ABSTRACT
Whereas Patañjali makes a clear distinction between two orientations of consciousness, orientation A, in which pure consciousness abides in true nature, and orientation B, in which consciousness is enmeshed with mental modifications, Jung does not make this distinction at all. Jung’s assertion of an ego and an unconscious that are ontically real appears as his most significant disagreement with Patañjali. The research reveals that depth psychology has used derivative consciousness to re-present intrinsic consciousness by formulating the unconscious. If depth psychologists are open to reconsidering ontic reality as self-illuminating, depth psychology and Classical Yoga have the potential to form a powerful alliance.
