From section 184.108.40.206 of Return of the World Soul, Part II (being published in 2012)
On July 14th, 1984 I had a very odd dream, which I only understood when I began to deal with the content of the book Return of the World Soul. It shows that the key to the understanding of these psychokinetic events seems to be what the dream called “synchronous synchronicities.” Since it sheds some light on the difference between common and “synchronous” synchronicities, I will share this dream:
Dream about the „synchronous synchronicity“:
“The government of England or the Queen of England decided to do some research on the question whether consciously experienced ‘synchronicities’ could have an influence on the state of the world and on the fate of humankind. The government or the Queen also asked Marie-Louise von Franz to give a statement on this topic. She decided however to send the letter to me to answer.
From somewhere (I do not know where and I also wonder whether there was anything about the subject in the letter) I got some details about such ‘synchronicities.’ Of course, when I woke up I forgot most of these details. However, I remember one tiny but important piece of information: the ‘synchronicities’ had to be of the type of ‘synchronous synchronicities,’ i.e., ‘synchronicities,’ in which the inner and the outer phenomena happen exactly simultaneously (and not more or less simultaneously as in common synchronicities).
In the dream such a decisive event that creates a ‘synchronous synchronicity’ is also described: I am the passenger in a car and am reading the work of Carl G. Jung. He describes this sort of ‘synchronicity’ as a bridge between two natural landscapes. They are however separated by exactly this highway where we drive. The piers of the bridge are in place, the bridge, however, is missing (see image 6.10).
Synchronous synchronicity as the missing bridge
In the moment, when I read this passage in Jung’s work, I spontaneously looked up and realized that precisely in this moment we passed exactly this scene in the outside. Further there was a detail which I did not notice in Jung’s description: in the left pier there was a built-in house.
I get further the information from somewhere that the landscapes were once connected by a natural hollow, but were then separated by a ‘cultural effort.’ It is exactly this separation why we are now in need of constructing the bridge of ‘synchronous synchronicity.’ The latter corresponds to the construction of the bridge, which connects the two landscapes again.”
Of course already immediately after the dream I associated with some elements. Since I had the dream more than 25 years ago and did not really understand it, I went on looking for spontaneous associations later. I would like to add them here.
The beginning of the dream exposes the constellated problem. I associated earlier dreams with it, in which Marie-Louise von Franz was presented as the Queen of England. Thus, if we put these together, we realize that the motif is the constellation of the queen – which means of course the anima mundi, the partner of equal worth to the king in Hermetic alchemy, with whom she consummates the coniunctio. The problem to solve in the dream is thus the subject of this book.
We know further that the coniunctio takes place on the background of Eros in its most comprehensive meaning. Together with the motif in the dream that consciously experienced “synchronous synchronicities” could have an influence on the state of the world and on the fate of humankind, the Eros motif reminds us of Wolfgang Pauli’s unpublished dreams of 1934/35 and 1936. In these dreams “the dark anima [the Chinese anima mundi; RFR] asserts with a certain persistence that there is a ‘magical’ connection between sexuality and eroticism [the Eros principle in general; RFR] on the one hand, and political or historical events on the other.” This was “extremely surprising and unexpected for [Pauli].” Further, as we have seen, these dreams happened in a period when Pauli also began to have dreams and fantasies that contained “close links with … parapsychological areas that are not easily accessible.” They also used a physical-symbolic terminology, talking for example of “fine structure” [obviously the fine structure constant; RFR] and “radioactive nucleus.”
When, in 1996, I read these passages for the first time in the German original of Atom and Archetype, I immediately remembered my above dream. Of course I had not the slightest idea about its meaning. I just saw the similar content. Later, however, I realized that my dream gave a decisive hint: the connection between the Eros principle and contemporary history seems to be what the dream calls “synchronous synchronicities” constellated in myself and likely in Pauli as well.
Already when I had the dream I had a very interesting association with the symbol “car.” “Car,” in German “Auto,” symbolizes a spontaneously beginning auto-matism in the vegetative nervous system (VNS). Thus I concluded that there was a spontaneous observation mode beyond my spontaneous looking up, behind the motion of my head. In this observation mode, time and space are “chosen” accidentally, thus it is the observational mode of the Eros ego.
With the government of England I associated also Margaret Thatcher, the Prime Minister at that time. On July 16th, 1984, two days after my dream, she declared a state of emergency because of the strike of the dockers. I concluded that such a behavior is the will-possessed attitude which according to Jung is compensated by the counter-will of the unconscious. Thus, we can also give a second interpretation of the beginning of the dream: the problem is not only the constellation of the anima mundi, the ruler of the Eros Self, but it is also connected to the contrast between the will-dominated state of the Logos ego and the state without will of the Eros ego. Of course this was also exactly the situation in which Carl Jung was when his big life crisis began in 1913. It was heralded four years earlier by the psychokinetic events at Freud’s place, and even 15 years earlier, when he decided to break off the mediumistic, i.e., parapsychological experiments with Helly, and began to study causal medicine and philosophy instead.
To continue my interpretation, I will use physical-symbolic terms as in Pauli’s dreams of 1934/35 and 1936 and define statements about psychophysical processes.
Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation defines the acausality of the quantum leap in a specific way that can be described mathematically. To define a causal physical process we need on the one hand Newton’s differential equations, and on the other hand the initial conditions of four variables; of time, of the position in space, of the momentum of the physical object observed, and of the amount of energy it contains. Energy and time are conjugated variables according to physics, and so are position (space) and momentum. The uncertainty relation tells us that the exact measurement of energy and time as well as position and momentum are impossible. If we measure energy as accurately as possible, time measurement becomes proportionately inaccurate and vice versa. The same is true for the other two conjugated variables: an exact measurement of the momentum (mass multiplied with velocity) of an object would cause an infinitely uncertain position of the same object in space.
Already at the time of my dream I was dealing with the uncertainty relation and asked myself whether it could not be used in a depth psychological way. With the discovery of matter-psyche I realized that we have to use Heisenberg’s idea on the psychophysical level. This means that beyond Heisenberg’s mathematical equation there can be an archetype of uncertainty, which causes a similar situation as in physics: if we let the time and the position in space of the observation of psychophysical events infinitely blur, the energy and the momentum of the object would become exactly observable.
Such an event happens in my dream, in the spontaneous glance at the outer world, and also in the Odeon Pauli effect mentioned above. It is exactly the acausal observation mode happening out of the VNS in the state of the Eros ego, the spontaneously beginning auto-matism above, in which time and place (space) of the observation are “chosen” accidentally, i.e., acausally. Thus, the “psychophysical momentum” and the “psychophysical energy” of the acausally observed event should become exactly “measurable.”
In German the physical term for momentum is “Impuls,” impulse. We also use the same term for a spontaneous impulse out of the “unconscious,” or out of the psychophysical reality of the VNS. Thus, if the place of the observation is accidental, according to the psychophysical uncertainty relation we become able to observe the spontaneous impulse out of the psychophysical reality (out of the unus mundus), which is not observable by the will-based ego. This spontaneous, acausal impulse out of the Eros Self corresponds to the parallel phenomenon in the inner world, the acausal observation in the state of the Eros ego. This is the “synchronous synchronicity” between the Eros ego and the Eros Self, which in a physical-symbolic language I defined above as the radioactive core observing its own decay.
Further, if the time of the observation is infinitely uncertain, what is the case, if we accept the kairos, the spontaneous, i.e. acausal change of energy becomes precisely observable. Such a process is not observable by the Logos ego and its will-based observation mode. I call this energetic phenomenon the acausal twin process that becomes observable exactly in the kairos and in an accidental place, the latter symbolized in my dream as the accidental position of the car in the moment of the acausal observation. The transformation of the unobservable X into matter-psyche with potentially increased order in the psychophysical reality or unus mundus, and the simultaneous re-transformation of matter-psyche with potentially increased order into spirit-psyche with realized increased order have taken place. The incarnation has happened into our world of spirit-psyche by the spontaneous observation in the moment of the kairos.
With the above, the bridge of the dream is also interpreted. It symbolizes on the one hand the spontaneous observation of the twin process – the “synchronous synchronicity” in consciousness – on the other hand it is the “synchronous synchronicity” between the unus mundus and our world, in which observable higher order, or increased “life essence” is created. The observation of such processes was repressed by a “cultural effort,” the development of the Logos ego. The “highway,” the subject-object boundary, splits the one world into two, and such observations by the Eros ego are not possible anymore. This is why we have to re-construct “the bridge.” The “conscious bridge” corresponds to the transformation of the Logos ego into the Eros ego, the altered state. The latter is then, in a process of acausal observation, able to observe the twin process, the bridge re-uniting the “two landscapes,” our world and the unus mundus.
As we will see, there are two different manifestations of this process: the acausal observation of the twin process between one’s own body and the individual vegetative body (subtle body), the outer and the inner aspect of the body, on the one hand, and on the other the acausal observation of the twin process between the “body of our world” and of its collective vegetative body (subtle body), the world soul in the unus mundus. The former process I call Symptom-Symbol Transformation and apply it in the case of somatic, psychosomatic and specific psychological diseases, the latter is Body-Centered Imagination to cure the collective disease of our world.
There is a further motif in the dream, which we have to interpret: the house built in the left pier of the bridge. The day before this decisive dream I read in the book Der Mensch und seine Symbole (Man and his Symbols) by Carl Jung et al. Obviously this is the book I read in my dream the following night. I was fascinated by an image, in which the human body is compared to a house (see image below).
Only in 1997, when I came back to this dream, I realized that the built-in house in the pier of the bridge is a symbol of the relationship between the body and the vegetative body. This interpretation is backed by my experience as a dream interpreter and healer, as in dreams the house is mostly a symbol of the body and/or the vegetative body. For example the house is destroyed and must be reconstructed, however in a different way.
Since here the house is on the left, the “unconscious side,” (in the unus mundus), it is a symbol of the vegetative body, the subtle body, observable by the Eros ego and the gut brain (VNS). I began slowly to realize that my dream from 1984 expressed symbolically the method I had been developing since 1987, Body-Centered Imagination (or Symptom-Symbol-Transformation), in which the energy of the physical body is first transformed into intermediate matter-psyche and then re-transformed into outer spirit-psyche, however with realized increased “life essence”.
 I write the term in quotation marks since these phenomena are not really synchronicities. It seems that the preconscious knowledge of the unconscious did not have a suitable term at its disposal.
 See section 220.127.116.11 in Part 1
 AaA, p. 8-9, letter [9P] from June 22nd, 1935
 AaA, p. 8-9, letter [9P] from June 22nd, 1935. See also section 6.16.7 of this book, in which I interpret Pauli’s fine structure constant and death room synchronicity.
 Today I see in this mode an automatism of the VNS, which begins however in an acausal way as soon as somebody is able to abandon the Logos ego and the CNS and enters the Eros ego and the VNS, the gut brain. As we will see in sections 6.13 and 6.14, this process is the background of Symptom-Symbol Transformation and Body-Centered Imagination.
 See section 6.1.4
 AaA, letters [9P], [11P] and [13P]
 If such processes are constellated in an individual and he remains unconscious of it, the creation becomes destructive, as in Pauli’s case.
 Jung, C.G., Von Franz, M.-L., Henderson, J.L. , Jacobi, J., Jaffé, A., Der Mensch und seine Symbole, Walter Verlag, Olten, 1968, p. 78
 Source: Wikimedia Commons