This post is inspired by a recent conversation with yami, with whom I discovered I agree with more than I thought.

Here is Wikipedia's definition of "mysticism"

Of importance to my arguments:

"Mysticism (from the Greek μυστικός (mystikos) "an initiate" (of the Eleusinian Mysteries, μυστήρια (mysteria) meaning "initiation"[1])) is the pursuit of achieving communion identity with, or conscious awareness of, ultimate reality, the divine, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, or insight. Traditions may include a belief in the literal existence of dimensional realities beyond empirical perception, or a belief that a true human perception of the world transcends logical reasoning or intellectual comprehension."


"Mysticism is usually understood in a religious context, but as William James and Ken Wilber point out, transcendent experiences may happen to anyone, regardless of religious training or inclinations[2]. Such experiences can occur unbidden and without preparation at any time, and might not be understood as religious experiences at all. A momentary unity may be experienced by the artist or athlete as a perceived interconnection with existence or a loss of self accompanied by feelings of euphoria, by the scientist as a spontaneous ecstatic inspiration, by an ordinary individual as a shift in physical reality after experiencing a temporary unconflicted state of mind, by a prophet as an open channel of knowledge or even dismissed as psychological disturbances in modern times."

These passages underscore my personal contention that the difference between religion and spirituality is that religion is based on a doctrine that outlines specifications of the nonmaterial world, as well as behavior. Spirituality is based upon personal experiences with the non-material world. The difference then, between spirituality and mysticism is that spirituality may remain in a vague, intuitive state, whereas mysticism, particularly in the modern sense, attempts to use logic, experimentation, and research to organize and clarify one's spiritual development.


"...the word mysticism, is best used to point to conscious and systematic attempts to gain transcendent insights/experiences through studies and practice. Possible techniques include meditation, contemplation (of causality), prayer, asceticism (fasting from the world), devotions, Dhikr, Sama, the chanting of mantras or holy names, communion with entheogens, and intellectual investigation. Mystics typically go beyond specific religious perspectives or dogmas in their teachings, espousing an inclusive and universal perspective that rises above traditional sectarian differences because they comprehend the shared basis of other religious traditions beneath the superficial ."


"The mystic interprets the world through a different lens than is present in ordinary experience, which can prove to be a significant obstacle to those who research mystical teachings and paths...

...One key to enigmatic expressions lies in the perspective that "the world" of appearances reflects only learned beliefs - based on the limitations of time, culture and relationships - and that unquestioned faith in those misperceptions limits one's return to the divine state."

This emphasizes the existentialist side: that everyone on this planet is actively interpreting reality and, while we find certain commonalities with each other's interpretations, each of us also experiences an exception or variation of that commonality. This is something the so-called "skeptic rationalists" fail to understand: that it's easy enough to sit there and diagnose what REALLY happened from your comfortable armchair...but YOU WEREN'T HAVING THE EXPERIENCE, so your diagnosis is limited.

Say two people go into trance states, have visions and experience euphoria. The "skeptic rationalist" can babble all he wants about the chemical changes occurring in the brain and nervous system, and how this triggers audio and visual hallucinations. But this does not explain how one or both of these people may communicate information for which they had NO prior knowledge, information that is, in some cases, extremely detailed and complex and for which the accuracy can be externally verified.

I once stated to a friend that the consequence of mankind's faculty for reason was the necessity for meaning and purpose in life. That we have the capacity to ask "how" and "why" creates an imperative to do so. I stand by that statement. And thus, I pose this question: What is the difference between a vision and an hallucination? I suggest the difference is that "vision" implies that the experience was meaningful to the individual. "Hallucination" is, ironically enough, used as a dismissal by "rationalists" to indicate that the experience had no real meaning or purpose.

I find it paradoxical that rationalists, who rely on their ability to use reason and logic to reveal truth and reality, dismiss any subjective experiences that contradict their empirical data as false or meaningless...while mystics, who rely precisely on subjective experiences to reveal truth and reality, perceive no contradictions.


"koans, riddles, and metaphysical contradictions
irresolvable tasks or lines of thought designed to direct one away from intellectualism and effort towards direct experience.

* The classic "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" (Zen) or "How many angels can stand on the head of a pin?" (Christian). Sometimes these are dismissed as mere incomprehensible silliness (see humor, below); sometimes they are taken (erroneously) as serious questions whose answers would have mystical significance. In either case, the intention is lost; the point being that excessive effort in contemplating the impossible leads the initiate to give up the ego pursuit of doing/getting as opposed to the unity experience of being/having.
* The evocative Taoist phrase - To yield is to be preserved whole, to be bent is to become straight, to be empty is to be full, to have little is to possess - is another example of a metaphysical contradiction describing the path of emptying of the learned self."

Israel Regardie once stated very plainly that the human mind is not, by itself, an adequate tool for determining truth, because it contained an element of self-contradiction. Numerous other mystics, including Aliester Crowley, have also declared this (although not as succinctly as Regardie), as have Buddhists and Taoists. I myself have long suspected that the element of self-contradiction lies in the use of "identifying logic"...equating one thing to another by use of the word "is". Dr. Robert Anton Wilson explains this at length in his book Quantum Psychology (a book that I have recommended to nearly everyone I've ever had conversations like this with...and for which nobody listens to me. Your loss, bitches). Thus, the Zen riddles and Taoist statements deliberately short circuit the method of identifying logic, by throwing the contradictions into its face.

Qabala replaces identifying logic with relational logic. Thus, instead of A=B, it suggests that A resembles B in some ways or that A has a connection to B (the connections or resemblences may be understood that they both possess qualities of X, Y, or Z).

"To an extent, mysticism and the modern sciences appear antithetical. Mysticism is generally considered experiential and holistic, and mystical experiences held to be beyond expression; modern philosophy, psychology, biology and physics being overtly analytical, verbal, and reductionist...The rift between mysticism and the modern sciences derives mainly from elements of scientism in the latter: certain branches of the natural sciences, broadly disavow subjective experience as meaningless, misunderstanding the limitations of the ancient languages."

BUT...

"Continental philosophy tends to be concerned with issues closely related to mysticism, such as the subjective experience of existence in Existentialism. It should be noted that while existentialism suggests a nothingness rather than a oneness, the mystic's pursuit of emptiness - despite its fear producing angst - for the sake of union with the Divine, points directly toward a potential unity between physics and psychology that does not at present exist. The mystic's attempt to describe cause and effect between one's internal state and the miraculous, hints at a close connection between psychological stability (ego transcendence) and the mysterious realm of causality quantum physicists are now deciphering - dimensional reality shifts that synchronize with states of consciousness and unconflicted choices."

Again, I indicate Dr. Robert Anton Wilson as one of the people who began pointing out the similarities between mysticism, philosophy and modern advancements in physics (most intensely in Quantum Psychology and The New Inquisition). Certainly, he is not the only one. However, I recommend him to people because his very tongue-in-cheek writing style enables the reader to experience an immense amount of fun and excitement when learning the material.

I am coming to understand how much mysticism is misunderstood. The reason for this seems to be that most people are stuck in a paradigm of thinking that logic and reason stand directly against either individual spirituality or religious doctrine. There is only science and superstition. Science uses research and logic to determine meaningful reality. Spirituality uses intuition and personal experience to determine meaningful reality. Mysticism combines the two.