The Mystical Experience: The Scholars’ Perspective

Psychological and Philosophical Context

The term ‘mysticism,’ comes from the Greek μυω, meaning “to conceal.” In the Hellenistic world, ‘mystical’ referred to “secret” religious rituals. In early Christianity the term came to refer to “hidden” allegorical interpretations of Scriptures and to hidden presences, such as that of Jesus at the Eucharist. Only later did the term begin to denote “mystical theology,” that included direct experience of the divine … in general, ‘mysticism’ would best be thought of as a constellation of distinctive practices, discourses, texts, institutions, traditions, and experiences aimed at human transformation, variously defined in different traditions. [Gellman, Jerome, “Mysticism”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy].

Mystical experiences are transcendent encounters with the Divine that, by definition, occur outside the normal course of human existence. They are subjectively reported to us by others, are not directly available to all and do not always take the same form.

The revealed and mystic literature of mankind bears ample testimony to the fact that religious experience has been too enduring and dominant in the history of mankind to be rejected as mere illusion. There seems to be no reason, then, to accept the normal level of human experience as fact and reject its other levels as mystical and emotional.” [Muhammad Iqbal, The Reconstruction Of Religious Thought In Islam].

How do psychologists and philosophers describe the elements of a mystical experience? The summarized description below follows the four characteristics of mysticism set forth by Harvard University psychologist and philosopher, William James, in his 1902 classic, The Varieties of Religious Experience, a Study in Human Nature. William-James2

1. Ineffable — This characteristic defines the property of something that is inexpressible or incapable of description. Being indescribable and inexpressible, the mystical experience defies language and definition.

The contents of mystical experiences cannot be limited to words, for the state must be directly experienced and cannot be shared, only described and reported.

By means of this contemplation of heavenly forms and images they rise by degrees to heights which human language cannot reach, which one cannot even indicate without falling into great and inevitable errors. The degree of proximity to Deity which they attain is regarded by some as intermixture of being (haloul), by others as identification (ittihad), by others as intimate union (wasl). But all these expressions are wrong . . . Those who have reached that stage should confine themselves to repeating the verse — “What I experience I shall not try to say; Call me happy, but ask me no more.” [Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, The Confessions of al-Ghazali].

If we can, by God’s grace, turn ourselves entirely to Him, and put aside everything else in order to speak with Him and worship Him, this does not mean that we can always imagine Him or feel His presence. Neither imagination nor feeling are required for a full conversion of our whole being to God. Nor is intense concentration on an idea of God especially desirable. Hard as it is to convey in human language, there is a very real and very recognizable (but almost entirely undefinable) Presence of God, in which we confront Him in prayer knowing Him by Whom we are known, aware of Him Who is aware of us, loving Him by Whom we know ourselves to be loved. [Thomas Merton, Thoughts in Solitude].

. . . his soul was caught up in ecstasy, whether in the body or out of the body, and he saw and heard what no tongue can tell. It was without form or mode, and yet it contained within itself the entrancing delightfulness of all forms and modes. His heart was athirst, and yet satisfied; his mind was joyous and blooming; wishes were stilled in him, and desires had departed. He did but gaze fixedly on the dazzling effulgence, in which he found oblivion of himself and all things. [Henry Suso].

2. Noetic — From the Greek noēsis / noētikos, noetic refers to inner wisdom, direct knowing, or subjective understanding. This characteristic relates to the rational and intellectual aspects of the mystical experience. Though indescribable and undefined,brain_2 mystical experiences provide significant and important knowledge.

Despite being inarticulate, they are significant and importance, offering insight and illumination to the mind. They impart a prolonged sense of certainty and authority base on a relationship to the Divine.

The road led thither along a river-bank. And on his way, being intent on prayer, he sat down facing the Stream which was running deep. While he was sitting there, the eyes of his mind were opened, not so as to see any kind of vision, but so as to understand and comprehend spiritual things such as those pertaining to the mysteries of the Faith, or to profane learning, and this with such clearness that for him all these things were made new. Neither could he give a plain account of each of them separately, which though they were many, he had yet comprehended, for a brightness so clear and penetrating illumined the darkness of his mind, that if all the enlightenment and help he had received from God in the whole course of his life down to this sixty-second year, and over and everything he had learnt were gathered together into one heap, these all would appear less than he had been given at this one time. [Saint Ignatius of Loyola, Testament, p.91-92].

All that I put down in my books is not the result of thinking or discursive reasoning. It is communicated to me through the breathing of the angel of revelation in my heart. All that I have written and what I am writing now is dictated to me through the breathing of the divine spirit into my spirit. This is my privilege as an heir not as an independent source; for the breathing of the spirit is a degree lower than the verbal inspiration. [Ibn ‘Arabi].

We are also prepared for reality as ‘religion’ conceives it: a reality with a ground floor (Nature) and then above that one other floor and one only—an eternal, spaceless, timeless, spiritual Something of which we can have no images and which, if it presents itself to human consciousness at all, does so in a mystical experience which shatters all our categories of thought. [C. S. Lewis, The Complete C. S. Lewis Signature Classics, p. 439].

3. Transient — A mystical experience is rarely sustainable for long periods. However, though the experience is temporary and its memory my fade with time, a permanent mark remains. The person that returns from a mystical experience to a “normal” frame of mind is never the same person.

Moreover, mystical experiences are uniquely recognizable upon recurrence, and can increase in their profound richness and importance.nur

Yet the amazing experiences of the mystics leave a permanent residue, a God-subdued, a God-possessed will. States of consciousness are fluctuating. The vision fades. But holy and listening and alert obedience remains, as the core and kernel of a God-intoxicated life, as the abiding pattern of sober, workaday living. [Thomas R. Kelly, Holy Obedience].

A believer longs after God – to come into His presence – to feel His love – to feel near to Him in secret – to feel in the crowd that he is nearer than all the creatures. Ah! dear brethren, have you ever tasted this blessedness? There is greater rest and solace to be found in the presence of God for one hour, than in an eternity of the presence of man. [Robert Murray M’Cheyne].

If ye keep watch over your hearts, and listen for the Voice of God and learn of Him, in one short hour ye can learn more from Him than ye could learn from Man in a thousand years. [John Tauler, The Inner Way, Sermon XV].

4. Passive —The oncoming of a mystical experience may be facilitated by prescribed techniques that aim at sublimation of the inner life. However, mystical experiences are rarely considered the result of physical effort or ascetic endeavors.Rumi2

In any event, once the mystical experience sets in, the mystic feels helpless, as if under a superior power.

. . . in the diligent exercise of mystical contemplation, leave behind the senses and the operations of the intellect, and all things sensible and intellectual, and all things in the world of being and nonbeing, that you may arise by unknowing towards the union, as far as is attainable, with it that transcends all being and all knowledge. For by the unceasing and absolute renunciation of yourself and of all things you may be borne on high, through pure and entire self-abnegation, into the super-essential Radiance of the Divine Darkness. [Mystical Theology, Dionysius the Areopagite].

You ask then how I knew He was present, when His ways can in no way be traced? He is life and power, and as soon as He enters in, He awakens my slumbering soul; He stirs and soothes and pierces my heart, for before it was hard as stone, and diseased. [Bernard of Clairvaux, Sermon 74].

They do not turn toward God. God himself sets their faces in the right direction. He does not, however, show himself to them for a long time. It is for them to remain motionless, without averting their eyes, listening ceaselessly, and waiting, they know not for what; deaf to entreaties and threats, unmoved by every shock, unshaken in the midst of every upheaval. If after a long period of waiting God allows them to have an indistinct intuition of his light or even reveals himself in person, it is only for an instant. Once more they have to remain still, attentive, inactive, calling out only when their desire cannot be contained. [Simone Weil, Waiting On God, p. 81].


Related posts:

Further reading:

This entry was posted in Mysticism, Divine Reality & Transcendence and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to The Mystical Experience: The Scholars’ Perspective

  1. Ron Krumpos says:

    From “An Idealist View of Life,” by Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan:

    “It is a condition of consciousness in which feelings are fused, ideas melt into one another, boundaries are broken, and ordinary distinctions transcended. Past and present fade away into a sense of timeless being. Consciousness and being are not different from each other. In this fullness of felt life and freedom, the distinction of the knower and known disappears. The privacy of the individual self is broken into and invaded by a universal self which the individual feels as his own. The experience itself is felt to be sufficient and complete. It does not come in fragmentary or truncated form demanding completion by something else. It does not look beyond itself for meaning or validity.”

    Note: He was the President of India 1962–67, Vice President 1952–62 and a Professor at Oxford University 1936–52. In 1962, I was introduced to Dr. Radhakrishnan by John Kenneth Galbraith, then the U.S. Ambassador to India.

  2. Ron Krumpos says:

    “Satori may be defined as an intuitive looking into the nature of things in contradistinction to the analytical or logical understanding of it. Practically, it means the unfolding of a new world heretofore unperceived in the confusion of a dualistically trained mind. …all its opposites and contradictions are united and harmonized into a consistent organic whole. Satori can thus be had only through our once personally experiencing it.”

    Daisetz Taitaro Suzuki (1870–1966): Professor of Buddhist Philosophy. Known in the West for his writings on Zen.

  3. Ron Krumpos says:

    “The greater you are the more you need to search for your self. Your deep soul hides itself from consciousness. So you need to increase…elevation of thinking, penetration of thought, liberation of mind – until finally your soul reveals itself to you. Then you find bliss…by attaining equanimity, by becoming one with everything that happens, by reducing yourself so extremely that you nullify your individual, imaginary form.”

    There is one who sings the song of his soul, discovering in his soul everything: utter spiritual fulfillment. Then there is one who expands even further until he unites with all existence, with all creatures, with all worlds, singing a song with all of them.”

    Abraham Isaac Kook (1865–1935): From Latvia; Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel (wrote The Lights of Holiness).

Leave a Reply