Jungian Mysticism

The following quotes are from:

Mysticism in the Analytical Psychology of Carl Jung and the Yoga Psychology of Patanjali: A Comparative Study by Harold Coward.
Philosophy East and West, Vol. 29, No. 3. (Jul., 1979), pp. 323-336.

As Jung puts it,
God is the union of the opposites, the uniting of the torn asunder, the conflict
is redeemed in the Cross. So Przywara says: 'God appears in the cross', that
is he manifests himself as the crucified Christ. The man who wishes to reach
this unity in God, to make God real in himself, can only attain this through
the Imitatio Christi, that is he must take up his cross and accept the conflict
of the world and stand in the center of the opposites.

The Christian during contemplation would never say, "I am Christ"
but will confess with Paul, "Not I, but Christ liveth in me" [The Buddhist]
sutra, however, says: "Thou wilt know that thou art the Buddha."
At bottom both statements express a fundamental sense of unity, but in Jung's
view, the way the unity is experienced is altogether different. The Buddhist
statement "Thou art the Buddha" or the Hindu Upanisadic teaching "I am
Brahman" requires complete removal of the individual ego or ahamkara. The
Western statement "Christ liveth in me" implies not a destruction of the ego
but rather an invasion or possession by God so that the individual ego continues
to exist only now as servant of the Lord.

The preceding review of Jungian psychology and Patanjali's yoga shows both
points of agreement and difference. Both authors agree with the definition
of mystical experience presented by the philosophers as being
characterized by a loss of the sense of finite ego and a corresponding increased
identification with a transcendent spiritual reality. But there was definite
disagreement about the degree of ego loss which occurs and about the kind
of psychological process which is mainly responsible for the mystic's identification
with the larger transcendent reality.

In the face of the earlier comparative psychological study, we find ourselves
left with what is perhaps a new and expanded version of Stace's question,
"Does mystical experience point to an objective reality or is it merely a subjective
phenomenon?" Now the psychological question must be added, "Can
there be mystical experience without an individual ego? Or put another way,
"Is unlimited consciousness of the fullness of reality psychologically possible?"