Showing posts with label nontheism nontheistic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nontheism nontheistic. Show all posts

2022/01/01

2108 The Mystical Experience - Friends Journal

The Mystical Experience - Friends Journal

The Mystical Experience
August 1, 2021
By Donald W. McCormick


Illustration by Donald W. McCormick.

===

Reclaiming a Neglected Quaker Tradition


Many influential Quakers, such as Rufus Jones, Marcelle Martin, and Howard Brinton, have seen mysticism as the heart of Quakerism. In her Pendle Hill Pamphlet Quaker Views on Mysticism, Margery Post Abbott wrote,

In the mid-1990s, I interviewed articulate Quakers from Britain, Philadelphia, and the Pacific Northwest, many holding major positions in monthly or yearly meetings. These sixty-plus Friends overwhelmingly agreed that ours is a mystical faith.

There’s no shortage of coverage of it in Friends Journal. Type “mystic” into the search box of the online archives, and you get 26 pages of links to articles and book reviews that refer to mystics, mysticism, and mystical experience.

Despite all this, Quakers who talk about their mystical experiences are sometimes met with indifference. They aren’t believed or get some other negative response. I spoke to one Friend who began to have mystical experiences after she started attending Quaker meeting. She obtained a clearness committee to help her understand what was going on, but its members were uncomfortable dealing with her experiences and shuffled her off to talk to a different standing committee.

Also, there is little about mystical experience in central, authoritative Quaker bodies and books. Britain Yearly Meeting and Philadelphia Yearly Meeting are the largest groups of Quakers in the northern hemisphere, but Britain Yearly Meeting’s Faith and Practice only has a few brief mentions of mystical experience, and Philadelphia’s Faith and Practice has even fewer. In the 565-page Oxford Handbook of Quaker Studies, there are 39 chapters by different authors; none of them is about mysticism. In the chapters, there is very little about mystical experience and nothing about the large scholarly literature on it. For a definitive academic study of a mystical religion, this is pretty casual treatment.

Viewing mystical experience as a spectrum from theistic to unitive makes room for the full range of mystical experience in Quakerism, does not suggest that one type is better than another, and provides a framework that can help us to benefit from decades of research on mystical experience.


The Range of Mystical Experiences


There are thousands of publications in the scholarly literature on mystical experience. A central figure in this literature is American psychologist Ralph Hood. He argues that there are two types of mystical experiences: theistic and unitive.

The theistic mystical experience (also called prophetic or numinous) is “an awareness of a ‘holy other’ beyond nature, with which one is felt to be in communion.” It may be called Krishna or God or Allah or Yahweh. It’s the direct experience of the Spirit or of God. In Quakerism, mystical experience is usually thought of in theistic terms. Hearing the still, small voice of the Spirit is an example of this. Theistic mystical experiences can take the form of visions or voices, as they did with George Fox. The most common venue for theistic mystical experiences is worship, where people feel the presence of the Spirit.

The unitive is the other type of mystical experience. It is the type that is usually studied by neuroscience and psychology researchers. Many scholars who do this research argue that a sense of oneness or unity is its defining characteristic. There are two kinds of unitive mystical experience in Hood’s model: introvertive and extrovertive.

In the introvertive unitive mystical experience, there is an overwhelming sense of oneness, but there are no thoughts, emotions, or perceptions. No sense of time, place, or self. And it’s ineffable; that is, it’s impossible to adequately convey in words.

In the extrovertive unitive mystical experience, the person “continues to perceive the same world of trees and hills and tables and chairs as the rest of us . . . but sees these items transfigured in such a manner that Unity shines through them,” according to British philosopher Walter Terence Stace, whose research on mystical experience formed the basis of much of Hood’s work. In this type, one’s sense of self merges with what one is perceiving. One may directly experience oneness with everything—with other Quakers at a gathered meeting or with the ocean. Someone in this state often perceives an inner subjectivity, an aliveness, in all things, even inanimate things such as a stone or sunset.

These qualities of mystical experience aren’t thoughts or ideas. One doesn’t think about or feel the oneness of everything; it is experienced directly. In a unitive mystical experience, emotions like joy, love, openheartedness, a sense of mystery, awe, reverence, or blissful happiness can arise later.

People often see their unitive mystical experience as a source of knowledge more valid than everyday reality, and feel the experience is sacred or divine.
Some people say they were united with God or use other religious language to describe it.


Images by Shusha Guna.
===

Quaker Thinking about Mystical Experience


Contemporary Quaker works about mystical experience tend to be based on the work of writers from 70 to 100 years ago, such as William James or Rufus Jones. Being stuck in the ways they thought about mystical experience is a problem because we’ve learned a lot about it since then.

Take William James’s 1902 book, The Varieties of Religious Experience, the most influential work in the field. Some of his ideas have held up over time (the ineffability of the unitive mystical experience) while others have not (the idea that getting drunk could “stimulate the mystical faculties”).

Rufus Jones is the most influential Quaker writer on mysticism and one of the most influential figures in Quaker history. He is the primary source of the idea that Quakerism is an experiential, mystical religion. But according to Hugh Rock in a 2016 article in Quaker Studies, Jones was hostile to the unitive mystical experience and felt that it reflected an immature stage of religious development. Also, like William James, many of Jones’s ideas have been questioned by later research, such as his assertion that the unitive mystical experience is “a metaphysical theory voicing itself, not an experience.” Anyone who’s had a unitive mystical experience, myself included, knows that they are genuine experiences, not theories.

Unfortunately, almost all Quaker writings on mystical experience fail to mention developments in the study of it from recent decades. You rarely see any mention of current thinkers or discussion of contemporary debates.

Also, when I talk with fellow Quakers about the unitive view of mystical experience, the most common response is, “Oh? There’s another view? What is it?” Our isolated views result, in part, because we don’t talk much with Christian, Buddhist, Sufi, Jewish, or other mystics, or participate much in the discussion of mysticism that goes on around the world in books, scholarly journals, conferences, and the web.

All this limits our thinking about mystical experience and makes it out of date; we don’t benefit from new developments about it that come from the hundreds of studies published about mystical experience each year in neuroscience, psychology, religious studies, and philosophy.

Our insularity also means that scientists conduct research on Buddhist, Catholic, and other mystics, but not Quaker mystics, even though Quakerism is seen as a major Western mystical tradition. We Quakers have a lot to contribute to the literature on mystical experience, but our isolation prevents this.

People know that Quakers value mystical experience. We help people to have mystical experiences, to recognize their mystical experiences, and to make sense of them. As a result of all this, Quakerism has become a spiritual home for mystics in the West.

Reconciling Theistic and Unitive Views

Quaker writing about mystical experience tends to emphasize theistic mystical experience and de-emphasizes or ignores the unitive. But within Quakerism, we can reconcile theistic and unitive perspectives on mystical experience by thinking of different mystical experiences as falling on a spectrum: with purely theistic experiences at one end, purely unitive experiences at the other, and a mix of the two in the middle. What does a mixed mystical experience look like? Marcelle Martin offers a vivid example of one in a 2016 Pendle Hill talk accompanying her book Our Life is Love:


One night . . . I was walking under the stars and I suddenly knew that the stars were me. I was in the stars. That we were part of a oneness and that there was a light flowing through everything and connecting everything and I could feel it flowing through my body and out of my arms and out of my fingers into the world with great power. It wasn’t my power. It was like a power of this divine reality. It took me a few years before I could say, “That’s God” because it was so different from what my expectations of what God was like.

Like Marcelle Martin, sometimes people who have this experience don’t think of it in terms of God or the Spirit until long afterwards. That happened to me. I had an intense introvertive mystical experience, and it took me years to realize that the oneness I had experienced was “that of God” in me.

Viewing mystical experience as a spectrum from theistic to unitive makes room for the full range of mystical experience in Quakerism, does not suggest that one type is better than another, and provides a framework that can help us to benefit from decades of research on mystical experience.

The Uniquely Quaker Contribution to Mystical Experience


Howard Brinton wrote that “mystics generally think of [the experience of union] only as union with God, but the Quakers . . . think of it also as union with their fellow men.” This sense of union with others is most common in the gathered meeting for worship. Current research on mystical experience generally doesn’t include the Quaker group mystical experience. One of the rare exceptions is Stanford Searl’s research. He writes that a gathered meeting doesn’t represent some version of ecstatic experience of mystical oneness with all creation. . . . What it represents and signifies is heightened awareness of interconnections among one’s self, others in the worship setting, and others in the wider world.

Sometimes a group mystical experience can be unitive. You can see this in William Tabor’s classic Pendle Hill Pamphlet, Four Doors to Quaker Worship. In it, he says that in the gathered meeting “The sharp boundaries of the self can become blurred and blended as we feel ourselves more and more united with fellow worshipers and with the Spirit of God” and that this experience can bring “joy, peace, praise, and an experience of timelessness.”

Most writing on the Quaker group mystical experience is about the gathered meeting, but the group mystical experience also happens outside of worship. In The Gathered Meeting, Thomas Kelly writes of the sense of unity or oneness that can happen between Friends:

It occurs again and again that two or three individuals find the boundaries of their separateness partially melted down. . . . But after conversing together on central things of the spirit two or more friends who know one another at deep levels find themselves wrapped in a sense of unity and of Presence.


A Vision of the Future of Quakerism and Mystical Experience

My own mystical experiences and study of both Quakerism and mystical experience have led me to a vision for the future of Quaker mysticism. Imagine this scenario for ten years from now:

Copies of Faith and Practice and reference works talk more about mysticism, and Quaker scholars interact with the larger community of mysticism researchers and publish in non-Quaker journals.
People have group mystical experiences in gathered meetings for worship. Many people come to meeting and keep coming back because it’s the place where they have this deep experience. More and more people are becoming Quakers.

People in our meetings aren’t afraid to talk about their mystical experiences. They don’t fear that their fellow Quakers will say that their experiences are implausible, incomprehensible, or inconceivable. We understand and support people’s mystical experiences. We’ve expanded our idea of mystical experience to include unitive ones that may not have a theistic aspect to them. This makes room for the mystical experiences of nontheistic Quakers, who now experience a closer connection to the mystical center of Quakerism.

People know that Quakers value mystical experience. We help people to have mystical experiences, to recognize their mystical experiences, and to make sense of them. As a result of all this, Quakerism has become a spiritual home for mystics in the West.

Correction: Margery Post Abbott’s name was misspelled in the earlier online and in the print edition.

Donald W. McCormick

As a professor, Donald W. McCormick taught management, leadership, and psychology of religion. His interests include the scientific study of mysticism and Quakerism, and evidence-based methods for teaching mindfulness. He is co-clerk of Grass Valley Meeting in Nevada City, Calif., and director of education for Unified Mindfulness. Contact: donmccormick2@gmail.com.
Previous ArticleNext Article


January 1 2022



David Castro
Bryn Mawr, PA, August 3, 2021 at 10:37 am


Thank you for this wonderful essay. I have always found the mystical element of Quakerism to be very important. I love your vision of how the mystical elements within Quakerism can be uplifted. There is something very powerful (and mystical) in the immediacy of silence and silent corporate worship. We carry the past with us in our memories, but a gathered meeting is also vitally present to the current moment and the experience of the light within the world, within ourselves, within others. It is a direct encounter with the spirit in which we have the opportunity for both theistic and unitive experiences!
Reply1

Priscilla Ppraeluso
Citrus heights Cap, August 6, 2021 at 12:45 pm


Well said.
Inspiring to this interested,
Outsider. I will be searching
Quakerism meetings when I Move to New England.
Thank you
Reply1

George Powell
Carmel Valley CA, August 30, 2021 at 5:40 pm


This essay is a great analysis of an ineffable subject. The categories of theistic and unitive mystical experience (and the sub-categories of introvert and extrovert for the latter) are useful for logically understanding this phenomenon. In my experience, all of these are experienced simultaneously, like united paradoxes.
Reply

George Powell
Carmel Valley CA, August 30, 2021 at 5:56 pm


Carl Jung wrote that the only experience of the Collective Unconscious in the world is found in the gathered or covered Quaker Meeting for Worship.
Reply

Kerry Shipman
Dorrigo NSW, September 2, 2021 at 12:18 am


Beautiful.
Reply

Rhonda Ashurst
Reno, Nevada, August 14, 2021 at 4:05 pm


I was happy to see this article on mystical experience in FJ this month! I am one of the editors of What Canst Thou Say (WCTS). WCTS has been sharing the personal stories of Quaker mystics for over twenty-five years through our quarterly publication. We also have an email listserv and blogs to foster sharing of mystical and contemplative experiences. I began writing for WCTS 15 years ago, when one of the editors found my writing and encouraged me to submit some of my pieces. It was through WCTS that I learned about Quaker faith and was ultimately drawn to Reno Friends Meeting. 

I felt like I finally found my tribe–others who had experiences like mine. You can find out more at our website: http://www.whatcanstthousay.org/

Friends are invited to request a free sample copy or send submissions for future issues. All varieties of mystical experience are welcomed and valued. You can also submit to our blog or sign up for the listserv through the website.
Reply2

schast
Philadelphia, PA, September 1, 2021 at 12:07 pm


I enjoy What Canst Thou Say.
Reply

donmccormick2
Grass Valley, CA, August 17, 2021 at 10:40 pm


I’m delighted by your post, Rhonda. I see we don’t live that far apart either. Did you by any chance attend the special interest group on mystical experience that I led at Pacific Yearly Meeting a few years back? I’m also glad that you mentioned What Canst Thou Say. To those who are unfamiliar with it, I can’t recommend it highly enough. In fact, partially in preparation for this article, I bought a copy of every back issue I could get–going back to 1994.
Reply1

Rhonda Ashurst
Reno, August 22, 2021 at 5:45 pm


I’m happy to hear that you are a reader of WCTS and that is has been helpful to you. I have only been going to Reno Friends Meeting since 2018, so I’m sorry I missed your group. We at WCTS are delighted by your article and thank you for writing it!
Reply1

Susann Estle
Danville, IN, August 30, 2021 at 12:02 pm


I, too, experience mysticism in a unitive fashion. I have often seen these experiences through the lenses of Native American or Indigenous spirituality – that the earth and all on it are interconnected, and yet there is “that of God in all” (not just humans). Quaker beliefs and practices help me practice equality and peace with this knowledge.
Reply1

donmccormick2
Grass Valley, CA, August 30, 2021 at 3:48 pm


That’s wonderful that you are having unitive experiences and that “the lenses of Native American or Indigenous spirituality” are ways that you find helpful in understanding mystical experience. Years ago, when I was trying to create a theory about spirituality in the workplace, I studied a variety of spiritual and religious traditions. One thing that I found that really impressed me was that certain cultures, such as the Navajo, are deeply spiritual but have no word for religion or the spiritual per se, in part because it is seen as such an integral part of life. If people don’t experience a separation between work and spirituality in the first place, a theory that looks at the degree to which work is more or less integrated with their spiritual lives is meaningless. I’m curious, do you engage in any Native American or Indigenous spiritual practices, like the sweat lodge or the sun dance?
Reply

friendmarcelle
Chester, PA, August 30, 2021 at 2:27 pm


Thank you for this wonderful article. I love the Vision of the Future of Quakerism and Mystical Experience. The author’s colorful illustration is amazing.
Reply1

Helen Meads
Huddersfield, West Yorkshire , August 30, 2021 at 6:31 pm


Here’s a link to a serious academic study of Quaker religious/spiritual/mystical experience, Don: https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/3076/1/Meads11PhD.pdf
Reply

George Schaefer
Glenside, PA, August 30, 2021 at 7:34 pm


Thank you, Don for your informative article and the reminder that Quakerism is, in fact, a mystical and experiential faith.

I agree with your assessment of the Oxford Book of Quaker Studies (2013.) The absence of any direct reference to the mystical Quaker religious experience is noticeable. While the editor (Stephen Angell) intended this volume to present Quakerism to the academic world, anyone searching for information, scholarly or otherwise, in this authoritative book, that explores in depth the bedrock Quaker conviction that spiritual knowing can only be found in a direct encounter with the divine, will have to look elsewhere.

The Cambridge Companion to Quakerism edited by Stephen Angell and Pink Dandelion and published in 2018 includes only one reference to mysticism in its index. It references the writing of Rufus Jones (Mystical Religion) published in the early twentieth century. While it states that Jones tried to locate Quakerism in the stream of Western mysticism, it claims that he drew heavily on American Transcendentalist thought and the early modern European mystics. There is no mention of the early Quaker mystical religious experience other than a brief reference to the idea of the Inward Light as central to Fox’s theology.

Again, it is the intention of the editors to present Quakerism to the wider-world and so the core religious and mystical experience that motivates Quakers to do what they do is not delved into. However, Pink Dandelion has published and spoken publicly about the profound mystical experience (extraverted unitive, to use your useful topology) he had as a young Englishman traveling in American. I know that Pink Dandelion is a sociologist and not a historian of religion. But he is a mystic! I hope in the future, as editor he will fix this lacuna in his presentation of Quakerism to those outside of the fold.

One corrective to this oversight is Mind the Oneness: The Mystic Way of the Quaker by Rex Ambler (PHP 463.) published in 2020. Rex’s pamphlet is based on a talk he gave to the Quaker Universalist Group at their annual conference in 2017. It “explores Quaker mysticism from the earliest years of George Fox to the present day.” Rex sees mysticism as part of the search for “ultimate reality” and authentic self hood: “a finding of oneness against the forces of separation and alienation, always in direct, unmediated experience.”

Ambler does make the caveat that mysticism is not a systematic endeavor. This is because the spiritual searching and the finding of a living truth to be guided by is not a static, step-wise process. It is a life long practice that unfolds as we engage with our world both inner and outer. I have experienced both introverted and extraverted unitive experiences (both theistic and non-theistic) at various times in my life. How this happened is a mystery, of course. But the glimpse of unity and the inner peace it brings leaves me with a thirst to know more.

And, for Ambler mysticism may involve protest. The Quaker mystic is often compelled to reconcile the unitive reality of our collective being with the social structures established by governments that attempt to separate (and thus alienate) people from their intuitive and noetic understanding of our common humanity as apart of the created world. To my mind, this is the basis of our equality testimony.

At the conclusion of Ambler’s pamphlet, he hopes that in the future the Quaker mystical vision will continue to be embodied in new and practical ways. Thanks again for raising up a topic so essential to our lives and work as Friends. I hope that the more we talk about this foundational aspect of our tradition the more appealing Quakers will be to those searching for a home (both theistic and non-theistic) where talking safely and respectfully about the mystical in the language of our present experience is welcomed.
Reply


donmccormick2
Grass Valley, California, August 31, 2021 at 4:32 pm


Dear George,
You wrote,
“Again, it is the intention of the editors to present Quakerism to the wider-world and so the core religious and mystical experience that motivates Quakers to do what they do is not delved into.”
“However, Pink Dandelion has published and spoken publicly about the profound mystical experience (extraverted unitive, to use your useful topology) he had as a young Englishman traveling in American. I know that Pink Dandelion is a sociologist and not a historian of religion.”
I once talked to a person from the field of sociology of religion and said that the field seems to study religion as if the existence of God was not a relevant question. They agreed that this was the case.
But he is a mystic! I hope in the future, as editor he will fix this lacuna in his presentation of Quakerism to those outside of the fold.
I suspect that the reason that mention of mystical experience is avoided in these books is that academics who are unfamiliar with the literature on mystical experience in neuroscience, psychology, history, and religious studies are embarrassed to write about it. There may confuse mystical experience with mysticism and there be anxiety that it would be like writing about something too intimately religious, or too new-age-wacky for academic study. I would very much like to know why they don’t include mystical experience in their books. But your comments made me realize that I don’t need to guess, I can just ask him via email. I think I will.
“Ambler does make the caveat that mysticism is not a systematic endeavor. This is because the spiritual searching and the finding of a living truth to be guided by is not a static, step-wise process. It is a life long practice that unfolds as we engage with our world both inner and outer. I have experienced both introverted and extraverted unitive experiences (both theistic and non-theistic) at various times in my life. How this happened is a mystery, of course. But the glimpse of unity and the inner peace it brings leaves me with a thirst to know more.”
I disagree with Ambler about this. I think that Buddhist and other disciplines are systematic and do lead to mystical experience. Also, the current research in the use of psylocibin and other psychedelic drugs can provide a system for it.
“And, for Ambler mysticism may involve protest. The Quaker mystic is often compelled to reconcile the unitive reality of our collective being with the social structures established by governments that attempt to separate (and thus alienate) people from their intuitive and noetic understanding of our common humanity as a part of the created world. To my mind, this is the basis of our equality testimony.”
That’s really beautifully put. I always wanted to have some buttons or t-shirts printed that said
Activist + Mystic = Quaker
But I’ve held back because I keep thinking it would offend some people, although I’m not exactly sure why.
“Thanks again for raising up a topic so essential to our lives and work as Friends.”
You’re welcome. I really enjoyed your comments.
Reply

Nola Landucci
August 30, 2021 at 11:42 pm


Theistic and unitive responses are different faces of the essentially mystic nature of creation in its essence, in themselves they are neither opposite nor in competition All vibrant spiritual systems are animated by and thru them, and ultimately united in the communion of the saints. Singing.
Reply

Kerry shipman
Dorrigo. New South Wales, August 31, 2021 at 1:41 am


Thank you for this wonderful article. I am a relatively newcomer to Quakers and after six months of regular meeting I feel as if I have been a Quaker all my life. I have always been drawn to the traditions of mysticism and feel sad about how it has been trivialized and exiled to the periphery by the very traditions that nurtured it and brought it into being. It as been hijacked by the esoteric blanket throwers and now is its time to reclaim its rightful place within the midst of community and the routines of every day life. St Teresa of Avila basically said the best way to distinguish between a neurotic and a genuine mystic is their ability to integrate into daily life of community. The heart of a mystical experience is to be grounded in the here and now.
I suspect at this time in our collective histories there are profound disintegrations of paradigms within the broad spectrum of Western culture and society aided and abetted by crass consumerism and radical individualism. The old reference points no longer give us direction – the old is dying but not yet dead and the new is coming to birth but not yet born. Perhaps the age of disconnection has run its course and humanity is ready to reach out for a connection that embraces us in mutual relationships grounded in stillness and silence.
In the silence of our meetings I experience the most profound embrace of Presence and connection and I don’t think we will have to wait too long to recover something we already have in abundance.
Reply

donmccormick2
Grass Valley, CA, August 31, 2021 at 4:35 pm


Kerry, I sincerely hope you are right about not having to wait too long. – Don
Reply

Sandra Palmer
Vienna, VA, August 31, 2021 at 1:28 pm


Thank you, Donald, for bringing forward the essence of Quaker practice, for our examination. I believe mystical experience is not meant to be mysteriously available only for a special few. It is meant to be commonplace and available to everyone. Reinforced in Meeting for Worship and other gatherings but also available while washing dishes or pulling up weeds. The more experience I have, the fewer useful distinctions I can make. That state of being really is ineffable. Yet we need to talk about it in order to provide validation for folks who may not understand what is happening, or has happened, to them. And because we need to know that one’s spiritual experience can–and should–develop, grow, and change. The One in whose oneness we participate does also instruct.

As a Quaker, I recommend also investigating the writings of Evelyn Underhill, St. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, and T.S.Eliot. Each of them has provided invaluable validation of my experience and opened doors to more, despite being no longer with us.
Reply

Chris King
Ojai, CA, August 31, 2021 at 2:26 pm


The word “mystical” puts me off. I prefer ‘transcendent’ because such experiences are greater than ordinary ones, but they don’t *necessarily*signify that I have communicated with some higher power. This is the puzzle to me—why people assume their experience of connecting with a higher power means they have in fact done so. As an author and artist I know that the experience of ‘outside’ can come from inside (though some would argue that ‘genius’ is something visited upon us.) I see visions nightly in my dreams. I can be ‘transported’ by sexual ecstasy or drugs or even exhaustion. What is curious to me is the strong human desire to be larger than ourselves. Why do we see some prophet’s dream as some greater truth rather than just some personal ‘trip’ that they enjoyed? Personal or prophetic, I guess we see transcendence as the antidote to that other deep vision the full knowledge of our own and our loved ones’ decay and death.
Reply

Kerry Shipman
Dorrigo NSW, September 1, 2021 at 2:47 am


Dear Chris,
I tend to agree and l think we need to grapple a little longer before we find descriptive words that resonate with the Western mind set.
One of our problems with the term mysticism is it implies a disconnection from the ordinary events of day to day living. The same can be said regarding Mystic. Mystery tends to be interpreted as a problem to be solved.
We have lost our capacity to recognise the mysterium as a reality to be penetrated with openess and curiosity. The insights gained by the individual experience is always for the benefit of the community.
I suspect there is a recalibration of significant paradigms taking place within our cultural and social fields placing our familiar reference points in a state of flux. The old is dying but not yet dead and the new is coming to birth but not yet born.
For me, the concreteness of ‘Now’ centres me within this state of flux, for the past is always present within the Now and actions to change the future are anchored in the Now. Perhaps mysticism may teach us the language of actions rather than words “…..for the word killeth.”
The Light lives within me/us, reverberates within me/us, and radiates from me/us as me/us.
Reply

David Leonard
Kennett Square, PA, August 31, 2021 at 3:47 pm


Thanks for this useful article.

One important Quaker thinker on mysticism who has been missed in this discussion is Douglas Steere. He was the Haverford colleague of Thomas Kelly and editor of the latter’s important TESTAMENT OF DEVOTION. He also was well connected personally across denominational and faith boundaries to other mystic leaders — Catholic, sufi, etc. He saw Quakerism as a lay mystical religious order within the larger, ecumenical church. Perhaps for that reason most of his longer work was published outside the world of Quakerism, even though he was deeply involved with Pendle Hill for many years. His 1984 edited volume on QUAKER SPIRITUALITY was published by the Paulist Press and much of his work on prayer was published by a Methodist press. The latter does a good job of bridging between mysticism and more conventional devotional spirituality.

Much of what appears to be the short shrift given to mysticism in “official” Quaker publications is due to the fact that those experiencing it often use other language for their experiences. George Fox spoke of “openings;” Issac Pennington and John Woolman also had direct divine “leadings.” There is no shortage of references to these leaders and their clearly mystical experiences in the multiple versions of FAITH AND PRACTICE.
Reply

donmccormick2
Grass Valley, CA, August 31, 2021 at 4:39 pm


I know of one accomplished mystic who explained to me that when you are no longer identified with a particular body or person, but instead identify with the entire universe, that the death of the individual self is no longer something that is to quite be so feared.
Reply

schast
Philadelphia, PA, September 1, 2021 at 12:21 pm


Thanks for (re) starting the discussion. I’ve found it helpful to think of mysticism in tandem with “terminal screens” (Kenneth Burke, 1966)–though I’ve expanded the concept, I think, in accepting how I experience mystically. For example, I might hear Jesus’ voice and God’s voice, but I know mentally, physically–and all ways of knowing–that these two ideas/entities don’t have “voice.” It’s as if–along with all the other languages of Babel–‘what-is-experience’ seeks a channel through which I will receive. That channel may be similar or different to how others experience, it may be a group experience, it may be familiar, it may be surprising and new. When we factor communication in with experience, I believe we expand the idea of mysticism and help individuals to see that they may have been mystics all along.
Reply

donmccormick2
Grass Valley, California, September 4, 2021 at 11:04 pm


That’s a very good point you make about the way that the Spirit communicates with us. If God or Jesus or the Spirit does communicate with us, it must be through some way that we can receive it. I’m reminded of people who dismiss religious experience as “just” something physical or neurological or biological. As if there is some form of communication that has no sensory or physical component to it. These people also remind me of the story of the holy man who is caught in a flood. His neighbor pulls up in a car and offers to give him a ride to safety. He replies, “No thanks. I have prayed and God will provide.” The water gets up to his neck and someone else comes up in a boat and offers to help. The man says, “No thanks. I have prayed and God will provide.” The man drowns and when he meets God in heaven, he asks God why his prayers weren’t answered. God replies, “I don’t understand either. I heard your prayers and I sent your neighbor in a car. Then I sent someone in a boat…”
Reply

Aaron J Freeman
New Haven, CT, September 1, 2021 at 12:44 pm


The six days of Labor, Commerce and Obligations, potentiate the seventh day of Rest. To understand the mystical nature of The Quaker Religion, it would help to understand the mystical nature of the Sabbath: you are going to die, which ultimately beats the alternative; The Sabbath is a good rehearsal for this; Quaker Meeting supercharges The Sabbath; Meeting is no more the whole of The Quaker Religion, than The Hinge is the whole of The Door. The experience of Reality should be a mystical act.
Reply

Kerry shipman
Dorigo NSW, September 3, 2021 at 12:42 am


I think the Sabbath is celebrated on Saturday and belongs uniquely in the Jewish tradition. Christians chose the first day of the week (Sunday) as it represented new beginnings in the light of the resurrection.
Reply

D Lockyer
Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire, Wales, UK, September 4, 2021 at 5:33 pm


Thank you for this article. I have been engaged in the study of the actual relationship between C G Jung and a group of Quakers who were in Geneva in the 1930s, and how they disseminated their transformed understanding of Quakerism as a mystical, experiential and experimental religion that resulted.
The key members of that group, Irene Pickard, Elined Kotschnig (who played a leading role in the Friends Conference on Religion and Psychology), P W Martin (who wrote the book Experiment in Depth), and his wife Margery, created an archive of materials which Irene Pickard fortunately preserved.
They knew Rufus Jones, Howard Brinton and Douglas Steere, and like them, laid great stress on the mystical tradition within Quakerism, which for them was given extra zest by what they saw as the psychological underpinning provided by Jung.
The resultant work is currently with a publisher.
Reply

2021/09/15

Nontheistic religion - Wikipedia 2021

Nontheistic religion - Wikipedia

Nontheistic religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

Nontheistic religions are traditions of thought within a religious context—some otherwise aligned with theism, others not—in which nontheism informs religious beliefs or practices.[1] Nontheism has been applied and plays significant roles in progressivismHinduismBuddhism, and Jainism. While many approaches to religion exclude nontheism by definition, some inclusive definitions of religion show how religious practice and belief do not depend on the presence of (a) god(s). For example, Paul James and Peter Mandaville distinguish between religion and spirituality, but provide a definition of the term that avoids the usual reduction to "religions of the book":

Religion can be defined as a relatively-bounded system of beliefs, symbols and practices that addresses the nature of existence, and in which communion with others and Otherness is lived as if it both takes in and spiritually transcends socially-grounded ontologies of time, space, embodiment and knowing.[2]

Buddhism[edit source]

The gods Śakra (left) and Brahmā (right)

Existence of gods[edit source]

The Buddha said that devas (translated as "gods") do exist, but they were regarded as still being trapped in samsara,[3] and are not necessarily wiser than humans. In fact, the Buddha is often portrayed as a teacher of the gods,[4] and superior to them.[5]

Since the time of the Buddha, the denial of the existence of a creator deity has been seen as a key point in distinguishing Buddhist from non-Buddhist views.[6] The question of an independent creator deity was answered by the Buddha in the Brahmajala Sutta. The Buddha denounced the view of a creator and sees that such notions are related to the false view of eternalism, and like the 61 other views, this belief causes suffering when one is attached to it and states these views may lead to desire, aversion and delusion. At the end of the Sutta the Buddha says he knows these 62 views and he also knows the truth that surpasses them. Later Buddhist philosophers also extensively criticized the idea of an eternal creator deity concerned with humanity.[7]

Metaphysical questions[edit source]

On one occasion, when presented with a problem of metaphysics by the monk Malunkyaputta, the Buddha responded with the Parable of the Poisoned Arrow. When a man is shot with an arrow thickly smeared with poison, his family summons a doctor to have the poison removed, and the doctor gives an antidote:[8]

But the man refuses to let the doctor do anything before certain questions can be answered. The wounded man demands to know who shot the arrow, what his caste and job is, and why he shot him. He wants to know what kind of bow the man used and how he acquired the ingredients used in preparing the poison. Malunkyaputta, such a man will die before getting the answers to his questions. It is no different for one who follows the Way. I teach only those things necessary to realize the Way. Things which are not helpful or necessary, I do not teach.

Christianity[edit source]

Bust of Paul Tillich

A few liberal Christian theologians define a "nontheistic God" as "the ground of all being" rather than as a personal divine being.

Many of them owe much of their theology to the work of Christian existentialist philosopher Paul Tillich, including the phrase "the ground of all being". Another quotation from Tillich is, "God does not exist. He is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him."[9] This Tillich quotation summarizes his conception of God. He does not think of God as a being that exists in time and space, because that constrains God, and makes God finite. But all beings are finite, and if God is the Creator of all beings, God cannot logically be finite since a finite being cannot be the sustainer of an infinite variety of finite things. Thus God is considered beyond being, above finitude and limitation, the power or essence of being itself.[citation needed]

From a nontheistic, naturalist, and rationalist perspective, the concept of divine grace appears to be the same concept as luck.[10]

Nontheist Quakers[edit source]

Logo of the Society of Nontheist Friends

A nontheist Friend or an atheist Quaker is someone who affiliates with, identifies with, engages in and/or affirms Quaker practices and processes, 

but who does not accept a belief in a theistic understanding of God, a Supreme Being, the divine, the soul or the supernatural

Like theistic Friends, nontheist Friends are actively interested in realizing centered peace, simplicity, integrity, community, equality, lovehappiness and social justice in the Society of Friends and beyond.

Hinduism[edit source]

Hinduism is characterised by extremely diverse beliefs and practices.[11] In the words of R.C. Zaehner, "it is perfectly possible to be a good Hindu whether one's personal views incline toward monismmonotheismpolytheism, or even atheism."[12] He goes on to say that it is a religion that neither depends on the existence or non-existence of God or Gods.[13] More broadly, Hinduism can be seen as having three more important strands: one featuring a personal Creator or Divine Being, second that emphasises an impersonal Absolute and a third that is pluralistic and non-absolute. The latter two traditions can be seen as nontheistic.[14]

Although the Vedas are broadly concerned with the completion of ritual, there are some elements that can be interpreted as either nontheistic or precursors to the later developments of the nontheistic tradition. The oldest Hindu scripture, the Rig Veda mentions that 'There is only one god though the sages may give it various names' (1.164.46). Max Müller termed this henotheism, and it can be seen as indicating one, non-dual divine reality, with little emphasis on personality.[15] The famous Nasadiya Sukta, the 129th Hymn of the tenth and final Mandala (or chapter) of the Rig Veda, considers creation and asks "The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. /Who then knows whence it has arisen?".[16] This can be seen to contain the intuition that there must be a single principle behind all phenomena: 'That one' (tad ekam), self-sufficient, to which distinctions cannot be applied.[17][18]

It is with the Upanishads, reckoned to be written in the first millennia (coeval with the ritualistic Brahmanas), that the Vedic emphasis on ritual was challenged. The Upanishads can be seen as the expression of new sources of power in India. Also, separate from the Upanishadic tradition were bands of wandering ascetics called Vadins whose largely nontheistic notions rejected the notion that religious knowledge was the property of the Brahmins. Many of these were shramanas, who represented a non-Vedic tradition rooted in India's pre-Aryan history.[19] The emphasis of the Upanishads turned to knowledge, specifically the ultimate identity of all phenomena.[20] This is expressed in the notion of Brahman, the key idea of the Upanishads, and much later philosophizing has been taken up with deciding whether Brahman is personal or impersonal.[21] The understanding of the nature of Brahman as impersonal is based in the definition of it as 'ekam eva advitiyam' (Chandogya Upanishad 6.2.1) – it is one without a second and to which no substantive predicates can be attached.[22] Further, both the Chandogya and Brihadaranyaka Upanishads assert that the individual atman and the impersonal Brahman are one.[23] The mahāvākya statement Tat Tvam Asi, found in the Chandogya Upanishad, can be taken to indicate this unity.[24] The latter Upanishad uses the negative term Neti neti to 'describe' the divine.

Patañjali statue in Pantanjali Yog Peeth Haridwar

Classical SamkhyaMimamsa, early Vaisheshika and early Nyaya schools of Hinduism do not accept the notion of an omnipotent creator God at all.[25][26] While the Sankhya and Mimamsa schools no longer have significant followings in India, they are both influential in the development of later schools of philosophy.[27][28] The Yoga of Patanjali is the school that probably owes most to the Samkhya thought. This school is dualistic, in the sense that there is a division between 'spirit' (Sanskrit: purusha) and 'nature' (Sanskrit: prakṛti).[29] It holds Samadhi or 'concentrative union' as its ultimate goal[30] and it does not consider God's existence as either essential or necessary to achieving this.[31]

The Bhagavad Gita, contains passages that bear a monistic reading and others that bear a theistic reading.[32] Generally, the book as a whole has been interpreted by some who see it as containing a primarily nontheistic message,[33] and by others who stress its theistic message.[34] These broadly either follow after either Sankara or Ramanuja[35] An example of a nontheistic passage might be "The supreme Brahman is without any beginning. That is called neither being nor non-being," which Sankara interpreted to mean that Brahman can only be talked of in terms of negation of all attributes—'Neti neti'.[36]

The Advaita Vedanta of Gaudapada and Sankara rejects theism as a consequence of its insistence that Brahman is "Without attributes, indivisible, subtle, inconceivable, and without blemish, Brahman is one and without a second. There is nothing other than He."[37] This means that it lacks properties usually associated with God such as omniscience, perfect goodness, omnipotence, and additionally is identical with the whole of reality, rather than being a causal agent or ruler of it.[38]

Jainism[edit source]

Jain texts claim that the universe consists of jiva (life force or souls) and ajiva (lifeless objects). According to Jain doctrine, the universe and its constituents-soul, matter, space, time, and principles of motion-have always existed. The universe and the matter and souls within it are eternal and uncreated, and there is no omnipotent creator god. Jainism offers an elaborate cosmology, including heavenly beings/devas, but these heavenly beings are not viewed as creators-they are subject to suffering and change like all other living beings, and are portrayed as mortal.

According to the Jain concept of divinity, any soul who destroys its karmas and desires, achieves liberation/Nirvana. A soul who destroys all its passions and desires has no desire to interfere in the working of the universe. If godliness is defined as the state of having freed one's soul from karmas and the attainment of enlightenment/Nirvana and a god as one who exists in such a state, then those who have achieved such a state can be termed gods (Tirthankara).

Besides scriptural authority, Jains also employ syllogism and deductive reasoning to refute creationist theories. Various views on divinity and the universe held by the VedicsSāmkhyasMimamsas, Buddhists, and other school of thoughts were criticized by Jain Ācāryas, such as Jinasena in Mahāpurāna.

Others[edit source]

Philosophical models not falling within established religious structures, such as DaoismConfucianismEpicureanismDeism, and Pandeism, have also been considered to be nontheistic religions.[39]

The Satanic Temple, a sect of modern or rational Satanism, was officially recognized as a nontheistic religion in the United States on 25 April 2019.[40]

The white supremacist Creativity movement has also been described as a nontheistic religion.[41]

See also[edit source]

References[edit source]

  1. ^ Williams, J. Paul; Horace L. Friess (1962). "The Nature of Religion". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Blackwell Publishing. 2 (1): 3–17. doi:10.2307/1384088JSTOR 1384088.
  2. ^ James, Paul; Mandaville, Peter (2010). Globalization and Culture, Vol. 2: Globalizing Religions. London: Sage Publications. p. xii–xiii.
  3. ^ John T Bullitt (2005). "The Thirty-one planes of Existence". Access To Insight. Retrieved 26 May 2010The suttas describe thirty-one distinct "planes" or "realms" of existence into which beings can be reborn during this long wandering through samsara. These range from the extraordinarily dark, grim, and painful hell realms to the most sublime, refined, and exquisitely blissful heaven realms. Existence in every realm is impermanent; in Buddhist cosmology there is no eternal heaven or hell. Beings are born into a particular realm according to both their past kamma and their kamma at the moment of death. When the kammic force that propelled them to that realm is finally exhausted, they pass away, taking rebirth once again elsewhere according to their kamma. And so the wearisome cycle continues.
  4. ^ Susan Elbaum Jootla (1997). "II. The Buddha Teaches Deities". In Access To Insight (ed.). Teacher of the Devas. Kandy, Sri Lanka: Buddhist Publication Society. Many people worship Maha Brahma as the supreme and eternal creator God, but for the Buddha he is merely a powerful deity still caught within the cycle of repeated existence. In point of fact, "Maha Brahma" is a role or office filled by different individuals at different periods." "His proof included the fact that "many thousands of deities have gone for refuge for life to the recluse Gotama" (MN 95.9). Devas, like humans, develop faith in the Buddha by practicing his teachings." "A second deva concerned with liberation spoke a verse which is partly praise of the Buddha and partly a request for teaching. Using various similes from the animal world, this god showed his admiration and reverence for the Exalted One.", "A discourse called Sakka's Questions (DN 21) took place after he had been a serious disciple of the Buddha for some time. The sutta records a long audience he had with the Blessed One which culminated in his attainment of stream-entry. Their conversation is an excellent example of the Buddha as "teacher of devas," and shows all beings how to work for Nibbana.
  5. ^ Bhikku, Thanissaro (1997). Kevaddha Sutta. Access To Insight. When this was said, the Great Brahma said to the monk, 'I, monk, am Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be... That is why I did not say in their presence that I, too, don't know where the four great elements... cease without remainder. So you have acted wrongly, acted incorrectly, in bypassing the Blessed One in search of an answer to this question elsewhere. Go right back to the Blessed One and, on arrival, ask him this question. However he answers it, you should take it to heart.
  6. ^ B. Alan Wallace, Contemplative Science. Columbia University Press, 2007, pages 97–98.
  7. ^ Principled Atheism in the Buddhist Scholastic Tradition
  8. ^ Nhat Hanh, Thich (1991). Old Path White Clouds: walking in the footsteps of the Buddha. Parallax Press. p. 299ISBN 0-938077-26-0.
  9. ^ Tillich, Paul. (1951) Systematic Theology, p.205.
  10. ^ Kaufman, Arnold S. "Ability", The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 60, No. 19
  11. ^ Catherine Robinson, Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord. Routledge Press, 1992, page 17.
  12. ^ Catherine Robinson, Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord. Routledge Press, 1992, page 51.
  13. ^ R. C. Zaehner, (1966) Hinduism, P.1-2, Oxford University Press.
  14. ^ Griffiths, Paul J, (2005) Nontheistic Conceptions of the Divine Ch. 3. in The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion by William J Wainwright, p.59 . Oxford University Press .
  15. ^ Masih, Y. A comparative study of religions, P.164, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 2000 ISBN 81-208-0815-0
  16. ^ O'Flaherty, Wendy Doniger, (1981)The Rig Veda: An Anthology of One Hundred Eight Hymns (Classic) Penguin
  17. ^ Collinson, Diané and Wilkinson, Robert Thirty-Five Oriental Philosophers, P. 39, Routledge, 1994 ISBN 0-415-02596-6
  18. ^ Mohanty, Jitendranath (2000), Classical Indian Philosophy: An Introductory Text, p:1 Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 0-8476-8933-6
  19. ^ Jaroslav Krejčí, Anna Krejčová (1990) Before the European Challenge: The Great Civilizations of Asia and the Middle East, p:170, SUNY Press, ISBN 0-7914-0168-5
  20. ^ Doniger, Wendy, (1990) Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions, P. 441, Merriam-Webster, ISBN 0-87779-044-2
  21. ^ Smart, Ninian (1998) The World's Religions P.73-74, CUP ISBN 0-521-63748-1
  22. ^ Wainwright, William J. (2005) Ch.3 Nontheistic conceptions of the divine. The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion p.67 OUP, ISBN 0-19-513809-0
  23. ^ Jones, Richard H. (2004) Mysticism and Morality: A New Look at Old Questions, P. 80, Lexington Books, ISBN 0-7391-0784-4
  24. ^ Brown, Robert L, (1991) Ganesh: Studies of an Asian God, SUNY Press, ISBN 0-7914-0656-3.
  25. ^ Larson, Gerald James, Ch. Indian Conceptions of Reality and Divinity found in A Companion to World Philosophies By Eliot Deutsch, Ronald Bontekoe, P. 352, Blackwell, ISBN 0-631-21327-9
  26. ^ Morgan, Kenneth W. and Sarma, D S, Eds. (1953) Ch. 5. P.207 Hindu Religious Thought by Satis Chandra Chatterjee, The Religion of the Hindus: Interpreted by Hindus, Ronald Press. ISBN 81-208-0387-6
  27. ^ Flood, Gavin D, An Introduction to Hinduism,(p.232) CUP, ISBN 0-521-43878-0
  28. ^ Larson, Gerald James,(1999) Classical Samkhya, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, ISBN 81-208-0503-8
  29. ^ Feuerstein, Georg (1989), Yoga: The Technology of Ecstasy, Tarcher, ISBN 0-87477-520-5
  30. ^ King, Richard (1999) Indian Philosophy: An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Thought, p:191, Edinburgh University Press, ISBN 0-7486-0954-7
  31. ^ Clements, Richard Pauranik, Being a Witness in Theory and Practice of Yoga by Knut A. Jacobsen
  32. ^ Yandell, Keith. E., On Interpreting the "Bhagavadgītā", Philosophy East and West 32, no 1 (January 1982).
  33. ^ Catherine Robinson, Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord. Routledge Press, 1992, page 45, 98, 115, 136.
  34. ^ Catherine Robinson, Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord. Routledge Press, 1992, pages 47, 51.
  35. ^ Flood, Gavin D, An Introduction to Hinduism, (pps 239-234) CUP, ISBN 0-521-43878-0
  36. ^ Swami Gambhirananda, (1995), Bhagavadgita: with the Commentary of Sankaracharya, Ch. 13. Vs. 13, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta ISBN 81-7505-150-7
  37. ^ Richards, John, Viveka-Chudamani of Shankara Vs 468.
  38. ^ Wainright, William, (2006), Concepts of God, Stanford Encyclopedia of Religion
  39. ^ Charles Brough (2010). The Last Civilization. p. 246. ISBN 1426940572Deism and pan-deism, as well as agnosticism and atheism, are all Non-Theisms.
  40. ^ "Satanic Temple: IRS has designated it a tax-exempt church"AP NEWS. 25 April 2019. Retrieved 30 July 2019.
  41. ^ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/03/24/neo-nazi-bought-church-with-plans-to-name-it-after-trump-a-fire-destroyed-it/


비신론

위키백과, 우리 모두의 백과사전.
둘러보기로 이동검색으로 이동

비신론(非神論, nontheism) 또는 비유신론은 무신론의 대안으로 제시된 용어다.

무신론의 주장은 “신이라는 것이 있는데 그것은 존재하지 않는다.”라고 비춰질 수 있는데, 이땐 허구의 존재든 그렇지 않든 우선 신을 가정한다고 볼 수 있다. 비신론은 애초에 신이라는 존재를 가정하는 것에서도 벗어나고자 하는 것이라 할 수 있다. 이는 우선 무신론을 공산주의나 전체주의 등과 함께 부정적으로 분류되는 것을 피하고자 하는 목적에서 시도되기도 하고, 불가지론과 무신론, 반신론을 모두 묶기 위해서 쓰기도 하며, 심지어는 몇몇 진보주의 종교의 반교조주의적인 성격을 나타내는데 쓰이기도 한다. 그래서 서양의 관점에선 불교가 비신론으로 간주되기도 한다.


==

非有神論

出典: フリー百科事典『ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)』
ナビゲーションに移動検索に移動

非有神論(ひゆうしんろん、英語:Nontheism)は、「宗教的」[1]か「非宗教的」[2]かに関わらず、神を必要としない信仰、神の不在を信じる者、有神論に否定的な無神論者等を含めた広い範囲を対象とする用語である。

使用の始まり[編集]

1853年、ジョージ・ヤコブ・ホリョークがハイフン付きのNon-theismを使ったのが始まりである[3]

関連項目[編集]

参考文献[編集]

  1. ^ Williams, J. Paul; Horace L. Friess (1962). “The Nature of Religion”. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Blackwell Publishing) 2 (1): 3–17. doi:10.2307/1384088JSTOR 1384088.
  2. ^ Starobin, Paul. “The Godless Rise As A Political Force”. The National Journal. 2010年7月29日閲覧。
  3. ^ "The Reasoner", New Series, No. VIII. 115