Adhering to the paradigm of dialogue between religious traditions and traditions of mysticism, Jung believed that all paths are correct, and therefore did not give preference to any of the traditions. There is not only a certain identification and axiological uncertainty, but, most likely, a well-founded multi-confessional approach. Thus, the English theologian D. Kupit believes that the thinker was a pioneer of the multi-confessional approach, which is now widespread in the church ^{[37, p. 99]}.  As a consequence, there is no question of the exclusivity of a particular religious tradition and its corresponding mysticism, which, by the way, can also be very diverse. Therefore, Jung's search work is quite correlated with such an approach to mysticism as universalism/essentialism, the opposite of constructivism. Due to the fact that these approaches have been studied in sufficient detail in the scientific literature ^[38], we will not dwell on this plot in a special way. Shall we say that Jung was not an "omnivorous" universalist. There are several layers of preferences in his views and attitudes.

The first preference is pantheism. The thinker believed that "nothing separates man from God" ^{[31, p. 45]}. This, of course, is not a judging God-legislator. In the statement that "nothing could convince me that creation "in the image of God" refers not only to man. In fact, it seemed to me that high mountains, rivers, lakes, trees, flowers and animals represent the essence of God much better than people..." ^{[31, p. 45]}. As a consequence of expressing such a position – the habit of wearing a small stone, which he deified. "What I vaguely felt to be my kinship with the stone was the divine nature in both dead and living matter" ^{[31, p. 68]}.

Thus, we can see that Jung has a set of ideas that we would designate as a mystical theology of the universalist kind, built on his personal mystical experience, which goes beyond mystical traditions and attachment to one of them. And, nevertheless, this is true if we keep in mind the traditions of monotheistic world religions. But since, as we have shown above, Jung's initial fundamental searches were also carried out in the bosom of esotericism and occultism, it was this that created a powerful magnetic field, the embrace of which proved irresistible and it was they that influenced not only his propensity for pantheism, but also his attitude to Christianity.

Here we must and even are obliged to point mainly to the Gnostic tradition, in which such a principle of his worldview as coniunctio oppositorum (union of opposites) was rooted. The mystical vision of the union of good and evil, characteristic of Gnosticism, turned out to be consonant with Jung's ideological mood and aroused his greatest interest. Along the way, we note that among the many revelations of active visionary writing in the "Red Book", Jung's rooting in the Western tradition of gnosis shines through. As the commentators testify, the thinker's path to gnosticism lay through alchemy. Thus, S. Shamdasani emphasizes that it was the "Red Book" that became the impetus for new directions of his searches, for example, manifested in deepening into alchemy ^{[39, p. 365]}.

What is the secret of Jung's fascination with alchemy (from the Arab.  al-kimia – the art of transformation)? The fact is that, in his opinion, alchemical experiments open a well-known window into unconscious processes. Within the framework of alchemy, transformation is carried out through the actualization of opposites and their subsequent reconciliation. Thus, the alchemist first distinguishes opposites and then makes efforts to reconcile them, no matter how irreconcilable they may seem. The creation of unity in line with the alchemical model became for Jung the goal of psychotherapeutic practice. But, it should be noted, this kind of integrity is an ideal to which one should strive, but which cannot be fully achieved. This is due to the fact that achieving the goal brings with it the end of spiritual growth and the very need for it.

As is known, Jung devoted most of his mature life to the study of alchemy, as if paying tribute to esoteric religion ^[40].In "Memoirs ..." he claimed that "the possibility of comparison with alchemy and the continuous intellectual chain leading to gnosticism gave the content of my psychology" ^{[31, p. 205]}. It should be noted that in the spirit of the general fascination with the East, Jung wrote a commentary on the "Mystery of the Golden Flower" in 1929, which, in his opinion, was "not only a Taoist text dedicated to Chinese yoga, but also an alchemical treatise" ^{[41, p. 3]}. He reports that "... it is the text The "Golden Flower" for the first time led me on the right path, because in medieval alchemy we have a long-awaited link between gnosis ... and the processes of the collective unconscious that can be observed in modern man ..." ^{[41, p. 6]}. 

What is the basis of the choice of gnosticism as its own basis of worldview and the basic paradigm of deep psychology? In particular, as shown by J. Satinover, the thinker openly identified deep psychology as the heir of the apostolic tradition, "especially in that he considered it an excellent solution to the problem of evil" ^{[32, p. 238]}. As Jung himself writes, "in the ancient world, Gnostics, whose arguments were greatly influenced by psychic experience, solved the problem of evil on a broader basis than the church fathers" ^[42]. Thus, his deep psychology declares that the problem of good and evil will be solved in it in the spirit of gnosticism. Therefore, the apostolic tradition here, as we believe, should be understood precisely as Christian gnosis, opposed to the teaching of the Church Fathers.

We will not consider in detail the phenomenon of Christian gnosis and esoteric Christianity, since this topic is covered in detail in scientific sources. Let's just say that, in fact, Jung is a supporter of gnosticism as such, that is, that he was in opposition to Christian teaching, but at the same time taking into account Gnostic trends in Eastern mysticism. As a result, the "dark side" of human nature is considered by him as integrated into a single comprehensive integrity. For this reason, in comparison with the Christian doctrine, the problem of the correlation of good and evil is solved in a dualistic manner, but one that recognizes not their eternal rupture, but confirms their union. "For Jung,– notes J. Satinover, – good and evil have turned into two equal, balanced cosmic principles that belong to each other in one comprehensive synthesis. This relativization of good and evil through their reconciliation forms the core of the ancient teachings of Gnosticism, which also placed spirituality, and hence morality, in man himself. Hence the "union of opposites"" ^{[43, p. 240]}.

Thus, starting with immersion in spiritualism and then getting carried away by ancient hermeticism, Jung settled on Gnosticism, giving it a modern form and content. However, what has been said should not be perceived as "sorting out" directions. As it seems to us, by virtue of his attitude to the inclusiveness of mystical experience, he synchronously followed several paths. Moreover, he embarked on the path of gnosticism almost immediately, i.e. already during the writing of the "Red Book". But the Gnostic motives are more clearly depicted in the book "Seven Sermons to the Dead", which is rather modest in its volume ^[44]. In this publication, we can state the discovery of a relatively small part of the volume of mystical-archetypal experience acquired by him, which became empirical material for his scientific work. The book was written in a fairly short time (late 1916 – early 1917). We will not dwell on the mystical atmosphere that prevailed at his home during this period and which, in fact, stimulated her writing. This is described in sufficient detail in the literature ^{[45, pp. 18-20]}. The treatise is written not only in the spirit of Gnosticism II AD, but also using the terminology of that era.  From a rationalistic point of view, there is an attribution to Basilides of the authorship of the text written by Jung in the context of elements of mediumship (automatic writing). Thus, there is a fact of individuation in the bosom of the Gnostic tradition.

It is hard to imagine that Jung is just a modest adept of ancient gnosticism. According to the apt remark of J. Satinvera, Carl Jung is not only the father of the New Age movement, but also the father of neognosticism, which is now developing under the auspices of the Gnostic Society ^[46]. "One of the most powerful modern forms of Gnosticism, without a doubt, is Jungian psychology both inside and outside the Church" ^{[32, p. 27]}. The above can be interpreted as the development of Gnosticism within the framework of the modern era in the form of the transformation of this doctrine into the most significant basis of analytical psychology. By the way, in the early work "Psychological Types" (1921) there is an indication of a Gnostic prototype, namely Sophia as a significant gnostic symbol ^{[27, p. 270]}, which he will actively use in his theological constructions. But we should not forget that the symbol of Sophia is also peculiar to alchemy, which, among other things, contains the roots of Jungianism. In particular, J. Raff conducted a special study of these roots and came to the conclusion about the alchemical origins of the three cornerstones of Jungian spirituality – the concept of personality, transcendent function and active imagination ^[47]. 

A. Ribi's research on the gnostic roots of deep psychology ^[48] is essentially supplemented by the conclusions contained in the preface written by L. Owens, in which the moment when gnostic mythology became Jung's personal mythology and the basis of his individuation is traced in a genealogical way. "In 1916, Jung," writes L. Owens, "apparently found the root of his myth, and it was the myth of Gnosis. I don't see evidence that this has ever changed. Over the next forty years, he continued to interpret the occult course of the Gnostic tradition in the Christian era: Hermeticism, alchemy, Kabbalah and Christian mysticism. In this vast hermeneutic enterprise, Jung built a bridge leading back through time to the cornerstone of classical gnosticism. The bridge that led to the new and coming era was based on a stone rejected by the builders two thousand years ago" ^{[49, p. 25]}.It is quite obvious that adherence to the Gnostic paradigm, within the framework of which a specific religious picture of the world emerged in the days of early Christianity, later recognized as heretical (Gnostic heresy), became the basis for Jung's rather indifferent attitude to Christianity and its inherent mysticism.

However, the thinker's universalism, in which one thing flows into another, did not allow him to fully fix his view on mystical Christianity.

But still it is impossible not to make some adjustments. In particular, despite the personal individuation in the Gnostic channel, i.e., the connection with the paradigm of gnosticism, which draws attention in the literature ^[50], Jung himself did not define himself as a gnostic. Consequently, when he approached Gnostic philosophy and found himself near it, he experienced the strongest influences from it, but did not completely move into it. This is due to the fact that, while remaining a scientist, he was aware that Gnostic figures arise from the unconscious as a result of the work of dreams. Therefore, he came to Gnosticism not through reading Gnostic texts, but through generalizing symbolic figures of his own inner experience. As a result, modern researchers have carried out work on comparing the symbolic series of his inner revelations with the Gnostic texts proper ^[51]. At the same time, it is worth recognizing the validity of the position proposed by J. Pennachio, who sees not an identity, but an analogy of Gnosticism and Jung's views. In his opinion, the semantic axis of the religious system of Gnosticism was the idea of the transcendence of the physical world and the divinity of self-knowledge: a similar idea is characteristic of Jung's concept of individuation ^{[52, p. 238]}.

A strong argument in favor of the above-mentioned universality can serve as platonic motives peculiar to him, expressed in a reverent attitude to the human soul. Comparing the philosophy of Plato and the philosophical aspects of deep psychology, J. Weldon sees striking similarities between them, in particular in what relates to the concepts of the structure of the cosmos and the psyche, as well as the nature of personality ^[53]. In addition to this, the individual self, identified as the soul, is seen as being on the "third level of being", which is located between the divine Self, or the One, and the ego complex, or the self, which is based on feelings. Through philosophy and individuation, the unity of the psyche is formed when the individual soul is simultaneously aware of the ego, or the sensory world, and the divine One. Plato understands this way as the realization of the macrocosm within the microcosm, and Jung understands it as the gathering of the soul in the unity of its opposite sides.

Despite all his universalism and the desire to highlight the psychological roots of all religions, it is necessary to point out Jung's deepening into the truths of Christianity while simultaneously striving to interpret them from the standpoint of his teaching about the unconscious in general and psychological views on religion in particular due to distrust of dogmatic theology ^{[54; 55, p. 20-25; 56]}.

His hermeneutical insight into the religious thought, dogmas and religious experience of Christianity acquired a clearly expressed therapeutic attitude towards Christianity. Two meanings should be understood by this relation. The first is the consideration of Christianity as an important and necessary component of the spiritual life of modern European humanity, which will facilitate a person's search for his own soul while simultaneously turning the latter to the element of the archetypically structured unconscious. The second is the revival of Christianity itself by introducing adjustments to it related to its reading in the coordinates of the Jungian version of depth psychology. In brief, we note that Jung's desire to promote the transformation of Western religion in general and the transition of Christianity to a new phase of its development in particular is very convincing ^{[57, p. 2]}.

If we recall the Russian philosopher N. Berdyaev, he also, in turn, prophesied about the advent of a new era of Christianity, namely mystical Christianity and the triumph of the mystical Church. Nevertheless, Jung's intuitions do not fit into this kind of discourse, including due to the lack of a tendency to consider Christianity as something exceptional. But the desire to penetrate into mystical Christianity is still noticeable in him. It must be admitted that, unlike N. Berdyaev, he was not an expert in the subject area of Christian mysticism and was quite far from church mystical theology.

But he still had a passion for some Christian mystics. It should be noted that the interpretation of their mystical-religious experience was carried out by him in the outline of the concept of active imagination. This approach can be traced in his analysis of the meditative practice of I. Laoyly. In the period 1933-1941, he gave a series of public lectures at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. They covered a wide range of topics, ranging from yoga and meditation to dream analysis and the psychology of alchemy. The list of these public speeches included lectures on "Spiritual Exercises" by I. Loyola. They were read in the winter of 1939-1940^[58]. Recall that the exercises of I. Laoyly belong to traditional forms of meditation, in which Jung saw parallels with the psychotherapeutic method of active imagination, which became the basis for the interpretation of visions described in the autobiographical writings of this saint. Another vector of similarity is represented by a comparison with yoga practices and eastern meditation. Despite the fact that Jung was quite far from theology, during this period of his work there were prerequisites for the formation of a positive attitude towards Roman Catholicism. After the Second World War, this found expression in fruitful cooperation with prominent Catholic theologians (V. White, B. de Jesus-Marie, H. Rahner).

Due to the fact that Christianity in all its basic component, including mystical, is built on the Bible, it was characteristic for Jung to turn to key biblical stories and interpret them on his own original basis. Such an appeal was supplemented by his interpretation of Christian dogmatics. As a result, Jungian Christian theology was formed, which significantly deviated from the usual theological interpretations, but at the same time stimulated new directions of theological research in Western Christianity.

But one should bear in mind the original message of the therapeutic approach to Christianity. From our point of view, it should be perceived in line with the thinker's intuition about the advent of a New era of spirituality. In essence, it meant getting out of the well-known situation of "God is dead" and entering a new phase of religious life, which is characterized by the actualization of the perception of the Divine. In other words, Jung sought to rekindle the extinguished light of divine mysteries in the souls of his contemporaries. What path did he choose to implement his project? This path represented a powerful realization of the potential of the psychological approach to religion, which represented a backward movement, namely the reverse "melting" of once frozen religious forms into forms of direct religious experience. In the general impulse of such aspirations, not only the religious feeling as such, but also Christianity itself, had to come to life, but also be renewed. And this involved the work of discovering the links between dogma and the direct experience of psychological archetypes. This outline of the upcoming work was outlined by him in Psychology and Religion ^{[13, p. 89]} and meant an in-depth study of the natural symbols of the unconscious as direct material.

According to Jung, it is precisely analytical psychology that is able to see elusive archetypes in a mystical way, which has not only a theoretical, but also a practical effect associated with the resolution of the spiritual crisis in which European humanity finds itself. In particular, he pointed out that the confrontation of Modern science and weakened faith has created a gaping hole, which he calls "spiritual anarchy" ^{[59, pp. 227-228]}. This term denotes a situation when his own soul revolts against a rational European person, and the intellect, detached from faith, generates alienation of a technogenic civilization. But due to the fact that Eastern spiritual practices cannot eliminate this gap, a European needs to cultivate his own "mental discipline" from the depths of the Western soul itself. And analytical psychology should help him in this. In this story we see again that, according to Jung, psychology is intended to become a special synthetic form of knowledge that combines spiritual vision and rigorous methods of empirical research ^{[60, p. 244]}

His own spiritual experience acted as such. Thus, in the course of using the method of active imagination, Jung acquired a spiritual mentor and guru named "Philemon", whom he described as "an old man with the horns of a bull ... and the wings of a fisherman." Before becoming Philemon, this being was introduced to Jung as "Elijah", and then finally mutated into "Ka", an Egyptian earthly soul that "came from below". It is noteworthy that the Spirit guide Philemon/Elijah further mutated into Salome, who turned to Jung in a self-controlled trance vision as Christ. And finally, let us pay attention to the fact that Jung, by his own admission, suddenly saw himself in the pose of a crucifixion victim with a snake wrapped around him, but then his face transformed into a lion from the Mithraic religion of the mysteries ^{[61, p. 86, 98]}. From the above fragment, the vagueness of the images is quite noticeable. This should be seen as another manifestation of Jung's universalism, meaning that Christianity is only one of the fixations of the archetypes of the unconscious, but, nevertheless, it is especially significant for European humanity. This can be seen by the example of his idea of personality. Let us recall that Jung was fond of pantheism, which, of course, was also present in Christianity, but was often regarded as something heretical due to misinterpretation. The halo of hereticism largely faded into the background when, upon closer reading, pantheism revealed panentheism – a more complex and less naive construction that smoothed the extremes of pantheism and theism.

In the section "On the Brahman concept of the symbol of reconciliation," Jung writes the following: "... Brahman should mean an irrational union of opposites – hence their final overcoming… These quotes show that Brahman is the reconciliation and dissolution of opposites. Hence the irrational factor behind them" ^{[27, p. 245-246]}. And, nevertheless, being faithful to the code of European culture, Jung understood analytical psychology as a dialogue between the individual and the Universe without the disappearance of the personality (ego), as was the case in Buddhist and Hindu theories. Agreeing with the thinker that the person of a person in its deepest ontological layers is constituted by an act of communion with God, we note that consistent personalization takes place mainly within the framework of Christianity.

In the light of what has been said, we cannot insist on Jung's indifferent attitude to Christianity, especially in the context of the differences he made between Western and Eastern religions. Meanwhile, he treated the figure of Christ with some detachment, at least in the early stages of his work. In "Memoirs..." one can notice the following remark: "The Lord Jesus never became quite real to me, was never quite acceptable, never caused love to the end, because again and again I thought about his underground double. ... The Lord Jesus seemed to me to be a kind of god of death. ... Secretly, his love and kindness, about which I have always heard praises, seemed doubtful to me..." ^{[31, p. 13]}. As the venerable age advanced, Jung's attention to Christianity in general and the figure of Christ in particular increased.    

Further, we see a more detailed appeal in one of the main works devoted to the study of the emergence of Christianity. We are referring to the book "Aion", written by Jung at the age of seventy. In it, these issues are considered through the prism of the relationship between psychology, alchemy and Christianity. In this work, he writes that "the symbol of Christ lacks integrity in the modern psychological sense, since it does not include the dark side of things ..." ^{[42, p. 41]}. Such a statement of the question sheds light on some wariness about the figure of Christ. Reconstructing the Jungian justification of such an attitude, J. Durley notes that "it was unfortunate for Jung that Christ in His goodness had no shadow side, and God the Father, Who is Light, had no darkness" ^{[62, p. 63]}. In fact, this is the conclusion of J. Dourly is quite consistent with the statements of Jung himself. Thus, he spoke about "... the incompleteness of the Christian image of God" ^{[31, p. 318]}. In addition to this, one can find another statement: "A person can achieve totality, become whole only with the assistance of the spirit of darkness ..." ^{[63, para 453]}. In this context, Christ cannot be a symbol of totality, because there is no evil and sin in him. And yet, according to an insightful study by Ch. There is every reason to believe that Christ, from the point of view of the archetypal concept, is one of the expressions of the supreme archetype of the divine hero ^[64]. This archetype has become a paradigm of life, and not just a way of faith for European humanity. The point is that the imitation of Christ is the passage of the same life experience, i.e. his path of individuation. The peculiarity of the latter is symbolically expressed in his suspension on the cross between two robbers, which means being between two poles – good and evil – with the subsequent choice of good.

So, the path of a Christian is the path of individuation through the archetype of Christ. Moreover, this archetypal figure personifying the self has also passed the path of individuation. Jung extended this approach to God as a whole in one of his most controversial works, The Answer to Job ^[65]. The main focus of this work is to demonstrate the evil side of God caused by the absence of the fourth hypostasis – Sophia.  Its appearance is dictated by the next phase of God's development, namely, the awakening of awareness of the unfair attitude towards Job and, as a result, the sacrifice of the Son as an active repentance for God's sins. And before that, Job himself was a sacrifice necessary for the consciousness of Yahweh developing in the process of individuation, whose image, according to Jung, is close to the archetype of the self.

The inversion of one of the main biblical plots, as well as the interpretation of God, frankly speaking, caused very opposite assessments in the psychological, philosophical and theological environment. For example, E. Fromm believed that "Jung reduces religion to a psychological phenomenon" ^{[66, p. 156]}, and therefore it is quite unreasonable to perceive him as an apologist of religion. But there are other assessments of Jung's position on religion. Thus, A. Ulanov notes that, unlike Freud, "Jung wanted to restore people's connection with their religious traditions (Western and Eastern) by establishing a bridge "between sacred figures and their own psyche".... which reveal the mysterious origin of the psyche in reality beyond its borders" ^{[67, p. 7]}.

In turn, we believe that the thinker went further. Driven by the intuition of the advent of a new era, he sought to create a new image of God, which, of course, meant claims to new contours of understanding religion and implied strained relations with classical theology, as well as with traditional religious institutions. In literature, this is regarded as a challenge to religion in its usual understanding in connection with its inherent understanding of God, good and evil, revived gnosticism, unusual hermeneutics of the Bible, etc. ^[68].

However, Jung was not afraid to go against established dogmas and create a new image of God, understanding him as the center of the collective self, with which the individual self correlates ^{[69, p. XIV]}. In addition to this, the image of God is considered by him as an evolving phenomenon rooted in the collective and individual unconscious, the description and explanation of the development of which is quite within the power of the heuristic arsenal of analytical psychology based on the use of philosophical generalizations. It seems that this is its function to ensure the religious development of mankind, as well as to give a new impetus to this development. All this does not exclude, as we will show in the next paragraph of our work, the possibility of modernizing Christianity based on the methodology of analytical psychology. Despite the fact that analytical psychology did not intend to turn into a religion in the person of Jung, there is still no doubt its desire to strengthen religious feelings and revive religious experience, mainly by deepening mystical experiences. Consequently, psychological and religious searches were not purely theoretical in nature, because they set the directions of psychoanalytic practice aimed at obtaining a therapeutic effect in relation to patients.

At the same time, the question arises whether it is possible to talk about Jung as a theologian? There is no doubt about the positive answer to this question. But, it should be noted, here we are dealing with a unique phenomenon, namely psychological theology, which has religious and philosophical substantive nuances. Our conclusion is based on the results of the research work carried out by D. Dyer. In his book "Jung's Thoughts on God" ^[70], he systematized fragments of Jung's works in which he used the word "God", as it turned out, more than 6,000 times, in the following thematic areas – the existence and essence of God, the personality of God, the relationship of man and God, God and the psyche, etc. Thus, there are prerequisites for the formation of a space of reflection on Jungian theology and the stages of development of the Jungian theologian, as well as for comparative studies, for example, classical and non-classical theologies, as well as for comparison with philosophical theology. But again, it is not possible to reduce this theology to a purely Christian spirituality. Creating his theology, Jung remained an empirical psychologist who investigated how the religious instinct and the corresponding images rise from the depths of the soul – that part of human nature that is independent of the conscious mind, while not forgetting to refer to religious texts, as well as to the religious-mystical experience of all mankind.

It would not be superfluous to note that Jung's followers seek to strengthen Jungian universalism in an ecumenical spirit. Thus, J. Spiegelman aims to reveal the manifestation of the divine principle in different religions, fixing not only differences, but also similarities, which demonstrates the functioning of the general laws of the collective unconscious ^[71].

Perhaps no less intensively Jung used the concept of "spirit", which was kind of programmed by his original commitment to spiritualism. Recognizing the ambiguity of this term, he considered it primarily as a mental factor, namely as a kind of psychic energy, and did not reduce it to a religious meaning. At the same time, they recognized the difference in the action of this energy in Buddhism or Christianity. Since many works have been devoted to the interpretation of this term, including the Jungians themselves, we note in line with the subject of our article that the spirit has a mystical essence, which Jung not only knew theoretically, but also interacted with in his clinical practice. As the Jungian analyst E. Ulanov shows, the spirit is the transcendent, which is not only on the other side of the material world, but is also present in the mental processes of the meeting of consciousness with the unconscious ^{[72, p. 4-8]}. One can interact with this transcendent reality in the process of active imagination. At the same time, he does not completely identify the spirit and the transcendent, believing that the transcendent exists on the other side of mental processes, consciousness and the unconscious, forming a numinous dimension of reality, symbolically manifested in the image of God.

It seems that in this case Jung goes beyond the disciplinary framework of analytical psychology into the interdisciplinary space of philosophy and theology. It seems to us that if there was no such way out of his discipline in his teaching, it would hardly be possible for him to have a dialogue with representatives of theology, who in turn sought to find elements in him that could become a resource for the modernization of theology. We recognize that these elements in many ways had a mystical content, and mysticism in the history of the Church, as is known, was a ground, sometimes not advertised, for theological research. It was in this mysticism, albeit localized in another scientific discipline, fed from mystical sources, that the European theologies of the twentieth century needed.

4. A new model of modern mystical spirituality in the context of the Jungian tradition

The directions of influence of Jung's ideas are extremely numerous. This should include the impact on the subject area of research of the phenomenon of mysticism. But not only that. Here it is important to influence mystical searches outside of purely academic circles. According to A. Ribi, creative interaction with the Gnostic tradition expands the creative possibilities of modern depth psychology and adds the necessary context for understanding the voice of the soul that arises in our time ^{[48, p. VII]}. Consequently, Jung's legacy is considered as the basis of a new stage in the spiritual evolution of modern man of Western culture (New Age). Sometimes Jung is called the ancestor of this stage. During the hippie movement of the 1960s, the rock opera "Hair" boldly proclaimed the dawn of the Age of Aquarius, the onset of which Jung prophesied in the "Red Book". In addition, he anticipated this emphasis in a 1940 letter to his former assistant G. Baynes, in which he noted the following: "1940 is the year when we are approaching the meridian of the first star in Aquarius. This is a harbinger of the earthquake of the New Century" ^{[73, p. 162]}. It is noteworthy that Jung can be considered not only as the herald of the New Century, but also as the designer of its content. As Yu. V. Shichanina notes, "in the middle of the XX century, deep psychology pinned great hopes on the integration of all existing dimensions of reality into a single human personality, the adoption of new ethics and the heroic curbing of the breakthrough of the "dark forces". From the height of today, it should be stated that these hopes were not destined to come true so soon, but the idea is still alive today" ^{[74, p. 170]}.

Indeed, such a reading was either picked up or independently induced by numerous authors of the well–known five-volume book - "Jung's Red Book for Our Time: the Search for the Soul in Postmodern Conditions" ^[75-79], once again demonstrates Jung's far-reaching influence on intellectual history and spiritual searches not only of the twentieth, but also of the XXI century. The main leitmotif of these collections is to reveal not only the spiritual vector of analytical psychology, but also to initiate a new myth that should lead out of the crisis situation of the "death" of God. J. Satinover notes in this regard that "Jung's direct and indirect influence on mainstream Christianity – and, consequently, on Western culture – is incalculable. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the theological positions of the majority of the dominant denominations in their approach to pastoral care, as well as in their doctrines and liturgy, have become more or less identical to Jung's psychological/symbolic theology" ^{[43, p. 240]}. In fact, we see not so much a purely interpretative approach to mysticism in the format of deep psychology, but also the fixation of the impact of Jungian ideas on the modification of religious practice and the stimulation of a new mystical tradition ^[80]. In the first case, this manifested itself in influencing Christian modernists and evangelicals. The second is the influence on the so–called new religious movements in the West, in particular on the contemplative movement (P. Tillich, M. Kelsey, J. Sanford, T. Moore, J. Campbell, J. Spong, R. Foster, A. Sanford, G. Thomas). Of no small importance was also the expansion of channeling practice and the emergence of R. Warren's "Shape" program, which is used by various churches and institutions. The section "Personality profiling" of this program is based on psychological typing developed by Jung.

In the previous paragraph we mentioned that after the Second World War there was cooperation between the South and Catholic theologians. In fact, this shows not only a dialogue of personalities, but also an interdisciplinary dialogue. As in other cases, the dialogue allows not only to exchange views, but also to clarify and develop their views and approaches. The most significant was the dialogue between Jung and W. White, a Dominican priest and a founding member of the C.G. Jung Institute. Their dialogue can be traced through the materials of their correspondence, which lasted almost fifteen years ^[15]. However, in the same way, driven by concern about the loss of personal religious instincts of modern man, they pursued different goals. Jung hoped to find intellectual resources to rethink classical Christian symbols. In turn, V. White sought to acquire an additional intellectual resource for the implementation of his project on the inclusion of analytical psychology in Catholic theology ^[81].

In the latter case, there was a development of the Catholic idea of the phenomenon of unconscious mental processes, which were identified with the soul, attracted by faith. Note that in the coordinates of Jung's views, it is not possible to talk about faith in its ecclesiastical understanding or through the prism of classical theology. But, be that as it may, the noted dialogue also contributed to honing the critical positions of both thinkers. In his book "The Shadow of God", A. Lammers shows the divergence of analytical psychology and classical Catholic Thomistic theology, presented in the views of W. White, on issues of theodicy, Christology, the nature of evil, etc. ^{[82, p. 18-23]}. It seems that it could not be otherwise due to the different nature of these disciplines and different methodology. The use of an analytical approach to the interpretation of mental processes within the framework of the religious life of Christianity has limits due to an uncharacteristic understanding of the soul for Christianity, as well as a specific understanding of religion.

The fact that the dialogue itself took place and it had a theological character speaks in favor of Jung's recognition as a theologian, although his theology itself is an aspect of analytical psychology. Nevertheless, and we fully agree with this, Jung deserves to be regarded as both a psychologist and a theologian at the same time ^{[83, p. 3-20; 84, 38-62]}. All this is quite understandable if we take into account the appeal of analytical psychology to religion studied in detail in the literature ^{[85, p. 7-32]}. And not so much in the theoretical as in the practical aspect, since analytical psychology considers the religious view of life as the most important factor of mental health. But the thing is that Christianity, to which his sympathies grew every year, in the form in which it took place in the twentieth century at the level of theological understanding, church life and personal religious experience, in his opinion, could not have a healing effect. Hence the desire for a new reading of Christianity through the actualization of pre–Christian and non-Christian spiritual, religious and mystical practices that appeal to mystical instincts. In our opinion, to the question formulated by P. Homans about whether Jung is a Christian or a post–Christian psychologist ^{[86, p. 21-37]}, we would answer that he is a post-Christian psychologist and theologian, because he does not associate the New Century exclusively with the modernization of Christianity, because it presupposes the triumph of a new religious-mystical spirit, which, in turn, is far from alien to Christianity. Therefore, it is not possible to call Jung a non-Christian and anti-Christian author. But still, in that spiritual complex, in the triumph of which he believed, there really are many things that are alien to Christianity as an idea and as a religion: Jungian Christianity is far from Christianity, as well as Gnostic Christianity, which, by the way, can be traced in his views and in the views of his followers.

But nothing prevents efforts to revive traditional Christianity within the framework of the New Spiritual Age. By the way, just like Jung, critical theologians agreed with Jung that an exclusively rational theological discussion of God can lead away from a live encounter with Him. And since God cannot be found by purely intellectual search, this leads to a discussion about the "death" of God. Against this background, Jung believed that as soon as we enter life and maintain contact with our instincts and "mundanity", God will become real again and act as a vital and guiding force of human life, as well as society as a whole. His view of the reality of God and how this reality should be restored is a convincing version of the resurrection of God.

These ideological impulses aroused the interest of theologians who sought to borrow some elements of Jungian theory, but, of course, within strictly defined limits. Among them are not only Catholic, but also Protestant theologies, for example, A. Keller, famous not only for being one of the founders of modern ecumenism, but also a theologian who was seriously interested in analytical psychology ^[87]. Avoiding the position of a simple apprenticeship, he considered the unconscious as a creative force that influences the imagination and is able to connect the physical world with the eternal world. Reliance on analytical psychology helped to strengthen his doubts about the ability of the rational mind to understand Reality and its mystery. Thus, this led to an increase in A. Keller's conviction in the importance of the mystical world-feeling, which should contribute to the revival of Christianity.

This approach provides an answer to the question of why Christians should read Jung if his views are characterized by moments of incompatibility with the Christian faith and its dogmas. According to representatives of the moderate wing of modern Jungianism, Jung's psychology can indeed improve the life of faith and solve some of the problems faced by Christianity ^{[88; 89]}. These views show the attitude of Jungian analysts towards dialogue with Christian theology and the desire to contribute to giving a new impetus to the Christian tradition.

In the context of maintaining a dialogue between Jungianism and Christianity, one should also consider studies concerning, for example, Jung's approach to Christian religious and mystical experience from the point of view of the concept of active imagination. As G. Trippe notes, "Jung definitely had some relation to Christianity during his career, so it is appropriate to ask how his clinical method of active imagination can intersect with Christian religious experience, just as he once drew parallels between the concepts and concepts of his research and Christian theological terminology" ^{[55, p. 25]}.

Among the Jungian analysts who follow in line with Jung's approach to certain aspects of traditional religions without setting out to break with them, M. Stein should be attributed. Following Jung, and also following E. Edinger ^[90], he conducts a detailed analysis of the Bible from the point of view of the theory of archetypes, showing that the Bible is a world created on the basis of a certain image of God ^[91]. The Biblical world is seen as the result of active imagination based on deep immersion in the image of God.

As we have already noted, Jung's interest in the manifestations of mystical experience was universal. He devoted a certain place in his research to the analysis of the experience of some Christian mystics, such as I. Layola. At the same time, such studies did not represent a detached religious studies analysis. There has always been a tendency in them, firstly, to interpret the material on the basis of their own psychoanalytic concept, and, secondly, to search for additional directions for its development. Such a research move is characteristic of his followers. For example, the study of the religious and mystical experience of Hildegard of Bingen, undertaken by A. Klendenen, is a synthesis of the spiritual experience of this saint with Jungian views on deep psychology, the unconscious and the reality of the soul. The author's Jungian approach can be judged by the conceptualization of Hildegard's mystical experience in the context of the poles of light and darkness, angels and demons, "ego" and "shadow" ^{[92, p. 82-105]}.

One of the subjects of the efforts of Jung's followers belonging to the circle of analytical psychologists was a critical analysis of the negative phenomena of modern religious life. Thus, Jungian analysts V. Scholz and J. Didier, rethinking Jung's approach to religion, undertook a systematic study of the psychological dynamics and causes of religious fundamentalism and fanaticism in the modern era. The basis of their approach is the consideration of these phenomena as a result of obsession with unconscious energies of the self, which, among other things, begin to prevail in religious and mystical experience, which indicates the deformation of the spiritual needs of modern humanity ^{[93, p. 27-224]}. It seems that the main pathos of the authors is to demonstrate the potential of analytical psychology in solving such a problem as the liberation, including mystical experience from its "dark" side. But we must understand that according to Jung's approach, we can talk about balancing these sides with enlightened energies of the self. Here it is worth remembering the fact that the mystical experience presented by the Christian tradition was by no means free from this dark side, interpreted as the participation of demonic forces, which was most intensively expressed in the phenomenon of seduction. However, in Christianity there was an attitude to purify mystical experience from these influences. And only such a purified experience was recognized as authentic. In Jungianism, we see a different approach, carried out also within the framework of other religious and ideological coordinates.

The development of the attraction to interdisciplinary synthesis can be seen on the example of a relatively recently published book that forms an interdisciplinary perspective of the interaction of theology, religious studies and depth psychology proper ^[94].

Representatives of Christian modernism also turn to Jung's teaching for some intellectual support. Among them, J. Newell is the founder of the Spirit Among Us movement, which offers new orientations for the new birth of Christianity ^[95]. In the same row, S. Kling can be put, emphasizing that in the conditions of finding Christianity at a crossroads, more and more people identify themselves as "spiritual, but not religious" ^[96]. In these conditions, relying on Jung's psychology, which provides a matrix for working with dreams, through which one can perceive the reality of God, he considers a promising transition from a state of fragmentation to a state of psycho-spiritual integrity and prosperity based on a combination of Christian and transreligious perception of hope.

By virtue of the subject of our article, we will attempt to trace the main lines of the development of mystical universalism in the writings of Jung's followers. Despite the fact that Jung himself went beyond the archetypal approach to mystical experience, nevertheless, the concept of archetypes as such found its development in the works of his followers, for example, E. Neumann, who solved the problem of determining the stages of development of archetypal reality.

 When determining the root cause of the formation of archetypes, E. Neumann assigned the transpersonal principle, emphasizing that "the transpersonal is a factor that does not depend on the personal, since the personal, both individually and collectively, is a later product of evolution" ^{[97, p. 5]}. It is worth noting that the concept of "transpersonal" in the Jungian tradition, including E. Neumann himself, is not interpreted as a kind of collective mind, but means only the collective unconscious preceding the process of consciousness. In this regard, it is necessary to object to the authors who interpret Jungian interpretations of the transpersonal as a collective mind in the following way. For example, I.E. Suleimenov and D.K. Matrasulova note that "... if we proceed from the assumption that at the first stages of its origin the mind was collective, then it seems quite natural that this collective mind generated some images, some informational entities of a purely collective nature that were not associated with the mental activity of an individual, since its it did not exist then" ^{[98, p. 18]}. From our point of view, Reason always implies a person, whether we are talking about the human mind or the Divine mind.

It seems that sometimes the concept of "transpersonal", with some hint of a reasonable metaphysical principle existing outside the human personality, is used by researchers with a certain cunning in order to avoid accusations of speculation.  Actually, N. Neumann himself noticed the following about this: "... if someone dares to speculative thinking, he will have to pay with a guilty conscience... and rightly so, because he will immediately begin to stumble over the facts" ^{[99, p. 98]}. This is where the question arises – can we consider any mystical experience of contact with God as a scientific fact? Neither Jung nor Neumann gives a positive answer to this question. But how we represent the essence of human consciousness depends on its decision. Indeed, is it only the result of random combinations of spontaneous unconscious factors and processes, or are these processes programmed by the Creator, who, although he laid an element of freedom in his creation – man, but sometimes corrects his actions, appearing to him and directing him in the right direction. But analysts bypass this question, stating only as a scientific fact the psychic reality of the unconscious Freudian Superego, which is the source of personal self-control. "The formation of a persona and adaptation to reality under the guidance of the Superego as a court of conscience," E. Neumann notes, "representing collective values, with the help of repression and suppression, the components of the shadow, anima and animus constellate in the unconscious" ^{[99, p. 325]}.

E. Neumann, as a follower of Jung, did not reject the experience of meeting God as such, but at the same time noted that "the experience of meeting God as a sacred event is only one specific kind of mysticism; moreover, it is far from the most common and perhaps not even the most significant" ^{[100, p. 5]}. Thus, the mystical experience here is thought of much more broadly than the actual religious-mystical experience. This is quite consistent with the ideas of Jung himself. In general, we should agree with this position. However, the devaluation of the religious-mystical experience as something insignificant causes disagreement. The fact is that a mystical encounter with something vaguely numinous, and not with a personal God, can hardly guarantee the personalization of a person. Be that as it may, but the noted passage testifies, on the one hand, to the convergence of the depth of psychology and mysticism in its broadest sense, but on the other hand, to the divergence of the depth of psychology and Christian theology.                        

It seems that the concept of J. Hillman became an example of another "turn" of the marked divergence. In his work, there was a shift of deep psychology as a scientific direction to the limits of the poetic-rhetorical cosmos with the simultaneous recognition of the poetic basis of the conscious mind and the conscious psyche, which has its expression in imaginative-poetic fiction. This approach is quite consistent with Jung's method of active imagination.     

According to the idea of analytical psychology, which claims to be a scientific theory and then a special therapeutic practice in the genre of therapeutic fiction, other than psychoanalysis, the structuring of the psyche is carried out with the help of myth. Reliance not on the structure of the brain, but on the imagination associated with fiction, is the starting point here. Quite rightly noting that plots are myths, and at the same time clarifying that myth is something more than theory and plot, J. Hillman emphasizes that myth is a story about the interaction between people and the divine. "Being in the myth presupposes the inevitable establishment of a connection with the divine forces and, moreover, being in mimesis with them" ^{[101, p. 16]}. According to J. Hillman, Freud and Jung took a step towards understanding human nature within the limits of myth, discovering at the same time the nature of "religious forces". Moving in a similar direction, he talks about establishing a connection between gods and genres, i.e. when God himself (Saturn, Venus, etc.) forms the syntax of the genre. Interesting is his conclusion that myth and God are not something separate. Opening in numinous moments with the help of an oracle or directly, God (gods) sets (sets) the plots and genres of mytho-poetic creativity. But the most important thing is that in this case the myth is no longer understood as a story, but as the interaction of man and the divine principle, which, in our opinion, in this case is not a theistic substance, but the divine principle in man himself and the divine principle of man himself, which is located in the poetic basis of the universe. As a result, the gods turn out to be just special images created by fantasy and influencing its further projection. The knowledge of God, according to this scenario, consists in recognizing these images (archetypes-demons) and in the reverse effect on them: "I don't come to them, but they come to me" (Plato). Hence, the task of sobriety and healing of the soul, which is very significant in theistic mysticism, is associated with the strategy of activating the imagination.

Recall that according to Jung's method of active imagination, the restoration of the psyche, torn by binary archetypes, is quite feasible in the metaxy – the median region from which it has departed. Healing, as such, is a return to the space of dialogue with the universe. The "healed" consciousness now lives a fictional life in which self-knowledge is achieved. The practice of such healing is not just the elimination of symptoms, but a radical improvement that goes against the ritual magic that manipulates images and asserts the exclusivity of the human will. The expansion of the power of the personality is achieved through a special attitude to the image. The image heals the personality through itself and in itself, reducing the image-daemons to the position of personal servants, whose task, according to J. Hillman's goal should be to solve the problem of those illusions that are called realities.

Of course, in such coordinates, no truly religious mysticism is impossible, because there is a complete transmigration into fiction, in which everything is possible. At the same time, we note that the redundancy and even overabundance of fiction is something that was initially alien to Christian asceticism, which involved vital forces in the process of spiritual transcendence in the direction of co–existence, and not to identity with divine forces. It is at this point that there is not so much a break with the ancient ideas about God and the divinity of man, as a break with the omnipotence and immensity of the poetic basis of consciousness, psyche and mind, when everything is possible. The path of Christian mysticism is the path of Christ, not Dionysus. And if with the latter everything is conditional and subject to replay, then with Christ everything is irreversible and serious. These are two ways of understanding reality and the constitution of mystical ecstasy.

It should be emphasized that J. Hillman, choosing the path of Dionysus, develops not only the method of active imagination, but the direction of psychology, which is something different in relation to theistic psychology. We are referring to his alchemical psychology ^[102], which is quite consistent with the track of Jung's search. As such, the development of alchemical psychology is one of the notable vectors of modern analytical psychology. For example, J. Raff, who wrote a book devoted to the role that Jung attached to the alchemical imagination ("Jung and the alchemical imagination"), began to further develop the concept of psychoidal alchemy, the main goal of which is not the rehabilitation of Sophia as a goddess, but the desire to create a relationship with her as a spiritual entity that transforms a human being ^{[103, p. XVI]}. He further writes that "in the course of my own research, I have found that adding the concept of the psychoid to our understanding of alchemy leads to many insights and a deeper understanding of alchemy as a spiritual tradition. Many authors criticized Jung for taking the position that the alchemists projected the unconscious onto the mystery of matter. Although such criticism is often based on misunderstanding, there is some truth in it" ^{[103, p. XVII]}.

Recall that Jung's new approach to religion included the formation of a new understanding of God. Moving in this direction, the followers of the thinker strive to continue efforts to rethink God and religion, which, according to their plans, fully corresponds to the spirit of the new era. Quite decisively, such an initiative is being developed by J. Wright ^[104].

He makes it clear in no uncertain terms that we are living in an era of the death of traditional religious paradigms based on the fact that demon and angelic forces are outside of us. He sees the modern religious task in not only mourning the theistic and monotheistic images of religion and God, but also to substantiate a new understanding of them, which can satisfy the mind and soul of modern man in the only way. Therefore, relying on Jung, he advocates the birth of a new religious myth. From our point of view, this kind of project is very radical, as it implies a sharp break with religious traditions. In support of such a gap, an argument is given according to which as long as our deities and devils are still perceived as being outside the physical sphere and outside the human psyche, the spiritual and political problems of our time will continue to persist. However, from our point of view, in the work of J. To a large extent, there is an energetic call for a new stage of religious development, which not only justifies the track "back to Jung", but also a rather bold revision of traditional theological and Christological dogmas, which means an installation for an irrevocable rejection of fundamentalism, which is formed not only on the basis of actualization of Jung's ideas, but also their use to expose the shadow side of religions that claim superiority and exclusivity.

This kind of refusal is far from lightweight nihilism. Here there is an emphasis on deepening into one's own spiritual and religious experience and awakening mystical layers in it. But this does not mean that the latter is doomed to amorphousness. Ancient, in particular, pre-monotheistic traditions come to the rescue. Therefore, moving forward along the path of religious development turns out, as it seems to us, to be a rollback to the archaic. We believe that the potential of a living religious feeling is far from being exhausted within the framework of traditional religions, especially if we take into account their diversity. Nevertheless, it is quite obvious that Jung's supporters are striving to go in an unknown direction. Of course, this unknown is relative, because here we mean other mystical traditions, in many ways alternative to Christianity. But here the project of choosing a mystical path is interesting. The same J. Wright proposes a project for the transition to psychological mysticism, which previously preceded, but from now on should replace historical theological mysticism ^[105]. The latter, as is known, was based on theistic images of God. But, according to J. Wright, such images no longer make sense. He calls the new mysticism "incarnate" and contrasts it with "heavenly" mysticism. Accordingly, psychological mysticism presupposes the expansion of not only the meaning of the concepts of "God" and "religion", but also mysticism, confirming the universality of the numinous experience. But universality here is thought of in the key of immanence. In other words, all spiritual entities should be understood and considered not as being outside of nature and the psyche, but in themselves. Only in this case the whole life becomes a mystical sanctuary. From our point of view, this is nothing but a path to the total mystification of everyday life. But do all people strive for such a perspective and is it really necessary for everyone?   

Analytical psychology has never been exclusively an armchair theorizing. First of all, this is work with patients, involving the analysis of their dreams and aimed at helping to achieve their mental health. Outside of nurturing and strengthening spirituality, which has significant religious-mystical and ideological dominants, according to psychological analysts, the latter is hardly possible. For this reason, we can see the development of a kind of psychedelic analytical praxis. Thus, the methodology of working with dreams was the basis of a guide for working in communities striving for spiritual health ^{[106, p. 313-340]}. At the same time, there are other directions in practical analytical psychology. Thus, J. Raff develops the idea of achieving close contact with the divine principle through ollie. As follows from his monograph, this is a divine being, the face of God. It appears in an imaginary sphere to become a partner of a certain person. A person must learn to enter the realm of imagination in order to meet and establish a relationship with an ally ^[107]. To do this, he developed a consistent series of exercises for the development of imagination. This, in his opinion, can teach you to identify your ally, learn his name and receive instructions from him, which will allow you to achieve full self-realization and a state of gnosis.

In another book, written jointly with V. Bonnington, "Healing the Wounded God" ^[108], J. Ruff, based on the experience of working with his clients, as well as his own internal experience and the study of myths, mysticism and alchemy, traces the emergence of a new spiritual paradigm in which the divine seeks its integrity through man and in man. In this work, the theme of the "psychoid" (ollie) is raised again, i.e. a being that exists independently in a realm beyond the psyche. This being challenges man and at the same time helps him on the way to individuation. The authors demonstrate how to contact and consciously enter into a relationship with him through dreams and with the help of what K. G. Jung called active imagination.  In addition, in the work under consideration, the analogues of the ally in mystical traditions, such as Sufism and alchemy, were investigated, and also analyzed how the ally differs from angelic beings.

ConclusionAs a result of the conducted research, it should be noted that due to the processes of secularization and the weakening of the influence of religious traditions that once mediated a certain segment of mystical experience, as well as against the background of a surge in alternative forms of expression of mystical experiences, there was a need for new ways not only to conceptualize, but also to construct mystical experience.

The analytical version of depth psychology, in fact, went beyond the purely psychological approach to mysticism, which reduced this experience to the phenomenology of subjective psychological experiences. This is determined by the fact that Jung was a kind of scientific dualist who considered the psyche as an independent reality, independent of the brain, and also functioning according to its own laws, different from the laws of the physical world. The fundamental essence of the so-called psychic life at the junction of its individual and collective forms is mysticism. Analytical psychology has limited subjectivist mystical individualism and plunged into the perception of the universal core of a diverse mystical experience, both religious and quasi-religious. In turn, it is quite noticeable that if psychoanalysis in its newest version is only just approaching an interdisciplinary synthesis, then the Jungian approach means significant progress in this direction. As a result, an original version of the hermeneutics of numinous experiences was formed, which seeks to reveal the connection between religious statements and their psychological correlates. In addition, the Jungian tradition helped to eliminate the negative connotations of the term "mysticism" that took place in the twentieth century. But the most important thing lies in the discretion of the ontological nature of mysticism due to the specified specifics of understanding the phenomenon of the human psyche. Nevertheless, the result of this kind of universalism was the erosion of the classical Christian mystical tradition, at least its Western Christian version, which led to its replacement with new mystical practices in line with new religious movements.