Are Mystical Experiences Considered Possible in Your Religion?

[Quintessence]

Simply, the more we give, the more we are given, and the more that is required from us. It can be thought of as levels of difficulty. As the levels become more difficult, that which is guiding us, or enticing us, has to become more apparent or we won't continue the pursuit.

Hmm. I have run into "level" or "developmental" models applied to mystical experiences on occasion. Not something I follow, personally, because it doesn't track with my own life experiences.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

Hmm. I have run into "level" or "developmental" models applied to mystical experiences on occasion. Not something I follow, personally, because it doesn't track with my own life experiences.

Yes, we like what is familiar to us. The mystical path that we have already walked is familiar, but the rest of the path is unfamiliar to us.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I like how @Rick O'Shez framed it earlier - mystical experiences are characterized by an altered state of mind or consciousness. In particular, I would consider a state of heightened awareness, a sense of being fully in the present moment, to be key. That state of mind, in of itself, does not a mystical experience make... but to deeply connect with something, you've got to be fully present in the moment.



Could you unpack this a little more? It looks like there is something interesting in here!
EDIT: Hah, it seems you elaborated a bit in responding to Vin, but is there more you'd like to add?

Aaah. That makes sense. I usually call it a holistic awareness. I dont know if that makes it any better?

 

[arthra]

Is it considered possible in your religion for a person to have an experience of unity with Ultimate Reality? That is, is it possible in your religion for a person to have a mystical experience? Or, if you lack any religion, then is it possible in your view for a person to have an experience of unity with Ultimate Reality?
Please note: This is posted in a discussion section, not a debate section.

I'm unsure about "unity with ultimate reality" but as Baha'is we do have revealed Writings that are mystical... and I'll share some here:

"The purpose of the one true God, exalted be His glory, hath been to bring forth the Mystic Gems out of the mine of man -- they Who are the Dawning-Places of His Cause and the Repositories of the pearls of His knowledge; for, God Himself, glorified be He, is the Unseen, the One concealed and hidden from the eyes of men. Consider what the Merciful hath revealed in the Qur'án: No vision taketh in Him, but He taketh in all vision, and He is the Subtile, the All-Informed!"

That the divers communions of the earth, and the manifold systems of religious belief, should never be allowed to foster the feelings of animosity among men, is, in this Day, of the essence of the Faith of God and His Religion. These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are rays of one Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated.

~ Baha'u'llah, Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, p. 12

The Mystic Dove proclaimeth from its blissful bower, in the everlasting Paradise: "The source of all bounty is derived, in this Day, from God, the One, the Forgiving!" The Bird of the Throne warbleth its melody in its retreats of holiness: "Supreme ascendancy is to be attributed, this Day, to none except God, Him Who hath no peer nor equal, Who is the Most Powerful, the All-Subduing!" The inmost essence of all things voiceth in all things the testimony: "All forgiveness floweth, in this Day, from God, Him to Whom none can compare, with Whom no partners can be joined, the Sovereign Protector of all men, and the Concealer of their sins!" The Quintessence of Glory hath lifted up its voice above My head, and crieth from such heights as neither pen nor tongue can in any degree describe: "God is my witness! He, the Ancient of everlasting days is come, girded with majesty and power. There is none other God but Him, the All-Glorious, the Almighty, the All-Highest, the All-Wise, the All-Pervading, the All-Seeing, the All-Informed, the Sovereign Protector, the Source of eternal light!"

~ Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 35

 

[Deidre]

Yes, that's actually why I returned to faith.

 

[roger1440]

Is it considered possible in your religion for a person to have an experience of unity with Ultimate Reality? That is, is it possible in your religion for a person to have a mystical experience?

Or, if you lack any religion, then is it possible in your view for a person to have an experience of unity with Ultimate Reality?


Please note: This is posted in a discussion section, not a debate section.

The way you are phrasing the question makes it differcult to answer. A mystical experience is a personal experience that is perceived through a person's belief system. If a person believes in Jesus or God that same person will believe Jesus or God was part of that experience. A good example is Saint Theresa of Avila.

 

[Tabu]

I am not sure what is meant by mystic experiences .
But if it means a Spiritual experience where you get connected with the One God , it is absolutely possible.
BrahmaKumaris teach RajYog Meditation ( Raj means King , Yog means Connect , so RajYog is the king of connections ) where one focusses on the inner beauty of the soul , gets connected and nourished from the Ultimate Beauty.
"Having found You, I have found the whole world. The earth and the sky all belong to me."

 

[Sunstone]

If you know of some study where they managed to get an fMRI scan of someone while they were having a mystical experience, I'd love to hear about it.

Jeff,

One of the many difficulties in discussing mystical experiences is that such experiences can bear a superficial similarity to psychosis, a fact that has misled more than one person into believing that they are actually the product of psychosis.

Furthermore, it seems that some – but by no means all – cases of temporal lobe epilepsy can trigger mystical experiences. And though such cases are relatively rare, their existence has led to a great deal of speculation that temporal lobe epilepsy accounts for the mystical experiences of numerous prominent religious figures, including Jesus, Paul, and Mohammed.

Last, such things as drugs, emotional stress, illness, physical exhaustion, and sensory deprivation are known to at times trigger hallucinations that can easily be confused with mystical experiences – or perhaps in some cases, trigger actual mystical experiences.

All of the above has been taken as evidence that mystical experiences are essentially pathological. However, the evidence does not seem to bear out that speculation.

In 1975, Andrew Greely conducted a study in which he first asked people a question designed to determine whether they’d had a mystical experience. Those who responded positively to the question were then evaluated for psychological well-being using standard tests of the time. The results were that people who claimed to have had at least one and perhaps more mystical experiences scored above the national average for psychological well-being. And, according the neuroscientists Andrew Newberg and Eugene D’Aquill, “Other studies have also shown that in general, even mild mystical and spiritual experiences are associated with higher-than-average levels of overall psychological health, expressed in terms of better interpersonal relationships, higher self-esteem, lower levels of anxiety, clearer self-identity, an increased concern for others, and a more positive outlook on life.”

For a fuller discussion of why mystical experiences should not be confused with psychotic episodes, or why pathological causes in general do not account for most mystical experiences, see Andrew Newberg, and Eugene D’Aquill, Why God Won’t Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief, pp 107-113. The discussion is too extensive to summarize here other than to say Newberg and D’Aquill make what I believe are several compelling arguments to discard the outdated notion that most mystical experiences are the product of pathologically abnormal psychological functioning.

Last, I’ve yet to hear of a mystical experience being “caught on tape” by the various brain imaging technologies, but meditative experiences have been caught on tape, and – so far as I know – they do not show any pathological abnormalities in the brains of the meditators.

 

[Sunstone]

I have heard of it, and am aware that it's relatively commonplace as far as mystical experiences go, even amongst those who do not see various aspects of nature as deities. It's more that I have some hangups with the language sometimes used to discuss mystical experiences. I don't feel like "unity" is the right word to describe what I experience. I don't feel there is "oneness" going on, but a deeper sort of connection or relationship with an entity that transcends everyday awareness or experience. From this vantage point, the independence and distinctiveness of the other entity is respected, as is in keeping with a pluralist worldview like mine. I use words like "invoking" or "communing," rather than "unity" or "oneness." Terms like "ultimate reality" strike me as off too. As far as I'm aware, the term originated as part of comparative religion work and an attempt to be neutral in referencing gods or their supposedly equivalent concepts. I don't feel that works. I neither view nor describe the gods as "ultimate reality" (or "ultimate realities," as would be more appropriate for polytheism). And as with words like "unity," phrases like that clash a tad with pluralist values and worldviews. I have trouble with it.

But in a sense, there is some value to saying "no, the sorts of mystical experiences described by people with a more monotheistic and monistic philosophy are not the sorts of experiences religions like mine believe in or cultivate." There are likely some important differences there that shouldn't be overlooked.

You make good points, but I wonder how much of the difference here isn't really just nomenclature. It seems there is a kind of relatively rare, cross-cultural, human experience which has at least one identifying component: That it involves a sense or perception of unity or oneness. That experience was what I was referring to in the title and OP of this thread as a mystical experience. I perhaps should have called it "an experience of oneness" so as to not confuse so many people into thinking I was insisting that all the various and sundry things people call "mystical experiences" were the topic of this thread. At any rate, your posts have been very helpful in allowing me to understand that an experience of oneness seems to be foreign to paganism. Thank you for that!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Yes, this is called Enlightenment, when the illusion of the mind body organism is dropped, Ultimate Reality shines through, like when the clouds move on and the sun is revealed, the sun was there all along.

What do you mean by "the illusion of the mind body organism"?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Like I mentioned before, it just means so many different things to different people. Personally I think that is a great thing.

Yes, and trying to categorise and define these experiences feels like going further away from them.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

What makes reality ultimate?

Arrogance? Assuming that our subjective experiences define the cosmos?

 

[Sunstone]

Whats the difference between mystical experience and everyday experience?

Well, people have various and different things come to mind when they hear the term "mystical experience", so the difference between a mystical experience and everyday experience pretty much depends on what one considers to be a mystical experience in the first place. In this thread, I'm pretty much interested in just one of the things people call a mystical experience. That is, the experience that apparently comes about when the subject/object division within normal waking consciousness abruptly ceases, bringing about a sense of unity or oneness of all things within the perceptual field. Of course, that's a relatively technical definition of a certain kind of mystical experience -- but a definition that you will often enough find approximately echoed in the scientific and philosophical literature dealing with that particular kind of mystical experience. Following that definition, the difference between a mystical experience and an everyday experience is that an everyday experience involves a division of the perceptual field into subject and object, while a mystical experience does not.

Wha makes reality ultimate?

You do. Whatever you see as reality for you is your ultimate reality. The phrase "ultimate reality" is just a conventional and perhaps outdated term that I used in the OP because various people have various notions of what is reality, and some people distinguish between different kinds of realities, although -- apparently -- you don't. For instance, someone may think that the natural world is dependent on a supernatural being or beings, in which case, their ultimate reality would presumably be that being or beings. Other people might argue that nothing beyond the natural world exists, in which case, their ultimate reality would presumably be the natural world. And still others might have other beliefs about what's ultimate reality.

 

[Sunstone]

Like I mentioned before, it just means so many different things to different people. Personally I think that is a great thing.

I'd be curious to know why you think it's "a great thing" that the term "mystical experience" means so many different things to different people? I myself cannot think of any reasons why it's a great thing, nor any reasons why it's not a great thing. In fact, the subject seems fairly unimportant to me -- except that you've made me curious why you, or anyone, would think it was a great thing.

 

[jeager106]

• mys·ti·cal1
  /ˈmistək(ə)l/
  adjective
  1. of or relating to mystics or religious mysticism:
  2. inspiring a sense of spiritual mystery, awe, and fascination:

When driving in the far north of Canada at about 4 a.m. the Northern lights we awe inspiring.
That was mystical for me.
Working at an auto plant back in about 1970 or so an insane man with 3 loaded guns and over 200 rounds
of ammo walked through the plant shooting people.
He walked past me at less than five feet, turned, pointed the gun at my face and
fired twice.
And missed.
Then turned and shot another man in the guts, another 2 X in the chest, then blew his brains out.
Mystical?
He killed 13, don't recall how many wounded.
Maybe that fits.
Then I became a police officer and things got worse. :>)

 

[Vinayaka]

I'd be curious to know why you think it's "a great thing" that the term "mystical experience" means so many different things to different people? I myself cannot think of any reasons why it's a great thing, nor any reasons why it's not a great thing. In fact, the subject seems fairly unimportant to me -- except that you've made me curious why you, or anyone, would think it was a great thing.

Love of diversity. Not much else.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Not sure. How do you know if two people have very similar experiences and one calls it a mystical experience, and the other person doesn't? I know several people who just go 'Aw, shucks, this is quite normal stuff' while others, about the same thing go nuts about it.
After all, anyone can say anything.

They can and they do. But you are right, it is all very subjective.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I like how @Rick O'Shez framed it earlier - mystical experiences are characterized by an altered state of mind or consciousness. In particular, I would consider a state of heightened awareness, a sense of being fully in the present moment, to be key. That state of mind, in of itself, does not a mystical experience make... but to deeply connect with something, you've got to be fully present in the moment.
[/COLOR][/FONT]

I broadly agree, though I think the boundaries are blurred. A while back on another forum somebody was describing what has obviously been a profound experience of "oneness", we worked out eventually that they had, for the first time, been fully in the present. And then if we are talking about a feeling of connection, there is the question of what exactly we assume we are connecting WITH, and I would suggest the answers we come up with are shaped by the assumptions and expectations we bring to the experience. So it is all rather subjective.

 

[Vinayaka]

They can and they do. But you are right, it is all very subjective.

There is just so much going on ...
- people feel left out so they invent stuff so they can feel part of the 'mystic' crowd
- mystic has a certain ring to it, like 'esoteric' and other mystery words
- awe, bhakti devotion, emotion, euphoria, visions, hallucinations, dreams, wonder, rushes, drug-induced states, calmness, coincidence, deja-vu, 'I've done this before', intuitive flashes, 'ah ha!' moments, serendipity ... all this and more can be termed 'mystic' at some time by some person

As to the idea that mystic experience is shaped by assumptions and expectations, I'm not so sure if that is always the case. A younger person, not yet programmed by any religion, or any other world view, can just encounter 'something' which can turn their life about, and set into motion a search for an explanation.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Well, people have various and different things come to mind when they hear the term "mystical experience", so the difference between a mystical experience and everyday experience pretty much depends on what one considers to be a mystical experience in the first place. In this thread, I'm pretty much interested in just one of the things people call a mystical experience. That is, the experience that apparently comes about when the subject/object division within normal waking consciousness abruptly ceases, bringing about a sense of unity or oneness of all things within the perceptual field. Of course, that's a relatively technical definition of a certain kind of mystical experience -- but a definition that you will often enough find approximately echoed in the scientific and philosophical literature dealing with that particular kind of mystical experience. Following that definition, the difference between a mystical experience and an everyday experience is that an everyday experience involves a division of the perceptual field into subject and object, while a mystical experience does not.



You do. Whatever you see as reality for you is your ultimate reality. The phrase "ultimate reality" is just a conventional and perhaps outdated term that I used in the OP because various people have various notions of what is reality, and some people distinguish between different kinds of realities, although -- apparently -- you don't. For instance, someone may think that the natural world is dependent on a supernatural being or beings, in which case, their ultimate reality would presumably be that being or beings. Other people might argue that nothing beyond the natural world exists, in which case, their ultimate reality would presumably be the natural world. And still others might have other beliefs about what's ultimate reality.

Thank you for the explanation. If I were to answer the question, my ultimate reality is life itself: natural and supernatural are part of one life. My mystical experiences are engraved in reality not seperate from it. I wouldnt know another phrase but ultimate reality by strict grammar means something greater. I know people can see their ultimate reality as greater, but those like myself who do not see reality as greater (or lesser)? What would be another word that doesnt separate reality from ultimate reality?