Documented: the 1913 break with Freud, the descent recorded in the Red Book, the discovery that his patients' spontaneous mandalas matched Eastern diagrams, the 1929 Golden Flower commentary reading huiguang as individuation, the alchemy studies (Psychology and Alchemy, 1944), synchronicity with Pauli (1952), and the apparatus of shadow, anima and animus, Self, and collective unconscious that frames it all. Later scholarship (Cleary, Sherry, Lindorff) documents the projection problem: Jung read Daoist content through categories the tradition does not carry, and partly acknowledged it.
The folk Jung is the warning label: do not approach Eastern practice as a goal-oriented project, do not imitate the East, the striving ego is the obstacle, and Westerners must grow their own equivalent from their own ground. The self-help industry then spent a century doing exactly what he warned against, with his commentary as the packaging.
The claim: Jung is the modern gnostic cartographer, the Red Book as descent narrative, the Self as the grown golden flower, synchronicity as the wall flickering, and his documented reluctance, he never published the Red Book in his lifetime, as the cartographer's own fear of his map. The trap literature reads individuation as the integration required to survive the toll houses.
Did Jung interpret the Golden Flower, or did the Golden Flower interpret Jung?