lily
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by lily on Jan 6, 2014 6:46:47 GMT -8
What is "mysticism" being used to describe here? Trancework and related tasks? Dreaming? Divination? Any kind of communication with Them? Only specific kinds? I'm not sure I understand the concept being discussed. I always wonder that when I see 'mysticism' being discussed in polytheist/pagan circles. Is there even a basic definition of such that is largely agreed on? Or is it left to the individual to determine what they feel it means in relation to the topic under discussion? |
|
|
|
Post by aclockworkireland on Jan 7, 2014 6:03:45 GMT -8
I find the unifying thing in mysticism is that we have the experience rather than define it in the same way.
Since its more about experience than something taught in a class or learned by reading from a book and since there are loads of different types of people theres going to be loads of interpretations. Setting predefined rules about what is and isnt mysticism only alienates the 99% of people who dont share our exact experience.
And in the end, do we really need that experience validated externally by conoforming to a group concensus?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wynn Dark on Jan 7, 2014 7:21:14 GMT -8
I think we need at least a loose definition of what we mean by the word for the purpose of having a discussion about it...otherwise everyone is running with their own pre-concieved notions on what can become a rather hot-button topic and we end up talking circles around one another. Then the knives come out...I mean, then arguments rather than discourse occurs.
Does anyone want to take a stab at what mysticism is, for the sake of the question being asked at least?
I mean you've got all kinds of divination that could be classified as mysticism if you take the definition to mean Any way of communicating with the gods, but I don't know that 'laymans' divination really falls into this classification...which begs the question of course. I'd say that reading astralagoi or dice divination wouldn't be mystical, where as an oracle being possessed and used as a mouth piece would be...with things like dream divination being difficult to throw into or out of mysticism.
Did that make sense to Anyone else, I think I've gone back to incoherent rambling.
|
|
|
|
Post by spookymuffin on Jan 7, 2014 10:12:50 GMT -8
What is "mysticism" being used to describe here? Trancework and related tasks? Dreaming? Divination? Any kind of communication with Them? Only specific kinds? I'm not sure I understand the concept being discussed. I don't know about mysticism, but I think *communication* with and from Them is very important, and one reason why Polytheism is so much more real and vital to me and my life than Christianity was; not only do I now know they are Real(after experiences communicating with them in up close and in more distant ways), rather than just having "faith"(though faith is what carried me through the process!), but I can actually have a relationship with any of Them, instead of just talking endlessly into a black hole and searching for warm fuzzies. I have in the past had more "mystical" experiences; as I've gotten busier communication is now limited to Tarot/divination and physical omens/coincidences. Maybe I'm just trying to make myself feel better about something I no longer have(whether temporarily or forever remains to be seen), but I think MAKING THE EFFORT, no matter what your propensities and innate abilities seem to be, is absolutely important if you want to have an actual relationship with Them. I feel like worrying about being "headblind" is sort of missing the point. If you meet Them halfway by trying something, They will(if They want) make sure you hear Their messages, in time. I think that mysticism is a set of techniques used to reach a specific goal: becoming personally and immediately aware of transcendent reality. Mysticism is a goal, not a technique. The techniques used at achieve that goal vary from tradition to tradition but the goal doesn't. Any activity labeled mystical has to support that goal; if another purpose is served then it's not mystical - even if it is the same activity. For instance, trance is just an activity; one can use trance for a range of purposes like divination, farseeing, etc. If a trance state is used by a practitioner to become aware of progressively subtle levels of perception as the barriers between worlds fall away - then I think it becomes a mystical practice. Though people whose practices are oriented in a mystical direction are likely to encounter a range of personalities along the way, communicating with these entities is not in itself mysticism (imo). These entities can offer guidance, support, and instruction but ultimately the mystical goal has to be achieved under our own power and with our own motivation driving us. Ultimately I don't think it really matters what inborn psychic gifts a person brings to their mystical practice. These gifts might help but they can also cause their own series of obstacles (personally I find it more fun to go off and talk to the spirits instead of buckling down and getting serious about my personal development). I agree; worrying about being headblind is certainly missing the point. I think such a concern really only applies if you're trying to refine divination or some other type of practice. And even then there are ways that you can develop the ability. |
|
|
|
Post by aclockworkireland on Jan 7, 2014 11:57:17 GMT -8
Well to illustrate my point I couldnt relate to that definition. Its not that its bad its just Id be on the diametric opposite side of some of it and now Im left 3 choices. 1 Challenging it and demene someone elses deeply held beliefs. 2 agree just for the sake of the group or to avoid causing offense 3 withdraw myself.
TBH since its a subject that involves some of the most profound experiences of my life and I assume other peoples that Id rather not discuss publically cos theyre personal and wouldnt dream of telling other people theyre wrong about theirs... all I can do is withdraw. Im not a kid who wants to agree with people to fit in...
|
|
|
|
Post by marybeth on Jan 7, 2014 15:35:40 GMT -8
Or you could add to the conversation by talking about what your idea of mysticism is. The only reason I'm asking for a definition is that I need a point of reference to work from in a conversation, not to define it for everybody.
|
|
|
|
Post by aclockworkireland on Jan 7, 2014 18:41:54 GMT -8
No sale love.
I also dont tell people their kids are ugly cos its too personal. Even if theyre touching me with sticky hands and looking at me with snotty faces a kid is beautiful. What makes a beautiful child? Eye of the beholder.
|
|
lily
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by lily on Jan 8, 2014 3:46:48 GMT -8
What's your point? It's no skin off my nose if your definition of mysticism differs from mine - as far as I can tell we're not talking about trying to come up with some kind of One True Mysticism but about trying to create a common understanding for this particular discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by spookymuffin on Jan 8, 2014 9:32:47 GMT -8
Seconded. (Thirded?) I'm not very precious about my beliefs and definitions; gods know I've been wrong often enough (heh). If you don't feel like sharing your personal definition, perhaps you could offer a counterpoint that we haven't considered? Is there an aspect of mysticism that you feel we've overlooked - or looked at too much?
|
|
|
|
Post by marybeth on Jan 8, 2014 15:43:59 GMT -8
Okay, what is YOU guys' personal definition? Or ideas on the subject, at least? The impression I get from around the interwebs is that it has more to do with trance-type stuff and less with more direct stuff, but I don't know where one might choose to draw the line. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by marybeth on Jan 8, 2014 16:25:59 GMT -8
Just went back and read your definition Spookymuffin. More specific than I would have guessed! By that definition, a lot of polytheists whose practice primarily consists of spirit/Deity communication might not be mystics! Interesting.  |
|
lily
New Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by lily on Jan 9, 2014 6:27:23 GMT -8
I know dictionary definitions can only take you so far, but I'm rather fond of them as a jumping-off point. So we have:
from the Collins English Dictionary as a definition of mysticism and
from the Oxford Dictionary Online as a definition of mystic.
Taken together I feel they do a fairly good job of defining mysticism, at least in the way I define it. I don't feel that 'achieving direct intuitive experience of the divine' is sufficient to make one a mystic, but the addition to the Collins definition of believing in 'the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect' seems to give a fairly complete picture of mysticism as I view it.
|
|
|
|
Post by spookymuffin on Jan 9, 2014 14:18:59 GMT -8
Just went back and read your definition Spookymuffin. More specific than I would have guessed! By that definition, a lot of polytheists whose practice primarily consists of spirit/Deity communication might not be mystics! Interesting. Though I'm not in a position to tell someone that what they're practicing is/is not mysticism, I don't consider communicating with spirits/deities to be - in and of itself - mystical. Here's why: 1. If a person doesn't hear/mishears/misinterprets a message from the spirits/Deities, I think that's a failure of communication, not a failure of mysticism. 2. Similarly, if a deity chooses not to make themselves known to a person, I think that's simply their decision and not a failure of mysticism on the part of the person. 3. Messages to and from spirits/deities can relate to all kinds of subjects, from "please help me find a parking place" to "hey, weren't you going to buy Me another bottle of wine?" If communication with spirits/Deities were in itself inherently mystical then every love spell, casual cuss word, etc. would be mystical - regardless of whether those messages were self-serving or had some other purpose in mind. ("Oh spirits of the tarot, please tell me if my ex's new gf is gonna slap my face at the bus station." This came from an actual divination client of mine.) 4. Many people who could be considered mystics go for decades without any communication from the divine. Sri Ramprasad, an ecstatic Kali devotee who I think many would regard as a mystic, spent years and years in intense practice before receiving anything from the Mother. There's a few other reasons. If I can pull them apart in a coherent way I'll add them. (ETA: Yes, I think that spirit/deity communication can and certainly does have a formative effect on the development of a person's mystical practice; I just don't think that experiencing or desiring spirit/deity communication is *necessarily* mystical just because it involves non-corporeal entities.) |
|
|
|
Post by marybeth on Jan 9, 2014 19:50:51 GMT -8
Those are all really fabulous points, Spookymuffin. So from what I'm getting, more the idea of a deeper experience along the line of mysteries is what you and Lily would call mysticism? By that idea, I would say I think mysticism's awesome, but maybe not necessary to being a good polytheist. If it was, I'd definitely be screwed, haha. I do think that at least attempting, over time, to communicate in *some way* with the Gods is important, though. Would love to hear what others think.
|
|
|
|
Post by spookymuffin on Jan 23, 2014 9:25:34 GMT -8
Those are all really fabulous points, Spookymuffin. So from what I'm getting, more the idea of a deeper experience along the line of mysteries is what you and Lily would call mysticism? By that idea, I would say I think mysticism's awesome, but maybe not necessary to being a good polytheist. If it was, I'd definitely be screwed, haha. I do think that at least attempting, over time, to communicate in *some way* with the Gods is important, though. Would love to hear what others think. I'll set aside the conversation on clarifying exactly what we all mean by mysteries (perhaps a conversation for another thread?) and agree with what clockworkireland said about mysticism having to be experienced personally; in this sense I think it's similar to the mysteries. Since mysticism is by its nature a highly personal experience (this agrees with the dictionary definitions provided above that emphasizes the solitary nature of this work) it's not going to experience a high degree of outside validation; however, I'd respectfully put forward that a number of mystic traditions strongly encourage, even require, the presence of a teacher. Hindu tantra is passed down from teacher to student, Sufi mystics study under experienced masters, and some Buddhist traditions emphasize the value of a teacher (forgive me for not providing examples; I'm drawing on what I've read by practicing Buddhists but I'm not very familiar with the different traditions). Teachers aren't there to provide validation but to point out errors and misconceptions. Teachers help prepare the student for the mystical experience but they don't give the mystical experience to the student. Are teachers an absolute must-have necessity in mysticism? Probably not. For every example of a mystic student with a teacher there is probably an example of a mystic student without one. Mystic students past and present without teachers usually cite the Gods/Spirits as their teacher - but the Gods/Spirits are supposed to be a mystic's teacher anyway, regardless of what human guide might be present. Speaking to your second point, marybeth, I think I agree that it's important to attempt communication with the Gods. When you talk about communication, what exactly are you referring to? I'd regard worship activities (prayer, ritual, etc.) to be communicative; since these activities are central to polytheist practice as I currently understand it, I'd thus conclude that communicative action - or the belief that communication happens through these actions - is central to polytheism. ETA: Reading back over this, it seems that an important commonality between mysticism and polytheism is the central role that two-way communication plays or is expected to play. The difference, perhaps, is the type of communication expected by the respective practitioners. I don't know if each and every modern polytheist expects the Gods to talk back; communication may happen symbolically, like through the siting of a particular bird associated with a specific Power or a high degree of synchronicity experienced after a particular ritual. This sort of communication may even be regarded as irrelevant, unimportant, or even a distraction by mystic students. Irrelevant because the student doesn't require confirmation of communication, unimportant because no message is signified that wasn't already understood, and a distraction because deciphering signs and symbols leads to second-guessing and diffusion of focus. (It goes back to how mysticism has to be personally experienced; if you've already experienced, why do you need further confirmation of that experience? Is not validation by symbolic communication similar to validation by other people?) Though one's experience of the world can and will realign itself as the result of mystic experiences, this kind of confirmation of communication may not be as central to the mystic experience as to the experience of a non-mystic polytheist. |
|
