Carl Jung viewed sexuality as more than a biological function; he saw it as a key principle of differentiation shaping human individuation. How does sexuality mark the boundary between spirit and matter, male and female, anima and animus? What does ridicule reveal when men transgress gendered roles, and why did Jung insist that only women can be pregnant? How might these distinctions help us understand the integration of opposites in the psyche and the wider collective search for balance?
Carl Jung’s The Red Book (Liber Novus) represents a profound journey into the depths of the psyche, chronicling his confrontations with the unconscious through visions, dialogues, and symbolic explorations. Written between 1913 and 1916 during a period of intense personal crisis, it serves as the foundation for much of his later analytical psychology. Scrutinies, the third part of The Red Book, includes the “Seven Sermons to the Dead” (Septem Sermones ad Mortuos), a Gnostic-inspired text attributed to the ancient philosopher Basilides, through which Jung channels archetypal wisdom. In this section, Jung delves into metaphysical concepts like the Pleroma—the divine fullness or totality where all opposites are undifferentiated and cancelled out—and the Creatura, the realm of created beings defined by distinction and qualities.
Sexuality emerges as a central theme, particularly in Sermons V and VI, where it is portrayed not merely as a biological drive but as a fundamental psychic force that differentiates human existence from the undifferentiated wholeness of the Pleroma. This differentiation is essential for personal and interpersonal development, aligning with depth psychology’s emphasis on individuation—the process of integrating opposites within the self to achieve wholeness while maintaining distinct identity.
In the context of analytical psychology, these ideas offer a model for understanding how sexuality functions as a bridge between the earthly and spiritual realms, influencing personal growth, relationships, and societal dynamics. By distinguishing sexuality from the Pleroma’s void, individuals can engage with it consciously, avoiding possession by unconscious forces and fostering balanced interpersonal connections. Below, I outline these concepts in detail, drawing on the sermons’ symbolic language to explore their implications for psychic development.
The Pleroma and Creatura: The Foundation of Differentiation
To grasp sexuality’s role, one must first understand the Pleroma, described in Sermon I as “nothingness or fullness,” an infinite, eternal realm possessing “no qualities” because all opposites (e.g., full/empty, light/dark) coexist and nullify each other. No being exists within it, as any distinction would separate it from this totality. In contrast, Creatura—the created world, including humanity—is defined by “distinctiveness,” possessing qualities that allow for existence in time and space. Jung emphasises that “distinctiveness is creatura. It is distinct. Distinctiveness is its essence.” This differentiation is not a flaw but the essence of creation: without it, beings would dissolve back into the Pleroma’s undifferentiated state.
This binary forms the core of Jung’s model for psychic engagement. The Pleroma symbolises the collective unconscious in its primal, archetypal unity, while Creatura represents the ego’s task of carving out individual identity through conscious discrimination. Failure to differentiate leads to psychological inflation or possession by archetypal forces, hindering personal development. Sexuality, as a key quality of Creatura, exemplifies this process, acting as a dynamic principle that generates life and separation from the Pleroma’s stasis.
Sexuality in Sermon V: Manifestation, Gender Dynamics, and the Need for Distinction
Sermon V directly addresses sexuality as a revealing force of the gods, contrasting it with spirituality to highlight its earthly, creative power. Jung writes: “The world of the gods is made manifest in spirituality and in sexuality. The celestial ones appear in spirituality, the earthly in sexuality. Spirituality conceiveth and embraceth. It is womanlike and therefore we call it mater coelestis, the celestial mother. Sexuality engendereth and createth. It is manlike, and therefore we call it phallos, the earthly father.” Here, sexuality is not reducible to physical acts but is an archetypal energy that “engendereth and createth,” driving differentiation and procreation in the material world.
Jung introduces gender-specific nuances, noting: “The sexuality of man is more of the earth, the sexuality of woman is more of the spirit. […] The sexuality of man hath an earthward course, the sexuality of woman a spiritual.” This reflects anima/animus dynamics in analytical psychology, where masculine and feminine principles interpenetrate, but must be consciously separated to avoid conflict. If undistinguished, “Man and woman become devils one to the other when they divide not their spiritual ways, for the nature of creatura is distinctiveness.” In interpersonal terms, this warns of projection: undifferentiated sexuality leads to possessive relationships, where partners embody each other’s shadows, stunting mutual growth.
Crucially, sexuality distinguishes from the Pleroma by being a quality humans must actively separate from their essence: “Man shall distinguish himself both from spirituality and from sexuality. […] Should ye not distinguish yourselves from sexuality and from spirituality […] then are ye delivered over to them as qualities of the pleroma.” In the Pleroma, sexuality has no existence because there are no opposites or distinctions—everything is balanced in nothingness.
By claiming sexuality as a personal quality without recognising it as a transpersonal daemon, individuals risk dissolution into unconscious unity, losing the individuation process central to depth psychology. Instead, treating sexuality as a “super-human daemon” allows conscious engagement, transforming it into a tool for self-realisation and relational harmony.
Sexuality in Sermon VI: Daimonic Aspects and Psychic Integration
Building on Sermon V, Sermon VI personifies sexuality as a daimonic force, emphasising its role in bridging outer and inner worlds. The daimon of sexuality is depicted as a “serpent,” an earthly, half-human entity symbolising “thought-desire” that “goeth to the depths.” In contrast, the daimon of spirituality is a “white bird” ascending to heights. This duality underscores sexuality’s grounding function, pulling toward material embodiment and differentiation, while spirituality elevates toward unity.
The sermon warns that undistinguished daimons become overpowering: “The daimones become gods if not distinguished.” Applied to personal development, this suggests that repressed or unintegrated sexuality manifests as neurotic compulsions or relational discord, echoing Jung’s later work on libido as psychic energy. By distinguishing it, individuals achieve “singleness” (individuation), enabling deeper social engagement without enmeshment.
Implications for Personal, Interpersonal, and Social Development
In Jungian depth psychology, sexuality’s distinction from the Pleroma models a pathway for holistic growth. Personally, it demands confronting the shadow—earthly desires—as part of individuation, preventing regression to Pleromatic undifferentiation (e.g., psychosis or apathy).
Interpersonally, it promotes relationships where partners honour each other’s distinct paths, avoiding “devilish” projections and fostering anima/animus integration for empathetic bonds. Socially, it critiques cultural repressions of sexuality, advocating collective rituals (e.g., communion under the Mother or Phallos) to channel daimonic energies constructively, reducing societal conflicts rooted in undifferentiated opposites.
Ultimately, Jung’s exploration in Scrutinies Part III portrays sexuality as a vital creative force that, when consciously distinguished, liberates the psyche from the Pleroma’s abyss, enabling authentic engagement with self, others, and the world. This aligns with analytical psychology’s goal: transforming unconscious potentials into conscious, differentiated wholeness.
Leave a Reply