James Hillman - Love Isn't Personal
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 พ.ค. 2020
- In this clip, James Hillman talks about different aspects of Love. Love is impersonal, he says, because it doesn't want you, it wants your archetypal energies.
Full clip (Archetypal Psychology) here: • Video
I have been listening to this video on repeat for a year. Hillman speaks so simply and magically, he heals with his words.
"Lovers don't finally meet somewhere. They're in each other all along" ... Rumi
I love this talk, thank you
"The Eros is right there inside the Psyche ready to break into fire" ....
Thank you for articulating and illuminating with depth the essence of the mystery and mysteriousness of ... "Love"
Have been thinking, saying, and writing over the years what was being presented (not taking Eros literally) as ... "Eros either makes his appearance or not" ...
Love Jesse & Celine here. Excellent channel.
thank you! I'm glad someone got the reference ;)
Having recently read Plato’s Symposium made this all the richer and illuminating!
Good stuff...
Great teaser, thanks 🙏🏻! I would like to listen to the full talk, but the link to the full clip in the description isn't working. Do you know the title of the original? There may be different versions around on youtube.
can you share the full clip/lecture? the link that you post is broken.
I just added a subtitle with a translation in portuguese, how can i make it available? Thank u
I'm not sure. Can you add it to the video?
@@individuationportal i wrote the subtitle and sended to youtube, i believe we gotta wait for it to be available, i just don't know if u, who uploaded the video gotta accepted it or not. Do u know anything about it?
Is Hillman occasionally reading from a text(s), or reading his lecture notes?
not entirely sure, but after listening to a lot of hillman lectures it seems like its 20% notes and 80% improvisation
Is that ethan hawke?
is he saying that we be poly?
No/ The essence of love is not a stereotype, not dogma and not controlled by ego/ Labels such a polyamorous or monogamous are beliefs that stem from religious subjugation from the ruling classes of the medieval epoch/ The sin is to lie to yourself and to be motivated by fear or greed/ Mediocrity is the worst sin/ Love is not possessive/ Love is unconditional/
I guess that's why everyone today is a narcissistic. It is way easier then original love...
Hillman's opening comment about 'Christianity made love into its god' is verging on disingenuousness. This is a linguistic confusion, since the 'love' of Judaeo-Christianity (and a few other religions to boot) is essentially 'agape' or revelation from transcendental omnipresent 'knowledge', the 'seeing' a redeemed state of the beloved. It has nothing to do with Eros. That Jung was correctly forced to speak in scientific terms and limit what can be said to what the psyche itself can observe is one thing, but the underlying transcendental aspect is still in his writings and can't be ignored. This talk is not about that, but about anima/animus projection and biological passion. Agape however was understood as, yes, impersonal in that it was universal, but deeply personal too in that 'what is without is also within' and infinitesimal meets vast. That's not to do with Eros at all really, and he unfairly makes Judaeo-Christianity take the rap for something totally unrelated.
@@melomateus_m.r Your point is? Hillman is equating the two.
@@melomateus_m.rIf a father tells his son “I love you”, do you think that’s Eros?
"Eros himself was not a god?" That's wrong.
In the earliest sources (the cosmogonies, the earliest philosophers, and texts referring to the mystery religions), he is one of the primordial gods
involved in the coming into being of the cosmos. In later sources,
however, Eros is represented as the son of Aphrodite, whose mischievous
interventions in the affairs of gods and mortals cause bonds of love to
form, often illicitly.
A cult of Eros existed in pre-classical Greece, but it was much less
important than that of Aphrodite. However, in late antiquity, Eros was
worshiped by a fertility cult in Thespiae. In Athens,
he shared a very popular cult with Aphrodite, and the fourth day of
every month was sacred to him (also shared by Herakles, Hermes and
Aphrodite)
Love was an obsession of the ancient Romans of the Late Republic and Early Empire. Frescoes of playful cupids adorned many houses as did pornographic scenes. Love elegy was a development of Roman literature.
The monotheistic Judeo-Christian God, IS love.
The thumbnail is totally incongruous to the subject matter. This has nothing to do with romantic love.
Nice opinion, irrelevant opinion really
I love Hillman, but the photo makes me want to vomit. No offence!
I can't stand James Hillman, he is so dry and ruins all mystique.
Then why’d you click on this video
As long as we will judge we ll stand in separation... preventing ourselves from receiving.... from opening up... maybe tje dryness comes out of that separation
I also find parts of what he says concerning, but I do like how he talks. The rivalry with Robert Moore is something notable.