William Apple is the founder of Ousia Analysis, formerly Aion Psychodynamic Coaching, and House of Aion — a nonprofit, in-development, dedicated to critical inquiry, psychospiritual education, and symbolic literacy.

 

His approach has developed through more than thirty years of study, practice, independent scholarship, analysis, spiritual discipline, and sustained engagement with psychological, philosophical, political, mystical, and esoteric traditions.

 

Within Ousia Analysis, he works as an educator, mentor, and guide, bringing that history into a continuing examination of the individual and collective structures through which human beings come to understand themselves.

 

William is not a licensed psychologist, psychotherapist, counselor, or mental-health provider.
 

Ousia Analysis is a nonclinical educational, philosophical, social, and spiritual practice; it does not provide psychotherapy, counseling, diagnostic assessment, psychological treatment, crisis intervention, or mental-health care.

 

Study and Training

 

William’s methodological education includes extensive study in:

​

• Analytical psychology, particularly Jung’s writings on the unconscious, individuation, symbolism, religion, and alchemy

• Psychoanalysis, including Freud, Lacan, and object relations traditions

• Individual psychology

• Psychosynthesis

• Pre-Socratic and Socratic inquiry, philosophical skepticism, and classical Stoic philosophy

• Western alchemical, mystical, esoteric, and occult traditions

 

He also holds certifications in CBT, DBT, ACT, IFS, and TCI. These certifications form part of his education and provide additional frameworks for understanding how different methodologies approach thought, emotion, behavior, relationship, and internal experience; they do not constitute clinical licensure, and he does not use them to provide psychotherapy, diagnosis, or clinical treatment.

 

Reading and study remain substantial parts of William’s life, including returning repeatedly to a thinker’s writings and investigating the sources, historical conditions, and philosophical assumptions through which their conclusions developed.

 

His engagement with Jung, in particular, extends across the analytical, religious, mystical, and alchemical dimensions of Jung’s work and into the surrounding traditions with which Jung was in conversation.

 

Influences and Lineage

 

The deepest spiritual root of William’s Work lies in his devotion to Avatar Meher Baba, while C. G. Jung provides a foundational language for its analytical, symbolic, and philosophical development.
 

Meher Baba’s teachings concerning love, service, consciousness, and the relationship between the individual and the Whole remain central to William’s understanding of what it means to live in relationship with another human being.

 

His psychological and philosophical orientation, together with his understanding of power, identity, colonialism, racialization, economics, liberation, and collective life, has been shaped by Marion Woodman, Erich Neumann, Marie-Louise von Franz, Edward Edinger, Jacques Lacan, Alice Miller, D. W. Winnicott, Carl Rogers, Alfred Adler, Roberto Assagioli, William James, Jean Piaget, Erich Fromm, Wilhelm Reich, Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes, Frantz Fanon, Malcolm X, Marcus Garvey, James Baldwin, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, and Black Elk, to name only a few.

 

These influences enter his scholarship through their distinct histories, questions, disagreements, and ways of understanding the world, and their differences remain part of what he continues to study.

 

Beyond these intellectual influences, his history includes:

​

• Bhakti yoga within the devotional lineage of Avatar Meher Baba, with particular attention to service and Mastery in Servitude

• Initiation into Dhyana Yoga through Sri Sri Sri Shivabalayogi

• A two-year apprenticeship with Skyhawk, a Choctaw medicine man, within the Choctaw tradition

• Study and practice of traditional Tantric and nondual teachings, distinguished from contemporary Western adaptations

• Engagement with Advaita Vedanta, Buddhism, Taoism, and other contemplative traditions

• Membership in the Église Gnostique Apostolique

• Study and practice within Pagan and polytheistic traditions, including Celtic Reconstructionism

• Engagement with occultism, including Right-Hand Path and Left-Hand Path traditions, initiatory Western esotericism, ritual practice, and symbolic descent

• An approximately three-year astrological apprenticeship with his dear friend and teacher, the late Kelly Lee Phipps, alongside study of Bruno Huber’s work, Jungian astrology, and astrological Psychosynthesis

 

These traditions have entered William’s life through different forms of study, practice, apprenticeship, initiation, devotion, and personal relationship.
 

They are named because they have participated in forming his questions and his way of seeing, while their inclusion does not imply that their teachings are interchangeable or that every relationship carries the same kind of training or authority.

 

His own spiritual commitments are substantial, and those who work with him are welcome to bring commitments that differ from his own; participation does not require adopting his beliefs or belonging to any of the traditions named here.

 

On a Personal Note

Much of my life has been spent trying to understand what it means to be a Human Being, while gradually recognizing how much of what I assumed that meant had already been supplied through the worlds into which I was born.

 

Reading, spiritual practice, analysis, relationship, and the difficult experience of encountering my own contradictions have all participated in that education, and they continue to do so.

 

One teaching that has remained especially significant to me is the passage in which Yeshua ben Yosef speaks of discipleship through the unsettling words, “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother…he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26⁠).

 

I have returned to this passage repeatedly because I understand Yeshua to be a man of Love, and therefore the question of what he means by hate asks something considerable of me: what must be relinquished, and what kind of relationship becomes possible through that relinquishment?

 

What I have come to understand within this teaching is a demand to examine the conditioning, programming, indoctrinations, loyalties, fears, and assumptions through which we have learned what an “I” is supposed to be.
 

Our relationships with mother, father, siblings, community, and tradition carry both the reality of those human beings and the inherited definitions through which we have learned to see them, ourselves, and the world; learning to distinguish between these things asks us to confront how much of what we call “love” may also contain obedience, possession, obligation, fear, and the demand that another person remain who we need them to be.

 

For me, the teaching concerns becoming willing to relinquish those inherited demands while remaining present to the human beings whose lives exceed them, including ourselves.

 

This is my interpretation, developed through years of contemplation and inquiry, and it deeply informs what I understand as the Great Work: the sustained undertaking of examining the material through which identity has been formed, so that our relationship with Being is permitted to become more conscious.

 

And, because I am implicated within that same material, the questions I bring to another person must also remain questions I am willing to ask of myself. I bring a particular education, experience, and way of seeing into the relationship, together with limitations that I must remain willing to recognize; you bring a life that I cannot know in advance, whose significance will always exceed whatever explanation I might offer of it.

 

My devotion to this Work is inseparable from learning how to be with another Human Being: to listen, to think, to question, and to remain in relationship as what we thought we understood becomes available for examination again.

​

—William