Several months ago, as I was riding on the New York City subway, I glanced up at the usual band of advertising that ran over the windows and noticed something unusual: a small square poster that contained the logo of the New York Public Library, along with the following quote: "If we had keen vision and feeling of all ordinary human life, it would be like hearing the grass grow and the squirrel's heartbeat, and we should die of the roar which lies on the other side of silence." From Middlemarch, by George Eliot.
I had not read Middlemarch (or any George Eliot, for that matter) and didn't know the context, but I was immediately drawn in to this beautiful sentence, with its description of the dulled state in which most of us live and the yearning to peel back this dullness in order to experience the powerful presence of life itself. This quote struck me because I, like countless others, had briefly and partially heard this "roar", had seen the place on the "other side of silence", and had felt a kind of dying. These encounters showed me that there is a purposeful presence that underlies all creation, and that there is a oneness to everything. The experience of this presence is often called "mysticism," and Eliot's sentence is an astonishing evocation of the mystic's journey.
All mystics share a similar understanding; that there is a presence, which goes by many names (and that I will refer to as God), that creates and animates everything, from the squirrel's heartbeat to the spinning of galaxies, and that we can, through our own consciousness, connect to this presence, which is a deeper and truer reality than the one that most of us experience in our everyday lives. And through this encounter we are transformed.
When exploring mysticism, there are four essential questions that naturally arise:
1. How can one access this deeper reality?
2. What does this have to do with religion?
3. Is this "deeper reality" real, or just a biochemical reaction or delusional state?
4. Why should one care about accessing this deeper reality?
These are difficult questions to answer accurately (and briefly), because the mystical experience, like an aesthetic response to a painting or the pleasures of sexual union, transcends and resists words. So mystics, like poets, always talk in metaphor and allusion. For help in these answers, then, I will turn to quotes from a diverse, and perhaps unexpected, group of mystics:
1. How can one access this deeper reality?
Mystics, like Eliot, know that our usual experience of reality is dulled, incomplete or illusory. As Eliot notes, though, this dullness is actually a protection that keeps us from being overwhelmed by the power of the true nature of things. Mystics, however, yearn to lift this dullness, and to experience the force of life as directly as possible. In order to experience this we must, as Eliot writes, penetrate to the "other side of silence". In other words, we must first quiet the constant mental chatter that dulls and distracts us, and once the mind is quieted and there is inner silence we can begin to perceive the "roar" that lies beneath. This is the meditative practice, which is the mystic's doorway to experience God's presence. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., the early 20th century Supreme Court Justice, described this dynamic, in terms very similar to Eliot's, with his yearning to transcend normal perception and arrive at a truer, more powerful reality: "I wouldn't give a fig for the simplicity on this side of complexity, but I would give my right arm for the simplicity on the far side of complexity."
2. What does this have to do with religion?
We can -- and much too often do -- argue about the different teachings of various religions and their many attempts to describe the nature of God. But the true purpose of all religions is to help facilitative a connection to this deeper reality, and the mystical experience is the original spark that informs religions. Because religion often gets hijacked by those who seek power or control, we may loose sight of this mechanism, but, as Henri Bergson, the French Philosopher who won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1921, wrote: "Religion is to mysticism what popularization is to science."
The mystical experience, however, is by no means limited to the realm of religion and does not require the life of a pious ascetic. And one certainly does not need religion or a proscribed belief structure in order to experience this presence. Mahatma Gandhi affirmed this with his simple aphorism, "God has no religion."
3. Is this "deeper reality" real, or just a biochemical reaction or delusional state?
The mystical experience is, I assume, a measurable biochemical phenomenon. This does not diminish or negate it, though, because everything that we experience, from the feeling of love to the perception of the apple in front of us, is some form of biochemical reaction in our bodies. That's how we operate. And just as we can explore the tangible qualities of the apple, we can also explore the intangible qualities of love -- and of the mystical experience. Mystics know, however, that they have glimpsed only a small part of the whole, because as human beings we are limited by our five senses, our level of development, and our cognitive abilities. But their descriptions are remarkably consistent across cultures, times and places, and give us a sense of the qualities of this deeper reality, with the recognition of an omnipresent consciousness that is the actual "material" of all existence. The 17th Century Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza saw this clearly, and in his treatise "The Ethics" wrote, "Besides God no substance can be granted or conceived."
Scientists who have peered deeply in to the essential nature of reality have also seen this presence. Max Planck, the founder of Quantum Physics, famously observed, "All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force ... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind."
4. Why should one care about accessing this deeper reality?
Plato addressed this question more than 2,300 years ago in his famous "Allegory of the Cave." In this allegory, Plato imagines a cave in which people are bound motionless in front of a wall, staring at shadows of cut-out images which, lit from a fire and natural light behind them, slowly move across the wall. These people come to believe that these shadows of shadows are all that there is to reality, and debate endlessly about the nature of these fleeting two dimensional images. One man, though, is freed from his chains and stumbles to the light at the mouth of the cave. As he slowly adjusts to the brightness he is able to see the sun and feels its warmth. Plato writes, "He would understand that the Sun is the source of the seasons and the years, and is the steward of all things in the visible place, and is in a certain way the cause of all those things he and his companions had been seeing."
For the first time in his life this man experiences freedom, as he sees that he had been living in a cold dark cave, separated from his fellow prisoners and ignorant of his true nature and reality. This is an experience of God's presence, in which the sense of separation and the desires of the ego are clearly seen as foolish and dangerous illusions that keep us bound and ignorant. The impulse to seek this presence is to know ourselves, each other and our world as clearly as possible in order to live at the highest level.
Andrew Z. Cohen: Spontaneous Revelation and Noble Effort
Mysticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mysticism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Religion, Mysticism, Spirituality: Towards A Unification of ...
B: "But their descriptions are remarkably consistent across cultures, times and places, and give us a sense of the qualities of this deeper reality"
In my view, (B) directly follows from (A), given that the same biochemical phenomena would give rise to similar experience and, therefore, the descriptions of the experience.
------------------------------------------------------------------.
C. "The mystical experience is, I assume, a measurable biochemical phenomenon. This does not diminish or negate it, though, because everything that we experience, from the feeling of love to the perception of the apple in front of us, is some form of biochemical reaction in our bodies. "
That really depends on what one means by 'diminish'
It says that mystical experience is similar to the "perception of the apple in front of us", i.e., it is nothing special. It is just a reaction of the brain to certain electrochemical stimuli. And that there is nothing necessarily "deeper" about mystical experience than watching an apple.
Where does the idea of "deeper reality" come from?
Finally, the quote by Max Planck is nothing more than "argument by false authority". Max Planck did not use his knowledge of Physics (his expertise) to deduce that we "must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind."
In other words, if Max Planck was afraid of the dark, that wouldn't mean that Quantum Mechanics says that dark is dangerous.
Who seeks End and Answer to The Eternal Mystery. And, Truth, above all.
Whatsoever “IT” may be.
It is The Only “Religion” of Free Mystics.
It’s all that need concern any seeker, spiritualist or scientist. Hence, were a mystic to find some hell, heaven, messiah, angel, god, goddess - after initial/intermediate mystical “happenings” - as The End Experience; then, that is what he/she shall state boldly, bravely, bare-knuckled.
Yet, this is not what The Happening is in The Final “Knowing”.
However, it would be wrong to say “IT” happens to any voyeuristic, pedantic individual. Mysticism is not The Realm of fools or philosophers but of pious, true seekers.
One’s “inherited” religion has got nothing to do with That Which Is.
But one has to, at the least, be aware and sensitive enough to realize that one must “respect” LIFE for “IT” to, in turn, “honor” the devotee. Which entails that one be A Vegetarian. Non-Vegetarianism is Bad Karma. Rest happens as is one’s Karma.
“That” Which Is has no favorites.
Whose Karma is, gets “IT”.
Yet, no New Truth EVER dawns.
What does is, one finds by one’s Own Self that “One” is The Primordial “Substance” of ALL LIFE. And, that everything and everyone is but ONE and OWN SELF in QUINTESSENCE.
“Happenings” along The Way are innumerable. Yet, in The End is UNITY.
It’s all very scientific, spiritual and surreal.
This is The TRUTH/GOD of FREE MYSTICS.
There’s nothing BEYOND “IT”.
In the highlands of Scotland (where my ancestors are from) it is still a common experience for people to go "oot and aboot" as they say. It is not uncommon for members of my family, extended and close, to recount lucid dreams of flying, and more consciously directed out of body events as well.
Descriptions of an expanded reality, where the dreamer/traveler moves consciously in a dream state, and where matter is seen as energy moving in a confined space, are accepted phenomena in many parts of the world, both ancient and modern, and these experiences are not reserved for the adept.
Many people have had the experience of "rolling over" and waking up, but how many have awakened just prior to rolling into their bodies, only to realize that they have actually rolled into themselves from somewhere slightly above their sleeping forms?
Almost every time I ask that question I get at least one person who says something like, "Wow, man, that happened to you too?"
Interesting idea that Christ was a shaman. My Methodist mother-in-law contends he was the actual King of Israel because he was descended from King David.
I am inclined to think that the real life Joshua bin Miriam was merged with the subject of a 1st century BCE teaching text of the Essene, who then evolved into "Jesus" of the gospels.
Thank you rabbi for a beautiful and inspiring article.
wishing you well,
Alan
So to continue with the tree - the sound of leaves falling is similarly, an interaction - neither wholly "in here" nor "out there" - of our hearing and "something" 'out there'; and most powerfully - and providing the biggest challenge if you really take the time to get quiet inside and let go of previous conceptions - the same is true of the solid "feel" of the bark. As Barfield says later in the book, there is no such thing as an unseen sight, an unheard sound, and most provocative - an unfelt "solidity".
(conclusion below)
Having pondered that for some time - slowly, delicately, allowing for our usual preconceptions to be at least temporarily in abeyance - consider now what we experience as a "tree". What about the brown of the bark? Isn't that also, Barfield suggests, an interaction between our vision and something out there, which he calls "the unrepresented".
This will take a moment to unfold (sorry my prose is so leaden - better to read Barfield, a master poet).
As Heisenberg told us repeatedly, and as far as I am aware, remains accepted in the physics community, we can't accurately say we have direct contact with a wholly mind-independent world when we do physics; rather, according to Heisenberg, it is not Nature that we study but Nature's response to our questions. To translate this into Barfield's example - it is not some entirely separate, mind-independent "thing" that we contact in our experience of the tree, but rather, the response of our visual perception to "something" whose nature we cannot wholly
What a beautiful article. I particularly liked the evocative quote from George Eliot. I'm also impressed that you're staying with the comments, responding empathically yet calmly. Regarding a few commenters who felt you hadn't addressed the question of whether a mystical experiencing is "merely" a bio-chemical phenomenon, I'd like to share a viewpoint from the opening chapter of Owen Barfield's "Saving the Appearances" (the opening chapter, a mere 5 pages, if you take the time to savor its implications, provides one of the most powerful means of cleansing the "doors of perception" in order to "see a world in a grain of sand" that I've found).
Barfield asks us to consider a rainbow, and inquire, "Is the rainbow really "there"? Then ask, what do we mean by thinking of something as "out there"? That it exists independently of our perception, right? But if we consider a rainbow, we see that what we call the experience of the rainbow is neither wholly "inside" nor "outside", but rather, an interaction between our visual perception and a combination of water vapor and sunlight.
(Part 2 is below)...
Dwell not in the inner void;
Be serene in the oneness of things,
And [dualism] vanishes by itself.
"On Believing in Mind" (Shinjin-No-Mei)
In "Manual of Zen Buddhism" by DT Suzuki
And (dualism) vanishes by itself."
Yes!, 'That!(for lack of a better word)'
Thomas Merton
Sorry if someone posted Merton's experience all ready. Is this experience a different way of knowing, or as Scrooge said, " You may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of
cheese, ..."
"all walking around shining like the sun"
In the Rg Veda, the greatest number of invocations are to Savitr, often translated as the sun in the sky. There are also many invocations to Usha, the dawn. Translators, without the requisite initiatory experiences have erroneously considered that a propitiation to the sun-in-the-sky-god was being conducted, and not an invocation of the inner experience.
There is no how, it is everywhere. There is only how to accessing a created or unreal conditioned state. When those drop off, reality is all there is.
2. What does this have to do with religion?
Religions tried to deal with all this in the beginning and now they are mutilated beyond recognition.
3. Is this "deeper reality" real, or just a biochemical reaction or delusional state?
The term deeper reality is subjective to how deep one's belief in current conditioned, unreality is. If the mind is simple, clear sharp and eager then nothing is to be done.
4. Why should one care about accessing this deeper reality?
One does not need to access this deeper reality, if one feels that present conditions are superficial, conditioned, random etc.. then the mind automatically tries to find the truth, it is an impersonal process. We try to make it personal, hence reality is always elusive. There is no monetary gain for accessing reality, one accesses it to access it, that's all. We are all conditioned to think in terms to individual and the individual will not do anything without reward or punishment, reality is not a reward or punishment for anything. The term access itself implies that something needs to be done, in actuality, seeing things as they are is all there is.
Sorry if all this is garbage, please ignore...
no place to go and nothing to do, as the saying goes
the observer and the observed become one
yet...
what of effort?
I would use the word awareness rather than vision.
awareness gives us that keen vision to see the Real.
the Real is right there in front of us but we see not.
the mystics see a reality that is yet to be seen by most.
therefore most hear them not.
if we listen we will find they are all saying the same things.
we are that that is expressing its potential in infinite forms of expressions living and nonliving and dont be so sure about that nonliving being nonliving.
neither the materialist nor the religious hear their words. find one catholic church teaching its masses the mystics like eckhart or st john of the cross.
I fear that which we all love shall be drowned
And washed away
By a sea of Erudition!.'
Unk Zen Master.
Though a seeker may have to wade through a lot of theology to appreciate that experience.
Regarding the mystical experience, William James wrote of it in a similar vein when he described "the peak experience." Beyond theology, beyond clergy, beyond meditation, the peak experience may come as a gift and a person doesn't really know where it came from or why he or she was fortunate enough to receive it. But it is far more powerful than any drug on the planet.