Comparative Mysticism

[Limbo]

I do think that all people have the poential for mystical experiences. I think that the various mystical traditions are essentially systems of techniques developed to bring out that potential.

I'm defining mystical experience in a wide sense:

"A (purportedly) super sense-perceptual or sub sense-perceptual experience granting acquaintance of realities or states of affairs that are of a kind not accessible by way of sense perception, somatosensory modalities, or standard introspection."

Mysticism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

[InLove]

Thank you, Limbo, for the link. Now I think I see the direction your study is taking. I am sorry if I inadvertantly took the discussion into an area which does not apply to the focus of the thread. But I just had to ask.

You have quite a project underway! I wish you success in your endeavor.

My own experience and studies have indeed led me to appreciate the commonalities between what the reference material attempts to describe as "the mystical conscience" and "unconstructed awareness".

InPeace,
InLove

[Limbo]

Originally Posted by InLove

You have quite a project underway! I wish you success in your endeavor.

Thank you!



This picture illustrates what I'm getting at. At the heart of the major religions is unity, because the mystics of the various traditions "percieve" the same Ultimate nature of Reality but describe "it" in different ways. Sorting through the different ways is where comparative mythology comes in.

The farther away from that center a religion gets the more exoteric, literal, and fundamentalist it becomes. The closer toward the center one goes, the more esoteric, universal, tolerant, and enlightened one becomes.

[bgruagach]

Here are a few other books you might want to check out:

"The Mystic Heart" by Wayne Teasdale.

Evelyn Underhill's work including:
"Mysticism"
"Practical Mysticism"
"The Cloud of Unknowing."

Richard M. Bucke's "Cosmic Consciousness."

[Zagreus]

Thank you, Limbo, for this beautiful illustration! Here, no one is slighted, differences are not overlooked, the unique qualities of various paths are not minimalized, and there is something concrete - in the form of this graphic - to help illustrate a condition that some of us believe is *already existing* ... rather than one that humanity is trying to force from without.

The mystic recognizes the Transcendent Unity, but knows it to be of God (or of the Ultimate Nature of things), and not of humanity's creation. At best, we can perhaps work toward an appreciation in our outer awareness, that this Inner Unity already exists, and has always existed. Even the mystic cannot always maintain a direct awareness of what has come through the mystical experience.

And yes, the farther one gets away from a recognition of this innermost nature of things, the more separative and divisive become the world's religions and their practitioners. I get the feeling that they think God is some kind of Borg-like entity (as on Star Trek), and that they fear *assimilation* ... when in fact, all that is being said is, "Look, isn't it good that we have so much in common, and that so many people on this planet are following a spiritual path! This speaks well of our future!"

One could say, are the world's religions not like the many fingers and toes of one body, each slightly different, but equally important for that body's functioning? Yet some would cut off a finger, if that were necessary to point out their *differences* and "unique value" apart from others. And in doing so, what do they really prove about themselves, or about their own religion?

~Zag

[Limbo]

Originally Posted by Zagreus

One could say, are the world's religions not like the many fingers and toes of one body, each slightly different, but equally important for that body's functioning?

Yes one certainly could say that. In fact, that same metaphor was used very well in a very beautiful video titled Fire on the Mountain: A Gathering of Shamans.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4749156257249602834

A very important gathering hosted by the Dalai Lama. I highly recommend it.

I like to think of the various traditions as instruments in a symphony, playing together. The various instruments sound different, but they play the same melody.

[Zagreus]

Originally Posted by Limbo

I like to think of the various traditions as instruments in a symphony, playing together. The various instruments sound different, but they play the same melody.

Would not cacophony and chaos ensue if the percussionists all insisted that *their* contribution was "unresolvable" into the harmony of the rest of the symphony? Or if the reedy oboe insisted that his own song was unique, and that only the clarinets had enough in common to accompany him?

It concerns me that even a single member of the orchestra feels his or her contribution is somehow unique or different enough to stand out in contrast to the rest of the performers. Why is it so difficult to appreciate that just as all the cellists must harmonize, and just as all the string instruments must harmonize, so also must the entire orchestra, with all the many & varied instruments, must harmonize - if there is to be a beautiful symphony, with one melody, and one theme?

There are string quartets, and woodwind quintets, precisely to highlight and emphasize the beauty of a particular family of instruments, and in these arrangements, it is true - the harmony and melody sometimes celebrates the unique sound of one (type of) instrument. Even chamber music, however, requires *years* of experience in a full orchestra before the virtuoso touch may be perfected.

I'll check out the video on Google. Thanks, Limbo.

~Zag

[wayfaring]

Take a look at:

spiritualminded.blogspot.com

for an ongoing mystical journal and related articles. The position here is trans-religious, that is, no one religion is subscribed to though it draws fom many. It is also panentheistic and theomorphic.

[InLove]

Originally Posted by Zagreus

Would not cacophony and chaos ensue if the percussionists all insisted that *their* contribution was "unresolvable" into the harmony of the rest of the symphony? Or if the reedy oboe insisted that his own song was unique, and that only the clarinets had enough in common to accompany him?

It concerns me that even a single member of the orchestra feels his or her contribution is somehow unique or different enough to stand out in contrast to the rest of the performers. Why is it so difficult to appreciate that just as all the cellists must harmonize, and just as all the string instruments must harmonize, so also must the entire orchestra, with all the many & varied instruments, must harmonize - if there is to be a beautiful symphony, with one melody, and one theme?

There are string quartets, and woodwind quintets, precisely to highlight and emphasize the beauty of a particular family of instruments, and in these arrangements, it is true - the harmony and melody sometimes celebrates the unique sound of one (type of) instrument. Even chamber music, however, requires *years* of experience in a full orchestra before the virtuoso touch may be perfected.

The occasional solo performed by one of these true virtuosos can, in a perfect moment, add something invaluable to the overall production.

InPeace,
InLove

[wayfaring]

Try 'Paths to transcendence according to Shankara, Ibn Arabi amd Meister Eckhart' by Reza Shah-Kazemi (World Wisdom) A very good systematic comparison of three outstanding mystics.

[charonpr]

Hi Limbo,

Would just like to say thanks for the image (now printed and pinned to my wall) and video. I wish you the very best with your project and look forward to hearing about any updates. I’ve had an interest in this subject for many years, though on a mostly on-off basis. However, for the last two years it has been growing at a huge rate, so much so that I am planning on making religion the main speculation on a degree course with the Open University.
I think the only reason it’s not become a loved obsession is that I am too unsure of my own beliefs (but looking forward to exploring this!).
Where did you find that image by the way?

Thanks everyone else for the other great links

Best wishes

[Pathless]

Originally Posted by Nattering Nabob

I was reading a book called Arctic Adventure written in 1935 by Peter Freuchen, a Danish adventurer and came across an account of a spontaneous mystical experience he had while seal fishing in a kayak...

The ocean is a place of intense beauty, interconnection, and even otherworldliness for us humans, is it not? It seems to me that it often induces in people altered states of consciousness. I came across the following Eugene O'Neill quote in a "Zen-a-Day" calendar a few years back:

"I lay on the bowsprit, with the water foaming into spume under me, the masts with every sail white in the moonlight towering above me. I became drunk with the beauty and singing rhythm of it, and for a moment lost myself--actually loast my life. I was set free... dissolved in the sea, became white sails and flying spray, became beauty and rhythm and the high dim-starred sky... I belonged within a unity and joy to life itself."