[an error occurred while processing this directive]
T H E Z E P H Y R __ M A G A Z I N E {__]++++++++++++++++++++++++++[] Issue #60 10-16-88 A weekly electronic magazine for users of THE ZEPHYR II BBS (Mesa, AZ - 602-894-6526) owned and operated by T. H. Smith Editor - Gene B. Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . You may share this magazine with your friends under the . . condition that the magazine remain complete and intact, . . with no editing, revisions or modifications of any kind, . . and including this opening section and statement. . . If you like the magazine, our Sysop and I would appreciate. . it if you would let your friends know where they can log . . in to find the magazine (and incidentally one of the . . finest BBSs in the country!). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (c) 1988 THIS ISSUE: On boards such as "Heaven's Gates" some users CLAIM to have some knowledge of religions. Others actually know what they're talking about. One of our regulars, Sue Miller, has done extensive anf formal studies in the field. This issue is one of the papers who wrote for a class. The topic is mysticism. ON MYSTICISM by Susan Miller "Mysticism is the scholastic of the heart, the dialectic of the feelings." -Goethe- This quote by Goethe is one of many attempts to define possibly the most indefinable portion of religion -- mysticism and mystical experience. How does one define, let alone study, mysticism? Definitions In attempting to define what mysticism is and is not, below is presented a summary of the definitions given by six different authorities. We'll examine these definitions and comment on their similarities and differences. Lawrence Fine: * "...mystics seek intimate knowledge of the divine that goes beyond intellectualization and rational thinking. ...are interested in the experience of the sacred in a way that is intuitive, direct, and intense." * "Mystics tend to find in themselves something in common with the divine. They frequently turn inward in order to discover that an aspect of their being, or the totality of their being, corresponds to or is akin to God." Mystics develop their "self-awareness" in order to discover some "identity between the self and the Other". * Mystics "tend to look upon the world of nature as a whole as an opportunity for discovering the sacred." * Mystics must follow a disciplined way of life, certain ethical practices necessary to perfect self, attain mystical experiences. * Mystics use special techniques such as prayer or meditation to help increase their knowledge of the divine. David Blumenthal: * Mysticism placed at one end of a continuum called "spirituality". * "...the forms and dynamics of spirituality turn 'mystical' when the reports of the experiences involved betray an abstract con-ceptualization of God, as opposed to a highly personalist, anthro-popathic conceptualiza tion." * Emphasis on aspect of "hard work" and "practice" to achieve mystical experiences. * Warning against reductionism in definition. J. Dan: * "Jewish mysticism, like any other mysticism, is based on the deep religious belief that divine truth can be neither found nor expressed in worldly terms. Divine truth lies in a mystical realm, completely hidden from the human sense and rationalistic analysis." * "...hints of this esoteric realm in the Scriptures, which, even though written in words, refer to a dimension that is beyond human language." * Says the bridge between the divine truth and language is symbolism, because this divine truth is completely inexpressible in human terms. Arthur Green: * Gives a definition of the mysticism "currently available in the intellectual marketplace" which is "an utter absorption within and identification with the deity." He expands this definition into a working definition with the following three points: * Mysticism is "a religious outlet that (1) seeks out inner experiences of the divine and to that end gener ally cultivates the life of inwardness; (2) longs to recover an original intimacy with God,...; and (3) in- volves itself with an esoteric lore that promises both to reveal the inner secrets of divinity and to provide access to the restoration of divine/human intimacy." Steven Katz: * "...renewed, immediate, non-critical, largely non-cogni tive, contact with the mystical depths of Being..." * "...in the presence of the Absolute...all true seekers come to know - to feel - the sameness which is the Ultimately Real." Gershom Scholem: * Mystic "seeks an apprehension of God and creation whose intrinsic elements are beyond the grasp of the intellect." * Mystical experiences come about "through contemplation and illumination". * Key phrases: "esoteric", "cannot be communicated directly", "introspection". Points of Similiarity In the above aspects of mysticism, three things are found common to more than one scholar: (1) the esoteric nature, (2) the discipline required to achieve the experience, and (3) the indes cribable nature of the experience. The esoteric nature of the mystic experience seems not to be a requirement of the mystical experience per se. It does not result from the difficulty of achieving such an experience, nor from the indescribable nature of the experience, but results from a tendency of the mystic to limit the availability of the techni ques for whatever reasons. Several of the authors talk at some length about the discipline required to become a mystic. This discipline might be but is not necessarily connected with the possible esoteric nature of mysticism. Blumenthal particularly emphasizes the hard work and practice involved in the life of a mystic. The techni ques used by mystics and aspirants to mysticism are many - study, prayer, meditation, holding to special ethical principles, performance of mitzvahs, and so on. This discipline could conceivably include a life of asceticism, although not necessarily in all situations or religious systems. It seems obvious that any mystical experience, dealing as it does with some unnamed connection of the mystic with the divine, would be quite indescribable by normal human language. Just about all of the authors make this point quite definitely, and go on to discuss the heavy use of symbolism needed in order to attempt to communicate mystical experiences in a way that others can attempt to understand. Points of Difference The above descriptions of mysticism differ in the subtle point of identifying the exact goal or object of the mystical experience: is it union or identification with deity, or simply knowledge of deity? There is a difference, and it seems that various mystical traditions approach the matter in different ways. In Buddhism, for example, the ultimate goal is an exact identification with that which is Absolute Reality, in which there is no self, nor any "other" against which to compare the Absolute. The Buddhist emphasis on non-self (Sanskrit: an-atman) is similar to the Hindu's goal to identify with the only true self, the Universal Atman, but some Hindu traditions are reluctant to regard the union with the Universal Atman as complete; there is sometimes a vague sort of distinctness between the one who has merged with the All and the nature of the All itself. 9 On the other end of the continuum are mystic traditions that strive for a knowledge of deity without a complete identification with the object of knowledge. In such a "gnostic" mysticism, there must often be a partial merging of self with deity in order to obtain the mystic gnosis, but there is always a separateness between self and deity. It makes sense that Fine and Green, who both emphasize the goal of union with deity rather than simply gnosis, also agree that an aspect of mysticism is that it attempts to find the divine nature in man. When there is a piece of deity inside a person, that person is more apt to want to want to locate his/her "roots" in the deity of the same nature. There is then a deep yearning to reunite with the ultimate being of like substance. Fine and Green naturally are also the two who point out the inward nature of mystics, which makes sense if that is where one can look to find deity. The alternative emphasis, provided by Katz and Dan, is on the knowledge, rather than the union with, the Ultimate Reality. This is naturally the position when we de-emphasize the deity in man, and have less motiviation to lose our self in something of a different nature. Katz and Dan both mention the goal of a mystical knowledge of reality, but neither mention the aspect of a divine spark in man, or of a goal to become identical with the Ultimate. These two ends of the spectrum are connected by Scholem's dualistic model of Jewish mysticism. With Scholem, neither extreme describes the Jewish mystic. The mystic does not have a "profound yearning for direct human communion with God through annihilation of individuality".10 Neither is God so distant that one cannot merge identities with God to some degree. To Scholem, the Jewish mystic's concept of Deity is "dualistic", in that God is always simultaneously transcendent and immanent. One can search for God inwardly and locate some measure of deity there with which to identify, without losing the distinction between self and God. The Study of Mysticism Now that we have come to some understanding of what mysticism means, it is important for us to discuss methods for investigating it. In general it seems useful to use those scholarly techniques of study already employed in the examination of traditional religious writings, with one special caveat: reductionism must be avoided at all times. We must not reduce the mystical experience into completely human terms, although naturally that is a very tempting way to deal with it. Although mystics are not necessarily at odds with the traditional religious community of their culture, the experiences of mystics are quite foreign to the average person, and tension over difficulties in communication will certainly occur. The natural starting place for mystical study by non-mystics is the literature of mysticism, first and foremost that produced by the mystics themselves as well as by commentators and critics. The latter works must be examined with care, always searching for the inevitable bias(es) that the writers will bring to their writings. The literature of mystics should be compared and contrasted with the traditional writings of the religion in question as an aid to discover the cultural basis from which the mystic has arisen. The student of mysticism would also profit from a careful study of the historical background of mystics and mystical works, since clues to deciphering the symbolism involved might be gained by this. Time spent in philological study would also seem to be an aid toward this end. The goal of studying mysticism is an understanding of mystics and their experiences, although this is by definition impossible for the non-mystic. As William Inge aptly phrases it, "...the relation of the individual to the Absolute, an essential them of philosophy, can only be mystically apprehended." Until Next Time Your own views of mysticism could make for some interesting conversation here. The number of tangent issues and ideas could keep us running for years. It's a bit more than someone hanging out a sign that says, "Tarot Readings." As for myself, I've just about completed the present book project ("Run For Freedom"). Before digging into the next (on how to design a home), I'll do up a couple of new issues for the magazine here. I can't tell you what they'll be about, because I don't know myself at this point. Meanwhile, if anyone else has something they'd like to contribute . . .