Regarding Spiritual Experiences

[sayak83]

There has been some discussion and skepticism regarding spiritual experiences, what they are and what, if anything, they reveal about God, Gods, Ultimate Reality etc. In this thread I will present my own tentative sketch guided by some books I have along with my own experiences and conversations with others. Anybody is welcome to contribute to the discussion or raise skeptical concerns as well.

I will open the thread with excerpts from a book called Philosophy of Mysticism that presents a good description of such experiences.

Quest of mysticism
At the center of mysticism as stipulated here is an inner quest to
still the conceptual and emotional apparatuses of the mind and the sense of self in order to sense reality without mediation.
Mental dispositions and emotions and their roots must all be eradicated. The quest begins with substituting a desire for enlightenment for more mundane desires, but even this
desire must be overcome for the mind to become clear of all conceptual, dispositional, and emotional content.

Through the mystical quest, we come to see the reality present when the background conceptual structuring to our awareness is removed from our mind—either experiencing in extrovertive states the phenomenal world independently of our conceptualizations and manipulations, or experiencing in introvertive experiences the normally concealed transcendent source of the self or of
the entire natural realm free of all other mental content.

Types of experiences
There are two classes of mystical experiences: the extrovertive
(which include mindfulness states of consciousness, “nature mysticism,” and “cosmic consciousness”) and the introvertive (which include differentiated nontheistic and theistic mystical experiences and the empty “depth-mystical experience”).
Extrovertive and introvertive mystics share terms such as “oneness,” “being,” and “real,” but their subjects are not the same: extrovertive
mysticism is about the “surface” world of phenomena while introvertive mysticism is about the underlying “depth” sources.

And there are some characteristics that all mystical experiences of both tracks share in one degree or another: the weakening or total elimination of the usual sense of an “ego” separate from other realities, while the true transcendent “self” seems deathless; a sense of timelessness; a focusing of consciousness; a sense that both the experience and what is experienced are ineffable (i.e., cannot be adequately expressed in any words or symbols); feelings of bliss or peace; often there are positive emotions (including empathy)
and an absence of negative ones (anger, hatred, and so on); and a cognitive quality, i.e., a sense that one has directly touched some ultimate reality and attained an insight into the fundamental nature of oneself or of all reality, with an accompanying sense of certainty and objectivity.

Ego elimination
Of particular importance is the misconception involved in the “I-Me-
Mine” complex (Austin 1998, 2006): we normally think we are an independent, self-contained entity, but in fact this “self-consciousness” is just another function of the analytical mind—one that observes the rest of our mental life. By identifying with this function, we reify a separate entity—the “self” or “ego”—and set it of f against the rest of reality. We see ourselves as one separate entity in a sea of distinct entities, and our ego then runs our life without any conscious connection to the source of its own being.
This error (called avidya in Indian mysticism) is not merely the absence of correct knowledge but an active error inhibiting our seeing reality as it is: there is no separate self-existing “ego” within the field of everyday experience but only an ever-changing web of mental and physical processes.

The inner quest necessary for overcoming this falsification
involves a process characterized in different traditions as “forgetting” or “fasting of the mind”—i.e., emptying the mind of all conceptual content, and in the case of the depth-mystical experience the elimination of all sensory input and other differentiated mental content. But mystics affirm that something real is involved in introvertive mystical experiences: through this emptying process, mystics claim that they become directly aware of a transcendent power, not merely conceive a new idea or interpretation of the world.


Goals of spiritual experiences
Cultivating selfless awareness is central to mystical ways of life, but
it should be noted that classical mystics actually discuss mystical experiences very little—how one should lead one’s life, the path to enlightenment, knowledge, and the reality allegedly experienced are more often the topics. Traditionally, the goal is not any momentary experience but a continuous new existence: the mystical quest is not completed with experience but with aligning one’s life with the nature of reality.
Mystics value most the reality experienced and the long-lasting transformed state of a person in the world and not any state of consciousness or momentary experiences, no matter how insightful.

I would also note that one should separate spiritual experiences as described above from paranormal experiences like seeing an angel/ghost, OOB and NDE experiences as well as psychedelic experiences. These involves seeing an object or entity that is non-normal or seeing oneself situated in a different non-normal position or realm. But the character of "I seeing something something, hearing something, being located somewhere" in those experiences remain intact even if the realms and objects are quite extraordinary. They can also lead to insights, but I will not discuss those here. Traditionally they were considered as journeys into other worlds.


All comments, rants welcome.

 

[Sunstone]

Great OP! You've laid out many of the issues involved in (what I call) the mystical experience in a clear and systemic manner, although I suspect one might need some prior familiarity with the subject to pick up on the nuances of what you've said.

By the way, I agree with you that the key way to differentiate between "spiritual experiences" and paranormal experiences is according to whether the "I" as an observer is absent or present in them, with it being absent in spiritual experiences and present in paranormal experiences. I believe the absence of the "I" as an observer is not only key to distinguishing spiritual from paranormal, but also the hallmark of spiritual experiences in all cases.

To me, spiritual experiences are one of the greatest mysteries of life. What, if anything, are they experiences of? How do they come about? Why are they so powerfully transformative? etc. etc.

It's the strangest thing, Sayak: a person can have an experience of a few moment's duration and afterwards, the whole rest of their life is changed. It seems to me that nothing -- or at least almost nothing -- is more life affirming than such experiences, which perhaps accounts for their being called in more than one culture and/or tradition being "born again".

Last, in addition to the philosophical study of mysticism, there is an emerging scientific study of mysticism that is being driven mainly by investigators in the neurosciences. Quite exciting, really.

 

[sun rise]

Mystics value most the reality experienced and the long-lasting transformed state of a person in the world and not any state of consciousness or momentary experiences, no matter how insightful.

To me, a momentary experience is like a person crossing a desert who comes upon an oasis. The pool of water and shade of the oasis is, as it were, refreshing and can recharge the enthusiasm for finishing the desert crossing to reach the ocean.

 

[Sunstone]

For some reason, the desire to have a spiritual experience seems to hamper or prevent one from having such an experience. Instead, desire -- any desire including the desire to have a spiritual experience -- seems to reinforce normal everyday consciousness. That is, the "I" that is an observer.

 

[Srivijaya]

I find the designation "Quest for mysticism" difficult to define. What is mysticism and how would one even quest for it? Any spiritual journey has two components; study and practice. Of the two, it is practice which yields genuine results. Study can point us in the right direction or give us those Aha! moments but without practice it's by and large an intellectual exercise. The following sutta sums it up perfectly:

English translation of AN 5.73, “One Who Dwells in the Dhamma”

73. One Who Dwells in the Dhamma
Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, “‘One who dwells in the Dhamma, one who dwells in the Dhamma’: thus it is said, lord. To what extent is a bhikkhu one who dwells in the Dhamma?”

“Monk, there is the case where a monk studies the Dhamma: dialogues, narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions. He spends the day in Dhamma-study. He neglects seclusion. He doesn’t commit himself to internal tranquillity of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on study, not one who dwells in the Dhamma.

“Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard & studied it and teaches it in full detail to others. He spends the day in Dhamma-description. He neglects seclusion. He doesn’t commit himself to internal tranquillity of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on description, not one who dwells in the Dhamma.

“Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard & studied it and recites it in full detail. He spends the day in Dhamma-recitation. He neglects seclusion. He doesn’t commit himself to internal tranquillity of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on recitation, not one who dwells in the Dhamma.

“Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard & studied it and thinks about it, evaluates it, and examines it with his intellect. He spends the day in Dhamma-thinking. He neglects seclusion. He doesn’t commit himself to internal tranquillity of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on thinking, not one who dwells in the Dhamma.

“Then there is the case where a monk studies the Dhamma: dialogues, narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions. He doesn’t spend the day in Dhamma-study. He doesn’t neglect seclusion. He commits himself to internal tranquillity of awareness. This is called a monk who dwells in the Dhamma.

“Now, monk, I have taught you the person who is keen on study, the one who is keen on description, the one who is keen on recitation, the one who is keen on thinking, and the one who dwells in the Dhamma. Whatever a teacher should do—seeking the welfare of his disciples, out of sympathy for them—that have I done for you. Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, monk. Don’t be heedless. Don’t later fall into regret. This is our message to you.”

 

[sayak83]

I find the designation "Quest for mysticism" difficult to define. What is mysticism and how would one even quest for it? Any spiritual journey has two components; study and practice. Of the two, it is practice which yields genuine results. Study can point us in the right direction or give us those Aha! moments but without practice it's by and large an intellectual exercise. The following sutta sums it up perfectly:

English translation of AN 5.73, “One Who Dwells in the Dhamma”

Quest of Mysticism. A more poetic way of discussion what a mystic seeks to gain through such practices.

 

[SalixIncendium]

There has been some discussion and skepticism regarding spiritual experiences, what they are and what, if anything, they reveal about God, Gods, Ultimate Reality etc. In this thread I will present my own tentative sketch guided by some books I have along with my own experiences and conversations with others. Anybody is welcome to contribute to the discussion or raise skeptical concerns as well.

I will open the thread with excerpts from a book called Philosophy of Mysticism that presents a good description of such experiences.

Quest of mysticism
At the center of mysticism as stipulated here is an inner quest to
still the conceptual and emotional apparatuses of the mind and the sense of self in order to sense reality without mediation.
Mental dispositions and emotions and their roots must all be eradicated. The quest begins with substituting a desire for enlightenment for more mundane desires, but even this
desire must be overcome for the mind to become clear of all conceptual, dispositional, and emotional content.

Through the mystical quest, we come to see the reality present when the background conceptual structuring to our awareness is removed from our mind—either experiencing in extrovertive states the phenomenal world independently of our conceptualizations and manipulations, or experiencing in introvertive experiences the normally concealed transcendent source of the self or of
the entire natural realm free of all other mental content.

Types of experiences
There are two classes of mystical experiences: the extrovertive
(which include mindfulness states of consciousness, “nature mysticism,” and “cosmic consciousness”) and the introvertive (which include differentiated nontheistic and theistic mystical experiences and the empty “depth-mystical experience”).
Extrovertive and introvertive mystics share terms such as “oneness,” “being,” and “real,” but their subjects are not the same: extrovertive
mysticism is about the “surface” world of phenomena while introvertive mysticism is about the underlying “depth” sources.

And there are some characteristics that all mystical experiences of both tracks share in one degree or another: the weakening or total elimination of the usual sense of an “ego” separate from other realities, while the true transcendent “self” seems deathless; a sense of timelessness; a focusing of consciousness; a sense that both the experience and what is experienced are ineffable (i.e., cannot be adequately expressed in any words or symbols); feelings of bliss or peace; often there are positive emotions (including empathy)
and an absence of negative ones (anger, hatred, and so on); and a cognitive quality, i.e., a sense that one has directly touched some ultimate reality and attained an insight into the fundamental nature of oneself or of all reality, with an accompanying sense of certainty and objectivity.

Ego elimination
Of particular importance is the misconception involved in the “I-Me-
Mine” complex (Austin 1998, 2006): we normally think we are an independent, self-contained entity, but in fact this “self-consciousness” is just another function of the analytical mind—one that observes the rest of our mental life. By identifying with this function, we reify a separate entity—the “self” or “ego”—and set it of f against the rest of reality. We see ourselves as one separate entity in a sea of distinct entities, and our ego then runs our life without any conscious connection to the source of its own being.
This error (called avidya in Indian mysticism) is not merely the absence of correct knowledge but an active error inhibiting our seeing reality as it is: there is no separate self-existing “ego” within the field of everyday experience but only an ever-changing web of mental and physical processes.

The inner quest necessary for overcoming this falsification
involves a process characterized in different traditions as “forgetting” or “fasting of the mind”—i.e., emptying the mind of all conceptual content, and in the case of the depth-mystical experience the elimination of all sensory input and other differentiated mental content. But mystics affirm that something real is involved in introvertive mystical experiences: through this emptying process, mystics claim that they become directly aware of a transcendent power, not merely conceive a new idea or interpretation of the world.


Goals of spiritual experiences
Cultivating selfless awareness is central to mystical ways of life, but
it should be noted that classical mystics actually discuss mystical experiences very little—how one should lead one’s life, the path to enlightenment, knowledge, and the reality allegedly experienced are more often the topics. Traditionally, the goal is not any momentary experience but a continuous new existence: the mystical quest is not completed with experience but with aligning one’s life with the nature of reality.
Mystics value most the reality experienced and the long-lasting transformed state of a person in the world and not any state of consciousness or momentary experiences, no matter how insightful.

I would also note that one should separate spiritual experiences as described above from paranormal experiences like seeing an angel/ghost, OOB and NDE experiences as well as psychedelic experiences. These involves seeing an object or entity that is non-normal or seeing oneself situated in a different non-normal position or realm. But the character of "I seeing something something, hearing something, being located somewhere" in those experiences remain intact even if the realms and objects are quite extraordinary. They can also lead to insights, but I will not discuss those here. Traditionally they were considered as journeys into other worlds.


All comments, rants welcome.

Great post!! Thank you for sharing this!

I will add that mystical experiences can happen spontaneously, and as @Sunstone mentions, can be and often are life altering, but it can take days, weeks, months, or even years to gain a conceptual understanding the experience (if one indeed ever does).

For some reason, the desire to have a spiritual experience seems to hamper or prevent one from having such an experience. Instead, desire -- any desire including the desire to have a spiritual experience -- seems to reinforce normal everyday consciousness. That is, the "I" that is an observer.

Indeed, which is why many teachers offer practices that focus the mind in order to bring one to an equanimous mental state so that one can realize one's true nature.

In a meditative state, one can begin to experience something mystical, but once an attempt is made to grasp it intellectually during the experience, it can blink out as quickly as it appeared, which is why I believe such experiences tend to be very brief.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I wonder if spiritual experiences are meant to last forever.

I guess you could say one of the best spiritual experiences comes through the experience brought about by the aggregates, but ironically even that won't last forever because one day death comes and all born concepts and experiences will go with the observer's role,

 

[Vinayaka]

For some reason, the desire to have a spiritual experience seems to hamper or prevent one from having such an experience. Instead, desire -- any desire including the desire to have a spiritual experience -- seems to reinforce normal everyday consciousness. That is, the "I" that is an observer.

Hence the observation 'I wasn't expecting it'.

 

[Vinayaka]

T
it should be noted that classical mystics actually discuss mystical experiences very little—how one should lead one’s life, the path to enlightenment, knowledge, and the reality allegedly experienced are more often the topics.

This.
Paraphrasing one of Twain's quotes that applies ... "Better to stay silent and have people think you are fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

In beginning stages, in that battle with ego ... one of the very first things the individual wants to do after a mystical experience is to go tell everyone all about it. We observe that often, and it's natural.

A discussion like this is different because it's not doing the personal sharing involving the ego.

My random thoughts.

 

[atanu]

There has been some discussion and skepticism regarding spiritual experiences, what they are and what, if anything, they reveal about God, Gods, Ultimate Reality etc. In this thread I will present my own tentative sketch guided by some books I have along with my own experiences and conversations with others. Anybody is welcome to contribute to the discussion or raise skeptical concerns as well.

I will open the thread with excerpts from a book called Philosophy of Mysticism that presents a good description of such experiences.

Quest of mysticism
At the center of mysticism as stipulated here is an inner quest to
still the conceptual and emotional apparatuses of the mind and the sense of self in order to sense reality without mediation.
Mental dispositions and emotions and their roots must all be eradicated. The quest begins with substituting a desire for enlightenment for more mundane desires, but even this
desire must be overcome for the mind to become clear of all conceptual, dispositional, and emotional content.

Through the mystical quest, we come to see the reality present when the background conceptual structuring to our awareness is removed from our mind—either experiencing in extrovertive states the phenomenal world independently of our conceptualizations and manipulations, or experiencing in introvertive experiences the normally concealed transcendent source of the self or of
the entire natural realm free of all other mental content.

Types of experiences
There are two classes of mystical experiences: the extrovertive
(which include mindfulness states of consciousness, “nature mysticism,” and “cosmic consciousness”) and the introvertive (which include differentiated nontheistic and theistic mystical experiences and the empty “depth-mystical experience”).
Extrovertive and introvertive mystics share terms such as “oneness,” “being,” and “real,” but their subjects are not the same: extrovertive
mysticism is about the “surface” world of phenomena while introvertive mysticism is about the underlying “depth” sources.

And there are some characteristics that all mystical experiences of both tracks share in one degree or another: the weakening or total elimination of the usual sense of an “ego” separate from other realities, while the true transcendent “self” seems deathless; a sense of timelessness; a focusing of consciousness; a sense that both the experience and what is experienced are ineffable (i.e., cannot be adequately expressed in any words or symbols); feelings of bliss or peace; often there are positive emotions (including empathy)
and an absence of negative ones (anger, hatred, and so on); and a cognitive quality, i.e., a sense that one has directly touched some ultimate reality and attained an insight into the fundamental nature of oneself or of all reality, with an accompanying sense of certainty and objectivity.

Ego elimination
Of particular importance is the misconception involved in the “I-Me-
Mine” complex (Austin 1998, 2006): we normally think we are an independent, self-contained entity, but in fact this “self-consciousness” is just another function of the analytical mind—one that observes the rest of our mental life. By identifying with this function, we reify a separate entity—the “self” or “ego”—and set it of f against the rest of reality. We see ourselves as one separate entity in a sea of distinct entities, and our ego then runs our life without any conscious connection to the source of its own being.
This error (called avidya in Indian mysticism) is not merely the absence of correct knowledge but an active error inhibiting our seeing reality as it is: there is no separate self-existing “ego” within the field of everyday experience but only an ever-changing web of mental and physical processes.

The inner quest necessary for overcoming this falsification
involves a process characterized in different traditions as “forgetting” or “fasting of the mind”—i.e., emptying the mind of all conceptual content, and in the case of the depth-mystical experience the elimination of all sensory input and other differentiated mental content. But mystics affirm that something real is involved in introvertive mystical experiences: through this emptying process, mystics claim that they become directly aware of a transcendent power, not merely conceive a new idea or interpretation of the world.


Goals of spiritual experiences
Cultivating selfless awareness is central to mystical ways of life, but
it should be noted that classical mystics actually discuss mystical experiences very little—how one should lead one’s life, the path to enlightenment, knowledge, and the reality allegedly experienced are more often the topics. Traditionally, the goal is not any momentary experience but a continuous new existence: the mystical quest is not completed with experience but with aligning one’s life with the nature of reality.
Mystics value most the reality experienced and the long-lasting transformed state of a person in the world and not any state of consciousness or momentary experiences, no matter how insightful.

Nice thread. According to some neuroscientists, however, these experiences are states of waking state brain. What will you say for that?

I would also note that one should separate spiritual experiences as described above from paranormal experiences

like seeing an angel/ghost, OOB and NDE experiences as well as psychedelic experiences. These involves seeing an object or entity that is non-normal or seeing oneself situated in a different non-normal position or realm. But the character of "I seeing something something, hearing something, being located somewhere" in those experiences remain intact even if the realms and objects are quite extraordinary. They can also lead to insights, but I will not discuss those here. Traditionally they were considered as journeys into other worlds.

All comments, rants welcome.

There are peer reviewed reports of NDE and I feel that OOB and NDE are as normal as other waking or dreaming state experiences of consciousness, which is upto all kinds of tricks. IMO, only, the Turiya, the fourth, the non dual self can be the unalterable truth. This is the consciousness that runs through the three states of waking, dreaming, and sleeping. A perfect mediator essentially sees the deep sleep state in its unlimited infinite and blissful glory, by being that.

 

[Thief]

skipping a few details.....
I have seen what I believe to be.....a spiritual plane
and I felt as if I was home

there was no event leading to the dream I had
it simply came to me on a quiet summer afternoon as I was taking a nap

life changing?.......no
this life has nothing to do with it......sort of

spiritual events of other kinds?......everyday
every word or deed draws the next life to you......or......
not

 

[Nakosis]

There has been some discussion and skepticism regarding spiritual experiences, what they are and what, if anything, they reveal about God, Gods, Ultimate Reality etc. In this thread I will present my own tentative sketch guided by some books I have along with my own experiences and conversations with others. Anybody is welcome to contribute to the discussion or raise skeptical concerns as well.

All comments, rants welcome.

I noticed you didn't say anything about a mystical experience's relationship to God.

 

[sayak83]

I noticed you didn't say anything about a mystical experience's relationship to God.

The transcendent power experienced by some mystics is believed to be a direct experience of God by them.

 

[sayak83]

Nice thread. According to some neuroscientists, however, these experiences are states of waking state brain. What will you say for that?



There are peer reviewed reports of NDE and I feel that OOB and NDE are as normal as other waking or dreaming state experiences of consciousness, which is upto all kinds of tricks. IMO, only, the Turiya, the fourth, the non dual self can be the unalterable truth. This is the consciousness that runs through the three states of waking, dreaming, and sleeping. A perfect mediator essentially sees the deep sleep state in its unlimited infinite and blissful glory, by being that.

Every state including the turiya has a brain state. One can't have any form of sophisticated experience without there being a neural state created by a complex brain activity. That's why we need a brain. Otherwise bacteria could have gained enlightenment as well. Nothing of significance follows from this.

 

[atanu]

Every state including the turiya has a brain state. One can't have any form of sophisticated experience without there being a neural state created by a complex brain activity. That's why we need a brain. Otherwise bacteria could have gained enlightenment as well. Nothing of significance follows from this.

Hmm. Then that is view of a doctor and not of the Turiya.

In my understanding, Turiya, as per foundational Shruti, is non dual and self. What can be meant by non-dual self? There is no second.

That Turiya has a brain state is a third party view and has nothing of the quality of Turiya.

YMMV.

 

[YmirGF]

Some excellent points, folks. Keep 'em coming.

 

[YmirGF]

This.
Paraphrasing one of Twain's quotes that applies ... "Better to stay silent and have people think you are fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

It is in full knowledge of this quote that I am wary of replying to a thread like this. There is much in the OP I agree with as well as much I'm just rolling my eyes over.

In beginning stages, in that battle with ego ... one of the very first things the individual wants to do after a mystical experience is to go tell everyone all about it. We observe that often, and it's natural.

My biggest issue with all this is the continual attack on the poor, much maligned, ego, to the point where eradication is deemed necessary. From my viewpoint, it seems more to be rooted in a misunderstanding of the nature and role of the ego and should be more correctly labeled as an effort against egotism and egotistical behaviors.

The ego itself will not hold the curious back from investigating a larger view of personality especially when the ego is reinforced and treated as a necessary aspect of being, rather than the ugly duckling of the psyche. Rather than trying to kill the ego, try wrapping the ego in a loving embrace where it understands that it is a valuable part of a far larger identity.

 

[Vinayaka]

My biggest issue with all this is the continual attack on the poor, much maligned, ego, to the point where eradication is deemed necessary. From my viewpoint, it seems more to be rooted in a misunderstanding of the nature and role of the ego and should be more correctly labeled as an effort against egotism and egotistical behaviors.

I agree. Despising anything isn't beneficial.

 

[YmirGF]

Quest of mysticism
At the center of mysticism as stipulated here is an inner quest to still the conceptual and emotional apparatuses of the mind and the sense of self in order to sense reality without mediation. Mental dispositions and emotions and their roots must all be eradicated. The quest begins with substituting a desire for enlightenment for more mundane desires, but even this
desire must be overcome for the mind to become clear of all conceptual, dispositional, and emotional content.

My main quibble with this is that so-called spiritual experiences are deeply emotional experiences. I defy anyone to dispute that as said experiences go to the core of the very being, so to try to attain such states by eradicating emotional reality is not likely to produce very fruitful results. I might be willing to go with the dropping of negative emotions and negative mental or pessimistic outlooks however.

Through the mystical quest, we come to see the reality present when the background conceptual structuring to our awareness is removed from our mind—either experiencing in extrovertive states the phenomenal world independently of our conceptualizations and manipulations, or experiencing in introvertive experiences the normally concealed transcendent source of the self or of the entire natural realm free of all other mental content.

If only the experience of reality was as binary as the author pretends.

Types of experiences

There are two classes of mystical experiences: the extrovertive (which include mindfulness states of consciousness, “nature mysticism,” and “cosmic consciousness”) and the introvertive (which include differentiated nontheistic and theistic mystical experiences and the empty “depth-mystical experience”). Extrovertive and introvertive mystics share terms such as “oneness,” “being,” and “real,” but their subjects are not the same: extrovertive mysticism is about the “surface” world of phenomena while introvertive mysticism is about the underlying “depth” sources.

More binary thinking. *sigh* I'd propose a third class which represents a holistic mystical view of reality and is a combination of the other two. But, that's just me, I guess. The Holistic Mystic?

And there are some characteristics that all mystical experiences of both tracks share in one degree or another: the weakening or total elimination of the usual sense of an “ego” separate from other realities, while the true transcendent “self” seems deathless; a sense of timelessness; a focusing of consciousness; a sense that both the experience and what is experienced are ineffable (i.e., cannot be adequately expressed in any words or symbols); feelings of bliss or peace; often there are positive emotions (including empathy)and an absence of negative ones (anger, hatred, and so on); and a cognitive quality, i.e., a sense that one has directly touched some ultimate reality and attained an insight into the fundamental nature of oneself or of all reality, with an accompanying sense of certainty and objectivity.

Again, from the Holistic Mystical view the ego simply steps aside knowing full well that it is safe and secure and knowingly steps back to allow other aspects of the psyche to move to the foreground of consciousness. In this view, the psyche is one big happy family.

Ego elimination

Of particular importance is the misconception involved in the “I-Me-Mine” complex (Austin 1998, 2006): we normally think we are an independent, self-contained entity, but in fact this “self-consciousness” is just another function of the analytical mind — one that observes the rest of our mental life. By identifying with this function, we reify a separate entity—the “self” or “ego”—and set it off against the rest of reality. We see ourselves as one separate entity in a sea of distinct entities, and our ego then runs our life without any conscious connection to the source of its own being.

This error (called avidya in Indian mysticism) is not merely the absence of correct knowledge but an active error inhibiting our seeing reality as it is: there is no separate self-existing “ego” within the field of everyday experience but only an ever-changing web of mental and physical processes.

All selfless claptrap, imho. I do respect that many individual s believe that this is implicitly so, but you do not have to sacrifice the greatest gift given in order to see more of the psychological countryside.

The inner quest necessary for overcoming this falsification involves a process characterized in different traditions as “forgetting” or “fasting of the mind”—i.e., emptying the mind of all conceptual content, and in the case of the depth-mystical experience the elimination of all sensory input and other differentiated mental content. But mystics affirm that something real is involved in introvertive mystical experiences: through this emptying process, mystics claim that they become directly aware of a transcendent power, not merely conceive a new idea or interpretation of the world.

And the Holistic Mystic would agree with the latter, in more ways than most would appreciate and see this route as being that of the extremists who have little appreciation of the psychology of being or have any affinity for the psyche they are a part of.

Goals of spiritual experiences

Cultivating selfless awareness is central to mystical ways of life, but it should be noted that classical mystics actually discuss mystical experiences very little—how one should lead one’s life, the path to enlightenment, knowledge, and the reality allegedly experienced are more often the topics. Traditionally, the goal is not any momentary experience but a continuous new existence: the mystical quest is not completed with experience but with aligning one’s life with the nature of reality. Mystics value most the reality experienced and the long-lasting transformed state of a person in the world and not any state of consciousness or momentary experiences, no matter how insightful.

The Holistic Mystic cultivates awareness of being and does not make a big deal about selfless or selfishness and considers such thinking to be the domain of the self-righteous -- however ironic. Their goal is an open ended goal and experience seen as endless. It is a middle path between neglect and extreme and one through which empathy burbles up without effort because the individual is not at war with themselves or has neutered an important portion of their being.

All comments, rants welcome.

Well, you asked.