- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I know I am little slower….but when someone says they are a mystic what does that mean? And then what is mysticism? This is a deep topic. Wikipedia puts it this way:
See also, “Mystic”. The term ‘”mysticism'” is used to refer to beliefs and practices which go beyond the liturgical and devotional forms of worship of mainstream faith, often by seeking out inner or esoteric meanings of conventional religious doctrine, and by engaging in spiritual practices such a breathing practices, prayer, contemplation and meditation, along with chanting and other activities designed to heighten spiritual awareness.
From what I understand, hermeticism, esoterica, occult, wicca, and mystery would be good topics to check out if you are interested in “Mormon mystics.”
Of course, Ayn Rand considered all religious adherents “mystics,” and meant that in a derogatory sense. But her point is interesting from a non-spiritual vantage point: if something embraces the unknown and unknowable over the known and knowable, that is embracing the mystical over reality. quietblue is right. And I think that is a good definition from Wiki. When I first began to critically analyze my experiences with God, I searched for an established group that understood my experiences, that shared a common vocabulary, that spoke of things as I understood them.
I knew that many people had spiritual experiences in the LDS Church, but getting anyone to talk about them openly was not working. At the outset, I couldn’t find people in the church discussing my experiences, so I went elsewhere. I went to the library, I went on the internet (which, back then, was nothing more than the Newsgroups (ie, Alt.Religion.Mormonism), I took classes at the local University (philosophy, logic, religion) (I was not living in Utah at the time).
At first I thought maybe I could identify with gnosticism, but that didn’t last long. While it was true that I *knew* things by the power (grace) of God, yet I couldn’t see that tradition fitting with my views. I sampled other traditions. I finally found that the mystical tradition fit my experiences fairly well, though I didn’t chant or follow other practices that many of them did. (‘shrooms, anyone?)
😮 Most religious movements have their mystics. Buddhism, Jewry, Catholicism, you name it, most have sub communities of mystics. While still picking and choosing carefully I could augment my understanding of my experiences with these groups. We had similar understandings of God by personal experience. I even ran across an atheistic mystic, who claimed to have been caught up to the 3rd heaven. I think it likely that he was, after reading his lengthy account, found here:
http://www.mysticalreunion.org/http://www.mysticalreunion.org/” class=”bbcode_url”> Anyway, I found a thread of familiarity in many traditions, but not all. Thelema, for example, I didn’t really relate to. In the end, I found that my own tradition of Mormonism was incredibly useful, powerful, and ‘true’ — and I hadn’t even recognized it.
As T.S. Eliot said,
Quote:We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
HiJolly
HiJolly wrote:We had similar understandings of God by personal experience.
To me, this sums up what is meant by mysticism. It is knowing by personal experience the same thing that Thoreau, Ashoka, or Zoroaster (I assume) knew by personal experience.
Here’s Thoreau:
Quote:…in dealing with truth we are immortal, and need fear no change nor accident. The oldest Egyptian or Hindoo philosopher raised a corner of the veil from the statue of the divinity; and still the trembling robe remains raised, and I gaze upon as fresh a glory as he did, since it was I in him that was then so bold, and it is he in me that now reviews the vision. No dust has settled on that robe; no time has elapsed since that divinity was revealed.
HiJolly wrote:In the end, I found that my own tradition of Mormonism was incredibly useful, powerful, and ‘true’ — and I hadn’t even recognized it.
HiJolly, as always…thanks for your thoughts…very interesting to me.Do you believe your traditional Mormonism was useful because it is “True” and allows for exploration unlimitless, or is it more a cultural thing that just seems to make sense to you?
This is an interesting thread.
Heber13 wrote:
Do you believe your traditional Mormonism was useful because it is “True” and allows for exploration unlimitless, or is it more a cultural thing that just seems to make sense to you?
I like to think it is the principles of traditional Mormonism; things like continuing revelation, angelic ministrations, keys of asking and receiving, Gift of the Holy Ghost, temples, etc. So….. Yes, the former. But I would not be completely honest if I did not also acknowledge the culture as well. Sometimes I hate the petty attitudes too often found in the Church. At the same time, though, I was remarkably blessed in my youth to have practically 98% of everyone surrounding me being authentic and engaged in the Church, in trying to be ‘good’.Maybe I just had rose-tinted glasses on. Could be… The culture does feel ‘good’ to me, mostly due, I think, to my happy years as a youth in the Church. How I wish all youth had the same experience.
HiJolly
HiJolly wrote:At the same time, though, I was remarkably blessed in my youth to have practically 98% of everyone surrounding me being authentic and engaged in the Church, in trying to be ‘good’.
Maybe I just had rose-tinted glasses on. Could be… The culture does feel ‘good’ to me, mostly due, I think, to my happy years as a youth in the Church. How I wish all youth had the same experience.
Same here. It’s just been a very nice ride and a pleasant climb.
My personal and very short definition is this: Anyone who seeks for direct, personal experiences with the divine (aka God). That is a very broad definition. Non-mystics are people who do not experience a sense of the mysterious and unknown, they do not experience things we label “the Spirit,” personal revelation or answers to prayers. Mystics have more to do with the individual person and less to do with the organization, religion or Church they belong to.
Joseph Smith was a strong mystic who claimed many direct experiences with angels, revelation, even God and Jesus Christ.
Mother Teresa was not a mystic. Even though she was a compassionate and devout religious woman, I seem to recall she recorded her personal doubts even about the existence of God (we found out after she died). On the other hand, there are innumerable examples from the same Catholic religion of people who were/are mystics.
Someone could be a Buddhist and be mystical or not a mystic. Same goes for most other religions. A tribal shaman or medicine man is a mystic. Some priests in various groups might not be. It all depends on the individuals and their experiences.
It seems like there are common themes and symbols when we look at mystical experiences. It isn’t all the same, but common themes include a permeating love and connection between all living things. That is one of many things I have noticed.
Valoel, do you think you and others here at StayLDS are mystics? By your definition, I would say yes. Would you agree?
I would say I was not a mystic until 2003. But mysticism is encouraged in the LDS tradition, I think. Perhaps I am merely a late bloomer. HiJolly wrote:Heber13 wrote:
Do you believe your traditional Mormonism was useful because it is “True” and allows for exploration unlimitless, or is it more a cultural thing that just seems to make sense to you?
I like to think it is the principles of traditional Mormonism; things like continuing revelation, angelic ministrations, keys of asking and receiving, Gift of the Holy Ghost, temples, etc.OR….are they the principles of Mormonism because they are universally true? Do you think it’s possible that Joseph (particularly) instituted these “principles” because they had been experienced by him and others…and they worked? We do tend to be attracted to, and fascinated by the mystical and secretive things. It makes us feel “special,” doesn’t it?
Rix wrote:HiJolly wrote:Heber13 wrote:
Do you believe your traditional Mormonism was useful because it is “True” and allows for exploration unlimitless, or is it more a cultural thing that just seems to make sense to you?
I like to think it is the principles of traditional Mormonism; things like continuing revelation, angelic ministrations, keys of asking and receiving, Gift of the Holy Ghost, temples, etc.OR….are they the principles of Mormonism because they are universally true? Do you think it’s possible that Joseph (particularly) instituted these “principles” because they had been experienced by him and others…and they worked? We do tend to be attracted to, and fascinated by the mystical and secretive things. It makes us feel “special,” doesn’t it?
Yes indeed, Rix. I totally agree. The only schools of spiritual development that endorse these things that I know of are the Western Mystery Traditions (my favorite is BOTA). If you don’t like the ‘Occult’ label, the only other choice is Mormonism. IMO.I would add, it *IS* special. Anyone who has an eternal moment being ‘One’ with God cannot deny it is special. Even if it makes one feel “less than the dust of the Earth”. A school, church or tradition that does this repeatedly for its members, is special, too!
Moses 1:8 And it came to pass that Moses looked, and beheld the world upon which he was created; and Moses beheld the world and the ends thereof, and all the children of men which are, and which were created; of the same he greatly marveled and wondered.
9 And the presence of God withdrew from Moses, that his glory was not upon Moses; and Moses was left unto himself. And as he was left unto himself, he fell unto the earth.
10 And it came to pass that it was for the space of many hours before Moses did again receive his natural strength like unto man; and he said unto himself:
Now, for this cause I know that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed. As Joseph said, all truth is contained within the Gospel, a true ‘Mormon’ seeks out truth wherever it is found.
HiJolly
Heber13 wrote:Valoel, do you think you and others here at StayLDS are mystics?
By your definition, I would say yes. Would you agree?
I consider myself to be a “mystic;” however, I don’t believe that makes me special. It is just a word to describe a person.
Mormonism, like HiJolly pointed out, is one of the few strongly mystical western religious traditions. Mormonism has endless stories of people talking to God, angels, seeing visions, having prophetic dreams, harnessing divine powers to heal and bless, being prompted in every day life from making major life decisions all the way down to praying for guidance to find your missing car keys. All of this is encouraged and expected. Somehow though, that word is not in the normal Mormon vocabulary. It is the word used by the rest of the religious world. We somehow associate it with the occult or something … *boggles* It’s the technical term for what most active Mormons take for granted.
I have personally experienced spiritual events that I can not deny, and they were very mystical. I still seek and experience these types of things. So that makes me a “Mystic.”
Occult means “hidden”, as in hidden knowledge.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.