If you have most, or even all, the answers, you won't be interested in what I have to say. But if your understanding and experience isn't so doctrinaire, and your spiritual concerns allow for doubt, pain, questioning and limitations then I only offer that you might be more normal that you realize. Being imperfect and incomplete helps you see and accept things the way they are and then there is still more. But I don't think you have to see and accept everything. The all things considered approach, except for NPR, is indeed a considerable undertaking. I guess that's why it gives me brain freeze.
For much of my life, I was putting together "Chuck's Pretty Good, Down Home, Systematic Theology" and a "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Spiritual Disorders." It had the usual cuts and additions that at some point were to make a complete whole. To my surprise and God's laughter, that didn't work out as well as I hoped. I thought it had some really good stuff, but it wasn't anything I really identified with.
I need to say that my experience says nothing about anyone else's journey. And most assuredly, it's the same other way around. The only truth I have is what is needed for myself. But it is open to added understanding and experience. Where I am now is no doubt temporal. But I don't anticipate any major changes. More likely, it will be little changes or evolutions that someday will make their own distinction and I'll then yet be at a different place. As uncomfortable as that is, I wouldn't want it to be any other way. If you are happy and content where you are then that's your place to be but not necessarily where someone else needs to be. If you still feel unsettled, you likely have further to go before you are home. But still, there is always the possibility of more.
Most of the time mystical refers to the rare, the ethereal, the intuitive, the unseen, and the hidden or to confused and vague ideas. I relate mainly to the confused and vague. Others are more adamant about what mysticism is; writing whole volumes about how to do it right which seems contrary to the concept in the first place. To me, its over-definition is more of the mainstream trying to suck in everything they can and if they can't, make some absolute judgment about it. Can you say control issues?
I think many believe there is more to spiritual reality than what is covered by their faith community. The fairly well known militant atheist Richard Harris believes that divergent faiths can't get along because they believe each other is wrong at crucial points. For some that is probably true, but there are those adherents who can see that those differences shouldn't interfere with cooperation in achieving a greater good. It is better for his argument if people stay close-minded, exclusive and completely comfortable in their spiritual lives.
Since many mystics often describe mysticism by their own experience more than any replication of an ancient or contemporary spiritual teacher, there should be some allowance for a variety of understandings. I think of my understanding as being more practical than anything else. But that term has already been overused. So I'm going to call it the little piece of the wholly other that I sense as being right there but with a strong sense of even more laying beyond that. It's not the thing that I can touch by just reaching out my hand toward the sky because it's more known by going further into my soul.
But no matter of teachings, traditions and transcendental experiences, there is an arrogance in seeing what is believed as temporal, as being capable of taking you only so far. But there is also some humility in admitting how much further there is to go and how much longer that might take. Most mystics whether through a marked event or just coming to the next place on their spiritual journey or religious belief or spiritual understanding have in common a knowing of God, the Divine, the Wholly Other that doesn't need anything else in order to believe. One might almost say the less the better, as there is no need to explain the Cosmos or God on an ultimate level, as if they are fully explainable to begin with. Mystery, paradox and unknowable truths become the norm.
For much of my life, I was putting together "Chuck's Pretty Good, Down Home, Systematic Theology" and a "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Spiritual Disorders." It had the usual cuts and additions that at some point were to make a complete whole. To my surprise and God's laughter, that didn't work out as well as I hoped. I thought it had some really good stuff, but it wasn't anything I really identified with.
At many point, my spiritual journey included a variety of ecclesiastical experiences. I strove to be as a stable part of whatever church communion I was in at the time. I thought that I was moving closer to "The Truth." I thought I was doing something that God wanted done. At best, I now I see that I was only an Interloper For Jesus (IFJ). I never had the spiritual ability, mentality or temperament to be a part of the academic, communal, and structured church. But instead of all the experiences getting me nowhere fast; they were realities that I could not deny. It took awhile longer to find what did, but the reward was my own personal happiness.
I need to say that my experience says nothing about anyone else's journey. And most assuredly, it's the same other way around. The only truth I have is what is needed for myself. But it is open to added understanding and experience. Where I am now is no doubt temporal. But I don't anticipate any major changes. More likely, it will be little changes or evolutions that someday will make their own distinction and I'll then yet be at a different place. As uncomfortable as that is, I wouldn't want it to be any other way. If you are happy and content where you are then that's your place to be but not necessarily where someone else needs to be. If you still feel unsettled, you likely have further to go before you are home. But still, there is always the possibility of more.
Most of the time mystical refers to the rare, the ethereal, the intuitive, the unseen, and the hidden or to confused and vague ideas. I relate mainly to the confused and vague. Others are more adamant about what mysticism is; writing whole volumes about how to do it right which seems contrary to the concept in the first place. To me, its over-definition is more of the mainstream trying to suck in everything they can and if they can't, make some absolute judgment about it. Can you say control issues?
I think many believe there is more to spiritual reality than what is covered by their faith community. The fairly well known militant atheist Richard Harris believes that divergent faiths can't get along because they believe each other is wrong at crucial points. For some that is probably true, but there are those adherents who can see that those differences shouldn't interfere with cooperation in achieving a greater good. It is better for his argument if people stay close-minded, exclusive and completely comfortable in their spiritual lives.
Since many mystics often describe mysticism by their own experience more than any replication of an ancient or contemporary spiritual teacher, there should be some allowance for a variety of understandings. I think of my understanding as being more practical than anything else. But that term has already been overused. So I'm going to call it the little piece of the wholly other that I sense as being right there but with a strong sense of even more laying beyond that. It's not the thing that I can touch by just reaching out my hand toward the sky because it's more known by going further into my soul.
But no matter of teachings, traditions and transcendental experiences, there is an arrogance in seeing what is believed as temporal, as being capable of taking you only so far. But there is also some humility in admitting how much further there is to go and how much longer that might take. Most mystics whether through a marked event or just coming to the next place on their spiritual journey or religious belief or spiritual understanding have in common a knowing of God, the Divine, the Wholly Other that doesn't need anything else in order to believe. One might almost say the less the better, as there is no need to explain the Cosmos or God on an ultimate level, as if they are fully explainable to begin with. Mystery, paradox and unknowable truths become the norm.
For me, I don't plan to push ahead. But eventually, I can see that it might look all too familiarly organized with meetings to go to that have attempts at chapter and verse systematizations, which would no doubt be much better than my originals. I admit to both my contempt for and love for formality. Too often it can be abused and too often it is the very thing that needs to be done. I would be concerned, but I don't have any reason to do anything about it, especially when I see others who do it so much better. The varieties of experiences, paths, and journeys have more merit than a singular assumption that anyone is just coincidentally part of the truth by birth. There is plenty that can be drawn from any kind of spiritual knowing - like love, kindness, charity, inspiration, compassion, beauty, wisdom, courage, and faith. These are more than enough. But I will stay uncomfortably open to what else might be there.
No comments:
Post a Comment