RE: MD traditions of mysticism

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sat Nov 23 2002 - 04:21:28 GMT

  • Next message: David Buchanan: "RE: MD Sophocles not Socrates"

    Sam said:
    In one sense you are exactly right: mainstream Catholicism, Orthodoxy and
    Anglicanism (and even more so the more 'Protestant' denominations) do not
    have rituals that are 'designed to induce a mystical experience'. That is
    because their understanding of 'mysticism' is not focussed on the particular
    experiences undergone by the mystic - so they see no need to 'induce'
    experiences - but on the changed shape of the life that results from coming
    closer to God. The essence of Christian 'mystical union' (a dodgy 19th
    century phrase in any case, not one used by Christian mystics) is the
    conforming of the human will to the divine will, which bears fruit in a
    radically altered life, ie one of tremendous compassion and the active
    search for social justice. The idea that a Christian mystic is someone
    concerned with generating 'experiences' is a profound enlightenment-era
    mischaracterisation. It is precisely that focus on experiences which people
    like Meister Eckhart and the author of the Cloud of Unknowing were concerned
    to criticise; for them, that sort of approach was the last obstacle to
    proper enlightenment, so 'religion' [ie a concentration on becoming a
    'spiritual' person] is the last idol to be overcome, as it is essentially
    prone to being 'captured' by the ego.

    DMB says:
    They see no need to induce mystical experience? Well, it seems to me that
    this exactly the problem. This is what I mean when I say the west no longer
    has a socially acceptable vehicle for the mystical experience and that the
    tradition we now have is even openly hostile to it. And this business of
    conforming human will to the divine will strikes me as paternalism rather
    than mysticism. How does one know the divine will except from a brush with
    divinity? Sorry, but on these matters I do not trust the religious
    authorities. For the most part their function is social; marrying and
    burying, teaching basic morality and such. In terms of "enlightenment" and
    spiritual develpment, I feel that the religious authorities are unhelpful at
    best. Also I don't think the Christian mystic is one is SEEKS to generate
    such experiences, but is one who's already had such an experience. Its not
    an intellectual choice so much as the natural consequence of something they
    went through first hand. And I think this is the only genuine way to bear
    the kind of fruit you suggest. I mean, people have to feel compassion and
    the desire for social justice through they're own realizations and not
    because somebody told them to obey God's will. (As if!) Sure, people can
    fake it for year or even whole lifetimes. But this kind of conformity or
    obedience is motivated by the wish to uphold morals amounts to little more
    than trying to spiritually
    "keep up with the Jones". (Mr. Jones has a greener lawn and sins less too.)
    And I think religion is the last great idol to be overcome most of all
    because religions so often tell you that you're already arrrived at the goal
    when all you've really done is parrot their doctrines.

    Sam said:
    You could say that the difference between Christianity and the Jamesian
    understanding of mysticism, is that Christianity is all about becoming holy
    through developing a relationship with God, whereas the search for 'mystical
    experience' is a form of self or ego-gratification. As Kahlil Gibran might
    have put it, 'what is the search for mystical experience but religion,
    tortured by its own thirst, and forced to drink of stagnant waters?'

    DMB says:
    Becoming holy through developing a relationship with God? I think ego can be
    involved in this too. Even more so. No doubt ego can motivate those who seek
    a mystical experience, but the experience itself is a dissolution of the
    ego, and until this has happened to you its hard to see what an ego really
    is. It is so constant and ubiquitous that it becomes invisible as air. It is
    one of those things we only notice by its absence. But mostly we agree. Ego
    can get in the way. But I have to confess that I don't know exactly what
    "holy" or "relationship with God" even means. So much of theological
    languange seems very far away from a mystical experience, but we can see
    that it refers back in some half-forgotten way. These are the stagnant
    waters, the static patterns that were created so long ago that their
    original meaning and purpose has been all but lost.

    Let me ask you, Sam, have you ever had a mystical experience? I'm not asking
    if you've ever been moved to tears or enjoyed an epiphany. I mean a personal
    event that ripped your head off. If so, you see what I mean about the
    stagnant waters.

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 23 2002 - 04:21:49 GMT