Yes and there are muliple reasons for that state.
First, Jungian interpreters are generally certified analysts and psychologists. They are extremely competent in their use and knowledge of the therapeutic aspects of Jungian Psychology but they seem unable to understand Jung's most difficult books. None of them has been able to explain Jung's book Aion, researches into the phenomenology of the Self. They are therefore ill-equipped to explain the most important characteristic of the Self as a lived conscious experience.
Second, Jung surrounded himself from the 1920 with a group of people that were well under his intellectual level. As they became the first generation of Jungian analysts, they were unable to understand the most difficult aspects of his psychology and they did not ask Jung clarifications about those subjects. That first generation of analysts trained the next generation and that knowledge was forever lost.
Third, Jungian interpreters seem unable to draw a direct conclusion from the chain of events in Jung's journey. When one put in line those important facts, one finds the key to understand his psychology. Those facts are:
1. Jung classified The Seven Sermons to the Dead written in 1916 as JU 0 in his personal library. That means that he ranked it as his first publication which is significant. That book is not chronologically the first one he has written. The Psycholgy of Dementia Praecox (1907) and Symbols of Transformation (1912) were published before the Sermons. This indicates that something happened after the publishing of Symbols of Transformation (1912) that pushed him to consider that the Sermons was his first writing of importance.
2. The essay The Transcendent Function was written in 1916 but was not published until some students from the C. G. Institute of Zurich found it in 1957. The fact that this essay was left unpublished for so long is definitely a clue worth considering. When one puts together all the mentions of the transcendent function in Jung's books, one understands that the function is litterallt what its title infers: the psychological function that produces a transcendent or mystical experience.
3. He titled his december 1913 active imagination experience of becoming the god Aion or deus leonticephalus MYSTERIUM. It is a clear indicator that he considered it as a transcendent experience. The title of the 1951 book AION is a clear reference to that experience that he also called a phenomenon of assimilation of the Self as well as his 1955 book Mysterium Conjunctionis (the mystery of the conjunction).
4. His interest for the opposites and their conjunctions. Jung understood early that mystical experiences are symbols of conjunction of opposites that enter consciousness with an extreme numinosity. Often reported experiences are the conjunction of me-God and me-universe.
5. His interest in gnosticism and gnosis. Jung found in gnostic tests the first reference to mystical experiences. In his book AION, he underlines the use by the Gnostics of the magnet as a symbol of transcendent experiences (the magnet being a conjunction of opposite poles).
6. His interest in the book The Secret of the Golden Flower that sparked his interest about alchemy. Jung found in that book the description of a mystical experience.
7. His extensive researches in alchemy. Jung found in alchemy the aurea catena or golden chain of secret knowledge about transcendent experiences. Alchemy offered him a tool to talk about those experiences without being tagged as a mystic. Thus, he chose to speak only to those who would be able to understand the second degree meaning of his studies.
The sum of these facts leads to only one important conclusion: Jung was primarily preoccupied with transcendent experiences and he inserted them in his psychology as important signposts of a consciously performed individuation process.
As in every science nowadays, scientific articles must be validated through peer review in order to be published. The problem with Jungian Analytical Psychology is that the reviewers do not understand Jung's most difficult texts. They have no idea why Jung used gnostic texts and alchemy in his psychology. Wolfgang Giegerich, not the best Jungian interpreter, even wrote that Jung wanted to "distract" himself from psychology by diving into something completely new!
When the reviewers are such in a state of ignorance and incompetence, Jungian psychology find itself to be in a dead end. New interpretations are left aside, discarded. As Jungian analysts don't take any notice of something that has not been reviewed by their peers, Jungian psychology stays in its particular state of being the only scientific field where its tenants do not understand what their most important contributor has written.
Let's hope the natural openness of Jungian readers will eventually break the walls which has restrict Analytical psychology for three generation.
