Chapter 6 Me, Reality and the Divine

May 19, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

CHAPTER SIX

ME, REALITY AND THE DIVINE

I have been using Ken Wilber’s quadrant model to analyse the experiences of the mystic in comparison to schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder and particularly the characteristics of mania. I have looked at the four quadrants and illustrated some of the stages or levels that are found in each quadrant and how they relate to these themes. But I want to return now to quadrant 1 for a moment. This is the quadrant that reflects our individual interior meanings and values at various levels of development. This is our phenomenological world.

6.1 OUR SELF

An important question for us to ask is: ‘Just what is it that moves through these levels and stages in quadrant 1?’ We are not talking about physiological structures here such as aspects or components of the brain: that is in quadrant 2. Neither are we talking about the collective: neither objective measurable structures in society nor our culture with its shared meanings and values. Rather, quadrant 1 represents a more abstract notion called the mind. It is important that the mind is not confused with concrete, physiological aspects of ourselves: the mind is an abstract concept whereas the brain is a concrete, physiological one. The brain can be ill, damaged and so on, but as Thomas Szasz argues, there is no such thing as mental illness. This is because the abstract mind cannot be physically ill or damaged. Unfortunately we inevitably use mixed metaphors in describing the mind, such that we may talk about mental structures, or psychic structures, but there is no concrete physiological structure in the mind as such. Perhaps a better term is ‘mental organisation’, or ‘self mental complex’. Other terms might include our ‘organised self-system’, or our ‘ego’. As we have already seen, each of the four quadrants do not exist in isolation: rather, there is an inter-relationship. Thus the mind is not isolated or separate from the brain and body, or from society and culture. Nevertheless, we cannot perform a brain scan and locate a physiological ‘organised self-system’, ‘ego’ or ‘self mental complex’. For shorthand, in this chapter, I am going to refer to this abstract self-system as the ‘ego’, though this may not entail all the definitions and descriptions given to it by Sigmund Freud and his followers, who popularised this term in the west. It is this abstract ‘organised self-system complex’ or ‘ego’ that moves through the levels or stages in quadrant 1.

Is this then who ‘I’ am? The answer is no, ‘I’ am not the ‘ego’ or ‘organised self-system complex’. ‘I’ am not my body, not my mind and neither am I my ego. In the west, we are familiar with the idea of us having, as part of our nature, a ‘soul’ or ‘spirit’. Am ‘I’ my ‘soul or ‘spirit’ then? No I am not. Some of us may think of ourselves as continuing in existence after death as some disembodied, essential ’I’, a disembodied ‘ego’. Note that if we think in this way we are giving the abstract ego a concrete existence: we don’t think of it like that but rather think in terms of an eternal  ‘soul or ‘spirit’. In Christianity and in Islam this disembodied ‘ego/soul’ is eventually reintegrated into a new, glorious physical resurrection body ready to face the Final Judgement e.t.c.. Even if we do not believe in these religions, we may think in terms of our disembodied ‘ego/soul’ meeting up with friends and relatives who have gone before us, being welcomed and reassured by them. In other, eastern religions, this disembodied ‘ego/soul’ may go through many earthly rebirths, being reincarnated in various forms. But even if this were so, that some ‘ego/soul’, some ‘spirit/self’ continued after our physical death, who would it be? What is it that would be thinking, valuing, witnessing and giving meaning to what it encountered? What would be the ‘I’ of  the ‘I/spirit/self/ego’? Would there be a soul of the soul?

Mystics and sages past and present who have reached the end of knowledge suggest that the ‘Self’ (capital letter ‘S’ because this is the Absolute, it is as far as we can go) or the ‘I’ is Consciousness. But it is important that Consciousness is defined in the correct way. Consciousness is not the locus of attention, concentration or mental focus. Consciousness, like other aspects of ourselves, is multi-layered. We are reasonably familiar with what have become everyday terms like conscious, sub-conscious and unconscious. Qualities such as attention and mental focus may be part or aspects of some of these terms, but we are interested in Consciousness, (with a capital ‘C’) or what Wilber calls ‘Consciousness-as-Such’: the Essence of Consciousness. Consciousness is Passive, Boundless and Timeless, unlike attention and mental focus or concentration which is active and selective. We will return to this in a moment.

6.2 PROJECTIONS OF FORM ON THE FORMLESS

What about the Divine? How do we understand God? Just as we may mistakenly project our abstract ‘organised self-system complex’ or ‘ego’ into some disembodied spirit state and call it our ‘soul’, ‘I’ or ‘real self’, so too, these days, if we believe in an external deity, we tend to project human characteristics on to such a deity and ‘spiritualise’ them to form an objectively existing ‘deity-out-there-with-characteristics’. This is made up two processes, firstly, ‘anthropomorphication’ – that is, projecting human-like qualities onto the Divine, and secondly, ‘reification’ – that is, projecting abstract qualities in such a way that we consider that they have concrete existence ‘out there’ and may in turn influence us. It is by these processes that we might find ourselves thinking of God as some old, grey-bearded man-in-the-sky, or as a stern Judge looking down on us and taking account of all that we do, or as a compassionate, merciful father ready to heal and forgive, or as an empowering Amazonian –like warrior queen, or a tender, nurturing mother and so on.

However, it is important for us to remember what these forms of the Divine really are: abstract, mental projections that do not exist in concrete, material reality. Many mystics agree that the Divine is greater than such forms and limitations, that the Divine transcends such forms, concepts and ideas. Mystics across various cultures, such as Meister Eckhart (German, Christian Dominican Friar), Shankara (Hindu), Ibn al-Arabi and Rumi (Sufi, Islam) came to experience the Stillness, Emptiness, Silence and Formlessness of the Divine, Transcending all form, concept, language and understanding. Even when we read these words, we are such creatures of form that we may still think of God as a Disembodied Identity, a Spirit-with-Qualities, existing in a location in time and space, a Location and Seat of all Wisdom, Knowledge and Love. But these mystics describe the Absolute as without attributes or qualities, beyond language.

What then do the mystics say of our abstract mental projections such that we think of the Divine as some old, grey-bearded man-in-the-sky, or as a stern Judge looking down on us and taking account of all that we do, or as a compassionate, merciful father ready to heal and forgive, or as an empowering Amazonian –like warrior queen, or a tender, nurturing mother and so on? Are these forms to be discarded? Well, typically, the answer is yes and no. We are such creatures of form, living as we do in a world of material forms, conceptual forms and linguistic forms, that it is hard for us to relate to the Divine as this Transcendent Formless Silence. If we wish to encounter the Divine-as-Essence, we must ultimately abandon form to be united with the Formless, but in our early steps on such a journey, mystics argue that it may be useful to think of the Divine in terms of such forms. But if we adopt such forms of the Divine, we have to continually remind ourselves that a) these metaphorical forms both reveal and veil the Divine, b) they limit the Divine and that c) these forms are not objectively or concretely real forms, rather they are more or less useful metaphors to assist us in our spiritual discoveries. Some mystics argue that the Divine manifests to us in our imagination by the use of such metaphorical forms. In this way the Divine meets us where we are, with appropriate imagery and language to assist us on our unique, individual spiritual path. Thus the imagination, according to Ibn al-Arabi, serves as a peninsula or Isthmus between the physical and the spiritual or Divine. Such forms are useful at the moment they are given, but may be superseded later by other, contradictory or paradoxical forms, giving other insights into different aspects or facets of the Divine. Such forms, being presented as relevant to the individual, are invariably coloured by that individual’s context in history and location. (Quadrants 3 & 4). Indeed, Arabi suggests that the Divine never repeats such imagery because the Divine is Infinite. This ever-changing presentation of forms of the Divine is called ‘Theomorphism’. The insistence that one form and one form only is ‘correct’ is what religious persons call orthodoxy, with its opposites of heresy and apostacy. It is this insistence of conformity to one form or another that leads to crusades, Holy Wars, intolerance and religious hatred. Religious traditions and institutions are usually the custodians of orthodoxy.

6.3 SELF AND DIVINE ARE ONE

Ultimately, such mystics suggest that the Divine is Consciousness: Absolute Formless Awareness in the Bliss of Perfect Stillness in the Eternal Now, without boundary – Total Unity. As I have said, this is perhaps difficult for us to grasp, since we always think in terms of form and objects. Our existence is couched in terms of labelling, boundaries and forms. We label something as ‘x’ therefore other things are ‘not x’, it is ‘this’, therefore it is not ‘that’. The Divine however is ‘not this and not that’. The distinction between subject and object is transcended. This leads these mystics to a further conclusion, a conclusion not just logically thought through, but Immediately Experienced: The Divine and the Self are One: Atman is Brahman. There is no difference and no separation or distinction – the Absolute and ‘I’ are the same in Essence. One metaphor used to describe this is that of the ocean and the spray from a wave. If the Absolute Divine is the Ocean, then the individual is like a droplet of Ocean spray: for a moment it has a separate existence yet it is always of the same Essence as the Ocean itself. Death is like the return of the droplet back into the Ocean again. It does not then exist in the Ocean as a separate droplet: its individual, separate identity is lost in and merges with the Ocean completely, as it is of the same Essence. The ‘ego’, the ‘mental organisation’, or ‘self mental complex’ or ‘organised self-system’, is lost and perfectly merged in Total Unity with the Divine Essence.

6.4 LOSS OR DISSOLVING OF EGO

This loss of ‘ego’, the loss of sense of ourselves as a separate, distinct entity is an important factor:

For the mystic, the ‘ego’ has to be transcended or surrendered in order to experience Immediate Unity with the Divine in mystical experience. This is part of the process of renunciation.

For those experiencing a phase of madness, of schizophrenia, mania or depression however, the organisation of the mind, the ‘organised self-system’, the ‘mental or psychic structures’, the ‘ego’, may ‘breakdown’ involuntarily. The term ‘mental breakdown’ is as bad as ‘mental illness’ – it is a mixed concrete and abstract metaphor, but I am sure that you get the gist of what I mean.

Of course the psychiatrist and psychologist may now be ready to have a field day. Both the mystic and the ‘mentally ill’ may display a fragmentation or loss of ‘ego’. Worse than this, the mystic has a delusion and thinks he is God! Surely such a person has lost touch with reality, they are suffering from hallucinations or illusions. To go to quadrant 3 – how many people think like this? Dennis Waite in his book ‘The book of One’ has spent time exploring the web for blogs and groups that adhere to the sort of mystical theology I have just begun to outline and he considered that in the whole world, there only seemed to be a few thousand members of such internet groups. Surely such people are misguided, they are in such a minority.

6.5 CONTRACTION AND IGNORANCE

What do the mystics say about this? If we are in Essence Divine, then why don’t we seem to know it? Those who do know it in experience are Self- Realised, Enlightened and so on. The details differ slightly from mystical system to mystical system, but essentially, only the Absolute Divine exists as Being, Consciousness, Bliss. But there is a contraction of the Divine to movement and to form: the One Divine is manifest or expressed in many forms. All that exists is a delimited manifestation in form of the Formless Absolute. In Essence, all is Divine, but in expression, it is delimited form, having no existence in and of itself. In this contraction to form, Ignorance arises. Thus, though in Essence, we, like everything and everyone else is Divine, in expression we are Ignorant of our True Nature. We misperceive ourselves and the Nature of Reality: we think of temporary material forms as being Real, we think of ourselves as essentially a mind housed in a material body and so on. In our Ignorance, we fall for an Illusion and misperceive the nature of Reality. When someone says to a spiritually minded person, ‘Get into the real world!’, they usually mean stop daydreaming and drifting off in abstraction and get into this practical, physical, material world. In this practical, material world, death becomes a tragedy, because it is the apparent end of life and the possible dissolving of the ‘ego’, (unless one believes in the eternal soul. For the mystic however, the Reality is that that which is all around us – the universe and the material world – is an Illusion: it is not finally real, it has no existence in and of itself, but is rather a delimited expression and manifestation of the Divine. Wealth, power, pleasure and so on are Illusory: just as we wake up from a dream and the apparent realities of the contents of the dream are sublated by waking consciousness, so too, this material, physical reality is a dream-like Illusion which itself will be sublated by Reality. Much of what we perceive as reality are in fact projections or constructions of our mind – categorising, dividing, separating, labelling, conceptualising and so on. We impose such structures onto existents.

Ibn al Arabi talks in terms of real/not real: it is not that existents are just Illusions or dream-like vapours: things exist as delimited contracted expressions of the Divine Essence. They do not have existence in and of their own right – that belongs to the Divine alone. Rather, they are given existence and continued subsistence by the Absolute Essence as a contracted, delimited expression or manifestation of the Unknowable. The One becomes many. Therefore, they are real, but not Real. They exist but have no existence in and of themselves, they have apparent separate existence and form but in Essence, they are One. For the mystic then, conventional thinking, (Ignorant thinking) is turned upside down: God is the Only True Reality, the rest is transient Illusion, only God exists.

Of course, this has tremendous implications for psychiatry and psychology when their practitioners start to talk in terms of a person ‘losing touch with reality’ and this being a sign of madness. What they mean of course is that such a person is losing touch with the majority conventional (Ignorant, unenlightened, unrealised) view of reality. As was said in Chapter One, such a statement needs a robust definition of what reality actually is.

6.6 DEPTH

We have also looked earlier at the concept of ‘depth’ in quadrant 1. At the deepest level, we have the sort of theology outlined above: theomorphic panentheism. The Formless, Empty Divine manifests in all forms, in paradoxical and even contradictory metaphorical forms (diversity), the Absolute is Immanent, that is, the Divine is the Essence of all that is, and yet is also Transcendent, cutting across all boundaries and formulations, (Unity). As creatures of form, this may be hard for us to grasp or maintain, especially because in Ignorance, we are used to the idea of God being separate and distinct from us. So, as a result, many sages argue that it is a useful stepping stone along the spiritual path to make use of (metaphorical) forms of the Divine, be they Christian, Hindu, Islamic, Judaic or whatever. The contradictions between the forms of the Divine in these systems of religion merely illustrate their limited, finite view of the Unlimited Infinite. Even so, the person on the spiritual path may find it easier to worship a form, to have a concept of the Divine in mind as they seek communion with the Absolute. Mystics regard this ‘formulation’ of the Divine as an individual’s ‘personal Lord’. It is the personal form that an individual uses in their relationship with the Divine. There are as many ‘personal Lords’ as there are people. Even two Christians, ‘converted’ at the same time and attending the same meetings will have different individual views of Christ and the Father. In effect then, Ibn al-Arabi suggests, we worship our own beliefs. These forms of the Divine are purely metaphorical, they are personal constructs of the Absolute. They are at best a combination of the Divine suggesting relevant forms of the Absolute to our imagination in order for us to gain in understanding and knowledge, together with projections on our part as we try to formulate the Unknowable. This path is not as deep as the path of the Formless, Attributeless Divine.

6.6 DEEPER REALITY AND ‘OBJECTIVE’ REALITY

One aspect that emerges then from these Immediate mystical experiences is the concept of a Deeper Reality. Thus, religious or spiritual rituals and ceremonies are described as shadows of a Deeper Reality for example. The implication is that the experience of God-Immediacy is, whilst we remain physical beings, a deeper or the Deepest Level of Reality. God-Immediacy carries with it a sense of Reality with a capital ‘R’: a Final, Absolute Reality. The experience of God-Immediacy then, is Deep, Clear, Vivid and Meaningful. Even so, I have had these experiences at different times such that the qualities that are sensed as Real are in fact contradictory and mutually exclusive from experience to experience. For example, in one instance, the experience arose from a perception of the Christian doctrine of the sovereignty of God: that God, as Big-Person-in-the-Sky, is in complete and absolute control of all events and circumstances, moulding and shaping the thoughts and hearts of both believers and sinners, ordering all to God’s glory and purpose. This concept appeared so Clear and Real, so Immediate and True that it elevated my mood and outlook and energised my whole being. I was in no doubt that God was in complete control of the universe in this way. Yet later experiences point to a view where God is Not Big-Person-in-the-Sky and does not intervene and shape the affairs of the universe in this way at all. Despite the strong sense of Reality and Clarity, it seems that the relationship of the content of this experience to ‘objective’ or material reality is indirect or even completely divorced from that ‘objective’ or material reality. This confirms in my own experience the views of Ibn al-Arabi and Shankara in terms of the use of metaphorical imagery.

6.7 ULTIMATE OR FINAL REALITY

6.8 LIMITATIONS CONCERNING ‘OBJECTIVE’ INFORMATION

In this approach, the Deeper levels of consciousness are not the place to explore the material universe. Deeper levels have a perspective on the material universe and may give some insight into it. Though things appear Lucid and Real because they are unmediated by the action ‘logos’ mode and ‘self system’ or ‘ego’ conceptualisations, they may not be as they appear. For example, the Divine may manifest as an Inner Wise Guide, but such guides do not necessarily make accurate predictions about the material world. Why is this?

The great danger is to think of the Divine as ‘Person-out-there’, ‘Mind-out-there’ or worse still ‘Ego-out-there’. The assumption arising as a result of this is that as we approach the Divine in Unity, we merge with a focussed, omniscient Mind and therefore because of that Union, should share in such focussed omniscience. But in my own experiences, I was continually told not to think of the Absolute in this way, and in fact, this misconception is one of the greatest problems that I have had to overcome. Two illustrations help the point: the first arising from my own experience is that of the droplet of ocean spray returning to the ocean – the ocean is diffuse and the droplet, in merging again with the ocean, ceases to exist as a separate identity – it does not remain as a separate droplet somehow bounded within the ocean. The second is from another teacher, who compared this union to being like a river flowing into the sea. In the same way, the river eventually loses its identity as it merges seamlessly with the ocean into which it flows.

Enlightenment or Self-realisation, or Union with the Divine then does not consist of merging with an omniscient, focussed ‘Mind’ or ‘Ego-in-the-sky’. Those who have had mystical or Gnostic experiences do not suddenly become proficient nuclear physicists, world-class musicians or capable of speaking all the languages on earth. Neither does it mean that the mystic becomes an omnipotent powerful ‘other’. He does not become a miracle worker, transcending the principles of nature, or develop immortality of body or any such thing. Rather, it means that the person identifies with forms less and less – such forms are recognised as finally unreal, or real with a small ‘r’: transient and temporary. Forms of the Divine are seen as merely metaphors, personal constructs and projections of form onto the Formless which, though useful for a time, have to be transcended. It means that ultimately, the idea of the mystic being a separate self, a thinking, feeling independent existent: an ‘ego’ or ‘sou’l housed in a physical body also has to be transcended and abandoned, in favour of seeing everything is an expression of Essence that will finally return to Essence. The ‘ego’, the focussed ‘self-system’ of mind/body/emotions/memory and so on, has to be surrendered – the ‘ego’ is dissolved or transcended into the Diffuse Expansive Boundless Stillness.

This dissolution, surrender or abandonment of ‘ego’ or ‘self’ (with a small ‘s’) is also an important factor in madness. Whereas with the mystic/Gnostic the ‘ego is surrendered as part of a spiritual discipline or path, for others, it may be something that happens as a result of stress, overwork, or, in the corresponding quadrant 2, chemical imbalance e.t.c in the brain, such that the abstract structures of the mind begin to collapse or function incorrectly. The results of these structures – the constructs of the mind in thought, memory, imagination, emotions, desires, values we have already come across in Chapter four with George Kelly’s Repertory Grid. We construct the universe and ourselves (ego) in this way.

The sort of Reality that I am describing is outlined in two diagrams below (Figures 7 and 8). It is impossible to concentrate these themes into a simple diagram, but the advantage of such a map is that it does give us an overview on one page of the dynamics and interplays that we are talking about. Such figures are intended to make general points and cannot be pressed too far.

Figure 7

Two schemes of Reality (Fig. 7 & 8)

Figure 8.

6.9 A SPIRITUAL JOURNEY

My own personal mystical encounters insist that my experience of such metaphorical forms of the Divine are a part of a spiritual journey and that journey is about aspects of who I am: a journey to Absolute God-as-Spirit because I am That. In a sense, I do not journey anywhere, because I am already That. It is not a discovery about the material world, politics, science, mathematics or psychology. The whole narrative is about my True Nature, Who I really am. It uses metaphorical form: images, ideas and concepts drawn from the material world and language, in this case the English language, as descriptors. If it did not do this, nothing could be conveyed or communicated. By definition, it has to use the material world to declare the Ineffable. Because it uses material and anthropomorphic descriptors, it is therefore an easy trap to fall into to think that the encounters are describing the real, objective material world and God as a separate ‘Big-Person-in-the-Sky’. But the whole journey, its language, form and style, is a metaphor for Who I am: the Absolute.

6.10 IS THE UNIVERSE CONSCIOUS?

How far does down does consciousness go? Is the universe itself conscious? Mythical and magical stages of thinking sometimes suggest that it is and New Agers, in returning to magical and mythical levels of thinking may also claim that the universe is conscious. Thus there are ideas in Christianity such as ‘everything works together for good to those who love God’, or if Jesus were to be silenced, then ‘even these stones would declare the glory of God’, or ‘the whole of creation groaning and waiting for the redemption of the sons of God’, and the trees of the field ‘clapping their hands’ at the revealing of the glory of God. This idea of consciousness going all the way down is also present in the more modern theory of Carl Jung, in his idea of synchronicity. In part these ideas arise from a particular perception of the Essential Unity of the universe, but does the universe have consciousness? This is where our definition of Consciousness is important. As we have already declared, Consciousness is not the locus of attention, concentration or mental focus. We are interested in Consciousness, (with a capital ‘C’) or what Wilber calls ‘Consciousness-as-Such’: the Essence or Ground of Consciousness. Consciousness is Diffuse, Passive, Boundless and Timeless, unlike attention, mental focus or concentration which is focussed, active and selective. Two illustrations may help: Imagine a play being performed in a theatre – the stage is set, the scenery has been painted and constructed, the actors perform and deliver their lines as written by the author. The orchestra plays the musical compositions as conducted. The prompt sits at the front of the stage ready to remind actors of any forgotten lines. The director has rehearsed and guided the actors. The audience listens and watches the performance. If this is a metaphor for the world or universe, where is Consciousness? Consciousness is the light that illumines the theatre.

Or again, take a look at the illustration below. What do you see?

Consciousness is like the white background that runs through the whole illustration. If we think of Consciousness as active, as the locus of attention, then we are asking different questions: We are asking ‘Does the universe have intention, or awareness? Is there intelligent activity inherent in the universe? Or is the universe blindly following natural ‘laws’ of physics? When we say that the Divine is the Essence of all that is, we do not mean in this active focussed sense of ‘Big-Mind-in-the-sky’.

Perhaps the idea of the process of contraction may help. The Absolute-as-Essence has all the potential within itself to be expressed as all that is and more, in an infinite variety of non repeatable forms, including intelligence and consciousness (with a small ‘c’). The Divine is often portrayed by mystics as having Knowledge, Will and Purpose, but even these are emergent, contracted attributes from the Essential Diffuse Formless Absolute that is perfectly Still in the Eternal Now. Therefore these ‘attributes’ too form an early part of the process of contraction. As already indicated, the process of contraction; of expression of the Formless to form, involves restriction, constraint and limitation. The One Formless Divine undergoes a Self-Delimitation into the many-ness of form, in time and space. In Essence the Formless remains, undivided and undiluted, but in expression to form there is delimitation with the arising of a corresponding Ignorance. If there is any kind of fall from an Original Perfect State, then this is it. Thus, in contracting to material existence; in being formed in time and space; the Diffuse, Formless, Timeless, Spaceless Divine Essence is expressed in a delimited way that involves a loss or veiling of Self-awareness and the emergence of Ignorance.

6.11 REAL AND NOT REAL

There is a difference between mystics when it comes to the balance between the material world and the Ultimate Reality of the Divine. Some completely reverse the conventional view. For them, only the Absolute is Real – the rest is an Illusion, a construct of the mind. Others use the terms ‘Real’ and ‘real’ or ‘not real’ to describe an Absolute, Final, Ground of Eternal Reality is in comparison to a qualified reality – a reality that is derived and sustained by the Divine in time and space but which has no existence of it’s own; a reality that will Ultimately return to and be absorbed back to it’s Essence, the One Absolute Reality.

Some mystics equate non-existence with being unmanifest. They emphasise the need of our input and receptiveness in any situation by asking the question: ‘If I am not there in the forest when a tree falls, does the falling tree make a sound?’. The sound is dependent upon a receptor, in this case me as observer/brain. If there is no receptor – the sound is not manifest. Thus it is, they argue, that the observer/brain evokes or manifests the universe, and each organism is the universe experiencing itself in endless variety.

6.12 RELATIVISM

The forms and concepts of the Absolute that we construct, such as benevolent Father, or Righteous Judge, are only relatively true with regard to the Absolute. There is no one form that is able to define the Ineffable, Diffuse, Formless God, yet all forms have a relative truth. What we have here is subjective relativism: where we make the statement ‘This is true for….’ For example, ‘This is true for me’, or ‘This is true for me at this time’, or ‘This was true for him as he saw it’. (Incidentally, even subjective relativism is subjectively relative). The result of this is that there are an infinite number of paths to God, because all approaches and forms of the Infinite Divine Absolute Spirit are delimited and relatively true in an infinite and absolute sense. The illusionary delimiting forms of the Absolute Divine Spirit, the metaphors and allegories held by an individual as pointers to the Unknowable Essence, make up that individual’s Personal Lord. The individual’s Personal Lord, then, is made up of that individual’s own constructed delimited metaphorical and allegorical forms of the Formless and Unknowable. As we have seen, there are as many Personal Lords as there are people and when a person worships their Personal Lord, they are worshipping their own forms of belief. But such forms enable us to relate to the Formless: it is difficult for us in most circumstances to worship Silent Attributeless Emptiness. The emphasis then of ‘Personal Lord’ is on the construct of congruent, personally meaningful (metaphorical) forms of the Divine, which resonate with the individual concerned. Gnosticism is a tradition that encouraged such diversity of form and which encouraged creative and novel use of metaphor and analogy.

In addition to form being relative to the Absolute, that is, subjective relativism, most spiritual traditions agree that there are levels of spiritual growth and development – there are, as we have already seen, differing depths. What this means for this discussion is that perspectives change as one moves into different, deeper modes of Enlightenment or Realization – different views or perspectives are obtained by going deeper into the territory. In other words, the views of the Divine and therefore the personally constructed forms of the Divine used by the spiritually ignorant are different from those forms used by those who attain spiritual awakening. This seems unfashionably elitist in these days of ‘equality’, but as far as I can tell, all spiritual traditions use this idea. What we have then is subjective perspectivism. If subjective relativism is ‘True for…’, then subjective perspectivism is ‘True from….’, for example, ‘This is true from where I am standing’ or ‘It may be true from where you are over there, but not from where I am standing’.

Here is an illustration. Three people are out walking to the summit of a hill and become separated. But they have mobile phones and manage to communicate with each other. The first walker says, ‘I am facing the sun and there is a beautiful lake on my right’. The second walker says ‘I am facing the sun too, but you are wrong, the lake is on the left’. The third walker, further down the path says ‘What lake?’. Who is right? Well of course they all are from their own perspective, but none of them has the full picture – so they are right and not right.

This is how it is for mystics: their definition of who they are changes such that they no longer identify themselves as a physical body, or a mind housed in a body, or a soul, and so on. These self-identifications are at different depths and with these changes of self-identification there arise different perspectives. In one experience a person may see themselves ‘caught up’ as a spirit into the presence of the Divine – they remain distinct and separate and such person describes the Divine as being outside – an ‘object’. The material world is perceived differently in this perspective than from the usual one. Others may have a similar experience but also be ‘filled with the Spirit of God’, giving not only a sense of empowerment, but also closeness and intimacy with the Divine, which remains nevertheless separate from the ‘I’. Once again, this perspective is different from the other two. A person may be filled and ‘caught up’ with the Divine and be deeply aware of some projected or manifested attribute of the contracted Divine, such as Love, Acceptance, Mercy, Compassion and so on. This delimited facet of the Absolute may seem to fill the person, or creation and thus, the perspective is different again. Yet others may be united with the Divine, they become the Divine and see things from that perspective – they may become Love and Compassion, or deeper still, they be become Empty, Timeless, Spaceless, Silent and Formless. In this perspective, they may say things like ‘I am the universe’ or ‘no one is born, no one dies’ or ‘the universe does not exist’. The degree of depth of experience affects a person’s perspective, such that what is Real and what is ‘not real’ changes, until all that is Real is the Boundless Absolute Alone.

6.13 THE DOMINANT REALITY

The usual waking mode of active ‘logos’ is the most dominant mode that we find ourselves in. By dominant I mean it is the one that we are most aware of and spend most time in. We spend less time in the ‘mythos’ mode, less time in sleep and even less time in a dream mode and very often on waking, most people do not remember their dreams or only remember them occasionally or in fragments because the waking active ‘logos’ mode largely sublates the dream content. Waking consciousness then, especially in the rational, active mode, becomes the ‘norm’ and the referent by which other modes are assessed such that other modes may be dismissed altogether as completely irrelevant: dreams mean little or nothing and are just the random idling of the mind, and spiritual experience is just an illusion based upon physiological changes of brain function. Spirituality and the Divine is thought of as an illusion, or worse, a delusion. The material perspective is the dominant perspective because of the Ignorance that arises from contraction which veils the spiritual from view. We identify ourselves as a person bounded in a physical body that exists in space and time, and thus think and act accordingly. For the mystic in deeper experience, the normal waking rational mode is itself like a dream and is sublated by the deeper experience of Reality.

6.14 THE SPONTANEOUS EXPERIENCE

So far I have looked at the ‘Logos’ and ‘mythos’ modes of consciousness, and we have seen that the non-usual ‘mythos’ mode of perception, together with access to deeper levels, can be cultivated by various disciplines and procedures such as meditation, devotion, renunciation, self-discipline and so on. However, mystical experiences are by no means limited to those who dedicate themselves to such disciplines and approaches: we have also seen that they may arise spontaneously. Such spontaneous experiences are often ‘triggered’ by some event or other…this may be a period of intense personal conflict, listening to music, being overworked or tired, gazing at a beautiful landscape e.t.c. In this case, the ‘ego’ is shifted from it’s usual place by this experience – one might feel as though one is taken out of the body or caught up to the Divine. The sense of ‘ego self’ may partly or fully collapse, such structures being inadequate for the experience. Such spontaneous Immediate experiences of the Divine may evoke Bliss and Peace, or, being unplanned, they may evoke a sense of deep unsettlement, disorientation, fear or panic, as the self-sense disintegrates. It is very easy to see why such a disturbance and experience might be considered to be an episode of madness. Not only has the sense of what is ‘real’ altered, but the person, their sense of who they are, has fragmented, even if only temporarily.

6.15 REALITY AND DIFFERENT WORLDS

My mystical encounters describe the spiritual and the material as the extreme poles of two different worlds. The spiritual world is Expansive, Diffuse, Formless, Boundless, Undifferentiated, Silent Emptiness. The other world is the material. This comes from the Sanskrit root ‘matr’ from which we get the words ‘matter’ and ‘metre’, and means to measure. The material world is the measurable world – a world on which we impose a grid of measurement, (Kelly’s Repertory Grid is a formal expression of an implicit process), a grid of separation and boundaries, via language, concept, symbol and so on. ‘Material’ is often used as synonym for ‘physical’ – from the Greek ‘physis’ (nature) and Indo-European ‘bheu’ (to become). As such, ‘material’ does not contain the idea of a basic ‘stuff’ from which the universe is made. Ignorance arises from the Absolute contracting to material form, such that human beings mistakenly identify themselves solely as material beings – separate measurable forms of ‘stuff’ bounded by space and time. The mystical experiences I have had declare that these two worlds are not reconcilable – in terms of world-views and perspectives at least. As I have already said, the spiritual world does not present us with an ideal political solution, an ideal structure of society or this kind of thing. The Absolute Formless transcends morals, space and time – aspects and qualities that are unique to contracted material measurable form. There is a very real sense in which the spiritually minded person is in a different place to the materially minded person. The mystic can be described as walking in two worlds – the material and the spiritual: the Real (Diffuse, Expansive, Formless, Ineffable) world and the real (focussed, qualified, illusory, measurable) world. However, since the Absolute is the Essence all that exists, these realms or worlds are not wholly separate, but rather, there is a seamless gradation or crossover of the Expansive Diffuse Formless Spiritual into the contracted focussed measurable material. In addition, the contents of Ineffable mystical spiritual experience may spill over and pervade the measurable material world-view (and vice-versa). Thus, those who have an experience of mysticism may find their values concerning what is important, meaningful and real, significantly and permanently altered even when they return to the usual material world-view and active, rational mode of knowing. This is a similar experience to falling into a dreamful sleep and the contents of the dream being affected by significant events that occurred during our previous waking hours.

6.16 ‘TRUTH’ IN SPECIFIC WORLDS

The two extreme poles of contracted measurable material and Expansive, Formless Spiritual are true in their own world and their own right and the crossover effect: the infiltration of one world upon another, helps to give us insights and a more holistic way of functioning. Ultimately, the mystic does walk in two worlds because all is One: the spiritual world does not negate the material and the material does not negate the spiritual. The Mystic avails himself of both worlds, (which in Reality is One) just as a therapist and their client may avail themselves of dream work and may synthesise them with waking reality. But ultimately, these worlds cannot be reduced to one or the other – the Absolute is not just all that is measurable.

Dream awareness and dream logic does not allow us to function in the material world: I cannot levitate as I please in the material world like I may in the dream world. The non-material Absolute, is contracted to material measurable form and is immediately divided, not in terms of Nature or Essence, but in terms of expression into (apparently) separate forms: thus God is partially divided against God, just as one leaf is separate from another leaf yet both are of the same tree. Formless Spirit cannot be fully reconciled with material form. What is true of the Absolute God-as-Spirit Essence, is not true for contracted material expressions. The Absolute Transcends morals, but humans do not, for example. The very nature of these realms then necessitates only a limited crossover.

6.17 LEARNING TO BE WORLD SPECIFIC

What questions then are specific to the spiritual world? Questions about the Self and the Absolute: ‘You are seeing aspects of where and who you are….you are God contracted in space and time’. Questions about the pathway to God: ‘a journey to God that transcends material things.’… a journey in which material matters encroach upon a Golden Path to God.

6.18 CONTRADICTIONS AND PARADOX WITHIN A WORLD

So far we have seen that each of the two worlds: the measurable and the Formless, the ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’ has its own ‘truthfulness’, its own area of application of information: the spiritual world is not centred on how to maintain a car engine for example. We have also considered contradictions within a world: all forms of the Formless are metaphors illustrating aspects and facets of the Whole, but never the Whole Itself, because no mind can encompass God. I want to give an example of this now from my own mystical experiences. A number of these were experienced at a time when I was involved in Fundamentalist Christianity and some were experienced at a later stage when the Christian world-view had been transcended. For example I have already referred to my experiencing clear views of God’s sovereignty only to later find such a view dismissed.

Here is a description of such an experience in my Christian phase:

‘The first Sunday of September 1975, was unlike any other. I entered the morning prayer-meeting of our church anniversary service very much with these concerns of the dryness and legalism of our church and pastor on my mind. I had given the pastor a book to read which seemed to express my feelings perhaps better than I could, in the hope that in some way he might perceive the problem. But as he prayed, I sensed immediately a difference in his approach: for the first time it seemed, he talked about the presence of the Holy Spirit and the need for his blessing. My heart and mind soared. There was such a sense of elevation and release that when we came out of the vestry I felt as if I could barely contain it and that it was as if I was walking about six inches off the floor. We entered the service and began to sing the opening hymn: one of the traditional ones. As I sang the words I had such a perception of the power and awesomeness of God which the words were describing, together with His Mercy and Gentleness that I could scarcely physically stand under the weight of the perception of these qualities of the Divine, which were almost overwhelming me. After the hymn, we sat down and the pastor then led in prayer and this perception of the attributes of God continued with such a weight that I felt completely melted, humbled and an awe. I KNEW, in an immediate and direct way the power of God to bring an instant revival and awakening. In the mere click of fingers, the power of the Holy Spirit could be poured out to hill the hearts and minds of all around such that they would perceive and be filled with the Love of God. This experience lasted for about twenty minutes, but the after effects lasted much longer: I joyfully began increased study, prayer and diligence; old habits that I felt God disapproved of fell away for months, yet before, I could not shake them with all my efforts; bitterness and animosity that had grown towards the pastor fell away; and the sense of a need for Christians to unite in love filled my mind and heart.

Here is the same incident described in another account:

During the course of the prayer meeting, the pastor prayed as usual, but I noticed a change in his words and attitude. Suddenly this man had shaken off some of his legalistic tone and seemed to embracing the Holy Spirit. It was as if I was being transported upwards out of the room. My heart and mind lifted as I was filled with the perception that God had changed this man. I was filled with a perception of the power of God over men’s hearts and minds. It was like the floodgates of heaven were opened and a torrent of blessing was poured into my soul. I walked out of the prayer meeting as if my feet were six inches off the floor…I was filled with optimism, expectancy, energy and joy. The service that morning was as many had been before it in form: the pastor briefly opened in prayer and we then sang a hymn. Alas I cannot remember what the hymn was, but it was a typical school anthem type hymn of praise. All I can remember now is that I sang the words of that hymn as I had done many times before, but now, again, it was as if a door in my mind had opened and I perceived clearly and plainly the depth and reality of the words of praise and descriptions of the character of God. These qualities of God, His Power, His Omnipotence, His Love, His Eternity, were so immediately Real, Deep and Powerful, so Clear to my mind that I groaned under the weight of the perception of them and could barely physically stand under the glory of what they described. I could barely sing because of my strong emotions, and tears filled my eyes. It was as if God was pouring out not just a shower of blessing but also a flood of power into my soul. At the end of the hymn I all but collapsed into my chair and the minister then lead us in prayer. He was a university-educated man, a qualified teacher, and by no means ineloquent. Even so, the prayer was like many that had been uttered before it, yet this time, my perception of the meaning of the words was so great that I was groaning under the weight of them. Words like Immortal, Sovereign, Merciful, Eternal, Lord, Love, Pardon, Ransomed, Healed, Forgiven, were so Rich and Deep, and I felt their meaning keenly in my heart and mind. I was hardly conscious of anything else. I felt their application to the Church and to me. I KNEW I was saved from the just deserts of hell, and that my heavenly Father who seemed very near and loving to me, loved me without question. After the prayer, the experience subsided, the immediate experience lasting about fifteen minutes. I don’t think I have ever felt so clear headed and balanced as I did then. The immediate perception was of God’s Almighty Power: that at any time, as it pleased Him, He could pour out such a torrent of blessing and turn people’s hearts no matter how indifferent or rebellious they were to Him. A revival and awakening could occur in the time it takes to snap one’s fingers and the Holy Spirit could pour out his blessing on one or a thousand with irresistible power, and this no matter how dark or oppressive the circumstances seemed. Though powerful, this experience was in no way frightening. It was coupled with such a sublime sense of God’s Supportive and Protective Love that my heart opened and rejoiced in this experience. At no time was I afraid. I should point out also that there was no self-exaltation or pride in this experience. Rather there was an experience of lowliness, of humbleness and unworthiness. This was a gift of God to me, an unworthy and undeserving servant.

Compare this with a later experience outside of Christianity:

Etheria flew down the corridor towards the room with the Water of Life. In the shadows at the end of the corridor, just beyond the bathing room, I realised that there was a locked door. I tried my key, which fitted the lock, and before I knew it, I was in a vast, cathedral-like room. Pews were laid out on a black and white tile floor. The vaulted roof was resplendent in gold and blue. There were ornate gold carvings everywhere, and at the front of the room, covering the ceiling and made of black stone, there was a huge eagle with wings outstretched. Etheria flew around the room. In the place where one would expect the altar to be, there was a stone table. From each corner of the table there rose a column and these supported a polished stone slab and dome. Between the four pillars was a glass globe, blue in colour, in which specks of light were swirling around. I became aware of a pulsating humming sound, like the sound of an electrical generator or vast electrical power. I asked Etheria what this was and she told me that it was the Hub of the Universe. I felt impelled to touch the globe, and this overcame my apprehension about getting an electrical shock or being hurt in some way. To my surprise, my hand went through the globe into the blue energy, and in a moment, I had entered it completely. I became the energy, and expanded out being the specks of light that infused the whole Cosmos. I began to lose my centre of being and feel that I was in all places at once. I heard Etheria say ‘As God fills the Universe, so God’s energy fills the Universe as the source of all life.’.  Then, the light seemed to dissipate and I found myself standing by the globe again. Etheria began flying in front of me and said ‘Come!’. I grabbed her ankles and together we flew out of the Treasure Room, high into the sky, until the Golden City appeared as a small dot below us. Up we went, beyond the Earth, the Solar System, the galaxy, to the outer reaches of the Universe. ‘All this is God’s Treasure’ said Etheria. Twice now I had felt as if I had expanded in space, but now the notion of time came to me. Did God transcend time? Etheria brought us back to earth, not in the Treasure Room, but in a park in the middle of the Golden City. The lawns were laid out formally, and there were benches to sit on. The paths converged to a clock tower, and I found myself sitting on one of the benches in the warm sunshine.  On both of the occasions of my expansion I had remained acutely in the present moment. As I sat on the bench in front of the clock tower, I wondered if God transcended time. I became aware as I sat in the warm sunshine that Etheria had now gone. Then, almost immediately I found myself taken up to a new place that words cannot describe. I felt as if I was caught up in space, yet it was not the same as the edge of the universe where I had just been. This was a place, a location, and yet no location. I heard a man’s voice saying ‘God exists in the eternal present. God does not stand outside of time, or above time. God does not look down at time like a measure or ruler where some things are in the past and others yet to come, somehow standing above both past and present. This idea is a mistake. God rests in the eternal present, continually enjoying the Bliss of the immediate Now. God is in a position of eternal, Self-sufficient rest. There is no need for God to move or act, and there is nothing that exists which exists outside of God. Rather, God enjoys the Now for ever. However, God chose to contract, to enfold downward into manifold forms and time came into being.’

Although there are similarities in these accounts, there are also differences and contradictions. When a systematic Christian theology is compared to the systematised theological implications and statements of later mystical encounters, these differences become more obvious. Compare the two following systems for example:

1) Human beings are affected in the totality of their being by a principle of disobedience and selfishness such that they cannot earn favour with a Just and Pure God and are helpless and doomed to God’s Judgement. Pure and Holy Commands and laws given by God only serve to compound the problem because this principle of disobedience present in all of us uses such commands and laws to create yet more disobedience. But before the foundation of the universe, God chose to save some from their deserved punishment: a remnant elected to salvation. This is accomplished by the giving, work and sacrifice of the God-man, Jesus Christ, whom God sends to be a sacrificial offering in order to atone for the transgressions and failures of this limited group of the elect. Thus Justice is satisfied because the God-man acts as substitute and takes on the punishment that the transgressions and failures of the elect demand. Mercy and Love is also satisfied because this deliverance is a free gift of God and the elect are saved. Those whom God has elected to salvation cannot resist the free favour that God bestows and all of them will be effectively delivered: not one of them being lost. Those who are delivered will persevere in their state of grace for all eternity. The rest of humanity receives the fair wages that their transgressions have earned: an eternity of judgement and loss for offending an infinitely pure God. At the end of the age, the present universe will be rolled up like a scroll and destroyed; and a new heaven and earth will be established. The dead will be resurrected to an eternal physical existence either in a state of grace or judgement.

Compare the above world-view with that below:

2) The fact that God exists is known primarily by the direct experience of God’s Immediacy, an experience that is then expressed in terms partly determined by the culture, tradition and historical location of that person. However, not every person experiences this Immediacy because when God-as-Spirit contracted in space and time to form the universe, Ignorance came into being. Thus it is that some people rest satisfied in empty things such as material wealth. Those who pursue negative or dark virtues do so as a result of this ignorance and further compound it. Nevertheless, God is in all things, including the Dark Virtues and Ignorance. God is Real, and Unique. God is Imperishable, and Indestructible. God is not an object, but Spirit. God is also described as Energy and again as Light or Clear Light Emptiness. All things are an expression of God, be they living or dead, light or dark, truth or lie. God is all things by contraction and therefore unifies all things. God is Unity. Nothing can exist without God. The Energy of God fills the universe as the source of all life. God is Sufficient in and of God’s own Being and is always the same, unchanging. God is transcendent of the human mind, concepts, language and ideas, and transcendent of time and morals, existing above all polarity in a position of Absolute, Eternal self-sufficient Rest in the Eternal Now. As God contracts to various manifestations, attributes and qualities of God can be seen. The very description of God in terms of characteristics capable of description and naming is a contraction in itself, because God is Formless Absolute Spirit.  God may be manifest in masculine or feminine form, or in mythical symbols or animals and becomes expressed in moral dimensions. Thus God is described as moral or virtuous and God’s Names are Beauty, Love, Compassion, Balance and Purity. Such Light Virtues arise out of Unity, whereas the Dark Virtues arise out of contraction and the separateness and Ignorance that result from contraction. In contracting from the Absolute, God is the Author of suffering. God is also expressed in the emotional dimension as being passionate and sensuous.

In the beginning there was only God-as-Spirit unmoving, formless and changeless in the Eternal Now. There was no material at all. Then, in an act of contraction itself, God-as-Spirit chose to contract further, into material form. Thus God-as-Spirit is like a vast Ocean and God’s separate contracted forms like the ocean spray. These contracted forms of God make up the whole Cosmos. The Cosmos is God and is the product of God contracting, or enfolding and subsequently unfolding or expanding in an evolutionary process. God’s Energy is the very Hub of the Universe. In this contraction, God is not fragmented, or distributed by measure. The total Essence of God-as-Spirit, without diffusion or division fills the universe in all its parts, the whole of God in every place, present at the same moment in all. The universe is preserved and remains in existence by God’s pleasure in continual contraction.

There is no realm of spirit beings or spiritual principalities. Neither do the spirits or souls of dead persons continue to exist in a disembodied spiritual community. Rather at death, God returns or expands to God-as-Spirit.

Human beings are fallible, and a pinnacle of natural processes of evolution. They are an expression of contracted God. They are agents in a moral dimension. They are compound individuals of matter (physical), emotion, sexuality, mind and spirit. They are evolving back to God-as-Spirit. Because of contraction they are ignorant of and separated from the Immediacy of God-as-Spirit. Some people rest satisfied in this ignorance, resting on and identifying solely with the comparative emptiness and trinkets of the material world. Some further their ignorance of God-Immediacy by pursuing materialism and dark virtues. Because humans are agents acting in relation to the universe, they operate in a moral dimension. But God does not issue commands or laws. Rather, people act in the intrinsic moral dimensions of light and dark virtues.  Extrinsic laws and codes are necessary for society because of those who follow the Dark Virtues, but when it comes to approaching God-Immediacy, extrinsic laws are considered inferior to the intrinsic Virtuous Path followed by Pilgrims. Since all mankind is evolving towards God-as-Spirit, humans are on a journey and therefore known as Pilgrims.

The Virtuous Path consists of Love, Beauty, Truth, Compassion, Wisdom, Peace, and Respect, which lead to Unity. Failure to lead a life of virtue may lead to a sense of Guilt and separateness. The dark virtues are Deceit, Pain, Betrayal, Secrecy, Ugliness, Hatred, Anger, Imbalance, Lack of Mercy, Foolishness, Contempt, War and Lies.  Pursuing these virtues leads away from Immediacy to Ignorance, sorrow, destruction, division, separateness and isolation.

The journey of each Pilgrim is unique and each person travels alone with God-as-Spirit ready to manifest to them as their Faithful Companion, Who prepares them to enter the Golden City.

At death God returns to God-as-Spirit, yet God remains contracted in the physical remains, because the whole universe is one God. At death, all things become new in that all earthly and human institutions cease. Thus there is no marriage, or law courts, or society of disembodied spirits in an afterlife. Rather, God returns to God-as-Spirit in the Transcendent Unity of Clear Light Emptiness, Resting in the Bliss of the Eternal Now. The Universe and time itself will cease when God chooses to cease contraction. At the end of time, all things will return to God-as-Spirit in Transcendence.

These are two quite different, sometimes contradictory and mutually exclusive systems of theology, yet both form the content of the apparently Real and Clear mystical experiences of one person. They are personal constructs, a reasonably coherent interrelated system of metaphors forming a Personal Lord and Divinity. In the material, measurable, categorised world we are quite used to such contradictions, even with specialised knowledge. Scientist in exploring the nature of light find that it seems to behave like a wave and also like a particle. Light cannot be reduced to one or the other, yet seems to have the qualities of both, so they have invented a new word to describe the nature of light: wavicle. This kind of thing reveals our ignorance, our lack of full understanding but we are quite used to this ambiguity. In the global warming debate, some argue that global warming is being caused by excessive amounts of industrial pollution. Others argue that it is a natural part of cyclical movements and changes on the planet over a long period of time. At this time we are ignorant as to the true cause. There is much about our material measurable conceptual world that we do not fully understand, but we form some sort of theory or schema concerning these events in order for us to make predictions and function effectively. Some issues, like the nature of light do not really affect most of us – we note the ambiguity but get on with cutting the lawn and doing the shopping. Other issues do affect us because we need to make a decision or prediction. We use our schema and if it works, it does not matter too much if it is ultimately right or not – if it works we are able to function. Thus for years it was believed that the sun revolved around the earth and this approach was useful enough to predict seasons and times in order to plant crops. I am arguing that contradiction within the material measurable world is exceptionally common and that we are used to it and in many ways function alongside it until a clearer understanding comes along. Such contradictions reveal our ignorance and misunderstanding.

Now it is exactly the same in the Spiritual Formless world. A mystic enters the cathedral in which the Hub of the Universe is situated. Around the Energy that is God-as-Spirit, there is a structure: a religious building. God-Immediacy is essentially an ineffable experience: it cannot be described, but almost immediately, our mind does create structure and form in order to attempt to describe it, communicate it and order the experience so that we can orientate ourselves. The immediate surroundings of the Hub of the Universe are the structures that we all create in this way: supporting columns of theories supporting a view of Transcendent God, religious and spiritual ideas that are polished, refined and set in stone, black and white dogmas and doctrines on which we stand, ornate rituals and ceremonies and other constructs concerning the Absolute. These structures are almost inevitable: they serve to structure, orientate us and allow us to function in the light of our spiritual experience. They are evidenced in the multiplicity of extrinsic religious faith systems world-wide. What makes these contradictions more unusual is the sense of Reality, Clarity and resultant Assurance or Certainty that accompanies the experience of God-Immediacy – even contradictory ones. It appears to be true that the Veil of Ignorance has been lifted momentarily to varying degrees in different experiences of God-Immediacy, but almost immediately we try and grasp with our mind what we have experienced. We translate our experience into language, form and concept. But the Transcendent cannot be grasped by the mind any more than a stone can understand a human being. God can only be seen when we transcend the mind and especially the active, rational, analytical ‘logos’ mode. To see God, we must let go of this mode of the mind: all thought and organised structure by which we understand the measurable world must be surrendered.  All our thought and logic cannot encompass God’s Immediacy. In some ways the situation is the same as the material measurable world: we do not know fully. However great our knowledge and understanding, however deep our insights, they cannot encompass God and the experience of God-Immediacy is Ineffable, such that in the area of our mind we still remain in considerable ignorance and such ignorance gives rise to contradictions. The mystic’s attainments and knowledge in spirituality can be compared to an anthill next to Mount Everest. Even though the experience is Deep and Real compared with our perception of the material world, it is still wholly inadequate when it comes to encompassing the Absolute. Our mind imposes form on the Formless, anthropomorphic qualities on the Divine, language on the Indescribable, boundaries on the Boundless. It is part of our human nature that we do this and we seem to need to do this. What we must remember is that the forms that we use are metaphorical, inadequate, culturally and historically determined in part and partial in their scope, such that each Pilgrim truly comes along their own unique path. No wonder then that there are contradictions and paradoxes!

6.19 PERSONAL LORD – PERSONAL THEOLOGY

Despite these contradictions and paradoxes, the mystic should be able to extract a reasonably coherent and systematic philosophy or theology from their experiences. The important things to remember is that these forms of belief are limited, metaphorical, and liable to change. They do not form a complete explanation – the mind cannot encompass God – they are not literal and concrete and should not be reified as such – they are transient and not permanent or eternal, but relative to our personality and contexts of our education, geographical and temporal location. They are finite formulations created in some degree of Ignorance of the Formless Unknowable Infinite.

6.20 DIFFERENT SYSTEMS

Relative subjectivism and relative perspectivism arising at different depths of experience mean that different, contradictory, paradoxical systems of theology arise. Such systems are different from person to person, and within a person over time. This means that different people have different perspectives on:

The Nature of God and the spiritual realm.

Hoe God should be approached

The nature of Unity and interconnectedness

How Divine Truth is communicated

The nature of Guidance (if any) from the Divine

The role, if any, of providence, fate and destiny

The nature of the post death state

The nature and usefulness (if any) of Prayer

The importance of sin, guilt or moral failure before the Divine

The need (if any) for Forgiveness.

The value and method of seeking to walk a righteous path

The role, if any, of Ritual and Ceremony

It also means that the individual’s perspective may change on these issues over time.

6.21 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

Let us return again to summarise some of the differences between psychosis and mysticism:

The following list gives indications of schizophrenia, (as opposed to mysticism):

The person’s thoughts are not easily understandable ie. what they say doesn’t make sense. They are irrational.

The person has difficulty functioning, or is unable to function, in everyday life: they are stuck in a ‘mythos’ mode of functioning that does not deal with practical issues. They lose touch with material reality and are stuck in a world of fantasy or delusion.

Auditory hallucinations are more common than visual hallucinations.

Episodes are generally prolonged.

Social relationships are impaired due to the person withdrawing socially.

They may respond inappropriately to the needs and concerns of others.

There may be a history of mental health problems in the individual or the family.

The person has usually exhibited mental health problems previously.

The event often has a negative outcome: hallucinations and delusions are considered a disruption to the normal functioning of the person’s consciousness.

The tendency is one of regression and pathology

They may feel alone and isolated

1% of people suffer this disorder

The following list gives indications of mysticism, (as opposed to psychosis):

No evidence of thought disorder or disorganised thinking. Though entering a recptive, ‘mythos’ mode, they are able to return to the active, rational mode of being. There is an integration or synthesis of the ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’ modes.

They enter the ‘mythos’ mode as a mature adult and return to the rational mode.

The experience is trans-rational and paradoxical.

The person is able to continue functioning in daily life after the experience.

Visual hallucinations are more common than auditory hallucinations.

Episodes are generally brief.

There is no impairment to social relationships.

They respond empathically to the needs and concerns of others.

There is often no family history of mental health problems.

There is often no history of mental health problems within the individual.

The event often has a positive outcome, resulting in improvement in the person’s functioning and their growth. It has a healthy effect.

0.1% of people experience this.

The mystic may have a supportive social network

The following list gives indications common both mysticism and psychosis:

Both enter the receptive ‘mythos’ mode

Both appear unmediated or Immediate and Real

Both have biological effects in the brain

Both are non-rational and cannot be construed or remain unconstrued

Both involve a unified perception and loss of boundaries

Both involve a deeper quest for meaning.

Both may give rise to a loss of orientation of the self

Both can be unsettling and disorientating

Both are marginalized by modern western secular society and even health professionals

Both may lead to a heightened sense of perception

Both may arise apparently spontaneously or unexpectedly.

In terms of mysticism and bipolar disorder:

Both may lead to euphoria, ecstasy, elation and joy

Both may lead to preoccupation and withdrawal, even depression.

We can now add some further factors:

As we have seen, both mysticism and psychosis may give rise to a loss of orientation, or even definition of the self. But this occurs for different reasons. In the mystic, the journey to Self-discovery, to understanding one’s True Nature, means a series of changes of identifications and attachments as to who one is. The mystic begins to see that he is not a body, nor a mind, nor a soul/spirit. Eventually, the ego itself is surrendered – that abstract cluster of thoughts/feelings/desires that seem centred in the head or heart, that locus of focussed perception distinguishing self from other, subjective from objective, internal from external is transcended in Union with the Divine. This may be arrived at by a number of paths and disciplines such as self-inquiry, meditation, drugs and so on. For the psychotic, this may be involuntary and frightening, a cause of fear, even terror rather than joy. It is a collapse, or disintegration of the ego, of the self-identity, of the structured cohesive self-system of thoughts feelings and desires that are used to define who the person is. The constructs of the self, an implicit process that Kelly’s theory formally outlines, begin to become distorted or fail to integrate properly. As we have seen this may be due to genetic issues, to stress or mental conflict, the use of drugs causing permanent biological changes and so on. It is not perceived as Unity, but self-disintegration and disintegration of one’s personally construed world.

Another difference that we have seen is the nature of reality. Many professional health carers, as far as the mystic is concerned, fall in Ignorance for the Illusion that material reality is the only reality. The mystic sees a deeper, spiritual reality that does not fall into the testable parameters of material, measurable thinking and concepts. For the mystic, this Diffuse, Boundless, Silent Emptiness of the spiritual dimension is the Essence, the Absolute Reality from which all existents are made manifest. Material reality is temporary, transient and has no existence of it’s own, but rather, has existence because of the Essence. The material rationalist or secular health professional sees this as irrational and illogical: a delusion or illusion that is a sign of illness, because for them, anything not staying in touch with measurable, material reality is a sign of illness. The mystic however cultivates entering this mode and then returns to material reality and is able to function in it in a practical manner, as well as using and applying the insights gained in the non-rational mode. The mystic often reports a sense of bliss or joy, of peace, calm and well-being, often seeing the experience as positive. The psychotic also enters, to some degree a non-rational mode. They may hear non-existent voices created by a physiological dysfunction in the brain. They may then act quite logically and consistently with that voice in the light of what it says. But this experience of voices is involuntary and often unwanted, yet such periods may persist over a long period of time and prevent practical functioning in the material world. The psychotic may display signs of inner conflict, disturbance and distortions of measurable reality such as paranoia – believing that people are talking or whispering about them for example. The experiences of voices or pictures, and misperceptions of material reality are often perceived as negative or destructive, or grotesque, such as mistaking a bundle of newspaper in the street for a dead sheep. Thus, though both mystic and psychotic encounter non-rational modes of being and become detached from material reality, the nature, duration, desirability and characteristics of these experiences are quite different.

6.22 ATTACHMENT, SELF-IDENTIFICATION AND ABSOLUTE

We now have a model of the person and their attachments and self-identifications that looks something like Figure 9 below. Once again, this is only an approximate schematic to give us a general overview.

Figure 9 Attachment, Ego, Self and Absolute

Mysticism, Mania and Madness e-book – Title and abstract

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

I looked and looked and this I came to see,

That what I thought was you and you,

Was really me and me

MYSTICISM, MADNESS

AND MANIA

 

AN EXPLORATION OF EXPERIENCES

OF GOD

AND

MENTAL DISORDER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BY

PILGRIM SIMON

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mysticism, madness and medicine may be quoted for non-commercial use in any form (written, visual, electronic or audio) up to and inclusive of 2000 words without the express permission of the author, providing that the verses do not amount to more than 25% of a complete chapter or more than 25%  of  the total text of the work in which they are quoted.

 

With regard to commercial publication, all rights reserved. No part of this manuscript may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system or transmitted in any form, or by any means, (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the author.  Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.

 

 

COPYRIGHT PILGRIM SIMON 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This study presents an overview Mystical experience, with some consideration of bi-polar disorder, schizophrenia and psychiatry. The Integral theory of Ken Wilber is adopted as a framework of discussion. The nature and role of beliefs, faith and the role of meaning is explored together with modes of consciousness before the mystic and their experience is considered in the light of Wilber’s model. Theoretical models of God and the nature of reality that these various views present are considered. The study concludes by looking at different principles of interpreting the content of mystical experience. I approach this study as a bi-polar sufferer who has had mystical experiences over 40 year period.

Mysticism, Mania and Madness: e-book contents

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

CONTENTS

 

CHAPTER 1   MYSTICISM, MOOD AND PSYCHOSIS

 

1.1  Introduction

1.2  Mystics and mysticism defined

1.3  Mystical phenomena

1.4  What is bipolar affective disorder?

1.5  What are the symptoms of depression

1.6  What are the symptoms of mania?

1.7  What types of bipolar disorder are there?

1.8  Is mania incompatible with mystical experience?

1.9  Symptoms of psychosis

1.10          Psychosis and schizophrenia

1.11          What types of schizophrenia are there?

1.12          Mysticism and schizophrenia

1.13          The tradition of psychotherapy

1.14          The tradition of mysticism

1.15          Mysticism, schizophrenia and psychiatry

 

 

CHAPTER 2   A FRAMEWORK OF ANALYSIS

 

            2.1 Ken Wilber’s four quadrants of existence

            2.2 Developmental lines and levels

            2.3 Quadrant 1: The evolution of a subject – ‘I’

            2.4 Quadrant one is related to the other three

            2.5 The spiritual line of development

            2.6 Consciousness – how far down does it go?

            2.7 Levels and psychosis

            2.8 Quadrant 2: The evolution of an object – ‘it’

            2.9 Facts, thoughts and reality

            2.10 Summary: the upper quadrants – the individual

            2.11 Quadrant 3: the evolution of objects in community – ‘its’

            2.12 Quadrant 4: The evolution of the subjective community – ‘we’

            2.13 Summary: The lower quadrants – the collective

            2.14 The right hand quadrants: Objectivity

            2.15 The left hand quadrants: Subjectivity

            2.16 A summary of the whole diagram

            2.17 Pre and trans rational stages – a confusion

            2.18 The problem of reductionism

            2.19 Objective empirical science

            2.20 Subjective hermeneutics and interpretation

            2.21 Reductionism

            2.22 Problems with Wilber’s system

 

CHAPTER 3   FAITH AND BELIEFS

 

            3.1 The internal world

            3.2 Perception

            3.3 Why don’t we wait for convincing proof of everything?

            3.4 Summary 1

            3.5 Functions of beliefs

            3.6 Fluidity of beliefs

            3.7 Falsifiability and unfalsifiability of beliefs

            3.8 Beliefs, values and self-presentation

            3.9 Summary 2

            3.10 Beliefs and logic

            3.11 World view assumptions

            3.12 The assumptions of psychology and psychiatry with regard to spirituality

 

 

CHAPTER 4   FAITH, MEANING, MYTH AND SPIRITUALITY

 

            4.1 Meaning

            4.2 Making sense of the world – two different modes

            4.3 The mode of ‘logos’ and rationality

            4.4 Personal constructs in the ‘logos’ mode

            4.5 The mode of ‘mythos’ and intuition

            4.6 Modes and western society

            4.7 Mysticism and the depths of the mind

            4.8 Myth and folklore

            4.9 Objects of faith

            4.10 Reification

            4.11 Contradiction in mystical content

            4.12 Relative perspectivism

            4.13 Stages of faith

            4.14 Related terms

            4.15 Faith, meaning and brain disorder

4.16 Personal experience of the quest for meaning, stability, orientation and

            stability

            4.17 The problem of meaning

4.18 Personal experience of mania and ‘mythos’

           

 

CHAPTER 5   MYSTICISM, QUADRANTS AND LEVELS

 

            5.1 Quadrant 1 – the mystic – the individual’s experience

            5.2 The dimension of depth

            5.3 The observing self

            5.4 Understanding the process

            5.5 Contemplative meditation

            5.6 Deautomization

            5.7 Meditation as a deautomization technique

            5.8 Is mysticism regressive?

            5.9 Renunciation

            5.10 Two modes – Action and reception

            5.11 Habituation in the action mode

            5.12 Receptivity: Renunciation in monastic training

            5.13 The receptive mode in everyday life

            5.14 What is knowledge?

            5.15 Two modes as mutually complimentary

            5.16 Summary

            5.17 Madness and mysticism: Clarifying the mystery

            5.18 The explanatory power of this model

            5.19 The spiritual, mystical experience

            5.20 The psychotic experience

            5.21 The logic of the illogical

            5.22 Putting the model in perspective

            5.23 Quadrant 2: The mystic – brain and physiology

            5.24 The breakdown of bicameralism

            5.25 Similar ideas

            5.26 Quadrant 3: The mystic in modern western society

            5.27 Quadrant 4: The mystic in community

            5.28 Summary

            5.29 Summary of differences between psychosis and mysticism

 

 

CHAPTER 6   THEORETICAL MODELS OF GOD-AS-SPIRIT

 

            6.1 Theories of God

            6.2 God as ‘consciousness’ model

            6.3 Limitations concerning objective information

            6.4 Transcendent or regressive?

            6.5 A ‘literally existing God’ model

            6.6 The Divine: A single Unity or a construct of culture-bound mystics?

            6.7 Is the universe conscious?

            6.8 Relating subjective experience and objectivity

            6.9 Testing spiritual claims

            6.10 An experiment

            6.11 Sublation

            6.12 Sublation and deeper reality: God as ‘consciousness’ model

            6.13 Sublation and deeper reality: ‘Literally existing God’ model

            6.14 Objective truth?

            6.15 Science and religion

            6.16 A spiritual journey

            6.17 Deeper reality and objective reality

            6.18 Deeper reality and God as ‘consciousness’ model

6.19 Deeper reality and ‘Literally existing God’ model

6.20 Reality and different worlds in the God as ‘consciousness’ model

6.21 Reality and different worlds in the ‘Literally existing God’ model

6.22 The dominant reality

6.23 ‘Truth’ is specific worlds

6.24 Spiritual and material worlds

6.25 Learning to be world specific

6.26 Contradictions and paradox within a world

6.27 Personal conclusions

6.28 Two models: Intermediate summary and conclusions

6.29 Differences between the ‘consciousness, reified consciousness and literal

                     models

6.30 Preliminary conclusions

 

 

CHAPTER 7   DOES GOD EXIST ‘OUT THERE’?

 

            7.1 Putting it together The Reality of the mystic – Illusions, Ignorance and the

                      Real

            7.2 Faith versus knowledge

            7.3 Enthusiasm

            7.4 Uncertainty – the foundation of spirituality

            7.5 Trying to grasp and know the Unknowable

            7.6 Contradiction and paradox

            7.7 Uncertainty and faith

            7.8 The material universe

            7.9 Conceptual forms of the Formless

            7.10 Subjective relativity

            7.11 Sacred writing and scripture

            7.12 Immediate and mediated

            7.13 Orthodoxy and authority

            7.14 Mysticism: Depth, Certainty, Truth Reality and Assurance

7.15 Subjective or relative perspectives

7.16 Form, revelation and proof

7.17 Personal spiritual growth, enlightenment and realisation

7.18 Yes and no, real and not real

7.19 Literalism, metaphor and reification in spirituality

7.20 Genesis – an account of the material with reference to the spiritual

7.21 Verifying subjective experience

7.22 Summary of differences between psychosis and mysticism

 

 

CHAPTER 8   MYSTICISM – PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION

 

            8.1 Light in an earthenware lamp

            8.2 Analogies – explaining the unexplainable

8.3 Outward forms and inner meanings

8.4 Understanding Abraham

8.5 Iconoclasm and theomorphism

8.6 Sacrificing oneself

8.7 Inward and outward are one

8.8 Relative forms, paradigms and world religions

8.9 Sacred literature

8.10 Interpreting sacred literature

8.11 Authority – Does it ultimately reside in sacred literature or in immediate

           mystical experience?

8.12 Pragmatism, compromise and heresy

8.13 Experience, revelation, inspiration and scripture

8.14 Deluded or what?

 

FURTHER READING AND REFERENCES

Chapter One: Mysticism, Mood and Psychosis

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

CHAPTER ONE

 

MYSTICISM, MOOD AND PSYCHOSIS

 

 

1.1 INTRODUCTION

 

There are a number of people today and throughout history from all over the world who have claimed to have direct and immediate experience of the Divine. Their experiences are described as mystical and they are called mystics. What is mysticism? How is it valued in society? How is it understood in the community? Can mysticism be explained by biological means alone? Are mystics just mentally ill? It also appears that those with so called ‘mental illness’, such as schizophrenics and those suffering with bi-polar affective disorder or manic depression, may also have tendency to focus on God, religion and spirituality. Why do people with certain neurological disorders such as schizophrenia or bi-polar disorder seem to focus on spirituality and God? Are all these people just deluded? Are they experiencing hallucinations or illusions? Do they have religious mania?  Are they eccentric or just plain ill? Or is there a spiritual dimension to be accessed that rational, western viewpoints mistakenly dismiss?

 

1.2 MYSTICS AND MYSTICISM DEFINED

 

Psychologist Arthur Deikman identified the basic characteristic of mystical experience as the intuitive perception that we are part of a universe that is a unified whole. As William James and others have remarked, such an experience is usually accompanied by feelings of reverence and awe; the experience is highly valued and is felt to be a more direct perception of reality than is possible ordinarily. Such an intuitive experience is called mystical because it is considered beyond the scope of language to convey. It may also include a direct, immediate experience of and/or identification with the Divine, which may be described in various forms. This identification of the self as Divine is opposed to the more usual sole identification of ourselves as being a finite body-self: in other words, a mind housed in a finite body.

 

1.3 MYSTICAL PHENOMENA

 

Reports of mystical experiences encompass a wide area, from moments of joy and sensory enhancement not much different from ordinary consciousness, to states that are said to go beyond all images, ideas, and customary perceptual experiences. In other words, they vary in degree. For descriptive purposes we can group these experiences into (1) untrained-sensate, (2) trained-sensate, and (3) trained-transcendent.

 

Untrained-sensate applies to experiences occurring in people not regularly engaged in meditation, prayer, or other spiritual exercises. Apparently, anyone can have a sensate-mystical experience. Such experiences feature intense emotional, perceptual, and/or cognitive phenomena that appear to be extensions of familiar psychological processes. Thus, for example, we have an account of a person having a classical mystical experience, occurring with no particular stimulus at all, arising from a state of quietness. All at once, without warning of any kind, he found himself wrapped around as it were by a flame coloured cloud. For an instant he thought of fire, some sudden conflagration in the great city, the next he knew that the light was within himself. Directly afterwards he found himself in a sense of exultation, of immense joyousness accompanied or immediately followed by an intellectual illumination that was quite impossible for him to describe.

 

The trained-sensate category refers to the same phenomena occurring in religious persons who have deliberately sought blessing or enlightenment by means of long practice in meditation and/or religious discipline. The untrained sensate and the trained-sensate states are phenomenologically indistinguishable, but the reports of trained mystics are usually expressed in the language of the religious system in which they are trained.

 

As one might expect, a mystical experience that occurs as a result of training, with the support and direction of a formal religious or spiritual social structure and ideology, tends to have a more significant psychological effect. However, there are also accounts of spontaneous conversion experiences that are noteworthy for their influence on a person’s life. It is typical of all mystical experience that it more or less fades away, leaving only a memory or longing for that which was experienced.

 

The trained transcendent or enlightenment experiences are said to have more permanent effects, but even in those cases, training is continued for a long time until the person has realized the experience in his everyday life. It would seem that mystical experiences form a progression when they occur as part of a specific spiritual discipline. Mystics such as St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila, and various commentators together with Eastern mystic literature generally divide the phenomena and the stages or levels through which mystics progress into a preliminary experience of strong emotion and ideation (sensate) and a higher experience – the ultimate goal – that goes beyond emotion or conceptualisation, (transcendent). It is this latter experience, occurring almost always in association with long training, that characterizes the trained-transcendent group. Thus: ‘The spirit is transported high above all the faculties into a void of immense solitude whereof no mortal can adequately speak. It is the mysterious darkness wherein is concealed the limitless good. To such an extent are we admitted and absorbed into something that is one, simple, divine, and illimitable, that we seem no longer distinguishable from it… In this unity, the feeling of multiplicity disappears. When, afterwards, these persons come to themselves again, they find themselves possessed of a distinct knowledge of things, more luminous and more perfect than of others…This state is called the ineffable obscurity…This obscurity is a light to which no created intelligence can arrive by its own nature.’

 

This is a very brief initial sketch of mysticism, just enough to establish the theme that I am addressing. But before we explore it any further, I want to take an overview of bi-polar disorder and psychoses, because there are parallel qualities in these experiences.

 

1.4 WHAT IS BI-POLAR AFFECTIVE DISORDER?

 

Bipolar Affective disorder used to be known as manic depression. As the older name suggests, someone with bipolar disorder will have severe mood swings which usually last several weeks or months and are far beyond the range of what most of us experience. They may swing from moods of deep depression to periods of overactive, excitable behaviour known as mania. Between these severe highs and lows can be stable times. The number and frequency of these periods of depression and mania vary from person to person: some people will experience just one or two episodes, whereas others will have many episodes of depression or mania. Also, some people see or hear things that others around them don’t (known as having visual or auditory hallucinations or delusions). A sufferer may be quite unaware of these changes in their attitude or behaviour and after a manic phase is over, they may be quite shocked at what they’ve done and the effect that it has had. Though mania may flare up periodically, depression is the most consistent symptom which may also provoke suicidal feelings. About 1 in every 100 adults have bipolar disorder at some point in their life. It usually starts during or after the teenage years and it is unusual for it to start after the age of 40. Men and women are affected equally. 

 

Differences in people’s genetic make up can make them more vulnerable to develop bipolar affective disorder, which has a history of being seen as a clear example of a biological form of illness: a disorder in which there is a brain problem that is in need of medical treatment to return the person to health. However, it is also clear that the relationship between inheritance, biology and bipolar disorder is far from being a simple one. Stressful events, illness or lack of support can trigger individual episodes of illness. The birth of a child might generally be regarded as a positive event, but sometimes the associated strain of changing roles, lack of sleep and possible additional financial burdens could be associated with increasing levels of stress which could in due course be associated with illness in someone with sensitivity to bipolar disorder. It seems that people with bipolar disorder can if anything become more sensitive to such experiences that might cause them health problems and can develop skills to avoid such situations. When avoidance is either not possible or not appropriate, then people can learn to take steps to protect themselves at an early stage from the consequences of such situations.

 

In the past, there was a tendency to describe bipolar disorder in relatively benign terms: there was an assumption that although specific episodes of depression or mania could be severe, they were also time-limited. Furthermore, and in contrast to views about schizophrenia for instance, it was assumed that people were actually quite well in between the episodes that brought them to the attention of psychiatric services. More recent work has, however, indicated that although some people do indeed cope very well with their lives for the vast majority of the time, there are a lot of people who have to cope with significant levels of symptoms even when they are ‘well’. In other words, many sufferers do not have sufficient symptoms to be said to be clinically depressed or manic but may at the same time have combinations of symptoms that serve to make day-to-day life very difficult. Indeed, an American survey suggested that on average a person with bipolar disorder could expect to lose nine years of life, fourteen years of effective activity and twelve years of normal health. These figures are quoted to emphasise the seriousness of the problem that people with this diagnosis have to deal with. There is no single type of person who develops bipolar disorder. However, there are certainly a number of people with high levels of motivation towards achievement and significant perfectionism who suffer from bipolar disorder.

 

1.5 WHAT ARE THE SYMPTOMS OF DEPRESSION?

 

Feeling depressed or down is a normal reaction to events in our lives. In the depressive phase that occurs as part of bipolar disorder, the depressive feelings will be worse, they will go on for longer and they will make it harder to deal with day-to-day problems.

Some of these other symptoms may also occur:

 

Feelings of unhappiness that do not go away.

Losing interest in things.

Being unable to enjoy things.

Finding it hard to make even simple decisions.

Change of appetite.

Weight loss or gain.

Tiredness and loss of energy.

Excessive feelings of worthlessness or guilt.

Being unable to see a positive future.

Having trouble thinking or concentrating.

Finding it harder to be with people.

Having thoughts that one would be better off dead or thoughts about hurting oneself.

Difficulty in performing normal activities such as work, taking care of things at home or getting along with people.

Lasting sad, anxious, or empty mood.

Feelings of hopelessness or pessimism.

Loss of interest or pleasure in activities once enjoyed, including sex.

Restlessness or irritability.

Sleeping too much, or can’t sleep.

Chronic pain or other persistent bodily symptoms that are not caused by physical illness or injury.

 

A depressive episode is diagnosed if five or more of these symptoms last most of the day, nearly every day, for a period of 2 weeks or longer.

 

1.6 WHAT ARE THE SYMPTOMS OF MANIA?

 

This is diagnosed if there is a period of a week or more during which a person feels abnormally good, high, excited, hyper or irritable. This can be so extreme that the sufferer loses contact with reality and starts to believe strange things, have poor judgement and behave in embarrassing, harmful or even dangerous ways.

 

This may be accompanied by:

 

An elevated mood, out of keeping with the individual’s circumstances. Often the person will appear euphoric with an overwhelming sense of well-being and self-importance.

Increased speech, often rapid and louder than usual, which may be difficult for others to follow.

A reduced need for sleep.

Loss of inhibitions, which may lead to inappropriate and impulsive behaviour.

Very grand, over-optimistic ideas and plans may be expressed.

In severe cases sufferers may develop ‘psychotic’ symptoms of delusions and hallucinations. The content of these is usually in keeping with the euphoric mood and the unrealistic sense of great self-importance.

Increased energy, activity, and restlessness.

Extreme irritability.

Racing thoughts and talking very fast, jumping from one idea to another.

Distractibility, can’t concentrate well.

Unrealistic beliefs in one’s abilities and powers.

Spending sprees.

A lasting period of behavior that is different from usual.

Increased sexual drive.

Abuse of drugs, particularly cocaine, alcohol, and sleeping medications.

Provocative, intrusive, or aggressive behavior.

Denial that anything is wrong.

 

1.7 WHAT TYPES OF BIPOLAR DISORDER ARE THERE?

 

Bipolar I:  Here there has been at least one high, or manic episode, which has lasted for longer than one week. Some people with Bipolar I will have only manic episodes, although most will also have periods of depression. Untreated, manic episodes generally last 3 to 6 months. Depressive episodes last rather longer – 6 to 12 months without treatment.

 

Bipolar II: In this case there has been more than one episode of severe depression, but only mild manic episodes, called ‘hypomania’.

 

Rapid cycling: With this, more than four mood swings happen in a 12 month period. This affects around 1 in 10 people with bipolar disorder and can happen with both types I and II. Rapid cycling tends to develop later in the course of illness and is more common among women than among men.

 

Cyclothymia: In this case, the mood swings are not as severe as those in full bipolar disorder, but can be longer and can develop into full bipolar disorder.

 

There are several specific similarities between self-reported descriptions of mystical and bi polar manic experiences:

Feeling of being transported

Feeling of communion with the ‘divine’

Sense of ecstasy, euphoria and exultation

Heightened state of awareness 

Hallucinations

Unrealistic beliefs in one’s abilities and powers.

 

1.8 IS MANIA INCOMPATIBLE WITH MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE?

 

Some people argue that mania is incompatible with mystical experience because in the manic stage, the mind is racing, over active e.t.c. In my experience I have found the manic stage to be more complex than that. I have found at least two stages, one that is positive, and one that is negative. Whilst it is true that the negative stage itself is not compatible with mystical experience, the positive stage is more conducive to mysticism.

 

Positive manic stage includes:

 

Happy, Euphoric, Optimistic, Clear headed, Insightful, Become spiritually minded, Impulsive, Spontaneous,

 

Negative manic stage includes:

 

Trying to ‘damp down’, on the edge of being in control, Distracted, Unable to concentrate, Mithered, Slightly paranoid, Reckless, Obsessive, Compulsive, Irritated with those who will not join me, or with myself, Become tired but still driven, exhausted mentally but unable to switch off, distracted dreamful sleep, overactive mind, Stressed, Conflicted, Putting myself under pressure/deadlines at work,

 

1.9 SYMPTOMS OF PSYCHOSIS

 

As indicated above, severe episodes of mania or depression can include psychotic symptoms. ‘Psychosis’ is a generic psychiatric term for a mental state often described as involving a ‘loss of contact with reality’, a general term for a state of mind in which thinking becomes irrational and/or disturbed. It refers primarily to delusions, hallucinations and other severe thought disturbances.

 

These disturbances can be defined as follows:

a) HALLUCINATIONS – hearing, seeing, or otherwise sensing the presence of things that are not actually there.

b) DELUSIONS – having strongly held beliefs which are not based on logical reasoning or explained by a person’s usual cultural concepts, and which are resistant to reason or factual disproof..

 

c) ILLUSIONS - mistakenly interpreting things in the exteranal world. For example, being convinced that a ball of newspaper in the street is a dead sheep.

Such psychotic symptoms in bipolar disorder tend to reflect the extreme mood state at the time. For example, there may be delusions of grandiosity, where the sufferer may believe that they are the Prime Minister or have special powers or wealth, and these  may occur during mania; whereas delusions of guilt or worthlessness, such as believing that that they are ruined and penniless or have committed some terrible crime, may appear during depression.

 

1.10 PSYCHOSIS AND SCHIZOPHRENIA

 

People with bipolar disorder who have these symptoms are sometimes incorrectly diagnosed as having schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder characterized by delusions, hallucinations, incoherence and physical agitation; it is sometimes classified as a ‘thought’ disorder while bipolar disorder is sometimes classed as a ‘mood’ disorder, though of course, thought and mood are interrelated. This difference should not be pushed too far. Schizophrenia is a psychotic disorder or group of psychotic disorders that cause a patient to lose touch with reality. It is marked by severely impaired reasoning as well as emotional instability and can cause violent behaviour. Schizophrenics are often unable to make sense of the signals they receive from the world around them. They imagine objects and events to be very different from what they really are. If untreated, most people with schizophrenia gradually withdraw from the outside world. Exactly what schizophrenia is has been the source of considerable disagreement among psychiatrists (doctors who deal with mental disorders). There is some thought that what psychiatrists call schizophrenia is actually a number of different conditions classified under a single heading. While there is evidence that genetic factors have a role in developing schizophrenia, other unknown causes play a significant part as well. Thus there are several competing theories as to what does cause the illness:

 

Heredity: Research shows that the condition tends to run in families: a person with schizophrenic relatives is ten times as likely to develop schizophrenia as someone who has no history of the disease in the family.

 

Viral infection: Some researchers have argued that schizophrenia is caused by a virus that attacks the brain. The virus is thought to attack the part of the brain that interprets messages from the senses. Damage to this part of the brain may account for a person’s delusions and hallucinations.

 

Chemical imbalance: A popular theory is that schizophrenia is caused by an imbalance of neurotransmitters in the brain. Neurotransmitters are chemicals that carry electrical messages between nerve cells. Too much of a neurotransmitter, or too little, may account for various mental disorders, including schizophrenia.

 

However there is still no agreement as to which, if any of these theories is correct, or whether it is caused by a combination of factors. Therefore, because schizophrenia’s cause is unknown, it is defined by a set of symptoms. Most sufferers have some, but not all, of these symptoms.

 

As we have seen, the most common symptoms are delusions and hallucinations, which may include hearing imaginary voices. Another common symptom is called insertion or withdrawal of thought: this term refers to the patient’s belief that someone or something can put thoughts in the patient’s head or take thoughts out. For example, some patients believe that God, the FBI, or alien beings talk to them and tell them how to behave. Disorganized thinking and behaviour are also characteristic of schizophrenia:  a sufferer may have trouble completing a sentence, thinking through an idea, or answering a question clearly. He or she may also have trouble carrying out routine tasks such as tying shoelaces, washing, or getting dressed. Those suffering from schizophrenia may exhibit other abnormal behaviour: they may show no emotions, or be unable to speak, or may avoid taking any action at all.

 

It is estimated that 1 percent of the world’s population has schizophrenia, therefore millions of people worldwide are affected by it. Another way to express the prevalence of schizophrenia at any give time is the number of individuals affected per 1,000 total population. In the United States that figure is 7.2 per 1,000. This means that a city of 3 million people will have over 21,000 individuals suffering from schizophrenia. People diagnosed with schizophrenia make up about half of all patients in psychiatric hospitals and may occupy as many as one quarter of the world’s hospital beds. Schizophrenia can affect people of any age, race, sex, social class, level of education, or ethnic background. Slightly more men than women develop the condition. Most patients are diagnosed in their late teens or early twenties, but the disorder can appear at any time in a person’s life. Schizophrenia is rarely diagnosed in children, though it has been reported in children as young as five years of age. Historically, people with these afflictions have been defined as “mad” or “insane” or were believed to be possessed by evil spirits. Those suffering from mental illness were often beaten, tortured, or locked up in special facilities.

 

1.11 WHAT TYPES OF SCHIZOPHRENIA ARE THERE?

 

Psychiatrists today recognize five subtypes of schizophrenia:

 

1) Paranoid schizophrenia – Those diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia tend to suffer from delusions and hallucinations. For instance, a person may believe he or she is someone other than who he or she really is. A person suffering from a paranoid delusion may believe, unrealistically, that someone intends to do them harm. Hallucinations often take the form of hearing imaginary voices and a patient may believe that he or she is receiving messages from a supernatural or unknown source. Although people with paranoid schizophrenia have relatively normal emotions and cognitive (thinking) functions, compared to those who suffer other forms of schizophrenia, their delusions and hallucinations, put them at high risk for violent or suicidal behaviour.

 

2) Disorganized Schizophrenia – Patients with disorganized schizophrenia have confused, disorganized patterns of speech, thought, and behaviour. They may act in a silly way or withdraw from the world.

 

3) Catatonic Schizophrenia – People exhibiting abnormal types of posture and movement characterize catatonic schizophrenia. A patient may stand or walk in peculiar patterns, may repeat certain motions over and over again, or become rigid and unmoving for long periods of time.

 

4) Undifferentiated Schizophrenia – This category is reserved for patients who show some symptoms of schizophrenia but do not fit into any of the three categories described above.

 

5) Residual Schizophrenia – Patients in this category have had at least one schizophrenic episode but no longer display the most severe symptoms of the first three types of schizophrenia.

 

1.12 MYSTICISM AND SCHIZOPHRENIA

 

Mystical experiences can be overwhelming for individuals who don’t already have a strong sense of self. They can become unsettled, frightened and confused by the sudden influx of spiritual consciousness. It can be disturbing and unsettling, and appear abnormal. Some may achieve a strong sense of self by considering themselves as Divine, for what can be stronger than to identify with the Absolute?

 

There is also a very strong link between schizophrenia and mysticism. Many people view both mysticism and psychosis as insanity and mental disorder. People who go through schizophrenic stages or conditions also often experience great mystic awareness: the divine is very close to these people because of their hallucinations (positive schizophrenia). In many self reported cases people showed enthusiasm to learn more about spirituality because of their experiences during different schizophrenic stages.

 

Feeling of being transported beyond the self to a new realm

Feeling of communion with the ‘divine’

Sense of ecstasy and exultation

Heightened state of awareness

Loss of self-object boundaries

Powerful sense of immediate, direct, intuitive knowing or perception

Distortion of time-sense

Perceptual changes (synesthesia, dampening, or heightening)

Hallucinations

 

Throughout history this question has been addressed by scholars from all fields of inquiry. Currently, psychologists are looking at the similarities and differences between the experiences, hoping to shed light on the nature, process, and treatment of psychosis. Kenneth Wapnick concluded that both schizophrenics and mystics follow basically the same developmental path, but differ in preparation for that process. Joseph Campbell observed that the schizophrenic is drowning in the same waters in which the mystic swims in with delight. When research was conducted, neuro physicians and scientists came to know about the neural cause of spirituality or mysticism and changes of brain structure, and they proved to be the same during both schizophrenia and mysticism. Yet many patients recovered from their illness by experiencing mysticism during schizophrenia. Even so, differences can be teased out.

 

The following list gives indications of schizophrenia, (as opposed to mysticism):

 

The person’s thoughts are not easily understandable ie. what they say doesn’t make sense.

The person has difficulty functioning, or is unable to function, in everyday life.

Auditory hallucinations are more common than visual hallucinations.

Episodes are generally prolonged.

Social relationships are impaired due to the person withdrawing socially. May respond inappropriately to the needs and concerns of others.

There may be a history of mental health problems in the individual or the family.

The person has usually exhibited mental health problems previously.

The event often has a negative outcome: hallucinations and delusions are considered a disruption to the normal functioning of the person’s consciousness.

 

The following list gives indications of mysticism, (as opposed to psychosis):

 

No evidence of thought disorder or disorganised thinking.

The person is able to continue functioning in daily life.

Visual hallucinations are more common than auditory hallucinations.

Episodes are generally brief.

No impairment to social relationships. Responds empathically to the needs and concerns of others.

There is often no family history of mental health problems.

There is often no history of mental health problems within the individual.

The event often has a positive outcome, resulting in improvement in the person’s functioning.

 

1.13 THE TRADITION OF PSYCHOTHERAPY

 

Psychotherapy arose in response to human suffering and, as far as we can tell, human suffering has always existed. The ancient lineage of psychotherapy is seldom appreciated because Western culture considers psychotherapy as a relatively recent development of psychiatry, one of its subdivisions. If we define psychotherapy as the treatment of mental distress through psychological means, we find records of such practices from the origins of civilization whenever priests, shamans, and witch doctors appear. While psychiatry, a category of scientific medicine, is a modern development, psychotherapy has been associated with the sacred for thousands of years. Historians of psychotherapy acknowledge priests and shamans as the first to heal the psyche. A sorcerer, his head crowned with deer’s antlers, is depicted on the wall of a cave in southern France, dating from 15,000 B.C. Psychotherapists of one sort or another have been around a long time.

 

Formal psychotherapy originated in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when treatment was taken over from the clergy by rationalistic medicine and eventually became the specialty of psychiatry. Psychiatry at first dealt primarily with madness, but Freud’s psychoanalysis extended psychiatry and psychotherapy to neurotic and character problems as well. The scope of formal psychotherapy has been progressively enlarged and is now concerned with problems of existential human suffering, the traditional domain of religion, from which psychotherapy historically originated.

 

Psychotherapy appears to have come full circle. Although the modern version is quite different from the archaic ceremonies that featured magic, taboos, gods, and dramatic rituals of exorcism, there have been changes other than appearance. Its marriage to rational medicine has given psychotherapy a systematic understanding of neurotic and psychotic syndromes and refined technical procedures. And an entirely new dimension, the enhancement of the observing self, has been added.

 

However, Western science is characterized by a split between the sacred and the rational, which has left modern psychotherapy less well equipped than the superseded ancient, primitive versions to handle certain problems. The loss of dramatic placebo devices is not the difficulty. The issue goes deeper, involving the most fundamental assumptions of Western thought. Freud’s view of reality and that of most contemporary theorists of psychotherapy is based on a nineteenth-century physical and biological scientific model that is far too narrow to encompass human consciousness. Consequently, certain sources of suffering cannot be dealt with from within a Western framework. We are faced with major problems that call for broadening our perspective and extending our science.

 

1.14 THE TRADITION OF MYSTICISM

 

The mystical tradition is also ancient in origin. The oral teachings recorded in the Upanishads, Buddhist sutras, and similar records go back thousands of years and provide evidence that mystical teachers of widely different cultures say remarkably similar things. Also concerned with human suffering, they propose that human beings are ignorant of their true nature and that ignorance leads to lives of pain and futility. The sages describe a Way that leads to a higher level of existence, one infinitely more desirable than the level on which most people conduct their lives. The mystical tradition does not offer therapy in the usual sense of that word, but achieving the goal of mysticism -‑ experiencing the Real Self  — is said to cure human suffering because its very basis is thereby removed.

 

Often confused with religion, the mystical tradition occupies a place of its own. Durkheim suggested that human beings developed religions through their perception of the tiered, a superior realm impalpable through the five senses but one that can nevertheless be experienced. Religion and mysticism are both concerned with the sawed realm, but most religions tend to associate the sacred with a deity, Whereas mysticism associates the sacred with the unrecognised Real Self of each human being. Thus, followers of formal religions often try to affect the behaviour of a god -‑ propitiating, phasing, and seeking aid. In contrast, the mystical tradition asserts the equation: I (Real Self) = God. While “I am God”” is the fundamental realization of mysticism, it is blasphemous in many religions.

 

Because both religion and mysticism respond to the perception of the sacred, the work of mystics historically took place within a religious context although it remained distinct from the activities of everyday religious practices. For example the wandering monks for whom the Upanishads were written did not perform Hindu sacrifices and rituals, but followed special practices imparted in secret by their teacher. The monks, usually thought of by laypersons as part of an established religious tradition, were actually following a teaching that said the ordinary forms and concepts of that religion were illusions one must transcend. A similar situation prevailed for Zen monks who pursued their training in the context of Buddhism.

 

Western culture often overlooks the distinction between religion and mysticism, especially in the psychological and psychiatric literature. This is unfortunate because the mystical emphasis on self‑development makes it consonant with modern psychotherapy. The mystical tradition has been concerned with the very problems that modern psychotherapy has been unable to resolve. It makes sense, therefore, to investigate mysticism with a view to dealing more effectively with those problems and gaining wisdom as human beings.

 

1.15 MYSTICISM, SCHIZOPHRENIA AND PSYCHIATRY

 

The confusion between psychosis and spirituality can be heightened by the approaches and assumptions of certain orientations within psychiatry and the medical world, such that the relationship between mysticism and psychiatry can be frought: one person has suggested that schizophrenia is to mystical experience as drowning is to swimming. Psychiatry in this analogy is like an over zealous lifeguard who can’t tell the difference between drowning and swimming. Everybody he sees in the water is run over by his rescue boat, knocked unconscious and hauled out with a boat hook and most of the people rescued, swimmers and drowners alike, are crippled in the process. The lifeguard, who can’t swim himself, denies that swimming is possible and claims that the crippling is actually caused by the drowning experience rather than the rescue. This is confirmed by raucous praise for the lifeguard from many of the crippled drowners and their relatives. The crowd of spectators on the beach are divided: a few of them can tell the difference between swimming and drowning, but most of them can’t and the crowd is persuaded by the drowners and their relatives to support the lifeguard’s tactics. Swimmers who aren’t too badly crippled and who want to go back into the water have to learn how to swim without splashing so as not to attract attention from the crowds adoring the lifeguard. It’s important for those who know how to swim to maintain the skill so that it can be passed on to others. Common sense would therefore indicate that an ability to swim should be a prerequisite for appointment as a lifeguard. In other words, psychiatrists need an appreciation of mysticism in experience, in order to understand the difference between mystical transcendence and psychosis. Perhaps this will happen one day.

 

 

Chapter Two: A Framework of Discussion

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

CHAPTER TWO

 

A FRAMEWORK OF DISCUSSION*
(Please note that any diagrams are published separately from this chapter)

 

In order to get a thorough outlook on mystics, mysticism and the view of the universe that they portray, together with the issues of bi-polar disorder and schizophrenia, it is very important to take all sides of the coin into account, or else we fall into a trap called reductionism, where we try and explain something by reducing it to just one of it’s facets or dimensions. For example, Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’ is more than just so many pages, letters, sentences and paragraphs, and to try and fully explain Shakespeare’s work using just these terms would be to miss out much of what ‘Hamlet’ is and means.

 

 

2.1 FOUR QUADRANTS OF EXISTENCE

 

I am going to adopt an approach based on the Integral theory presented by Ken Wilber. Below (Figure 1), is a schematic summary of what he calls `the four quadrants’ of existence: intentional, behavioural, cultural and social.

 

 

 

Quadrant 1 is concerned with the individual’s internal mental life: our meanings, values, thoughts, consciousness and so on. Quadrant 2 is concerned with objects that make up the individual and which can be measured and observed: brain structures, brain activity, heart rate, biochemical processes, e.t.c.. Quadrant 3 is also concerned with observation and objective measurable facts, but is concerned with groups: how do humans gather together, what gender or age distribution is there in a group and so on. Quadrant 4 is also concerned with groups or collectives, but this quadrant is concerned with shared meanings and values present in cultures. All these facets are important.

 

2.2 DEVELOPMENTAL LEVELS AND LINES

 

There is more to this diagram though: within these four quadrants of existence, there are lines of development with various stages and levels. There appears to be substantial agreement between developmental theories and approaches as to these various stages or sequence of levels in each line. Radiating out from the centre, then, are diagonal lines of developmental stages within each quadrant. (See figure 2).

 

 

Figure 2

 

Though we are going to stay with this diagram for simplicity, in fact, Wilber’s theory is more complex than this in that there are a number quasi-independent lines of development spiralling outwards rather than progressing in a straight line as the diagram suggests. For example there are lines of linguistic, aesthetic, moral, spiritual, intellectual and mathematical development all spiralling out from the centre. Thus it is that a person may be clever, but morally reprobate, or have high artistic ability yet not be linguistically fluent. The idea of stages or levels may be most familiar to us in the example of our progression through childhood, to adolescence, to adulthood. The theories of thinkers such as Piaget or Freud merely put in more stages and levels to create a greater differential. In the natural world we can illustrate these stages of development by saying an acorn develops into a sapling which then develops into a fully mature oak tree. Note that with both these illustrations, the order of progression is fixed and a later stage contains aspects and qualities that an earlier stage does not: a sapling has leaves, an acorn does not; and an oak tree is not just a giant acorn. We can also note for example that adolescence does not come before childhood and an adult is not just a giant baby. Of course people can and do differ about the details of such a diagram, but it is presented here in a simple form, as a reasonable summary that helps the present discussion. Wilber insists that to fully study something, we must adopt an ‘all quadrant, all level’ approach, because if we don’t, we fall into the trap of reductionism. Thus as we study a human being, they are not just a developing physical body: they have developing thoughts, consciousness and intentions as well. Neither does the individual exist in isolation: they are part of measurable structures in the world: families, work groups, nations and so on and such groups, cultures and communities have shared meanings and values.

 

Lets look a little more at these four quadrants and their developmental lines:

 

2.3 QUADRANT 1: THE EVOLUTION OF A SUBJECT – ‘I’

If we do a data search among the evolutionary trends of interior apprehension: the subjective individual self, we find a largely uncontested hierarchy of emergent properties, summarized in the Upper Left quadrant, quadrant 1. (Figure 3).

 

Figure 3

 

These stages develop through irritability to sensation, to perception, to impulse, to use of image, to a use of symbols, to use of concepts and the use of rules, to concrete operational thinking where one is able to make predictions and act on the material world, to formal, abstract operational thinking – creating theories about the world involving maths, concepts, symbols and so on, and on to synthesizing reason – bringing various theories together in synthesis. These are the levels or stages of individual interior development suggested in part by psychologists such as Piaget or Freud. Thus at lower stages for example, a child cannot see that the amount of water in a tall glass is the same as the amount of water in a shallower, broader glass. It takes a certain level of development to be able to accommodate this idea. The existence of most of these emergent properties are largely uncontested by specialists in the field, and the levels listed in the Upper Left Quadrant represent a simple summary of some of the major evolutionary capacities of interior apprehension and subjective thought.

 

Wilber describes these levels as holons. A `holon’ is a whole that is simultaneously part of some other whole (a whole atom is part of a whole molecule, a whole molecule is part of a whole cell, a whole leaf is part of a whole oak tree, etc.). As we move from one stage to another, the previous level does not just disappear, but is both included and transcended. Thus in moving from the emotional stage to the rational stage, emotions do not just disappear but are incorporated and included.

 

The Upper Left quadrant, quadrant 1, represents subjective phenomenological experience: an individual’s subjective meanings, values, and their agency or intention. It is concerned with interior individual experience: what does ‘Hamlet’ mean to me? What value do I give it? How richly do I perceive it’s content? Or, what does the Divine mean to me? What value do I place on God? How important is the Divine in my life? Or, what does bi-polar disorder or schizophrenia mean to me? How important are they in my life? How do I synthesise these things into my experience? It is in this quadrant that we think in terms of talking therapies such as Person centred counselling, or personal construct analysis such as Kelly’s Repertory Grid. It is the area of phenomenology, of many psychology disciplines, counselling and so on.

 

2.4 QUADRANT ONE IS RELATED TO THE OTHER THREE

 

It is important, as we have seen, that we do not merely consider one quadrant. There is a relationship between the four quadrants, a correspondence between levels. Thus, as the brain develops and evolves, certain stages or levels of subjectivity emerge: new ways of thinking and perceiving arise. In turn, new shared meanings develop in the community, which may then organise itself in a new way, say from a tribal to a national structure.

 

2.5 THE SPIRITUAL LINE OF DEVELOPMENT

 

The spiritual line of development is concerned with Absolutes and Ultimates. Where do I fit in with regard to the ultimate scheme of things? Where did everything begin? Where does everything end? Is there an end? Is there an absolute Being? If so, where do I stand in relation to It/Him/Her? Is there a meaning to existence? Is there a purpose to existence? What is my value and role in the great scheme of things? The spiritual line of development is concerned with answers to these questions. In terms of quadrant 1, there is a spiritual line of development progressing through pre-rational magic, to mythic, to rational and to post rational levels of spiritual expression. We can note that as a person emerges into each stage, they tend to be very critical of the previous stage that they have emerged from. In the magic stage people see an interconnection both between objects: stick a pin in this doll’s arm and the person whose likeness it represents will have a painful arm; and between objects and the spiritual dimension: as above so below. A multiplicity or pantheon of gods or spirits may be believed in, and it is at this stage that we find pagans, witches, sorcerers, occult practitioners, voodoo, belief in nature spirits, the use of tarot cards, spells and so on. In the next, mythic stage, people move to belief in one God, one elect, one people under God and so on. Here we typically find many elements of the Christian fundamentalist for example. As I have just indicated, we can note that the Christian fundamentalist tends to be highly critical of people at the previous stage: they denounce witches, burning them at the stake; they denounce magical practices as satanic and they denounce those outside of the one ‘true’ faith as heretics, have religious Inquisitions and so on, and there arises a polarisation between the saved and the damned. The rational stage of individual development corresponds with the Enlightenment and the development of science. We can note that the scientist, like the mythic fundamentalist, is often highly critical of the previous stage, in this case, the mythic world-view. Thus for example, scientists like Richard Dawkins attack religious fundamentalism with an almost evangelical fervour. The emphasis of the rationalist turns to logic, to science, to objectivity and thus we find the rise of scientism and positivism: an insistence that only that which can be seen or measured is real. Frames of personal meaning are created where the individual is conscious of their worldview as a worldview. The rationalist tends to demythologise symbols, rituals and myths, dismissing them as superstition, and takes responsibility for choosing their own values and lifestyle. The rationalist stage sees the emergence of atheism or agnosticism, or the rationalist’s faith may be placed in objective science and reason, or in a form of liberal, less literal religion for example. Beyond this, there are also post-rational stages of spiritual development. People at this level begin to embrace polarities such as Love and Wrath, Light and Dark with alertness to paradox and there arises a need for multiple interpretations of reality. The symbols, myths, rituals and metaphors that people rejected in the previous rational stage are returned to at this stage, but in a less literal fashion and they are instead appreciated as vehicles for expressing truth. There is a move away from exclusivity and closed viewpoints: groups and traditions other than their own are now included in their view of the world: there is a principled openness to the truths of other religions. We see here the beginning of a world-centric orientation and rational, existential universal pluralism. Yet those people at this level also begin to recognise their seriously incomplete self-knowledge. Science and logic are attacked as closed, restricted, narrow and inadequate when it comes to a comprehensive explanation of existence. But there are yet more post rational stages: there can be a move to universalising faith informed by the experiences and truths gained by the person in their previous stages of development. A trans-class awareness arises and the beginning of transpersonal intuition and a devotion to overcoming violence, oppression and division emerges. Those people who are considered important in matters of spiritual faith now extend well beyond the bounds of social class, nation, race and gender, and there is now no polarisation of the saved and the damned.

 

2.6 CONSCIOUSNESS – HOW FAR DOWN DOES IT GO?

 

There is, however, within quadrant 1, rather endless debate about just how `far down’ you can push any form of rudimentary consciousness. Some push it all the way down to the atoms of existence, while most scientists find this a bit much. The whole point of the hierarchy of evolutionary emergents of apprehension is that consciousness is almost infinitely graded, with each emergent holon possessing a little more depth and thus a bit more apprehension. However much `consciousness’ or `awareness’ or `sensitivity’ or `responsiveness’ an oak tree might have, a cow has more, an ape has more than that, and so on. Some theologians would claim that the centre point of four quadrant diagram is the foundation of all that exists – the Conscious Absolute. Yet others would go further and declare that the Absolute is not just the centre point, but also the paper on which the diagram is written, the Conscious, Formless Foundation of all that exists. Yet, at the same time, this Formless Absolute is expressed as form as well, in the very lines and words that make up the diagram. This is a position called pantheism, where the Divine is immanent: expressed in all that is. Others may argue that the Transcendent Divine is to be found either on the fringes of this diagram or outside it altogether: Conscious God, separate and distinct, looking down and acting on creation. Another position however, insists that the Divine is transcendent, standing across or above all that exists, whilst simultaneously the Absolute is the Foundation of all that is, and is expressed in all that exists. This is a position known as Panentheism: the Divine is simultaneously Transcendent and Immanent: the Divine is the Foundation of all that is, expressed is in that is and beyond or across all that is. Does this mean that everything is conscious or that consciousness goes all the way down? We will return to this question later.

 

2.7 LEVELS AND PSYCHOSIS

 

As we have seen, each level or stage is transcended and included in the later stages. They are nestled within each other rather like one of those Russian dolls, or like the layers of an onion. But what happens if something goes wrong at a particular stage? What happens if there is some sort of malfunction or distortion or malformation of development in a stage? Well, Wilber argues that either certain aspects of growth are hindered, or the distortion is carried through to later stages, distorting their development also. If schizophrenia and bipolar disorder have roots in genetics and the biochemistry of the brain, then there will be corresponding effects in the subjective developmental quadrant. The levels of emotion and thought in quadrant 1 will be affected and distorted or imbalanced.

 

2.8 QUADRANT 2: THE EVOLUTION OF AN OBJECT – ‘IT’

 

The diagonal line of stages in the Upper Right quadrant, quadrant 2, (Figure 4), presents the standard developmental hierarchy presented by modern evolutionary science: atoms evolve to molecules to cells to organisms, each of which `transcends but includes’ its predecessor in an irreversible fashion: cells contain molecules, but not vice versa; molecules contain atoms, but not vice versa, and so on. The `not vice versa’ constitutes the irreversible hierarchy of evolution through time. Each of these individual units or levels (molecules, atoms, organisms), each holon, is a whole that is simultaneously part of some other whole (a whole atom is part of a whole molecule, a whole molecule is part of a whole cell, etc.). The Upper Right quadrant is simply a summary of the scientific research on the evolution of individual holons.

 

Figure 4

 

This quadrant is concerned with the evolution of the human biological organism and how it functions. For example, it is concerned with how the brain processes the information contained in ‘Hamlet’, how shapes of letters are perceived by the eye and are then processed in the brain, which neuronal pathways are firing and so on. It is here that we would be looking for genetic causes of bi-polar disorder and schizophrenia, or seeking to explain religious belief or mystical experiences in terms of neurophysiology: neuronal pathways, genes, bio-chemistry and so on. Bipolar disorder and schizophrenia have a history of being seen as clear examples of biological form of illness, that is, disorders in which there is a brain problem that is in need of medical treatment to return the person to health. This is confirmed by evidence that bipolar disorder and schizophrenia can be inherited. For example, studies show that children of a bi-polar sufferer have about a 30% chance of inheriting the problem. We are in this quadrant when we might be thinking of performing brain scan research on a person in a meditation or mystical mode of consciousness, monitoring their brain waves and brain activity and so on. It is here that we develop, research and administer biochemical interventions such as anti-depressant and mood levelling medications such as Prozac and Lithium. Similarly we are in this quadrant when we are thinking in terms of electro convulsive therapy and gene therapies. In other words, this is the quadrant of the biology, chemistry, physiology, genetics and anatomy of the individual. It is the area where medical doctors, psychiatrists and other scientific experts specialise and is concerned with objective, measurable facts. The psychology discipline of classic behaviourism is here in this quadrant for example, because it is not concerned with the ‘inner mental life’ of quadrant 1, but with objectively measuring stimulus and response within an organism.

 

2.9 FACTS, THOUGHTS AND REALITY

 

If we ignore the other quadrants and rely on this quadrant alone, then we end up with scientism and positivism. In these positions, only that which can be objectively measured and observed is real. We may use extensions to our natural senses: telescopes, microscopes, imaging technologies and so on, but this quadrant is concerned only with objective measurable ‘facts’ about the objective, individual organism. Therefore, for example, as soon as we move from behaviourism to cognitive behaviourism, to include the way we think together with how we act, we are moving out of our exclusiveness with this quadrant and starting to avail ourselves of quadrant 1 as well. Paradoxically, by using this idea of relying solely on objective measurability, positivism, by it’s own criteria, does not exist, because it cannot be objectively measured. Strictly speaking then, if we reduce any event to this quadrant, we reduce reality to that which can be objectively measured – the material. The rich, mental life of values and meanings, of interpretations and perspectives is largely or completely ignored and certainly, any idea of a spiritual dimension to existence is dismissed. Anyone who is hearing voices or seeing things that cannot be objectively measured and tested, (other than as brain activity) has clearly, by this way of thinking, lost touch with reality. But if we are describing people as losing touch with reality, then we clearly need a good and accurate definition of what reality is. To reduce reality to this quadrant, or to the objective quadrants 2 and 3 is, I suggest, to severely restrict and limit the nature of reality: it is to fall into reductionism. But in our western, predominantly post enlightenment society with its reasoning perspective, many people including scientists, psychiatrists and doctors understand reality in this way and at the extreme, if something cannot be measured, in their view, it does not exist. However, these people do avail themselves of the quadrant 1 aspect, whether they know it or not. Thus, given limited evidence or ability to measure, they speculate: they hypothesise, theorise and suggest solutions that are not measurable, and which are based on what they do know. This is a theme that we will return to later.

 

2.10 SUMMARY: THE UPPER QUADRANTS 1 & 2: THE INDIVIDUAL

 

These are the two `upper’ quadrants. What both of these quadrants have in common is that they are concerned with individual holons: subjective and interior on the left and objective and exterior on the right. They are concerned with the individual person and their development mentally and biologically through various stages or levels.

 

2.11 QUADRANT 3: THE EVOLUTION OF OBJECTS IN COMMUNITY – ‘ITS’

 

Individual holons always exist in communities of similar holons. These communities, collectives, or societies are summarized in the lower quadrants. First of all, let’s look at the objective Lower Right quadrant, quadrant 3, (Figure 5). These levels and stages also simply represent the results of generally uncontested scientific research.

 

 

 

Figure 5

 

There is a correspondence between quadrant 2 and 3. When atoms were the most complex individual holons in existence, proto-galaxies were the most complex collective structures; with molecules: planets; with prokaryotes: the Gaia system; with neuronal systems, reptilian brain stem and limbic systems: families and tribes; and so forth. It is concerned with collectives such as nation/states, agrarian societies, the organisation of industrial societies and so on. We are concerned here with the objective measurement of groups of ‘it’s’. In this quadrant, with regard to Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’, we would be concerned with things like the age distribution of those people who read the play, whether more women than men read ‘Hamlet’, how many copies of ‘Hamlet’ are there in the average bookstore, and so on. We might be concerned with how students of ‘Hamlet’ organise themselves together into a collective. With regard to spirituality, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, we would be concerned with age and gender distribution of bi-polar sufferers, schizophrenic sufferers, or mystical practitioners, and with religious community membership structures and so on. It is in this quadrant that we note that about 1 in every 100 adults has bipolar disorder at some point in their life and that 1 percent of the world’s population has schizophrenia, With regard to mysticism, it is estimated that only 0.1 percent of the world population or even less experience these trans-rational levels of consciousness. Clearly, not all bi-polar sufferers or schizophrenics are mystics.

 

2.12 QUADRANT 4: THE EVOLUTION OF THE SUBJECTIVE COMMUNITY – ‘WE’

 

As on the objective, measurable side, so on the subjective side: every subjective, conscious individual holon exists in a community, that every individual agent is actually agent-in-communion. If we look at the collective forms of individual consciousness, we find various world spaces or worldviews or communally shared sensitivity. These various cultural or communal interiors are summarized in the Lower Left quadrant, quadrant 4. (Figure 6).

 

Figure 6

 

This quadrant deals with collective, shared meanings and values. What value does English society give to ‘Hamlet’? What shared meanings do Shakespearian students have of ‘Hamlet’? Again, how far down you push a cultural background (or collective awareness) depends upon how far down you are willing to push individual awareness. But we can all probably agree that humans possess not only a subjective space (the Upper Left) but also certain intersubjective spaces (the Lower Left).

 

So here in quadrant 4, we are concerned with the value and meaning that different communities place for example on, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, spirituality and religion. In archaic and magical communities, the witch doctor, shaman or priest may be held in high esteem and respect, their words forming unquestionable rules and guidance. Meanwhile the schizophrenic may be regarded as possessed by evil spirits. In a mythic community, witch doctors, occult practitioners, may be severely criticised and pressured to conform to the ‘one right faith’ of nationhood. Their literature may be destroyed. The schizophrenic may be regarded as demon possessed or satanically oppressed, leading to attempts at exorcism. In more developed, rational level communities, the mythic level priest or religious leader may be virtually dismissed as outdated, superstitious and of little value to the community, as for example occurred in communist Russia in the twentieth century. The schizophrenic is seen as suffering from a brain disorder. As with individual subjective development, communities tend to be critical of the stage from which they have just emerged. In rationalist liberal western society, mainstream Christian religion, previously the respected, dominant spiritual practice, is in decline and crisis, often being seen as outmoded and outdated, even irrelevant in the modern scientific age where secularism tends to be dominant. It may well be seen as backward, superstitious and a hindrance to progress. Even so, under the surface many of the populace express a spiritual hunger. The spiritual line wants to evolve and develop, but is stunted by the rational/logical/materialistic outlook that is dominant in the community. Many people seek out novel beliefs and practices in the various new religious movements, or exotic ones such as eastern beliefs and practices. Or they may return to the old religions in new guises, as in much of New Age practice and belief: regression disguised as progression. Or they may hold on to more liberal and non-literal reinterpretations of the dominant traditional religion, which in the west, is  Christianity. In the same way as the other quadrants, there is a correspondence with levels in other quadrants. Mythic societies tend to organise in one way, whilst rational societies in another.

 

2.13 SUMMARY: THE LOWER QUADRANTS – THE COLLECTIVE

 

These are the two `lower’ quadrants. What both of these quadrants have in common is that they are concerned with collective holons: subjective and interior on the left and objective and exterior on the right. They are concerned with collectives of people and how those collectives develop, how they objectively structure their society and what shared subjective meanings and values these communities hold to.

So now we also have two right hand and two left hand quadrants:

 

2.14 THE RIGHT HAND QUADRANTS: OBJECTIVITY

 

What both of the right hand quadrants have in common is that they represent holons that all possess simple location — they can all be seen with the senses or their extensions such as telescopes, microscopes and so on; they are all empirical phenomena; they are, in other words, objective and inter-objective realities; they are what individual and communal holons look like from the outside, in an exterior and objectifying fashion. They are concerned with truth.

 

2.15 THE LEFT HAND QUADRANTS: SUBJECTIVITY

 

What the two `Left Hand’ quadrants have in common is that they represent holons that are all subjective: they are subjective and inter-subjective realities; they are what individual and communal holons look like from the inside, in an interior and subjectifying fashion. They are concerned with beauty, goodness, value and meaning.

 

2.16 A SUMMARY OF THE WHOLE DIAGRAM

 

Thus, the upper quadrants refer to individual holons, the lower half, to their collective forms. The right half refers to the exterior or objective aspects of holons, and the left half, to their interior or subjective forms. This gives us a grid of exterior-individual (or behavioural), interior-individual (or intentional), exterior-collective (or social), and interior-collective (or cultural) — a grid of subjective, objective, inter-subjective, and inter-objective realities.

 

2.17 PRE AND TRANS RATIONAL STAGES – A CONFUSION

 

In the subjective left hand quadrants there is a progression of stages or levels from pre-rational, to rational, to trans-rational. Magic and mythic levels are pre-rational. They are typified by more primitive cultures than those generally found in the west; by paganism; witchcraft; and religious fundamentalism. Even so, Nazism was a mythic political system, (one race, one blood, one nation e.t.c.) which harnessed higher, rational level aspects such as science to fulfil its mythic ends. (Gas chambers to eliminate Jews for example). Fundamentalist creationists do the same: they harness scientific thinking and evidence to support a mythical young earth position. As we have seen, people at a given emergent level tend to be critical of the previous stage from which they are emerging. Thus scientific and enlightenment rationality is critical of religious fundamentalism; religious fundamentalism is critical of superstitious magic and so on. However, because pre-rational and trans-rational stages are both non-rational, they are often confused with each other, in what Wilber calls the Pre-Trans fallacy. Thus a regressive movement may often be mistaken for further development and evolution. Faced with a collapse or a sense of inadequacy or crisis at the rational world view, a person or a society may evolve upwards to trans-rational levels, or they may regress downwards, retreating to comfortable pre-rational mythology and magic thinking, even though they think they are moving upwards. They revert to the comfortable ‘old-time religion’. Wilber regards most New-Agers as falling into this category – they think that they are closer to the Divine, but they are in fact regressing to earlier, pre-rational perspectives that are contradicted by evidence and rationality. Conversely, a person may move to a higher trans-rational level and be considered to be regressing to an irrational level – to being childish and naïve in their outlook. Thus mystics may be regarded as superstitious, naïve eccentrics.

 

2.18 THE PROBLEM OF REDUCTIONISM

 

Unfortunately, as has already been suggested, because many researchers specialize in one or two quadrants only, they tend to ignore or even deny the existence of the other quadrants. Materialist or Right-Hand theorists, for example, tend to deny substantial existence to the interior – to the mind, meaning and value, thus classical behaviourists pay no attention to subjective mental processes, the Left-Hand quadrants. There are many examples of this type of quadrant partiality or reductionism. When someone tells a bi-polar suffer or schizophrenic to ‘pull themselves together’ or ‘get a grip’, they are ignoring the upper right hand quadrant of biology, of brain chemistry and genetics and their effect on mood and behaviour. They have a narrow view of reality.

 

2.19 OBJECTIVE EMPIRICAL SCIENCE

 

Objective, empirical science has very specific paramaters: it requires things like provable, repeatable results without experimental bias and sometimes this entails some kind of double blind verification. Objective science concerns itself with what can be proven and as such it gives us a lot of very useful information about things that have ‘simple location’ – rocks, chemicals,  kidneys, the temperature at which paper combusts etc…But empirical science cannot tell us anything about meaning or any subjective valuing for that matter: It cannot tell us about morals or beauty – these are just simply not it’s domain. Rather, it is limited to surfaces -  and while this is a very  important domain of study, it can tell us nothing about depth. Depth has to do with interiority: consciousness, hermeneutics (the interpretation of meaning) emotions, how we feel about things, what hurts us, what delights us, etc…


Empirical science is discovered through a ‘monological gaze’: it is a process of observing, not of interacting with interiors. We do not dialogue with the consciousness of a stone to find out it’s chemical composition, we analyze it’s constituent parts using an empirical process. However, hermeneutics, morals, ethics, psychology and states of consciousness are studied through a ‘dialogical process’ which reveals interior depth. These are the so-called ‘soft’ sciences. I have no empirical way of understanding what Picasso’s painting ‘Guernica’ means, but if I engage in a dialogical process of studying up on the history of that time and Picasso’s opinions and feelings about the events of that period and if I let myself enter a contemplative meditation on the painting, it starts to have all sorts of interior meaning…art is experiential and is situated in a historical and intellectual context. Thus, while empirical science can tell us that you are feeling happy because your dopamine and serotonin levels are elevated, it cannot tell us what subjective meaning the experience preceding your happiness (say, a meeting with the dalai lama) had for you.


2.20 SUBJECTIVE HERMENEUTICS AND INTERPRETATION


The ‘soft’ sciences such as psychology are not empirically provable, therefore they rely on extensive dialogue, case studies, theoretical discourse, argument and counter argument. There are real experts in each field who represent a ‘community of the adequate’: those qualified to assess the claims of peers and less experienced newcomers, thus, though it is not empirical, there is nothing arbitrary about this. Being subjective does not mean that everything is relative, or that all opinions are equally valuable. For example: there are expert art historians whose interpretation of Picasso’s ‘Guernica’ painting would be significantly better and deeper than the little girl’s or boy’s down the road. There are expert psychological theorists and clinicians whose interpretation of a symptom would be better and deeper than your average tarot card reader at a seaside resort. There are experts who specialize in ethics who could make more nuanced and deeper arguments than Saddam Hussein or Tony Blair.


2.21 REDUCTIONISM


Reductionism arises in two ways: a) whenever we reduce any quadrant to any other quadrant, or b) whenever we confuse or merge any quadrant with any other – quadrants are deeply related to each other but not the same.

 

In other words the reductionist problem can be described like this: empirical scientists want to reduce everything to what is empirically verifiable – and they will often deny the validity of anything that is not empirically verifiable. But, as we have already observed, much of what makes us human – art, psychology, meaning, philosophy and emotional values, are not empirically verifiable at all! The scientific reductionists will then say that all emotions are merely chemical, or there is no such thing as meaning because you can’t measure it with a slide rule….consciousness has no objective reality because we can’t find it with a microscope etc…poetry has no intrinsic value either, right? On the other hand, those advocating ‘soft’ science will want reduce everything to the subjective (i.e. non objective, non empirical) realm. They will then say that all reality is merely a product of thinking (solipsism is the name of this not particularly new philosophical stance – thoroughly disproved at least a hundred years ago), or that all chemical imbalances in the brain are a product of traumatic experiences or repressed emotions etc….(in truth some are and some are not – schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder are more often than not genetic). Both of these positions limit reality and do us a great diservice. Both positions are sometimes true, both sometimes false, often it is some combination of the two.

 

Quantum physics took science to it’s edge back in the 1930’s and showed us the limitations of our then extant empirical model to explain certain observable, repeatable, experimental phenomena. This in no way means that there is no such thing as physical reality or that everything is affecting everything else an insipidly meaningful way, or that that gravity is just a consensus reality illusion – the previous are all popular, fanciful, fun, science fiction concepts. Our generation got to see these concepts in wonderful films and T.V. programmes and they are a little confused at times as to how real they are – or whether or not any serious scientist believes them. These phenomena reveal that there are big gaps in how we understand physics at the sub atomic level and much theorizing has ensued to try to make sense of these gaps. This theorizing has little if anything at all to do with any of the New Age beliefs that people have tried to merge them with in recent years.


In contrast to physics, both spirituality and psychology are soft dialogical sciences. They are concerned with depth, interiority, meaning, consciousness. The attempt to apply the laws of physics to say, consciousness or emotions (category error) is much like trying to apply the rules of chess to the game of tennis. On an abstract level it is fun for a minute or two, but in practical terms it is essentially meaningless. Likewise, trying to apply the observations of developmental psychology to the process of measuring radiation from the sun is like trying to apply the principles of the observed mating rituals of the musk otter to the process of  burning a Compact Disc – again meaningless. So too – the attempt to conflate what gets called ‘quantum physics’ with what gets called  ‘psychology and spirituality’ is a con of smart marketing perpetrated on those who know very little about either and walk away more confused about both than ever before – albeit pleasantly disoriented. The New Age movement commits both of these category errors: both the reducing and the merging of domains/categories/quadrants with each other. In doing so there is much confusion about depth and meaning. The New Age movement is in some ways a reaction to the empirical science and logical reasoning dominating western thought since the rational enlightenment – but unfortunately they do not attempt a higher order integration that stands on the shoulders of this important rational development while honoring and including the hermeneutical, dialogical domains. Rather, they romanticize and seek to regress to a pre-rational state in the name of spirituality.

 

2.22 PROBLEMS WITH WILBER’S SYSTEM

 

One difficulty with Wilber’s system is that most of its basic propositions (the spiritual philosophy that arises again and again throughout history, the existence of higher structures, states, modes and developmental lines in consciousness; the spiritual evolution of the cosmos; the four quadrants; the notion of spiritual depth etc.); only seem to have validity if we ourselves have experienced or at least are open to the notion of the existence of higher trans-rational levels of consciousness. We are back to the illustration of the lifeguard who cannot swim and does not believe that swimming exists: the problem that we saw at the end of the last chapter. As we have seen, it is estimated that only 0.1 percent of the world population or even less experience these trans-rational levels. This problem is worsened by the fact that the different levels of consciousness tend to misunderstand each other and sometimes are even hostile to one another: a child at a certain stage of development cannot understand the fact that a tall glass of water contains the same amount of water as a smaller but broader glass: the child is sometimes even hostile to the one who tells otherwise. If a mystic in western society enters into a non-rational mode of consciousness and reports what they experience to others, they really will tend to be seen by the many in the dominant rational and analytical mode living in the community around them as being at best eccentric, offbeat, irrational and naïve, or worse: regressive, immature, or crazy. Add the fact that those who are labelled as so called ‘mentally ill’: schizophrenics and sufferers from bipolar disorder, may have a concern with religious themes and both they and the mystic can be in even more trouble. In other words, mystics may be perceived negatively as ‘mentally ill’ or at best as religious cranks and eccentrics, out of touch with reality in a modern, rational, scientific world.

 

Chapter Three: Faith and Beliefs

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

CHAPTER THREE

 

FAITH AND BELIEFS

 

3.1 THE INTERNAL WORLD

 

Quadrant 1 contains our subjective orientation to the world, our beliefs which change as we develop along the various levels. It is here that we frame and conceptualise the objective world in our minds in order to orientate ourselves and act efficiently on the world around us. Beliefs obviously also play an important role in spirituality and religion so I want to give a little attention to beliefs and faith at this point. Quadrant 4 is concerned with communal beliefs, the beliefs of the community. Faith, then, is a foundation or base for social relations, personal identity and the making of personal and cultural meanings. These beliefs have correspondences in how society objectively structures itself Quadrant 3, – the rational, secular industrial society is structured differently than a medieval mythic-level Christian society. Beliefs also have corresponding objective, measurable effects in the physical organism, Quadrant 2, such as in brain activity and so on. We are primarily concerned here with quadrants 1 and 4, with asides to quadrants 2 and 3.

 

 

Faith is a generic feature of human beings and is distinct from belief, religion and spirituality:

 

BELIEF: Is an intellectual assent or agreement to statements that form the doctrines, theology or ideological claims of a particular spiritual or religious tradition, group or individual. Belief therefore is just an aspect, or part of an individual’s or group’s faith. Beliefs are inferences, propositions, or hypotheses that we create where there is insufficient evidence to prove them as either correct or false. This is why we are in quadrants 1 and 4 more than quadrants 2 and 3. These beliefs exist along a continuum of certainty that includes such positions as conviction, assurance, opinion, persuasion, inclination and sentiment.

 

RELIGION: Is a cumulative tradition in a culture or society that is composed from the many and varied beliefs and practices that have expressed or formed the faith of individuals past and present. The components of religion include religious institutions, such as churches, temples, shrines and so on; authoritarian or hierarchical structures, such as Popes, archbishops and priests; as well as art, architecture, symbols, rituals, ceremonies, narrative, myth, Sacred writings, doctrines, ethical or moral teachings, music and practices of justice and mercy. Religion tends to be an outward demonstration of internally held beliefs and faith.

 

SPIRITUALITY: Is the realm of the individual’s beliefs and experiences in relation to the Absolute, Divine or Ultimate: the non material, incorporeal Essence that is without material form or substance, but which may (a) emerge from the material, such as pure thought emerging from the brain, or (b) contract to form the Essence of all the material that is. Spirituality is inward and subjective, hence again our emphasis on quadrants 1 and 4, and often takes the form of a journey. Spirituality is always defined in this study in relationship to an individual’s perception and experience of the Absolute and not, as is common today, in relation to uplifting or liberating emotional experience.

 

FAITH: Faith includes unconscious dynamics as well as conscious awareness and also includes deep-seated emotional dimensions as well as the cognitive operations and content of rationality and logic. Therefore faith is more personal and more existentially defining than belief. A central process that integrates or unites faith is intuition, underlying the formation of beliefs, values and meanings that form our faith. This faith serves to:

            a) Give direction and coherence to people’s lives.

            b) Link people in shared trusts and loyalties with others.

c) Ground personal stances and community or group loyalties in relation to a larger frame of reference.

d) Enable people to face and deal with the outer limits of the conditions of human life, relying on that which has the quality of Ultimacy in their lives.

 

This description of faith embraces both religious faith as well as secular orientations.

 

3.2 PERCEPTION

 

The material, objective world of the right hand quadrants has in itself some inherent structure or pattern to it and this partly structures our perception of that material reality. But this objective material reality is perceived via our selective attention and sensory receptors. Our perception of material reality is not just a passive reception but rather it is an active seeking out of information from a particular viewpoint or perspective. Our particular perspective is a physical, cognitive, emotional, motivational viewpoint in the light of memory and experience. Thus, objective material reality is subjectively interpreted with a particular bias. This perception of reality is a mixture of what psychologists call ‘top down’ and ‘bottom up’ processing and is imbued with meaning and value. It is ‘top down’ because perception of an object is interpreted and categorised within our existing framework of beliefs and selectively attended to and imbued with meaning and value. It is ‘bottom up’ because raw information enters and is filtered through our senses: grass is green because the sensors in our eyes pick up certain wavelengths of light and not others. In addition, this perceptual information is often processed automatically. The beliefs that we construct about objective material reality are shared with others in a particular society and culture at a particular time. Our framework of constructed beliefs is therefore shared and affirmed or verified by parallel experience; by communication using shared symbols such as language and images which are cultural tools. This gives our constructed framework of beliefs a cultural or group bias.

 

3.3 WHY DONT WE WAIT FOR CONVINCING PROOF OF EVERYTHING?

 

Why do we speculate and construct beliefs about objective reality? Why don’t we wait for convincing proof? Well, if we did, we would not be able to function: we would not have enough information to act, when we needed to with the result that we would be paralysed. Rather, based on what evidence we have, together with other related factors, we make inferences from our perception of the objective world in order to make sense of the world, so that we can make predictions about it in order to function and operate appropriately in the world so that we can survive. Making sense of the world involves using bounded, differentiating forms: concepts and categories that are representations of the world involving beliefs and interpretations about similarities and differences in perceived reality. In this way, events, people and objects are labelled via a language; categorised according to features and prototypes and sorted with related concepts in memory. In addition we use scripts – stored routines in our memory which serve to give us expectations. If I say the words ‘Boxing match’, we do not picture a hall of flowers, a violin or the ocean. We already expect to see a hall, with a boxing ring and anticipate to see a referee supervising two men fighting in the ring using boxing gloves, and so on.

 

These representations are not isolated chunks of information but are highly interconnected with other beliefs that we hold, other knowledge that we have, with our emotions, the behaviour of others and ourselves, our motives, our memory, our expectations and our values, to form a complex network. Since all these factors are related to our beliefs, we invest varying amounts of ourselves in our beliefs. For example, if we believe it is important to help those less fortunate than ourselves we may invest our time, energy, money and skills into various pursuits to this end such as donating money or being involved in voluntary work or with a charity. Therefore beliefs are loaded with investments and commitments, which vary in type according to the particular belief and it’s strength. As we embrace a set of beliefs then, consequences follow for other beliefs via the interconnected network that we have formed and these beliefs in turn involve further investment of energy, commitments and consequences.

 

In the main, we do not consciously entertain contradictory beliefs: a person does not hold belief in God and at the same time believe that there is no God, this would be the opposite of the order, structure, predictability and stability that we seek in order to function in the world. Even so, we may hold on to false or erroneous beliefs because they may enable us to function reasonably well, even better than understanding the truth, which we may seek to avoid or deny. The truth may be so threatening to our belief and faith network, and therefore threatening to us, our sense of identity, meaning and orientation, that we prefer to deny and /or oppose the truth and hold on to an untruth, a lie, or illusion.

 

3.4 SUMMARY 1

 

In order to make sense of a partially structured or patterned objective material world and in order to function and survive in it, we interpret and categorise our selective and biased perceptions via cultural tools such as language. Since we cannot investigate all the evidence available, we have to speculate and make inferences with which we construct a highly complex belief structure and framework about our world. These beliefs interact not only with other beliefs, but also with our emotions, motives, behaviour, memory and expectations to produce an even more complex interrelated system. This network carries with it varying degrees and types of investment of our time, energy and behaviour e.t.c., and has logical and sometimes illogical consequences for other beliefs in the system. Because we are trying to make sense of our world, we do not tend to hold on to explicitly contradictory beliefs.

 

3.5 FUNCTIONS OF BELIEFS

 

One of the functions of holding of particular beliefs is to give us identity: a sense of the qualities that make us who we are we are this, not that. They give us purpose: an arousing of short and long term goals and directions: I am going in this way, not that. They also serve to give us cohesiveness: a sense of personal integrity and unity such that we do not feel divided or incoherent. They often serve to give a reduction in anxiety: a calming of fear and uncertainty, though some beliefs will increase fear and anxiety, e.g. the belief that the world is going to end tomorrow. They give us a sense of belonging: a sense of unity with others who hold similar beliefs, a connectedness that inevitably also means division and separateness from some other groups. For example if you are a Christian, you are to varying degrees divided from and separate from Muslims.

 

It is important to note that these effects and functions of belief will follow regardless of whether the belief is true or not, so long as the person who holds them considers them to be true, or manages to effectively avoid serious and threatening contradictions. A Christian creationist may hold to their beliefs in spite of evidence to the contrary in order to maintain these qualities of identity, purpose, cohesiveness, connectedness and anxiety reduction which override considerations of the truth or falsity of a belief. It may be more important to belong to a group than become separate from them by overly challenging the group’s beliefs. Thus there may be an unwillingness to examine the truth or otherwise of some beliefs because of the investment/commitment/reward of these other factors. We will return to this theme in a moment.

 

3.6 FLUIDITY OF BELIEFS

 

Beliefs are not static and rigid but rather they are fluid and processes of accommodation and assimilation usually apply: in assimilation, as new information is received, it is assimilated or incorporated into the various categories, concepts, schemes and scripts that we have already constructed. But sometimes, new information does not fit into the categories, concepts, schemes and scripts that we have constructed, e.g. the world did not end as predicted, so the existing schemes and scripts may have to be modified to accommodate the new information. However, different beliefs offer different resistances to change. Some beliefs are peripheral and their alteration has hardly any effect on the faith network and thus they do not pose a threat to identity, purpose, cohesiveness, connectedness and anxiety reduction. Peripheral beliefs have not involved much in the way of investment or commitment. For example, the average person may not believe that there is water on the Moon. Assimilation of the discovery that there is water on the moon is probably quite easy: it has little real effect on day-to-day living. But other beliefs are more central and core: they are well established and deeply interconnected with our orientation, identity, purpose, integrity, sense of belonging and ability to keep anxiety at bay. To change these beliefs may entail great personal and psychological cost.

 

3.7 FALSIFIABILITY AND UNFALSIFIABILITY OF BELIEFS

 

We may have to accept that our investments in core beliefs have been misplaced and thus we may feel foolish in front of others. Our sense of understanding the world and ourselves may be threatened. Other beliefs may be affected as a consequence of changing this one. Our emotions, behaviours, motives, expectations and even our memory may be affected. Our sense of orientation, identity, purpose, integration and social belonging may all be threatened and anxiety, fragmentation and aloneness may increase. In short, challenging core beliefs will cause a person to feel threatened and thus defensive measures such as physical threats, shouting people down, denial, refusal to listen and avoidance may follow. The continuation of such dissonance may lead to psychological problems.

 

Beliefs are validated by reference to others, (social referents), the world itself and our internal system. We constantly monitor and review our position by learning new information and via social comparison with authority figures that we respect: scientists; religious leaders; experts; peers: friends in and out of the groups to which we belong; and relatives. The pressure that such people can exert on our beliefs is very high and hence they can affect our behaviour, emotions and sense of identity.

 

Sometimes, new but contradictory information is reframed to fit in with the existing belief system. Thus when the ‘Aliens will destroy the world tomorrow’ prophecy fails, rather than admit failure, the believer may say that the aliens changed their minds as a result of the group’s efforts at warning the world, even when no such efforts have been made, because it is too costly to personal integrity and cohesiveness to declare that the whole thing was a mistake. Time, effort and money had been invested in the belief that the world would end…perhaps homes and jobs were given up, and preparations made…

 

A popular model for looking at failed prophecy suggests three modes of reframing prophetic failure: adaptation, reaffirmation and reappraisal. First, believers may acknowledge an error of dating. Second, the blame may be shifted to some force inside or outside of the the group which has interfered with the cosmic plan. Lastly, believers may postulate that the event did in fact occur as predicted but that it happened on the spiritual rather than the material plane and was not, therefore, directly observable to believers. The denial of the failure of a prophecy is not just another option, but the common mode of adaptation of groups following a failed prophecy. Groups tend to reinterpret the promise of a visible verifiable event into the acceptance of a nonverifiable, invisible event. Members may however still experience dissonance and emotions such as sadness, fear, bewilderment and disappointment and it is for this reason that the prophecy must be reinterpreted. Emotional distress is addressed by placing an emphasis on renewing group ties after disconfirmation. The data demonstrates that even intense religious groups are not a group of fanatics who follow doctrine without question. They are sane people trying to reason their way through facts and doctrine in the pursuit of understanding. Even when a messianic leader is alive the messianic belief will be contested and some members do have doubts about the leader’s messianic status. Group members may cope with failed prophecy by appealing to a number of rationalizations which not only preserve, but enhance their commitment to a messianic prophecy. In one such group several members stated that although the leader was a potential messiah, the present generation did not possess enough merit to warrant his coming, i.e. it was their fault. Another explanation was that it is only God who knows when the messiah will arrive: group members thought that they knew the script, but they were wrong, because humans cannot know God’s intentions. However, one of the most common explanations was that even though the leader was dead, now that he was without the hindrance of his physical body, he was in fact more powerful spiritually and was better able to bring on the coming redemption. Thus if a prediction fails, the members of the group may not abandon the movement, but aim to resolve the dissonance while relying on the unfalsifiable beliefs out of which religious thought worlds are constructed and within that context believers can engage in a reaffirmation of basic faith and make a reappraisal of their predicament. The belief that someone is a messiah is empirically testable: it is verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment. The belief that the leader is the messiah has changed into a supernatural unfalsifiable belief that he is more powerful in the spiritual world.

 

3.8 BELIEF VALUES AND SELF-PRESENTATION

 

As we have seen, our beliefs are also imbued with values, e.g. good, bad, right, wrong or worthy. We have our own internal value system – what we think is good, right e.t.c., which though to a great degree is learned from others, is nevertheless our own. Such values are linked to our sensations of pleasant/unpleasant and are thus linked to our motives. However, society in general also has values, as do the groups to which a person belongs. Thus there may be dissonance between our own beliefs/values and those of the society/group to which we belong or are embedded in. To some degree this is overcome by presenting oneself to the group in such a way as is acceptable to them and thus one is accepted by them. However, too much dissonance will result in pressure: refusal to present oneself in an acceptable manner may maintain integrity but create the anxiety and threat of rejection. The more important the acceptance of others is to us, the more pressure we feel to conform. It is here that the unorthodox mystic finds a measure of conflict: do they stay faithful to the immediate experience that seems Real and True, but which also may run counter to the orthodoxy of the group? There may arise a conflict in the mystic between personal integrity and conformity to and acceptance by the group, especially any religious group, to which they belong. This is why the often radical contents of mysticism are couched in orthodox terms, all the more so in less tolerant days when one might be burned at the stake for heresy.

 

3.9 SUMMARY 2

 

Our interrelated beliefs, which affect so many aspects of ourselves, help to give us orientation, identity, purpose, cohesiveness, a sense of security and understanding. New information is either slotted into our existing belief schemes or our schemes may be changed to accommodate new information. Core beliefs, closely related to our integrated sense of self, may be difficult to change, because such change makes us feel threatened and vulnerable. We validate our beliefs in part by comparing ourselves with others, some of whom may exert considerable pressure on us to modify our stance in order to maintain existing beliefs and the values linked with them. If we do not maintain the status quo, we risk losing their and the groups acceptance of us and threaten the coherence and identity of the group.

 

3.10 BELIEFS AND LOGIC

 

Because our beliefs are so intimately connected to our emotions, behaviours, motives, expectations, integrity, identity and belonging, we are not purely logical or rational beings when it comes to belief, because all the above factors intrude on our logic. Typical examples of non-logical thinking include magical or mythical thinking where for example we may interpret events occurring closely in time as causal of each other, e.g. ‘I was just thinking about Joe and the telephone rang and it was Joe on the line…’. We may infer that our thought somehow induced Joe to ring. As a result we may consider that there are special powers or a subtle interconnectedness to the universe that we cannot explain. Thus, autistic people have no sense of the fact that other people have intentions, or are capable of deceit by saying one thing and meaning another. One autistic person on seeing the ability of someone to infer another person’s thoughts by their body-language, ascribed this to special powers. Our use of magical thinking is also affected by context: though amazed by an illusionist’s tricks at a magic show, we nevertheless ascribe it to the artist’s skill in sleight of hand and misdirection. The same trick carried out by a fortune-teller, or prophet, or person claiming special powers, may induce magical thinking. Mythical thinking occurs at a different, higher level. It is more concerned with grand schemes, issues of destiny, salvation of mankind and so on. Like magical thinking, aspects of it attempt to answer the meaning and purpose of existence. Unlike spells and direct interconnection between objects or between objects and the spiritual realms, it usually posits the ideas of gods, spirits, saviours, heroes, fate, destiny, grand purposes of the universe, predestination, the battle between good and evil and such like. In later stages, it moves to monotheism: the idea that there is one God and one God alone. Typically it involves fundamentalist religions.

 

Most New Age beliefs and modern religious fundamentalisms in western society are regressive forms of belief that offer us a return to child-like security and comfort in the face of a harsh existential reality. In this case, the feelings of comfort and safety offered by such beliefs, together with a sense of belonging when such ideas are shared in a like-minded group, override considerations of truth and logic. They provide an apparently safe haven when rationalism and logic appears to fail, or appears too harsh.

 

3.11 WORLD-VIEW ASSUMPTIONS

 

Unspoken beliefs, or assumptions, underpin every world-view. If we did not make such assumptions, we could not construct theories about reality. We do not know everything so we have to speculate a foundation on which to build a belief system. We often unknowingly take such assumptions and speculations by faith as being true. We have already seen that empirical science, including psychiatry, is an approach that wants something to be verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment, and that it has a tendency to a reductionist, materialistic view of reality. Unspoken beliefs about the nature of reality underpin not only psychiatry, but psychology, politics, science, and religion. As we have seen, some assumptions emphasise the objective material, others the subjective and even unseen spiritual dimensions. We cannot avoid these assumptions, but it is good to be aware that they are there, and if possible know what they are. Such assumptions are part and parcel of our framework of meaning and have implications and consequences on the perceptions, interpretations of reality and constructs that we make. These in turn affects out behaviour: if we do not believe in chemical imbalance in the brain, we will treat a schizophrenic or bipolar disorder sufferer differently than if we do hold on to such concepts. If we believe in a spiritual realm, we will act differently towards one who claims immediate experience of the Divine than we would if we think that the existence of such a dimension is primitive nonsense. Our individual assumptions are further shaped and affected by the common assumptions held by the community in which we live. A few centuries ago, an atheist would have to have been quite circumspect about his beliefs in the light of living in a largely pro-Christian community because of all the outrage and sanctions that such a view might elicit from others around them with whom the atheist had to live. Today, in Britain particularly, we live in a largely rational secular society where political correctness has steadily and systematically been dismantling the traditional cultural Christian spiritual orientation in favour of so called neutrality, and further eroded it by supporting or giving preference to minority, ethnic religions in the name of human rights. At it’s core, rationalist humanistic secularism is either atheist or agnostic – it either does not believe in God outright, or it does not know whether God exists or not, and so sits on the fence. Thus in the community, spirituality may tend to be perceived negatively as regressive or naïve, and mystics seen as eccentric or tinged with madness. In the meantime, a terrible vacuum and confusion of spiritual forms has been created which more organised and fervent religions such Islam may fill.

 

3.12 THE ASSUMPTIONS OF PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY WITH REGARD TO SPIRITUALITY

 

As we consider bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, we inevitably find ourselves in the domain of psychology and psychiatry. Psychologists are interested in the healthy functioning of the brain and mind, psychiatrists are trained medical doctors specialising in the field of brain disorder, and as such are able to prescribe medications. We have already seen that psychiatry may well reduce its perspective to that of objective science, quadrants 2 and 3. It often seeks to explain spirituality and spiritual experience in terms of brain activity and functioning. Psychologists on the other hand are, to put it bluntly, divided. On the one hand, there is a descriptive trend, documenting the various types of religious experience where religion and spirituality are seen as an asset to personal growth, meaning and wholeness. The representatives of this position include psychologists such as William James, Edwin Starbuck, C. G. Jung, Gordon Allport, Abraham Maslow. The other is the explanatory trend, promoted primarily by researchers who are suspicious, sceptical or disdainful of religious and spiritual experience. They, like many psychiatrists, seek the origins of such experiences not in a transcendent realm, but in mundane psychological, biological and environmental events. Religion and spirituality is seen as a liability. The best known representatives of this trend are James Leuba, Sigmund Freud and B. F. Skinner. With such widely divergent perspectives and agendas, psychologists are not only attentive to different aspects of spirituality and religion, but also likely to conceive of spirituality and religion in starkly contrasting terms. Descriptive psychologists focus on interior subjective states, quadrant 1 and to some degree quadrant 4. Explanatory psychologists typically focus on externals, quadrants 2 and 3. When viewing external expressions such as creeds and rituals, they are likely to see them as unfounded and irrational: myths to be demythologised because they have little or no basis in objective facts, or, like some psychiatrists, they may reduce them to biochemical activity in the brain. In effect, they say something like: ‘Because we can observe changes in brain activity during a reported transcendent mystical experience, then that is all the experience is: a change in brain activity.’. How a psychologist or psychiatrist evaluates a bipolar or schizophrenic sufferer who has spiritual/religious interests or concerns depends then on the perspective of the individual expert and the assumptions of the theory that they are adhering to. They may perceive such interest in spirituality or mystical experiences as a pathological symptom: irrational and out of touch with the reality which they advocate.

 

This means that psychologists and psychiatrists may be experts in their field, but they nevertheless hold to a theoretical orientation with its accompanying assumptions: they are not neutral, especially when it comes to spirituality.

Chapter Four: Faith, Meaning, Myth and Spirituality

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

 

CHAPTER FOUR

 

 

FAITH, MEANING, MYTH AND SPIRITUALITY

 

 

4.1 MEANING

 

Individual human beings seem to require meaning and this too is found in quadrant 1. I am defining meaning in broad psychological terms as synonymous with significance, importance and sense of coherence. To live in a world or universe that is merely random, incoherent and chaotic does not seem to be an option for the human mind. The need for meaning seems tied with our very existence: in other words it is an existential issue. Clinical psychologists and psychotherapists have observed that a lack of meaning leads us to boredom, apathy, emptiness, cynicism, lack of direction, criticism of the activities purported by others to have meaning, aimlessness, worthlessness, confusion and despair.

 

Meaning seems to exist at multiple levels: We can talk about the meaning of life: Does life in general, or at least human life, fit into some overall, coherent pattern? Does the cosmos have any coherent importance and significance? But meaning exists at lower levels too. Our lives seem to be made up of a multiplicity of meanings as opposed to finding meaning in just one great coherent scheme, important as that may be to some of us. Thus we may find meaning in teaching others, in being employed, in repairing a car, in writing an article or creating a painting.  In contrast to those people who have a sense of meaninglessness, those who possess a sense of meaning experience life as having some purpose or function to be fulfilled and some overriding goal or goals to which to apply themselves. Religion and spirituality often deals with the grand themes: human origins, the fate of the universe, our place and purpose in the grand scheme of things. When it comes to religion or spirituality there is usually a reference in this coherence to some magical, supernatural or spiritual ordering of the universe.

 

4.2 MAKING SENSE OF THE WORLD – TWO DIFFERENT MODES

 

We can think of a human being as an organism composed of components having both psychological and biological, or subjective and objective dimensions: the Upper Quadrants 1 and 2. These components have two basic modes of operation: an ‘action mode’ and a ‘receptive mode’. The action mode is a state organized to manipulate the environment. To carry out this purpose the striate muscle system is the dominant physiological agency. Base-line muscle tension is increased and the EEG usually features beta waves. Internally, we find focal attention, heightened boundary perception, object-based logic and the dominance of formal characteristics over the sensory, that is shapes and meanings have a preference over colours and textures. In contrast, the receptive mode is a state whose purpose is receiving the environment, rather than manipulation of it. Thus the sensory-perceptual system is usually the dominant agency rather than the muscle system. Base-line muscle tension tends to be decreased, compared to the tension found in the action mode and the EEG tends to the slower frequencies of alpha and theta. Psychologically, attention is diffuse, boundary perception is decreased, non logical thought processes are evident and sensory qualities dominate over the formal – colours and textures take precedence over shapes. These functions are coordinated or synthesised to maximize the intake of information from the environment. But as human development proceeds the receptive mode is gradually dominated, if not submerged, by a natural and culturally enforced emphasis on striving activity and the rational action mode that serves it. The receptive mode tends, more and more, to be an interlude between increasingly longer periods of action-mode organization. A consequence of this bias is that we come to regard the rational, analytic, action mode as the normal one for adult life and to think of the unfamiliar receptive states as pathological.

 

Our ‘knowing’ then takes two forms: the rational and the intuitive, also known as ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’. The rational or ‘logos’ mode is an active form of knowing using and mediated by discursive reason and analysis. It is the type of knowing used by science. The intuitive or ‘mythos’ mode is an immediate passive form of knowing, unmediated by reason or logic. In earlier times, both these forms of knowing were considered essential, indispensable and complimentary, each serving different functions such that each was impoverished without the other. It was a dangerous mistake to confuse the two or to ignore one in favour of the other. When the Crusaders allowed ‘mythos’ thinking to dominate their battle strategies, they failed. Literal interpretations of myths can lead to nihilism – the total rejection of established social conventions and beliefs, especially those of morality and religion.

 

4.3 THE MODE OF ‘LOGOS’ AND RATIONALITY

 

The ‘logos’ world-view is what we usually call ‘modern’ or ‘rational’. The word ‘logic’ comes from the word ‘logos’ in Greek. So does the ‘-ology’ ending of words like ‘anthropology’, ‘psychology’, ‘biology’, etc.  The ‘logos’ way of viewing the world de-emphasizes emotions; it is ‘high focus, low affect’, and Western philosophy and science are paradigms of the ‘logos’ world-view. The ‘logos’ world-view features linear time, which goes in one direction only (forward): the past is gone, and each particular event is unique in space and time. So history becomes important as the record of unique non-repeatable events. In the ‘logos’ world-view, time is imposed on religious ideas: for example, concepts like ‘beginning’ and ‘end’ start being applied to the universe. God becomes the ruler of linear time, deciding when it starts and stops and thus stories of creation and the last things emerge. The ‘logos’ world-view features an empirical, practical orientation, wanting proof, validation and evidence: people begin to think of nature as governed by causal laws. Using evidence, methods of proof and verifiablility, humans can discover these laws of nature and use them to manipulate, predict, and control nature in increasingly large-scale ways.Logos’ cultures typically have writing which allows knowledge to be accumulated and thus it is not limited to what the current group can remember. Linguistic precision becomes vital and the world of things is value-neutral: everything is a something, everything has ‘whatness’, ‘nature’, ‘essence’ — some specific kind of being. If this is an apple, then it’s not a banana: it has apple-ness, it lacks banana-ness. ‘Logos’ cultures often oppose thinking that is used with feeling and instead value people who can think efficiently and use language clearly. Men are considered to embody the logical ideal more than women, children, or slaves. Western religions thus offer personal salvation after death and one’s eternal destiny is not tied to one’s tribe or clan: salvation is on an individual basis. In a ‘logos’ society, the law is attained by reason, it is flexible in order to meet change and development: it is pragmatic.

 

Active rationality or ‘logos’ -

Makes things work more efficiently. e.g. its application in politics.

Discovers new facts and applications concerning the physical universe.

Does not assuage human emotional pain or sorrow.

Cannot answer questions about the ultimate value of human life.

Cannot explain the meaning of life.

Is concerned with truth, facts and practical matters.

Tends to develop an economy of reinvestment of capital into technological change and innovation. Thus it creates a society of institutionalised change and separation of church and state, religion and politics.

Is particularly associated with the Right Hand quadrants.

 

4.4 PERSONAL CONSTRUCTS IN THE ‘LOGOS’ MODE

 

Personal Construct Theory gives one of the richest possible accounts of a person’s cognitive processes. It is the only approach in psychology, which was developed from the start as a complete psychology, explicit about its assumptions and theoretical base. To a greater extent than other ‘cognitively’ oriented theories of personality and psychotherapy, Personal Construct Theory places a strong emphasis on emotiponal experiences, understood as signals of actual or impending transitions in one’s fundamental constructs for anticipating the world. For example, individuals might experience a sense of threat when faced with the prospect of imminent and comprehensive change in their core structures of identity (e.g., when facing dismissal from a valued career, or abandonment by a partner they counted on to validate a familiar image of themselves).  Alternatively, people might experience anxiety when confronted with events that seem almost completely alien to the point that they find it difficult to interpret within their previous construct system.  This attention to the delicate interweaving of meaning and affect has made PCT an attractive framework for contemporary researchers and clinicians concerned with such topics as relational breakdown, trauma and loss, all of which can fundamentally undercut one’s assumptive world, triggering a host of significant emotional and behavioural responses.

 

It was invented single-handedly by George Kelly in 1955 (with a two-volume, 1,000+ page monograph, which is still the definitive work in the field). He explicitly set out to replace the models of the person adopted by behaviourism (the person as a ping-pong ball, continually batted between stimulus and response), and by psychoanalysis (the person as a dark cellar where a maiden aunt is locked in mortal combat with a sex-crazed beast, with the whole thing refereed by a rather nervous bank clerk), with the model of  ‘person as scientist’. Its essence is that personal identity is defined by the way we construe or ‘understand’ our personal worlds.

 

Its major tool is the ‘Repertory Grid’, which is an amazingly ingenious and simple idiographic device to explore how people construe or construct their world. The names of the subjects (options) to be explored – (people, objects, theories) are arranged in groups of three, the same question being asked of all these groups or triads: ‘How are two of these similar and the third one different?’  The answer constitutes a ‘construct’, one of the dimensions along which the subject divides up her or his world. ‘How is my father different from my mother and sister?’ for example. My father is ‘Male’ whereas my mother and sister are ‘Female’, might be the answer. Some constructs, such as ‘male’ and ‘female’ (when applied to people) are commonplace but it is these personal constructs that say a lot about the person. If for example, the options were different makes of cars, then the ‘male-female’ construct would be even more revealing than if we were looking at people. There are conventions for keeping track of the constructs. When the grid is complete, there are several ways of rating or ranking all of the options against all the constructs, so as to permit sophisticated analysis of core constructs and underlying factors.

Theory

 

Kelly’s full theory of personal constructs is very detailed but its main points are:

 

Our construct systems make our world more predictable:

 

We use our construct systems to make the world easier to find our way around. Because we know that countries closer to the Equator are hotter than those at the Poles, we can make a better job of packing what to take to a journey to Mexico. Because we know that cars built in the 1970’s were not built with economy in mind, we know better than to make fuel consumption the deciding criterion when looking to buy an old banger. If we know that when our partner behaves in a particular way it usually means that they’re feeling preoccupied, or loving, or harassed, then we adjust our expectations and our behaviour accordingly. Our construct systems reflect our constant efforts to make sense of our world, just as scientists make sense of their subject-matter: we observe, we draw conclusions about patterns of cause and effect, and we behave according to those conclusions.

 

Our construct systems can grow and change:

 

Our construct systems are not static. They are confirmed or challenged every moment we are conscious. If we believe that Arctic Airlines offers the best service in the world, and then we have a dreadful trip where everything goes wrong, we do one of two things: we either adapt our construct system, altering our feelings about them in the light of our experience; or we immunise our construct system, with thoughts like They must have been having a really bad day, or Yes, but the airport was so overcrowded they didn’t stand a chance. Whether we adapt or immunise depends on a number of things: how open we are to new information, how much it matters to us to maintain our belief in the superiority of Arctic Airlines, how important it is to us to have a lot of information about airlines anyway.

 

Our construct systems influence our expectations and perceptions:

 

Also, if we’re expecting Arctic Airlines to treat us well, we probably get on the plane in a better mood than we would on an airline that gave us poor treatment last time. If our experience is that Arctic’s cabin staff always smile when they meet us, we probably board the plane with a smile ourselves. We might not notice when Arctic’s service fails to live up to standard, but pay attention when it happens with the other airline. Because our construct systems reflect our past experience, they also influence our expectations and behaviour.

 

Some constructs, and some aspects of our construct systems, are more important than others:

 

The airline example repeats in every area of our experience. We feel, think, and behave according to our construct system; we adapt our constructs, immunise them, or have them confirmed. Some of our constructs – those which represent our core values and concern our key relationships – are complex, quite firmly fixed, wide-ranging, and difficult to change; others, about things which don’t matter so much, or about which we haven’t much experience, are simpler, narrower, and carry less personal commitment.

 

Your construct system is your truth as you understand and experience it – nobody else’s:

 

A person’s construct system represents the truth, as they understand it. Construct systems cannot be judged in terms of their objective truth – whatever ‘objective’ means in the world of personal feelings and choices. When we meet someone whose construct system is different from our own – especially if we don’t like it, or think it’s wrong – we sometimes use words like prejudice or stereotype to convey our disagreement. We might try confronting them with opposing opinions or evidence, and get frustrated if we see them immunising their constructs instead of adapting them. But we have to accept that their system has worked, more or less, for them so far, and that if it is different from ours then that is a reflection of the fact that they’ve had different experiences, different reactions, and see different things as important.

 

Construct systems are not always internally consistent:

 

People can and do live with a degree of internal inconsistency within their construct systems. At the simplest level, many of us encounter this as small children when we hear an adult say ‘This hurts me more than it hurts you,’ and wonder why, under those circumstances, they don’t stop doing it. At the more complex level, we observe this when we encounter someone whose self-perception seems to be at odds with reality, who seems to present different faces in different circumstances. Most people live with a certain level of inconsistency, which does them no harm; but when the distortions of judgement become too costly or inappropriate the person (and/or those around them) is likely to suffer some form of personal distress.

 

The extent to which one person can understand another’s construct system is a measure of that person’s empathy:

 

You do not have to have the same construct system as another person in order to understand them; but you do have to be able to infer the other person’s construct system. The simple example is when one mate says to another ‘After a day like you’ve just had, I thought you’d like chicken soup,’ and is rewarded with a grateful smile. Most of the advice on how to get on with other people, for whatever purpose, is reducible to the prayer to the Blessed Spirit to grant that I might not condemn my neighbour until I have walked a mile in his moccasins – or, as Kelly might have put it, his construct system.

 

4.5 THE MODE OF ‘MYTHOS’ AND INTUITION

 

Some people, usually those people emphasising logos and putting down the mythic view from which they are emerging, have called the contrasting ‘mythos’ world-view ‘primitive’ or ‘irrational’. In the mythos experience of life, mathematics and logical types of thinking are not as important as high emotionality – ‘low focus, high affect’. The model is the Aborigine Dreamtime: a ‘strong’ time, eternally ‘now’, ‘everywhen’, in which roles and activities are always ongoing. Some elements of ‘mythos’ remain in contemporary world religions: the ongoingness of Jesus’ salvation act in every Mass for example. The ‘mythos’ world-view is unhistorical because daily time is unimportant. The only time that matters is ‘strong’ time, which is always ongoing. Ritual re-enactment of events and archetypal persons (Hunter, Warrior, Lover, etc.) in strong time gives meaning to everyday life. In ‘mythos’ cultures, one achieves a kind of liberation from daily time by imaginatively merging with timeless archetypes and repeating archetypal activities in a ritual manner. According to ‘mythos’ world-views, there has been a devolution (a ‘fall’) from a Golden Age to daily time — things now aren’t as good as they were in a long-ago Eden. ‘Mythos’ focuses on a sacred past or beginnings: on primordial origins. It focuses on the constants and the foundations of human life. Oral cultures — those without writing — tend to be ‘mythos’, so knowledge is limited to what the group can remember. Sacred places and objects are thought to exist within the everyday world. The sacred texts of the ancestors teach all that needs to be known, so as a result ‘mythos’ people tend to be wary of changing the natural world and do not modify nature on a large scale. The categories of being merge: a thing can be simultaneously both X and not-X. ‘Mythos’ people seek to conserve what has been achieved since the fall since they have a sense of the fragility of civilisation. Teaching therefore tends to be by rote, with little emphasis of originality, innovation or creativity as these can be seen as potential threats to what is usually the dominant agrarian economy. ‘Logos’ rationality and analysis is therefore limited. ‘Mythos’ resonates with the deepest unconscious being. In ‘mythos’ societies, the law is given by the Supreme Being and is unalterable. Behaviour and practice seeks to be in harmony with the fundamental principles and laws of existence. To violate these principles is to be unnatural – like a fish out of water.

 

In ‘mythos’ cultures there are no sharp distinctions between:

tribe / self / ancestors

self / nature

thinking / feeling

living / dead

body / soul

conscious / unconscious

animal / human

sacred ritual / secular life activity

 

‘Mythos’ cultures tend to focus on groups and individuals matter only insofar as they exemplify the timeless archetypes. For example, ‘mythos’ cultures tend not to have the concept of an individual afterlife: one’s eternal destiny is bound up with the destiny of one’s clan or tribe.

 

Receptive intuition or ‘mythos’-

Accesses the inner working of the mind that is not readily applicable to the affairs of the external world.

Is not rational or reasonable in terms of logic

Cannot be demonstrated or validated by evidence and methods of proof

Does not form the basis for a pragmatic or practical policy or a blueprint for action

Is creative, insightful and inventive

Provides a context of meaning and significance with which to make sense of daily life

Is concerned with the timeless and constant in existence.

Is concerned with origins, foundations and the deepest levels of mind.

Directs attention to the eternal and universal.

Is rooted in the unconscious, an area of the mind not accessible by rationality yet which still has a profound effect on experience and behaviour.

Is associated with mysticism, one interpretation of which is that it is a descent into the mind, especially the sub conscious and unconscious by means of structured disciplines of focus and concentration in order to acquire insight and intuition.

Serves to illuminate the inner life of spirit.

Tends to be associated with agrarian economies where there is not the same investment of capital into technological change, and therefore not the same degree of innovation. Church and state, religion and politics are one, all areas expressing the unity of God. To fence off an area as off limits to spirituality would seem a shocking violation, a denial of God. Politics is a channel of God: the prophet IS the political head.

 

4.6 MODES AND WESTERN SOCIETY

 

However, western society has increasingly focused on the active rational or ‘logos’: on science and rational inquiry, such that the receptive, intuitive, or ‘mythos’ mode is ignored, dismissed or suppressed. However, both are essential for a full human life; each is diminished unless complimented by the other. Thus the true philosopher has to be as rational as Aristotle, but then go beyond him in an ecstatic, imaginative apprehension of truth.

 

4.7 MYSTICISM, MYTH AND THE DEPTHS OF THE MIND

 

We are not usually aware of the depths of the mind, which we call unconscious or subconscious. This deeper realm exists between the realm of sense perceptions and that of intellectual abstractions. It is a world of pure images, a realm of visions proceeding from the subconscious to the conscious level of the mind in dreams and in hypnogogic imagery: vivid sensory images occurring at sleep onset but especially vivid with sleep-onset rapid eye movement sleep periods and which also can be accessed by some exercises and intuitive disciplines of the mystics. Mystics however claim that these visions are not just subjective or unconscious fantasies but have an objective reality, even if they remain impervious to logical analysis. In either case, instead of discounting them as merely imaginary and therefore unreal as modern rationalists might do, we should attend to this dimension of our experience. It lies too deep for conscious formulation, but has a profound effect upon our behaviour and our perceptions. Our dreams are real; they tell us something and in our dreams we experience what is imaginary. Mythology is an attempt to organise the experiences of the unconscious into imagery which enables men and women to relate to these fundamental regions of their own being. Thus truth is not merely that which can be logically, publicly and legally perceived, but it also has an interior dimension that cannot be apprehended by our normal waking consciousness. Divine truth is without limit: fresh insights are always possible and no single interpretation of Scripture or a spiritual text or mystical experience could suffice. True knowledge can never be a matter of intellectual conformity to a particular interpretation. No sage or religious authority, however eminent, can claim monopoly of spiritual truth.

 

4.8 MYTH AND FOLKLORE

 

The word ‘mythos’ begs us to look at the word ‘myth’ a little more closely and with it, related words such as ‘legend’, ‘fable’, ‘folklore’ ‘parable’, ‘allegory’ and ‘metaphor’ and ‘fairytale’.

 

A Myth is a narrative through which religious or spiritual affirmations and beliefs are expressed, from the Greek word meaning ‘tale’ or ‘speech’. Often a myth is a story of unknown or unverifiable origin, but part of the tradition of a group or culture, thus myths are shared cultural narratives, (Quadrant 4). Myths often have a religious or spiritual component and usually also carry an explanatory component that ostensibly relates to historical events, especially those events that are of importance to the group. Myths are not concerned with the truth, factuality or historical accuracy of an event but rather, are concerned with the meaning of an event, because the event is seen as a manifestation of constant, timeless realities. Thus individual biographies are located in stories of a more extensive, expansive kind and concerned with the nature of time, space, place, origins and death. They are often stories about divine beings, generally arranged in a coherent system. When embodied in a cult, the components of ritual and ceremony related to the myth, illuminate and work aesthetically on the worshippers to evoke a sense of sacred or revered significance and meaning, enabling them to apprehend the deeper currents of existence. The divine beings and the events that surround them are revered as true and sacred and endorsed by rulers and priests.

 

The functions of myth are to:

Change history from a threat of unpredictable chaos and chance to stability.

Place particular events and biographies in a larger context that supplies them with meaning and significance.

Save us from spiritual and existential despair.

 

Myth is so predominant that it is a human universal, but he nature of this universality is open to interpretation. Thus, for:

Jung: Myths arise from a collective unconscious and use archetypes such as King, Trickster, Hero and Fool.

Freud: They are created in the formation of the mind.

Levi-Strauss: They are created in the formation of the mind and its need for order and logic.

Joseph Campbell: They have four functions:

Mystical: Evoking awe and gratitude.

Cosmological: offering models of the cosmos that are coherent with the Divine but beyond physics.

Sociological: supporting the existing social order.

Psychological: initiating individuals into their own, especially spiritual, potentialities

 

Some question whether people were ever intended to take myths literally. In Wilber’s stages of emergence, at the mythic level of development, they do indeed often seem to be taken literally and those people who stay at this level or move back to it, say in Christianity for example, tend to believe that Adam and Eve literally existed, that the serpent literally spoke to them, that the earth is literally under 10,000 years old, that there was once a literal world-wide flood which Noah and the animals survived and so on. The active, rational level of development on the other hand dismisses these stories: it demythologises. It sees them as untrue in the light of scientific development and discovery and therefore often throws them out as meaningless. Because myths are ostensibly about matters of fact, it is assumed that if the events portrayed are shown to be in error, then the myth is in error also. People who move to later post-rational stages of development however may return to these myths and whilst seeing that the gods do not literally exist upon Mount Olympus for example, they nevertheless may draw from them a sense of meaning, using them as symbols and forms illustrating deeper realities.

 

Returning to the issue of faith, psychologist Roberto Assagioli, in his book, ‘Act of will’, describes the nature of faith. In talking about the choice, decision and will, he argues that affirmation is a pivotal stage in the act of the will. Once deliberation, choice and decision have been carried out, we enter the phase of achievement: of making what is willed happen or manifest itself. The first stage of this phase of achievement is affirmation, because without it, the decision remains latent. Affirmation is a state of mind, a state of certainty: it is a synthesis of two attitudes: faith and conviction:

Faith is intuitive. It is a belief in things hoped for but not seen. [MYTHOS]

Conviction is cognitive and is arrived at via: Reason and obedience/adherence to that which is perceived as being in harmony with truth. [LOGOS]

 

To bring what has been chosen and willed into effect, affirmation must be vigorous and intense, having the sense of an authoritative command. Assagioli suggests the following model:

 

        MYTHOS           SYNTHESIS             LOGOS

 

         FAITH———AFFIRMATION—-CONVICTION

 

We can further refine this model by considering the word ‘conviction’. As we have seen easlier, beliefs are an acceptance of inferences, propositions, or hypotheses where there is insufficient evidence to prove them as correct. They exist along a continuum of certainty that includes such positions as conviction, assurance, opinion, persuasion, inclination and sentiment. Beliefs give us:

 

Identity: A sense of the qualities that make us who we are.

Purpose: an arousing of short and long term goals and directions.

Cohesiveness: a sense of personal integrity and unity.

Belonging: a sense of unity with others – of sharedness, connectedness that inevitably also means division and separateness from some other groups. For example if you are a Christian, you are divided from and separate from Muslims.

Reduction of anxiety: a calming of fear and uncertainty, though some beliefs will increase fear and anxiety, e.g. the belief that the world is going to end tomorrow.

 

So we could modify the above model to that below:

 

   MYTHOS          SYNTHESIS          LOGOS

 

    FAITH——–AFFIRMATION——BELIEF

                                                        CONTINUUM

                                                         (conviction-assurance-

                                                         opinion- persuasion-

                                                         inclination-sentiment)

 

Roots in Unconscious                      Conscious

Intuitive                                            Analytical

Non-rational                                     Rational

Narrative                                           Empirical

Why?                                                How?

Truthfulness                                     Truth

Meaning                                            Facts

Insight                                               Deduction

Universal                                           Particular

Foundations/Origins                         Present/Future

Spiritual                                            Material

Cognitive/Emotional                        Cognitive

Conservative                                     Innovative

Unifies                                               Separates

Orientates                                          Pragmatic

 

We have also further defined faith as an integral centring process, it is intuitive, underlying the formation of beliefs, values and meanings, especially in spirituality. It carries the connotation of restful reliance on its object. Faith is a foundation to social relations, personal identity and the making of personal and cultural meanings. It is a generic feature of human beings that is distinct from belief because faith includes unconscious dynamics as well as conscious awareness. Faith also includes deep-seated emotional dimensions as well as cognitive operations and content. Therefore faith is more personal and existentially defining than belief.

 

Faith:

Gives direction and coherence to people’s lives.

Links people in shared trusts and loyalties with others.

Grounds personal stances and communal loyalties in relation to a larger frame of reference.

Enables people to face and deal with the limit conditions of human life, relying on that which has the quality of Ultimacy in their lives.

 

We can see from this definition, that there is a close relation to the functions of ‘mythos’ as well as ‘Logos’.

 

4.9 OBJECTS OF FAITH

 

Both faith and belief require an object: it is meaningless to just say that I have faith: or I have belief. Both these statements beg the question ‘faith or belief in what?’ One has faith and belief IN something, or ABOUT something, even if it is in a Formless God that is no-thing. If we look back at the figure of Quadrant 1 (below) we see that there is a horizontal line ‘mystical modes at any stage’:

 

 

 

 

This indicates the depth of mystical experience. As we have seen, mystical experience is not a jump to a higher stage, 9though that may be a secondary effect), neither is it a regression to a lower stage of development. If we do access lower level structures, it is as a developed adult. This line indicating depth of mystical experience is a continuum or smooth transition. Nevertheless, there are identifiable degrees of depth, from the rational, active logical thinking mode, through different degrees of receptive, intuitive modes, where the rational active mode is increasingly suspended. The depth that we are at is indicated by the nature of the object of our faith.

 

a)      Rational active mode. Thus we begin at the rational active mode where the object of our faith tends to be in the objective material world as the only reality. We place our faith in knowledge gained from systematic, objective measurement of this reality through disciplines such as science, physics, biology, chemistry and so on. If it cannot be observed or measured, it does not exist.

b)      Nature mysticism. This is where we see nature in a deeper, richer hue, as if we are seeing the unity and essence of nature and the natural world, with it’s beauty, proportion and symmetry. We many be gazing at the sea, or a beautiful mountain or landscape, or be watching tall grass blowing in the summer breeze, and be taken out of ourselves as it were to perceive the Peace and Unity and Beauty of Nature, and this perception may make us feel quite full of Joy or Peace.

c)      Literal mysticism. In looking say at a rainbow, we may be taken out of ourselves by the beauty of its colours, the perfect symmetry of it’s curve across the sky and so on. But we may go further: if we are of a Christian or Jewish orientation, may understand the rainbow to be a sign of God’s Covenant that He will never destroy the earth again by water as He did in Noah’s day. The appropriateness and aptness of the rainbow as such a sign may be impressed upon us. We may then be led to perceive the Beauty, Love and Mercy of God and be transported in wonder and delight in the simultaneous Power and Gentleness of the Divine. We may consider all this to be literally True and find our faith strengthened and confirmed by such a perception of God. Of course, this may happen with whatever framework of transcendent belief we have: we may see angels, or feel that angels are present with us; we may believe in the fairy world: in sprites and elves and tree spirits and so on; we may believe that there are Wise Spirit Guides literally communicating and helping us along the path; we may believe in a pantheon of Divine Beings: good and evil gods, mischievous gods and so on. Whatever our belief is, this depth of mystical experience may be understood and framed using that belief framework, which may be strengthened and deepened in us. The point is, we take it literally. Here is part of the testimony of Sarah Edwards, the wife of new England Calvinist minister Jonathan Edwards which gives an example of such a literal experience: ‘. ..all night I continued in a constant, lively, clear sense of the heavenly sweetness of Christ’s excellent and transcendent love, of his nearness to me, and of my dearness to him; with an inexpressibly sweet calmness of soul in an entire rest in him. I seemed to myself to perceive a glow of divine love come down from the heart of Christ in heaven, into my heart, in a constant stream, like a stream or pencil of sweet light. At the same time, my heart and soul all flowed out in love to Christ; so that there seemed to be a constant flowing and reflowing of of heavenly and divine love, from Christ’s heart to mine; and I appeared to myself to float or swim, in these bright, sweet beams of the love of Christ, like the motes swimming in the beams of the sun, or the streams of his light which come in at the window. My soul remained in a kind of heavenly Elysium. …As I sat there, I had the most affecting sense of the mighty power of Christ, which had been exerted in what he had done for my soul, and in sustaining and keeping down the native corruptions of my heart…so intense were my feelings…that I could not forebear rising up and leaping with joy and exultation…’(The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol.1 [1974] p.lxv Banner of Truth Trust). Here, her experience is framed within the Calvinist faith to which she belonged. Though she did not perceive herself as literally floating, she believed in a literal work of Christ. Her beliefs in a literally existing Jesus as her personal saviour were deepened and strengthened.

d)      Trans religious mysticism. Sometimes the experience is of such depth that it cannot be contained by the person’s contextual religious framework, or orthodoxy. Thus a person may begin a spiritual journey that involves finding a framework of faith and belief that is able to contain the nature and content of the experience. Such a person may move from western Christianity to an exploration of eastern religions for example. Thus such a person may leave one religion for another, or move from atheist to believer and so on. This may take a regressive form, such as returning to mythical or magical frameworks of belief; a move common amongst New Age devotees. Amongst this group, or even with one individual, the Divine may take many forms in order to accommodate the experience – especially to accommodate paradox and contradiction.

e)      Trans forming mysticism. Here, the insights gained from the experience, especially in relation to paradox or contradiction of forms, may lead to a trans forming position, where the Divine cannot be formulated because the Divine is transcendent of forms, concepts, language and ideas. This is where we find talk of the Divine as being Emptiness, Stillness, the Silent Desert, Attributeless, in all things yet none of them and so on.

 

With regard to the Absolute then, in the ultimate mystical experience God-as-Spirit transcends concept and form. There are degrees of mystical experience: some are deeper than others. This depth can be measured along a continuum in which the deeper the experience, the more Attributeless and Formless the Divine becomes. In experiences of less depth, the Divine may appear as the very Essence of Love – God IS Love. Or nature my shine with a Deeper Reality such that one perceives the Essence of Nature – what lies beneath the expressions of the natural world. But in deeper experiences, the opposite may occur: the dominance of formal characteristics – of forms, of attributes of God, concepts, language and ideas which are the dominant characteristic of the active, rational, ‘logos’ mode, becomes less and less. The Divine appears to transcend any delimitation to form or attribute or categorisation, any boundary or differential. Yet in order to describe the experience, to communicate it to others, we have to force the experience into language and concepts, to images and symbols. This is where mystics struggle to find the words, to find exactly the right words to describe the nature and content of their experience, because language is inadequate to contain what they have perceived.

 

Sufi mystic Ibn al-Arabi suggested that the imagination where any images and symbols and sounds of the Divine arise is like a peninsula between the material and the spiritual. In a similar way, Shankara considered such symbols and images as projections that we make onto the Formless Absolute. Arabi suggests a downwards movement from the Divine in creating appropriate images and symbols in our imagination in order to meet us where we are, making the Divine Vital and Relevant to the individual. Shankara suggests an upwards movement, whereby we project imaginary, illusionary forms onto the Formless. If the Divine exists ‘out there’, then probably both are true. Thus, these forms of the Divine both reveal and obscure the Divine. They reveal aspects of the Divine, yet, because such forms cannot encompass the Divine, they also obscure or hide the Divine. For the mystic, as this is true of these imaginary forms, so it is true of the universe: the universe, being the Divine expressed and delimited to form, both reveals and obscures the Divine Absolute. Thus Arabi’s answer to all questions was ‘Yes and no’. Is this person God? Yes in the Essence, no in their expression of delimitation. Personal mythical forms of the Divine can at best be described as allegorical, symbolic or metaphorical. They stand between us creatures of form and the Formless Absolute.

 

4.10 REIFICATION

 

However, another tendency that we have with regard to accounts of mystical experience is to turn these metaphors and symbols into a concrete object: into something that exists ‘out there’. This is a process called ‘reification’. For example we may turn metaphorical, symbolic manifestations of God into an external God or Deity which is seen as independently existing ‘out there’ and being capable of acting on us, the subject and on the world around us. This process of reification happens because as creatures of form, we are nearly always operating in a rational, logical mode with forms: with ‘things out there’. Also, since many of the metaphors concerning God are anthropomorphic, or human-like, there is then a tendency to reify these anthropomorphic symbols so that we tend to think of God as ‘Big-Person-in-the- sky-out-there’. However, whether we ultimately take such experiences as portraying an Entity literally existing ‘out there’ depends upon the developmental stage of faith that we are at.

 

4.11 CONTRADICTION IN MYSTICAL CONTENT

 

‘If there is one God, how come there are so many different and contradictory beliefs and systems of worship?’ Well, we have just had the answer to this question. The Formless Absolute that is encountered in the deepest mystical encounters cannot be encompassed by the mind. The Divine is transcendent of concept, of language, of ideas, of forms. In describing the Divine, in conceptualising the Absolute, we delimit the Formless into form. Such descriptions are inadequate stepping-stones in the imagination that serve to point to, but cannot in any way encompass, the Absolute. They are metaphors and allegories, symbols that both reveal and veil the Divine to the individual mystic. Such symbols are personally relative to the individual mystic: they are personally meaningful and significant. Thus many mystics and Gnostics will argue that each individual has their own path to the Divine – that there are as many paths as there are individuals. Being Formless and Transcendent, the Divine is full of paradox: because the Divine is in all things, then the Divine is both Good and Evil, yet cannot be reduced to one or both of these concepts. Thus it is easy to see how apparent contradictions in mystical content arise between one mystic and another, especially since each person who has a mystical experience is embedded in a particular culture at a particular time. Even more than this, we are finite beings in a finite location looking at the infinite – the mystic sees only facets of the Absolute, like looking at facets of a diamond. Though all the facets belong to the diamond, one may be on the opposite side to the other, which may reflect quite different, even opposite things.

 

4.12 RELATIVE PERSPECTIVISM

 

The mystic then, stands in a finite location relative to the Infinite. They stand at a particular point in time and space and therefore have a unique perspective. With regards to the content, the symbols, metaphors and images that the mystic uses to describe and delimit the Infinite, their position is one of relative perspectivism: this is how things look to me from here at this time. To someone else, standing over there at a different time, things look quite different, in fact they even contradict the view of the first person. We only start to have problems with this when we mistake these symbols and allegories for concrete realities by the process of reification, or delimit the Divine solely to one set of symbols to the exclusion of others, not allowing for the infinity, transcendence and paradox of the Divine. The mystic is not saying that the Divine is just in the imagination. This would be a reductionist stance where the Divine is reduced to quadrant 1 and to some degree quadrant 4. The Divine is not perceived by the mystic as a mere fantasy of the imagination. Rather, the mystic is saying that it is in the imagination where delimited forms of the Divine emerge as symbol, metaphor and allegory. The Divine exists, but in our ignorance, our minds cannot encompass the Absolute by forms. There may be disagreement amongst mystics as to where such forms originate: is it the imagination, the heart or spirit, but that is a technical discussion beyond the range of this study. I am simply concerned to point out that the mystic does not consider the Divine to be a mere figment of the imagination.

 

4.13 STAGES OF FAITH

 

Faith itself is not static or expressed in a single mode, but rather it progresses through the developmental stages, it forms one of the lines spiralling out on Wilber’s diagram.  Faith development is part of a complex interplay of factors, including biological maturation, emotional and cognitive development, psychosocial, religious and cultural experience. Thus it is a quasi-independent line of development and has corresponding lines in cultural meanings and values, society and biology. Each stage of faith development nestles within the other earlier stages, like a Russian Doll, transcending but including the previous stage(s). Movement from one stage of faith to another is not automatic or assumed.

 

The stages below broadly relate to Wilber’s stage model of development. They are outlined by James W. Fowler in (Shafranske, E. 1996. p170)

 

1) PRIMAL FAITH. The infant has a pre-lingual disposition of trust that forms in the mutuality of the infant’s relationships with parents and caregivers and which serves to offset the anxiety and mistrust that arise from a succession of cognitive and emotional experiences of separation and self differentiation. The experiences of body contact, care, vocal and visual interplay, ritualised interactions associated with early play, feeding and tending and the development of interpersonal emotional attunement serve to activate a latent potential:

For finding coherence and reliability in the self and primal others.

For forming bonds of attachment with them.

For shaping a predisposition to trust the larger value and meaning

                  commitments conveyed in parental care.

 

2) INTUITIVE-PROJECTIVE FAITH. In the child’s pre-lingual imagery stage, meaning is based on the emotional and perceptual ordering of experience. Imagery holds and orders the mixture of emotions and impressions that are gained by the child. Experiences of power and powerlessness orient children to a frequently deep existential concern about questions of security, safety and the power of those on whom they rely for protection. It is here that we find the first self-consciousness of being seen and evaluated by others and the child is sensitive to the twin polarities of pride and shame. Here also is the child’s first construction of representations of God, which research suggests is made up of dominant emotional characteristics that the child has experienced in their relations with caregivers. Thus abuse or neglect may activate the child’s defences resulting in dissociation and splitting, where the child may construct images of a ‘bad’ self, deserving the inevitable punishment of a demanding but justifiably angry God.

 

3) LITERAL FAITH. Here, more stable forms of the interpretation and shaping of experience emerge. The world is constructed by the child in terms of linearity and predictability. God is not constructed in personal terms or as having highly differentiated emotions. The ultimate environment is constructed in terms of fairness and moral reciprocity: God is consistent; caring but just – goodness is rewarded, badness punished. Symbols and concepts remain concrete and literal. This is a typical mythical stage.

 

4) CONVENTIONAL FAITH. The child begins to think about thinking – this is the beginning of the reflexive self. The ultimate environment is now constructed in terms of a personal God, who has accepting love, understanding, loyalty and gives support in a crisis. The child develops an attachment to those beliefs, values and personal style that link them in a conforming relationship to significant people in their life. They do not want to be rejected by these significant people who are depended upon for confirmation and clarity about the child’s identity and meaning. Thus the child can be trapped in the ‘tyranny of the they’, where the opinions and approval or otherwise of significant people matters more than their own beliefs of integrity. This too may be a typical mythical stage.

 

5) INDIVIDUATIVE-REFLEXIVE FAITH. At this stage, beliefs and their underlying assumptions are critically examined. Self-identity is explored apart from the individual’s roles and relationships and the person at this level takes their own goals and identity for themselves. The ability to take the perspective of a third person emerges generally out of the conflict between external and internal authorities. Frames of meaning are created where the individual is conscious of their worldview as a worldview. People at this level tend to demythologise symbols, rituals and myths, and take responsibility for choosing their own values and lifestyle. This is a typical active rational stage, a stage of ‘Logos’.

 

6) CONJUNCTIVE FAITH. Here, polarities such as good and evil are embraced with alertness to paradox and there arises a need for multiple interpretations of reality. Symbols, myths and metaphors are appreciated as vehicles for expressing truth; and groups and traditions other than one’s own are included. It is the beginning of a world-centric orientation and a rational, existential universal pluralism. It is the beginning of a synthesis, (of active, rational ‘Logos’ and Intuitive, receptive Mythos’ modes of knowing) together with recognition of a seriously incomplete self-knowledge and a principled openness to the truths of other religions.

 

7) UNIVERSALISING FAITH. Universalising is informed by the experiences and truths of previous stages. There is a trans-class awareness and the beginning of transpersonal intuition as well as a devotion to overcoming violence, oppression and division. Those people who matter in faith now extend well beyond the bounds of social class, nation race and gender. There is no polarisation of the saved and the damned.

 

So we could further modify the above model to that below:

 

MYTHOS         SYNTHESIS                    LOGOS

 

FAITH——à AFFIRMATION ß——– BELIEF

                                                                   CONTINUUM

(primal-intuitive/                (conviction-assurance-opinion-

 projective-early literal-)   persuasion-inclination-sentiment)

  

                                    (-late literal-conventional-

                                         indivituative/reflexive)

 

                (conjunctive-universalising)

 

Roots in Unconscious                      Conscious

Intuitive                                            Analytical

Non-rational                                     Rational

Narrative                                           Empirical

Why?                                                How?

Truthfulness                                     Truth

Meaning                                            Facts

Insight                                               Deduction

Universal                                           Particular

Foundations/Origins                         Present/Future

Spiritual                                            Material

Cognitive/Emotional                        Cognitive

Conservative                                     Innovative

Unifies                                               Separates

Orientates                                          Pragmatic      

 

This gives us a richer answer to the question of whether people tended to take myths literally: the answer depends upon the developmental level of an individual’s or group’s line of faith. This model also offers the relationship between faith and belief. The synthesis of faith and belief is an orientation, a meaningful world-view that has to be affirmed. Assagioli argues that even in ordinary decision making, in choosing one option among a number of alternatives, the affirmation, in order to be effective, must be vigorous and intense, having the sense of an authoritative command.

 

Techniques of affirmation day to day life include:

 

Using words of power…’look to the stars’ e.t.c.

Using images such as a picture of an ideal already accomplished or a symbol, such as a lion for strength e.t.c.

‘Acting as if’: assuming the physical and mental attitudes which directly or symbolically express that which is to be achieved.

Repetition: to reinforce these affirmations and images.

 

With a mythology, similar strategies may be used:

 

The use of repetition of key facets of the myth in ceremony and ritual.

‘Acting as if’ by emulating the Divine for example.

Using images, objects, idols, symbols of key figures/truths in the mythology.

Using words of power – perhaps in meditation or chanting…’I am God manifest in the material’…to access the Absolute or reinforce ones worldview.

Repetition: in chanting, meditation, prayer or singing.

 

4.14 RELATED TERMS

 

When the religious link in a myth is broken, the actors in the story are then seen as human heroes, giants, fairies and such like and the myth becomes a folktale. If the actor is Divine, but the story is trivial, the result is a religious legend. Myths differ from legends and folktales by the way in which they offer explanations. Myths are usually stories which point to truths of a kind which cannot be told in other ways and which are not disturbed if the apparent ‘facts’ are shown to be otherwise. Thus it is that religion has many myths of creation which strictly speaking are incompatible with each other yet there is no need to reconcile them.

 

The difference between myths and other related terms can be found below:

 

Legend: This is a short traditional oral narrative about a person, place or object that really exists or is believed to have existed. Even when it recounts a supernatural event, it is claimed to have happened in real life. It is presented as true though there is some scepticism involved. It offers information, moral judgements and warnings. Examples are: Robin Hood, King Alfred burning the cakes and King Canute. Or they may involve real people and supernatural tales, such as the story of St Dunstan.

 

Folklore: This concerns something voluntarily and informally collected, created or done by a group of any size, age, social or educational level, in whatever media, oral, written or visual, which has roots in the past but which also has relevance to the present. It usually recurs in many places in similar but not quite identical form. It is the group, whose joint sense of right and wrong and of what is appropriate and so on, that shares the story, as opposed to being put forward or maintained by an institution or authority.

 

Fairytale:  These are not presented as true but as a fantasy. They are a group of oral narratives centred on magical tests, quests and transformations. They are defined by their plots which follow standard basic patterns and their function is the oral entertainment of children and adults. They are alternatively called magic tales or wonder tales since not all of them have fairies in them. The word ‘fairy’ covers a wide range of non-human yet material beings with magic powers who may be visible at will and change shape.

 

Fable:  This is a short comic tale making moral points about human nature usually through animal characters.

 

Parable: This is a short story drawn from ordinary life illustrating important teaching. The most familiar in western society are the parables of Jesus, such as the parable of the sower and so on. Each parable illustrates one aspect of God and God’s dealings. Parables are more direct than allegories.

 

Allegory: This is a narrative that may express abstract ideas as concrete symbols. It is a symbolic work in which characters and events are to be understood as representing other things, especially a deeper spiritual, moral or political meanings. It is a prolonged metaphor, where one thing is used to represent another, from a root word meaning ‘to stand between’.

 

Personal Mythologizing. It would seem that in engaging in mysticism, one can create a personal myth, a narrative with a complex web of meaning which relates to the Absolute or Divine and the whole of the cosmos, thus giving oneself a meaning, significance, purpose and value to all that is. The mystic arrives at a set of concepts and a narrative arrived at intuitively via immediate experience that orders the cosmos for the individual, which is true for the individual, yet not reliant upon ‘facts’, just as a general myth. By drawing out the themes and as it were, the ‘theology’ or ‘philosophy’ contained within such mystical narrative experiences, a personal mythic system is created. 

 

Mystical encounters then are not legends, folklore, fairytales, fables or parables. It is tempting to describe the contents of mystical experience as a prolonged metaphor or allegory, standing between the spiritual and the material, using symbols and forms drawn from the material realm to represent Formless Spirit. However making this definition is itself a move into ‘logos’: to call a myth a symbol, allegory or metaphor is to rationalise it, to throw things together so that they become inseparable. As soon as we say ‘only a symbol’, modern consciousness has arrived. Myth contains its own truth – and at some deep level it is self-evident. If one had approached a Greek citizen and asked them whether a character really did descend into the underworld they would not have understood the question, it is to ask an inappropriate question.

 

The mystic, then, is able to return from intuitive, ‘mythos’ modes of knowing, in order to synthesise such experience with the rational, ‘logos’ mode. The synthesis of these two modes gives a fuller, more rounded view of the nature and meaning of the universe and our place in it. Those who have bipolar disorder have an inherent instability of mood. Although the disorder is primarily one of mood changes, this also affects perspective and thought. Today life may appear bright, purposeful, exciting, stimulating; an opportunity to be grasped and enjoyed and to hell with the consequences, later, it may appear dull, oppressive, meaningless and something to be endured. It may be so black and meaningless that suicide may seem the best option. This instability of mood and perception, and the sense of meaningless that can accompany depression may drive the bipolar sufferer to seek a stable, meaningful foundation; a rock to be anchored to in these storms of life. Such a stable, meaningful foundation may lead the bipolar sufferer to spirituality and religion. The case of the schizophrenic is more acute, especially if they are hearing voices or seeing things that are not there, which may take on Divine or supernatural qualities. There may again, at some level, be a search for a foundation of meaning and stability that leads to religion and spirituality. One researcher, psychiatrist Julian Jaynes, when studying and working with schizophrenics, noted how inescapable and authoritative such audible and visual hallucinations can be – like the voices and the appearing of gods. This theme will be explored in the next chapter.

 

4.15 FAITH, MEANING AND BRAIN DISORDER

 

Spirituality and in some cases it’s accompanying outward expression in religion, may serve then to give a deeper, richer stability, structure, meaning and orientation to life and existence, especially with regard to ultimate questions such as ‘Why am I here?’, ‘What is the purpose of the Universe?’, and so on. Those with disorders such as bipolar disorder or schizophrenia, may have what healthy people use as the usual levels of structure, stability, meaning and orientation severely challenged. The depth of meaning, structure and orientation, e.t.c. that most people require in order to function in the world just may not be enough for these sufferers: these disorders may throw their world into imbalance, fear, instability and chaos so that a deeper exploration of meaning and orientation may be required to achieve stability and this may be found in spirituality. If god-like voices or visions are being encountered, the leaning to spirituality may be even greater. It is no surprise to me that many people suffering from such disorders may seek stability in the depths of spirituality.

 

This can be a mixed blessing: a spiritual orientation may be found, which, irrespective of whether it is ‘true’ or not, provides meaning, stability and orientation. Furthermore, there may be caring love and support from fellow believers. The down side is that if such a belief framework is subsequently severely challenged, such that doubt and uncertainty arise, then this may be very destabilising indeed. Not only may the person be thrown back into chaos, but they may be very angry, feel deceived and foolish. One only has to look at the testimonies of Christian Fundamentalists who left their fundamentalism to see what a heartbreaking and unsettling phase this can be. See ‘Leaving the fold’ by Edward T. Babinski, Prometheus books.

 

4.16 PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF THE QUEST FOR MEANING, STABILITY, ORIENTATION AND INTEGRATION.

 

What has been discussed above is in agreement with my own personal experience. After a period of severe depression, my (undiagnosed) mood swings became regular and acute. After spending ten years in a Christian fellowship, I increasingly questioned and challenged the Christian theology, eventually leaving the church. I spent a further ten years with alternating world views ranging from secular humanism to a return to Christianity, sometimes on the fringes of Christian fellowships. I explored the theology and philosophy of the New Age, of Psychology and some world religions.

 

After ten years of not being involved with any spiritual group or people, I was restless. Friends would say that I should be involved in teaching, or counselling, or involved in some religious organisation and indeed, career guidance had suggested lecturing or teaching and I was in many ways by this time a trained and qualified counsellor, though counselling had left me a little disillusioned regarding a certain overall lack of coherence.

 

It was in this frame of mind that I decided to carry out a Repertory Grid Analysis in order to see the way in which I perceived these different options and why I seemed to be a little stuck with regard to moving into any of them. As we have seen earlier in this chapter, the Repertory Grid is a system devised by psychologist George Kelly for drawing out the belief constructs that we use in approaching a given area or theme. The theme in this case was belonging to religious or spiritual groups.

 

Fourteen options were compared:

 

No fellowship: I learn from books, websites, lectures, television.

Attend a Calvinist Christian fundamentalist church

Attend a Pentecostal Christian fundamentalist church

Attend an Anglican/Methodist Christian church

Attend an informal house fellowship/experience meetings.

Go to a Buddhist retreat. E.g. Lake District.

Attend a Multi faith or Inter faith centre.

Go to a spiritual retreat, e.g. Findhorn, Counselling workshop.

Attend a Liberal Christian fellowship

Try something new and exotic. E.g. Islam, Hinduism.

Start my own meetings/lead own group.

Attend a spiritualist fellowship

Practice Transpersonal counselling/lecturing/teaching.

Go to a Yoga course/or meet a guru/leader.

 

By comparing these options, about fifteen bi-polar constructs were elicited. Further deeper or core constructs were in turn elicited from those constructs that seemed important or significant. In all, thirty two constructs were elicited, with the preferred option placed under the ‘preferred pole’ heading and it’s opposite being placed under the ‘contrast pole’ heading. It is worth looking at the ‘preferred pole’ list below to see how many of them are concerned with meaning, orientation, stability and integration with others.

 

Preferred pole                                                                        

 

1) Intuitive, spontaneous, informal warm.                            

2) Open, receptive to mystical experience.                          

3) Personal reward, satisfaction and achievement                 

4) Fulfilment of my potential.                                                               

5) A sense of purpose and direction socially                        

6) Uplifting and absorbing: energising.                                  

7) Accepted by others, belonging, connected, being part.     

8) Truthfulness and integrity                                                 

9) Orientation, I know where I am                                        

10) Confidence                                                                       

11) At ease, relaxed, peaceful                                                

12) Long lasting commitment to God and others                   

13) Involved in the purpose and meaning behind religion     

14) Reaches depths of my being, real me, relevant.               

15) Affirming of life and self  Nothing,                                 

16) Gives clear perception and vision of God and Reality    

17) Sense of self-control, self-determination. Independence.

18) A position of power and strength                                   

19) Mature, Adult                                                                 

20) Stable, level, steady, firm base, good foundation            

21) Able to stand in storm and tempest                                

22) A sense of order, structure, discipline and boundaries    

23) Being happy and comfortable                                         

24) Not accountable to others                                                              

25) Able to build (on good foundation)                                

26) Participation. Originality                                                

27) Part of my context, culture. Fits, established                 

28) Able to function well                                                      

29) Able to discover new ideas. Originality, Freshness       

30) Diversity, multiplicity, plurality, Transcendence           

31) Involvement in spiritual counselling, teaching e.t.c.      

32) Tendency to altruism                                                      

 

 

Contrast (unpreferred) pole

 

Cold formality

Closed, narrow, restrictive. A hindrance to immediacy.

Frustration and dissatisfaction

Poor performance, falling short of potential.

Lack of social purpose, aimless, meaningless.

Numbness, depression, tiredness, listlessness.

Disapproved of by others, outsider, outcast, isolated.

Charlatanism, deceit, lies, untruths, party spirit.

Do not know where I am, constantly wrong-footed. Bewilderment

Anxious, guarded, uneasy, tense

Drifting, temporary and transient fellowship

Indifference, or involvement only in shadows.

Empty, superficial, only touches surface.

Annihilation, death.

Things stay as they are, status quo.

Manipulated, others force agenda, dependent on group

Weakness, loss of power, draining.

Put into role of child, patronising, tendency to rebel.

Unstable, fluctuating, up and down, unsettled.

May collapse or fall in trial and difficulty.

Undisciplined, eclectic, free for all, chaos.

Restless, uncomfortable, unhappy.

Accountable to others – censure, disapproval e.t.c.

Not able to build

Following by rote: creeds, chants, set formulas e.t.c.

Unfamiliar, foreign, alien, square peg in round hole

Poor functioning, Distracted, restricted.

Restricted to prevailing system. Clichéd.

Restricted to one ideology.

No involvement, keeping self to self. Hiding ones light

Self interest, even selfishness

 

Each of these was rated then in importance, and then evaluated for each option in terms of how likely one or the other side of the construct would be fulfilled. This produced a network of figures, of totals for each option and each construct and so on. But at the end of this exercise, I still felt that I had not quite grasped the essence of the problem, so a further set of options were drawn up for comparison:

 

Attend a Pentecostal House fellowship

Practice Transpersonal counselling in hospice or Mind.

Transpersonal counselling: own practice

Be a lecturer in a college following their syllabus

Set up my own lectures in a college or library

Be a spiritual mentor or guide

Teach or lecture in a Pentecostal/Quaker fellowship

Do occasional teaching or lecturing

Writing for spiritual magazines.

 

The bi polar constructs elicited are listed below. Once again, it is worth looking at the ‘preferred pole’ list below to see how many of them are concerned with meaning, orientation, stability and integration with others.

 

Preferred pole                                                

 

Meaningful, deep                                

Safe, within my limits              

Healthy self protection          

Happy, settled                                    

Orientated                              

In control                                            

Can function                       

Relaxed, space                     

Even tempered                    

Good relationships                             

Within my finances                             

No guilt                                               

Little weight to carry       

In touch with others            

Good foundation                 

Ordered, steady                  

Focussed                                             

At ease with myself              

Energising                          

Emotionally safe                

My agenda                                         

Sense of liberty                  

Away from house

Giving info                                        

No qualifications               

Not open to blame          

Touch others lives                            

Study at own pace                            

Companionship                                

Help and support                            

Unmonitored                          

Theoretical                                       

 

 

Contrast (unpreferred) pole

 

Ephemeral, light

Out of my depth 

Risk of emotional hurt

Unhappy, anxious

Bewildered

Overwhelmed emotionally

Cannot function

Cluttered, tense

Moody, irritable

Strained relationships

Beyond my finances

Feel guilty

Heavy burden

Distance, barrier

Baseless

Tossed about

Distracted

Persucute myself

Depressing

Emotionally crippling

Someone else’s agenda 

Bounded, closed in

At my house

Problem solving

Need qualifications

Open to blame

Do not touch others lives

Pace set for others

Lonely

Unsupported

Monitored

Practical

 

All of these two groups of constructs were rated highly: they were seen as important.

 

In the end, the results of the analysis were:

 

The best option was the one that I was in: the semi-hermit; the individual walk. (42%)

The next best options were:

Writing (37%)

Pentecostal House fellowship/experience meeting. (36%)

Going to yoga class. (31%)

Starting my own meetings. (16%)

 

The constructs that scored negatively, in other words, the areas of dissatisfaction in the best option of keeping an individual walk and not attending any fellowship were:

-40 No participation

-40 No involvement

-40 Lonely

-40 Isolated

-36 Unsupported

-28 Socially aimless

-19 Do not touch other people’s lives

-16 Sense of distance from people, barrier

-16 Depressing

-14 Unhappy

-14 Moody

-14 Burdensome

-12 Self-interested

-12 Poor performance

-12 Drifting socially

 

We can note some bipolar disorder issues here in this list also. This shows that for me, as a bipolar sufferer, deeper issues of meaning, stability, integration and foundation are indeed important issues in spirituality.

 

4.17 THE PROBLEM OF MEANING

 

Human beings seem to need meaning. Without it they suffer boredom, depression, and despair. Increasingly, psychotherapists are called on to deal with these symptoms as people confront aging and death in the context of a society that is coming to realize the possibility of its own decline and extinction. The religious framework that formerly defined meaning has been replaced by a scientific world view in which meaning does not exist. ‘What is the purpose of human life?’ and ‘Why am I?’ are questions that are said by most scientists to lie outside the scope of science or to be false, since they assume that the human species developed by chance in a random universe. According to this view, human beings are complex biochemical phenomena, of considerable scientific interest but not essentially different from anything else that science examines. Western psychotherapy is hard put to meet people’s need for meaning, for it attempts to understand clinical phenomena in a framework, based on scientific materialism, in which meaning is arbitrary and purpose nonexistent. Consequently, Western psychotherapy interprets the search for meaning as a function of childlike dependency wishes and fears of helplessness or, at best, a genetic disposition toward intellectual control, preserved and enhanced by natural selection because of its survival value.

 

Such explanations, however tidy they may be, do not offer much help to adolescents and young adults seeking a life path, to persons confronting the anxieties of the nuclear age, or to those who experience despair as death approaches, unable to find significance in life goals based on personal acquisition, unable to find meaning in the purposeless universe of scientific empiricism. It is not just the patients that are affected; psychotherapists themselves fall prey to the same ailment. Consider the following extract from an article in the American Journal of Psychiatry reporting the experience of a group of therapists, aged thirty-five to forty-five, most of whom had a psychoanalytic background. The group met ostensibly to obtain peer supervision but this soon became a therapy group to deal with a crisis that all of the members were experiencing:

 

The original members of the group were remarkably homogeneous in their purpose in joining. The conscious reason was to obtain help in mastering a phase in their own development: the mid‑life crisis. We refer to that stage of life in which the individual is aware that half of his time has been used up and the general pattern of trajectory of his work and personal life is clear. At this time, one must give up the normal defences of early life such as having infinite faith in one’s abilities and/or the belief that anything is possible. The future becomes finite; childhood fantasies have been fulfilled or unrealised, and there is no longer a sense of having enough time for anything. One becomes aware that one’s energy and physical and mental abilities will be declining. The individual must think of prolonging and conserving rather than expanding. The reality of one‘s limited life span comes into sharp focus and the work of mourning the passing of life begins in earnest.

 

This depressed, resigned outlook should not be dismissed as peculiar to that particular group; it is in fact, an approved psychiatric standard. The American Handbook of Psychiatry articulates its contemporary ‘wisdom’ as follows: To those who have obtained some wisdom in the process of reaching old age, death often assumes meaning as the proper outcome of life. It is nature’s way of assuring more life and constant renewal. Time and customs change but the elderly tire of changing; it is time for others to take over and the elderly person is willing to pass quietly from the scene.

Here, the meaning of life is death, which provides an end to the fatigue of the elderly. What a vision!

 

The greatest problem Western psychotherapists face may be the absence of a theoretical framework to provide meaning for patients and therapists alike. Clearly, those struggling to overcome neurotic problems are likely to be badly handicapped when the context within which they view themselves does not provide meaning, direction or hope. It is also clear that science’s vision of an orderly, mechanical, indifferent universe can provide no purpose for life. Yet our lives and our psychological health depend on a sense of purpose. Mere survival is a purpose, but not enough for human consciousness. Nor is working for the survival of others sufficiently meaningful if one believes that the human race has no place to go, that it endlessly repeats the same patterns, or worse.

 

The ‘midlife’ crisis with which the psychotherapists grappled probably reflects the fact that at midlife one’s own death becomes less theoretical and more probable. Goals of money, security, fame, sex, or power might formerly have peen purpose to life. With experience however, the limited nature of such satisfactions becomes increasingly evident. As one grows older, an awareness surfaces that one is on a relentless slide toward extinction, making self‑serving goals seem utterly futile. Even altruistic goals can wear thin without a larger picture of the human race than the one our scientific culture provides. As our life progresses, then our search for meaning becomes increasingly urgent. Profound despair and dull resignation are symptoms of failing in that search. The pervasive use of alcohol, sedatives, and drugs in our society might well reflect many people’s attempts to suppress despair at their purposelessness and to substitute heightened sensation for meaning.

 

This widespread malady need not be inevitable, for it is possible that the conclusions of scientific materialism are wrong. From time to time we sense a larger reality than the pot of science provides, a subtle perception pointing to a better, Meaningful existence. The dissonance between the scientific view and the one that we intuitively perceive, produces restlessness and a need for resolution. Even the pursuit of material goals may be a blind response to the urge to attain a dimly sensed reality in which purpose and meaning are facts, not fantasies. Our ability to progress in that direction is severely hampered by our not understanding the nature of the problem, by restricting reality to the empirical realm. Indeed, Western psychological science tends to regard the very consciousness through which we know the physical world to be no more than a product of that world, an epiphenomenon less real than that which it comprehends. No wonder meaning vanishes.

 

A physicist commented on this assumption: ‘Most painful is the absolute silence of all our scientific investigations towards our questions concerning the meaning and scope of the whole display. The more attentively we watch it, the more aimless and foolish it appears to be. The show that is going on obviously acquires a meaning only with regard to the mind that contemplates it. But what science tells us about this relationship is patently absurd; as if the mind had only been produced by that very display that it is now watching and would pass away with it when the sun finally cools down and the earth has turned into a desert of ice and snow, it is as if Descartes had been stood on his head and made to declare, ‘I think; therefore, the world exists and I am an illusion’.

 

Pain and dysfunction inevitably result from the denial or distortion of reality, a consequence clearly demonstrated in the effects of the fantasies of those suffering from psychosis or neurosis. It is equally true of the fantasies and beliefs promulgated by an entire culture. Our culture’s belief in positivistic empiricism  - only the tangible is real ‑ produces increasing symptoms at the individual, social, and political levels. A person who seeks psychotherapy may be suffering from a distortion of reality, not only at the interpersonal but at the metaphysical level, and neither the person nor the psychotherapist is aware of that.

 

A basic tenet of mysticism is that reality as ordinarily perceived is indeed a distortion and that human suffering is the consequence of believing in that distorted view. According to mystics, the problem is compounded by the inherent need of people to progress in their ability to perceive the reality that underlies the phenomenal world, which can result only from the development of a higher intuitive faculty, or an evolution of consciousness. People whose evolutionary need is frustrated experience a persistent dissatisfaction with the course of their lives. On the other hand, fulfilment of that developmental goal enables people to perceive the meaning of their own lives and the purpose of human existence. Thus, in the mystical tradition, meaning is a perceptual issue.

 

The problem of limited perception, such as that encountered in biology has been described by C. F. Pantin: . . . if you are not careful you may start to imagine that you can explain the whole behaviour of the sea anemone by very simple reflexes, like the effect of a coin in a slot machine. But quite by accident, I discovered that apart from reflexes, there was a whole mass of purposive behaviour connected with the spontaneous activity of the anemone about which we simply know nothing. (Actually, this behaviour was too slow to be noticed; it was outside our sensory spectrum for the time being.) Similarly, it is possible that the meaning and purpose of human life are outside the spectrum of ordinary consciousness, the widening and deepening of which is the concern of the mystical tradition. In fact, some see the evolution of consciousness as the principal task of the human race. Western psychology, in its often vain attempts to explain away the sense of meaninglessness and its attendant symptoms, may have much to learn from mysticism, which sees meaning as something real and accessible to consciousness, provided the appropriate perceptual capacity has been developed.

 

The fundamental questions, ‘Who am I?’ and ‘What am 1?’ arise increasingly in the struggle to find meaning and purpose in life. Therapists hear them as explicit queries or to indirect form: ‘Who is the real me?’ or ‘I don’t know what I want – part of me wants one thing and part of me wants something else. What do I want?’. Western psychology is severely handicapped in dealing with these questions because the centre of human experience - the observing self – is missing from its theories. Yet, at the heart of psychopathology lies a fundamental confusion between the self as object and the self of pure subjectivity. Emotions, thoughts, impulses, images, and sensations are the contents of consciousness: we witness them; we are aware of their existence. Likewise, the body, the self-image, and the self‑concept are all constructs that we observe. But our core sense of personal existence the ‘I’, is located in awareness itself, not in its content. This distinction between awareness and the content of awareness tends to be ignored in Western psychology, its implications for our everyday life are not appreciated. Indeed, most people have trouble recognizing the difference between awareness and content, which are parts of everyday life. Yet, careful observation shows people that they can suspend their thoughts, that they can experience silence or darkness and the temporary absence of images or memory patterns – that any element of mental life can disappear while awareness itself remains. Awareness is the ground of conscious life, the background or field in which all elements exist, different from thoughts, sensations, or images. One can experience the distinction simply by looking straight ahead. Be aware of what you experience, then close your eyes. Awareness remains. ‘Behind’ your thoughts and images is awareness, and that is where you are.

 

What we know as our self is separate from our thoughts, memories, feelings, and any content of consciousness. No Western psychological theory concerns itself with this fundamental fact; all describe the self in terms of everything but the observer, who is the centre of experience. This crucial omission stems from the fact that the observing self is an anomaly – not an object, like everything else. Our theories are based on objects: we think in terms of objects, talk in terms of objects. It is not just the physical world that we apprehend in that way; the elements of our mental life are similar. Seemingly diffuse and amorphous emotions are localized and observable; they have definite qualities: emotions, like fluid objects, are entities we observe. Images, memories and thoughts we objects we grasp, manipulate, and encompass by awareness just as we do the components of the physical world. In contrast, we cannot observe the observing self; we must experience it directly. It has no defining qualities, no boundaries, no dimensions. The observing self has been ignored by Western psychology because it is not an object and cannot fit the assumptions and framework of current theory.

 

Lacking understanding of this elusive, central self, how are we to answer the essential questions ‘Who am I’, ‘What am I?’, that lie at the heart of science, philosophy, the arts, the search for meaning? To find answers we must step outside the boundaries of our traditional modes of thought.

 

Here too the mystical tradition has focused on an area ignored by Western science. Both Yogic and Buddhist metaphysics and psychology emphasize the crucial difference between the observer and the content of consciousness and use meditation techniques to heighten the observing self. As with meaning, mystics hold that answering ‘Who am I?’ and ‘Why am I?’ requires a special mode of perception. That claim is not surprising, considering the anomalous character of the observing self. To understand the ‘I,’ we should first learn what the mystical tradition can teach us about it.

 

4.18 PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF MANIA AND MYTHOS

 

The experience of mania can sometimes be negative: irritability, distraction, racing thoughts and so on, or it can be positive: a sense of well-being, euphoria and so on. In this more positive aspect, the sense of well-being and euphoria has led me to a sense of being elevated, lifted up and expansive: a sense of transcendence. This state I have found can be conducive to entering the ‘mythos’ mode of consciousness. I can feel so elevated and transcendent, so expansive and free that I can be more susceptible to the intuitive, non-rational mode of being with its attendant sense of the Real. This is a double whammy for the bipolar sufferer: they not only have a destabilising elevated mood of euphoria, but they slip into the disorientating non-rational but immediately Real, Meaningful and Vital ‘mythos’ mode of being.

Chapter five: Mysticism, Quadrants and levels

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

CHAPTER FIVE

 

MYSTICISM, QUADRANTS AND LEVELS

 

I want to take a closer look at mystics and mysticism now, using Wilber’s four quadrant model.

 

5.1 QUADRANT 1: THE MYSTIC – THE INDIVIDUAL’S EXPERIENCE

 

As already suggested in Wilber’s theory, the individual goes through a number of developmental stages or levels in which the world is understood and valued from different and increasingly inclusive orientations.

 

Mysticism does not just occur at the end or top of the developmental line, but can occur at any stage, because it is a different mode of consciousness. Mysticism is NOT primarily a leaping up to a higher stage or level, though that may be an effect, but rather an alteration of our state of awareness or consciousness at any given level of development or evolution. Some forms of mysticism establish, confirm and deepen existing personal forms of the Divine. Thus a Calvinist Fundamentalist Christian may see their theological worldview deepened, made more meaningful and more firmly established, such that their perspective appears Real, True and Vital, so that they become assured and certain of their faith. However, this may also happen with a Pagan, Muslim, Jew or Hindu, even though all these different beliefs are contradictory or to some degree mutually exclusive of one another. Other people who have a mystical experience may not accept the Divine as ‘God-out-there’ at all, but may see deeper wonders and unity in Nature Itself. Yet others may see the Divine as Transcendent Other, whilst still others may see their own True Self as Divine: Self and God are One. Whilst for some, the forms of their beliefs may be deepened and more firmly established, others may have their beliefs and forms of the Divine challenged, transcended and radically changed. This can even happen for one individual as I can personally testify: in one experience, belief forms were consolidated and deepened in a meaningful way, in later experiences, those very forms were challenged and overthrown.

 

5.2 THE DIMENSION OF DEPTH

 

We might think of this dimension as a horizontal line of depth in quadrant 1, (with corresponding effects in other quadrants), where at any stage, varying degrees or depths of the receptive ‘mythos’ mode may be entered into. I want to suggest that the deeper the experience of ‘mythos’ is, then the more Formless, Undifferentiated and Boundless the Absolute appears, until all is One in the Bliss of the Eternal Now. The more shallow, or less deep the mystical experiences, then the more forms are differentiated. Thus God may appear as Love, or Truth. The nature of the receptive ‘mythos’ mode is that the rational, active, differentiating mode of being is to a greater or lesser degree suspended and this means that experience is less mediated by rationality, form and conceptuality. The experience therefore appears Immediate, Direct, Unmediated, Real and True. It appears to the mystic as though the very Ground of Being or Ultimate Essence is being encountered Directly. This is why mystics use capital letters in their descriptions: it seems as though they have reached the very end, the very foundation, the very ultimate essence of being – there is nothing beyond. However the experience is in a continuum between active rational and receptive non-rational modes. Any forms, symbols, metaphors e.t.c. that arise in the experience may also appear Real and Certain. Thus, before the mystic reaches the greatest depth of Formlessness, forms of the Divine may appear more certain, more true, more real, giving rise to certainty or great assurance and conviction. This in turn may lead to the process of reification: to considering that these metaphors and symbols of the Divine actually exist ‘out there’. Thus we may end up with a strongly held view of the Divine as ‘Big-Person-Out-There-Who-Is-Judge’ for example, and strongly oppose any who say otherwise.

 

5.3 THE OBSERVING SELF

 

Arthur Deikman, an academic medical researcher, who underwent meditation training and experienced mystical states. Thus he is not the lifeguard who does not believe in swimming. He proposed that mystical experience is a psychological phenomenon (so he reduces it mainly to quadrant 1 and to some degree quadrant 2), that largely has been ignored by contemporary scientists. He notes that scientists have waged a long battle to obtain freedom from religious control. One example is Galileo, typifying the struggle of the rational, active, analytical, ‘logos’ stage to emerge from ‘mythos’ thinking. Furthermore, mystical experiences are usually described within a religious or spiritual framework. It is only natural then that things mystical should be suspect and categorized as part of organized religion by scientists, who are now highly critical of the mythical stage from which they have emerged. Worse still, the content and form of some types of mystical experience seem to give clear evidence of psychopathology. For these reasons, the scientist, including psychologists and psychiatrists of a scientific persuasion, may be tempted to dismiss all such reports as some type of hysteria or madness.

 

Furthermore, in order to study the mystical experience the scientist must stand outside of his customary mode of thought long enough to experience the different mode of consciousness involved in these phenomena. But such participant observation is not a part of the experimental model of contemporary science. Psychologists and psychiatrists in particular, have tended to model themselves after the eighteenth century physicist, who believed he could be ‘objective’ in observing the world. Deikman proposes that it is time to depart from this attitude and concludes that the broad terrain of mystical phenomena contains within it lawful processes pertaining to a mode of consciousness as mature and vitally practical as the active, rational logical one to which we are accustomed.

 

5.4 UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS

 

Classical mystical texts from widely varying cultures and times seem to prescribe the same basic psychological techniques for attaining the same basic alteration of mode of consciousness. The scope of this study precludes listing enough examples to convey this impression as vividly as it is justified, but, as an example, the instructions of Walter Hilton, a fourteenth century Roman Catholic canon, are similar to those of Patanjali, a yogi from about the sixth century. This vast literature can be summarized as follows: If a person wishes to achieve a different mode of awareness that goes beyond the usual feelings and perceptions of ordinary life, a mode in which the person perceives God or his own basic Essence, then it is necessary that they practice (1) a form of contemplative meditation and (2) renunciation. Treating these instructions as technical psychological procedures, Deikman investigated contemplative meditation in a laboratory setting.

 

5.5 CONTEMPLATIVE MEDITATION

 

Contemplation is a non-analytic apprehension of an object or idea. It is non-analytic because discursive thought is given up together with the ordinary attempt to psychologically grasp or manipulate the object of attention. ‘Non-demanding attention’ suggests the appropriate attitude: ordinary thought is considered an interference: it hinders the direct, immediate contact that yields essential knowledge through perception alone.

 

In a series of experiments, a group of normal subjects who were unfamiliar with meditation, were instructed to contemplate a simple blue vase according to the following instructions which Deikman adapted from the yoga of Patanjali: ‘The purpose of the sessions is to learn about concentration. Your aim is to concentrate on the blue vase. By concentration I do not mean analysing the different parts of the vase, or thinking a series of thoughts about the vase; but rather, trying to see the vase as it exists in itself, without any connections to other things. Exclude all other thoughts or feelings or sounds or body sensations. Do not let them distract you, but keep them out so that you can concentrate all your attention, all your awareness on the vase itself. Let the perception of the vase fill your entire mind.’.

In the first series of experiments each subject performed the exercise for thirty minutes, during ten sessions spread over one month. Deikman interviewed each subject immediately following each session and then analysed the transcripts of the tape-recorded interviews. The subjects’ experience of the vase changed as follows:

1)     there was an increase in the vividness and richness of the vase image (e.g., they described it as ‘luminous’, ‘more vivid’).

2)      the vase seemed to acquire a life of its own, to be animated.

3)     there was a decrease in the subject’s sense of being separate from the vase, occurring especially in those subjects who continued longest in the experiment (e.g., ‘I really began to feel . . . almost as though the blue and I were merging or that the vase and I were merging. It was as though everything was sort of merging’).

4)     a fusing of perceptual modes (e.g., ‘when the vase changes shape, I feel this in my body’ and ‘I began to feel this light going back and forth’).

 

This data is not easily explained by the usual concepts of projection or autohypnosis, sensory isolation, direct suggestion, or the influence of the demand expectations of the experimental situation. Deikman hypothesized that these changes were a consequence of ‘deautomatization’, an undoing of the usual rational, logical, analytical ways of perceiving and thinking. This was because of the special way that attention was being used. In particular, he proposed that there seemed to be a deautomatization of the psychological structures that organize, limit, select, and interpret perceptual stimuli.

 

5.6 DEAUTOMATIZATION

 

Deautomatization is a concept derived from a discussion of the automatization of motor behaviour: in well-established, routine behaviour the body and mind function automatically. We are probably familiar with the example of driving a car and suddenly being aware that we have travelled through traffic lights without knowingly being aware of whether the lights were on red or not. Deutomatization is, as it were, a shake-up which can be followed by an advance or a retreat in the level of self organization. . . . Some manipulation of the attention is necessary if deautomatization is to take place.

 

5.7 MEDITATION AS A DEAUTOMIZATION TECHNIQUE

 

The technique of contemplative meditation constitutes just such a manipulation of attention as is required to produce deautomatization. The percept receives intense attention while the use of attention for abstract categorization, analysis and thought is explicitly prohibited. Rather, attention is reinvested in perception. Since automatization normally accomplishes the transfer of attention from a percept of action to abstract thought activity: categorisation, analysis, structuring and ordering e.t.c., the meditation procedure exerts a force in the reverse direction: cognition is inhibited in favour of perception, since the active intellectual style is replaced by a receptive perceptual mode. In other words, the automization mode is synonymous with the active, rational ‘logos’ mode that we saw in the last chapter. Automatization is a hierarchically organized developmental process and thus one would expect deautomatization to produce a shift towards a perceptual and cognitive experience that involves a mode that developmentally precedes the more analytic abstract intellectual mode typical of present-day adult thought. The shift would be to a process lower in Wilber’s hierarchy, rather than a complete cessation of the particular function involved, a shift to the mythic level or ‘mythos’ mode that we saw in the last chapter.

 

Heinz Werner described the imagery and thought of primitive cultures and of children as:

1)      relatively more vivid and sensuous.

2)     syncretic: that is having a reconciliation or fusion of differing systems of belief, as in philosophy or religion.

3)     physiognomic: judging human character from facial features, and animated.

4)     less differentiated with respect to the distinction between self and object and between objects, characterized by a lack of differentiation and a fusion of sense modalities.

 

The phenomena that the subjects of Deikman’s experiments reported fulfilled Werner’s criteria completely, although the extent of the shift away from their normal consciousness was varied from one subject to the next. Their perceptual and cognitive changes were consistently in the direction of what Werner would describe as a more ‘primitive’ or ‘regressive’ organization, in Wilber’s terms, a regression from rational to a pre-rational mythic level.

 

5.8 IS MYSTICISM REGRESSIVE?

 

Terms as ‘primitive’ and ‘regressive’ are placed in quotation marks for a particular reason. It is more accurate to say that the undoing of automatic perceptual and cognitive structures allows a gain in sensory intensity and richness at the expense of abstract categorization and differentiation. One might call the direction regressive in a developmental sense, but the actual experience is probably not within the psychological scope of any child. Rather, it is a deautomatization occurring in an adult mind and as such, the experience gains its richness from adult memories and functions that are now subject to a different, ‘mythos’ mode of consciousness. Deikman’s thesis is that scientific research has neglected the study of mystical experiences not only because of their association with organized religion, but because scientists have applied such terms as ‘regressive’, ‘immature’, and ‘childish’ to an area of function that may be of value.

 

5.9 RENUNCIATION

 

Poverty, chastity, isolation and silence are traditional techniques that are used in pursuing the mystical path. As dramatic as such techniques may be, they tend to obscure the fact that the renunciation that is sought is much more basic than merely modifying external behaviour. For example, mystic Walter Hilton prescribes a renunciation of thought: ‘Therefore if you desire to discover your soul, withdraw your thoughts from outward and material things, forgetting if possible your own body and its five senses. . . .’ Similarly, St. John of the Cross calls for the banishment of memory: ‘Of all these forms and manners of knowledge, the soul must strip and void itself and it must strive to lose the imaginary apprehension of them, so that there may be left in it no kind of impression of knowledge, nor trace of aught so-ever, but rather the soul must remain barren and bare, as if these forms had never passed through it and in total oblivion and suspension. And this cannot happen unless the memory be annihilated as to all its forms, if it is to be united with God’. A seemingly simple, but perhaps equally subtle and difficult statement, made by a contemporary Zen master is that renunciation ‘is not giving up things of this world, it is accepting that they go away’.

 

Deikman became a participant observer by undergoing meditation training under the auspices of the Zen Centre of San Francisco. The meditation experience, coupled with visits to a Zen monastery, interviews with the Zen master and reading of Buddhist literature, led him to view renunciation as relating to a change in attitude. It is a shift from doing to allowing, from grasping the world to allowing the world to enter us. It is the meditative attitude carried into everyday life. Ordinarily, we tend to categorize renunciation as virtuous, attributing various moral or holy qualities to it. But Deikman’s hypothesis is that the basic attitude or purpose of a person has a determining effect on their mode of consciousness. From this point of view, renunciation is a practical, not a moral issue: Your mode of consciousness fits your intention and renunciation changes intention.

 

5.10 TWO MODES: ACTION AND RECEPTION

 

Deikman’s proposal assumes that we think of a human being as an organism composed of components having both psychological and biological dimensions. Like the ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’, these psychological and biological components have two basic modes of operation: an ‘action mode’ and a ‘receptive mode’. The action mode is a mode organized to manipulate the environment. To carry out this purpose the striate muscle system is the dominant physiological agency. Base-line muscle tension is increased and the EEG usually features beta waves. Psychologically, we find focal attention, heightened boundary perception, object-based logic and the dominance of formal characteristics over the sensory; shapes and meanings have a preference over colours and textures. These attributes develop together. For example, as Piaget has shown, thinking develops in association with the manipulation and perception of objects, and object-oriented thought is associated with muscle activity, especially eye muscle activity. Thus we experience ‘effortful’ thinking – reflecting the involvement of our muscle system. Likewise we can understand the perceptual characteristics of the action mode as providing what is needed for success in acting on the world. For example, a clear sense of self-object difference is necessary to obtain food. Similarly, a variety of psychological and physiological processes are coordinated and developed together in multidimensional unity adapted to the requirements of the task; i.e., manipulating the environment.

 

In contrast, the receptive mode is a mode whose purpose is receiving the environment, rather than manipulation of it. The sensory-perceptual system is usually the dominant agency rather than the muscle system. Base-line muscle tension tends to be decreased compared to the tension found in the action mode and the EEG tends towards the slower frequencies of alpha and theta. Psychologically, attention is diffuse, boundary perception is decreased, non-logical thought processes are evident and sensory qualities dominate over the formal. These functions are coordinated to maximize the intake of the environment. But as we progress through the levels of development, the receptive mode is gradually dominated, if not submerged, by a natural and culturally enforced emphasis on striving activity and the action mode that serves it. The receptive mode tends more and more, to be an interlude between increasingly longer periods of action-mode organization. A consequence of this bias is that we come to regard the action ‘logos’ mode as the normal one for adult life and to think of the unfamiliar receptive ‘mythos’ mode as pathological.

 

5.11 HABITUATION IN THE ACTION MODE

 

The pervasiveness of the action ‘logos’ mode is evident when we consider how our language reinforces it. We tend ordinarily to use language to analyse, discriminate and divide the world into pieces or objects which we can then grasp both psychologically and physically, in order to act upon them. The richness and subtlety of our language for any particular area of our lives reflects the extent to which we apply the action mode to that sector. For example, most of us have only one word for snow, but if we are skiers we may have several. The Eskimo has many words that discriminate the varieties of snow conditions that he must take into account in order to survive.

 

In some cases, the issue is not how many differences we have learned to detect but the mode of consciousness in which the experience takes place. ‘Love’ for example, is represented for the average person by only one word, yet each of us probably has experienced many different varieties of that condition. We have not developed a rich vocabulary for love because it is experienced in the receptive mode: indeed, it requires the receptive mode for its occurrence. Similarly, colour experience (rather than the use of colour as a sign) requires the receptive mode and colours have only a relatively few names compared to the vast variety of hues to which we are sensitive. This is true even for the artist to works with, manipulates and makes colour objects and therefore has an expanded colour vocabulary compared to most people.

 

Some extreme examples can illustrate these contrasting yet complementary modes. Imagine a cab driver in heavy traffic, struggling to get a passenger to the airport in time so that he may earn a large tip. S/he is intentionally engaged in manoeuvring among the objects of his world and is focused on a future goal, trying as best he can to control what happens. S/he is not occupied with the colour of the automobiles, the blueness of the sky, or the aesthetic qualities of the streets and buildings, but sees only openings or blockades of traffic and notes only the colours of the traffic signals. The driver sees the shapes and understands the meanings of the various objects flashing into their narrowed field of attention while at the same time part of their attention recalls alternate routes and they scan their memory to remember the typical traffic flows. Their base-line muscle tension is high and their EEG would probably show a desynchronized, fast voltage pattern.

 

In contrast, consider a monk or nun who is sitting in contemplative meditation in a garden. At that moment, they are oriented toward taking in the environment, a function that is performed via the receptive mode. If they are deeply into that mode, their mode of consciousness may feature a marked decrease in the distinction between themselves and their environment to the extent that they merge with it or have a nonverbal (ineffable) perception of unity, or both. Sensory experience dominates their consciousness; their muscles tend towards relaxation and their EEG is likely to show alpha and theta waves. In contrast to the cab driver, they are not concerned with the future but instead are letting whatever happens happen, while language and thinking are relinquished almost entirely.

 

During most of our lives, what occurs is probably a mixture of the two modes or at least a fluctuation between them. For the majority of us, that fluctuation is heavily dominated by the active, rational mode. However, it is not the presence or absence of physical activity per se that determines the mode. Rather, it is the underlying purpose or attitude that seems to be crucial. For example, a monk working in a garden or lovers in embrace ideally would be given up to the receptive mode. However, if the monk or nun are worried about how soon they will gain enlightenment or experience mystical union, or if the lovers are preoccupied about how well they are performing, quite a different kind of experience will result. Thus, we are not talking about activity versus passivity as usually conceived, or about the secondary and primary processes of psychoanalytic theory. There is some similarity between aspects of the receptive mode and the cognitive style associated with primary process, however, this bimodal model addresses itself to a functional orientation – that of ‘taking in’ versus ‘acting on’ the environment. The receptive mode is not a ‘regressive’ ignoring of the world or a retreat from it, although it can be employed for that purpose, but rather it is a different way of engaging the world in pursuit of a different goal.

 

5.12 RECEPTIVITY: RENUNCIATION IN MONASTIC TRAINING

 

With this discussion in mind, we can understand renunciation as a strategy to establish the receptive mode as the dominant orientation and to intensify its effects. In most spiritual disciplines a psychosocial system has been developed for use in a monastery or ashram, e.t.c., where technical exercises, communal living and ideology are integrated to bring about this change. It is instructive to look closely at one example of such a system: we can consider life in a Zen monastery of the Soto Zen sect. The basic principles of its operation are similar to those of other spiritual disciplines. The Zen monastery teaches its students (monks or nuns) a state of acceptance and ‘non discrimination’. This is accomplished by meditation, communal living, an ascetic way of life, in the context of a supporting philosophy, in this case, Buddhism. There are different forms of meditation prescribed but the purest form is called shikan-taza, or ‘just sitting’. A person performing shikan-taza is not supposed to do anything except to be sitting, therefore trying to meditate better than the day before or trying to achieve enlightenment represent incorrect attitudes. The basic instruction is acceptance, rather than doing. Even intrusive thoughts or fantasies while meditating are not struggled against, but are treated as distractions that one must be patient with until they go away. The monk is told that if he is truly sitting, he is enlightened – to just sit, to just be, is enlightenment, itself.

 

The average person finds it very difficult to just sit and not do anything. When they try it, they begin to realize how rigorously they have been trained to be busy, to solve problems, to make objects, to look ahead, to strive toward a goal. The sitting meditation may be regarded as an experiment in which the student explores what it is like when he does not respond to the usual commands of pain, anxiety, boredom or desires. One effect of this meditation is to give the student the actual experience of having their ordinary sense of linear time change to something that might be described as timeless. For brief intervals, time can be felt to disappear and anxiety with it. Likewise, the feeling of a personal self (the core dimension of the action or ‘logos’ mode) tends to become less vivid and in some instances, may disappear.

 

The philosophical instruction that is given in lectures or, indirectly, through the chanting of religious texts, presents a theory that the world is one of constant change, composed of a basic nothing that takes an endless variety of forms but whose essence cannot be analysed. In particular, the usual concept of death is taught to be an illusion. In this way, the most powerful force that orients us towards the future – the fear of death – is diminished.

 

The social systems of the monastery also undercut the action mode by minimizing material rewards. No one accrues profits and one day is very similar to the next. The food stays the same, there are few status rewards and thus, there tends to be nothing very concrete to ‘look forward to’.

 

In these ways, the monastic system strikes at the attempt by the active ‘logos’ mode of consciousness to grasp, to cling to, to strive for, to reach ahead and possess. The psychological importance of this is readily apparent. If we examine the content of our thinking, we can see that most of our energies are devoted to prolonging or bringing back a particular pleasure that we have had, often at the expense of enjoying the pleasure available at the moment. Operating in the action mode with an orientation towards the future, we tend to lose what is available to us in the present. For example, a person taking a pleasant walk on a beautiful spring day may be unhappy because they are thinking about the end of their holiday. In contrast, a monk or a yogi is taught to accept, to allow, rather than to be concerned with seeking pleasure or avoiding pain. To the extent that they succeed in this reorientation, they establish the groundwork for a mode of consciousness that the mystical literature describes as timeless, non-dualistic, nonverbal and completely satisfying. In brief, Deikman proposed that the key to this is a mode of  being that he called ‘the receptive mode’, a mode that is natural to us, but which is seldom employed to its full potential.

 

5.13 THE RECEPTIVE MODE IN EVERYDAY LIFE

 

One lesson derived from Deikman’s research is that the receptive mode is not the exclusive property of monks or mystics. Almost all of us make use of it (without being aware of it) to perform functions that we do not usually regard as esoteric or spiritual. To take a very mundane example: trying to remember a forgotten name by a direct, conscious effort may yield nothing. In such a situation we typically remark, ‘It will come to me in a minute’, and it usually does. We stop struggling to remember and allow ourselves to be receptive and only then does the name pop into awareness. Our shift in attitude – a change in strategy – permits a latent function to be exercised: switching to the receptive mode permits the operation of capacities that are non functional in the action mode.

 

The same principle is illustrated further when we consider a more important use of the receptive mode: to solve more difficult problems by means of creative intuition. Typically, there is an initial stage of struggling with the problem but a sense of impasse develops and the struggle is given up. Sometime later, while completely occupied with a less important activity, or perhaps waking from sleep, the answer suddenly appears. Often, it is in a dreamlike symbolic or spatial form and needs to be worked over to make it coherent and applicable. In terms of Deikman’s bimodal model, the process begins with the use of the action mode during the preliminary or preparatory stage. When progress is blocked, a shift takes place to the receptive mode. In that mode, our capacity for creative synthesis is able to function and the intuitive leap to a new configuration takes place. Then, we shift back to the action mode in order to integrate the new formulation with our previous knowledge and to communicate it to others.

 

For most people, the receptive mode probably has its most important function in intimate relations. The capacity for a deep and satisfying experience with another is related to a person’s ability to relinquish control, to allow the partner to move through physical and psychological boundaries and to stay focused in the present. Furthermore, intimacy in persons who are thus able to ‘let go’ is associated with heightened sensation, diffuse attention, a decrease in the boundaries of the self (as in meditation) and in some cases, profound experiences occur that may be properly termed mystical. In contrast, persons who are unable to give up their customary ‘logos’ mode of activity, striving and control, will continue to suffer a constriction of their experience: for them the pleasurable sensations, the release of tension and feelings of closeness tend to be minimal or absent.

 

5.14 WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE?

 

Mystics claim to have a direct, intuitive perception of Reality that is, the Ultimate Reality and that claim is a reasonable possibility. As we have seen, studies in perception and developmental psychology indicate that typically we exercise a significant selection process over the array of stimuli with which we are presented. For efficiency’s sake, we have to pay attention to some things and not to others and we automatize that selection process to such an extent that it becomes difficult to recover our perceptual and cognitive options. For that reason, mystical disciplines make use of a variety of means to bring about a deautomatization so that a new, fresh perception can occur. Deikman hypothesized that when this deautomatization is combined with an increased capacity for receptive-mode function (as a result of ‘spiritual’ training), the event traditionally referred to as ‘awakening to the awareness of one’s True Nature’ takes place.

 

As in the case of creative intuition, descriptions of such ‘enlightenment’ experiences indicate that they are sudden, involuntary and present the ‘answer’ in a flash. They tend to follow a long period of struggle and are often triggered by something of an irrelevant nature – the same pattern noticed for creative intuition. Furthermore, accounts of enlightenment often stress that additional work was needed before the new knowledge was fully ‘realized’. We can say that it had to be integrated through use of the action ‘logos’ mode. Thus, Deikman proposed, mystical ‘enlightenment’ or ‘awakening’ may be the result of a radical use of the basic creative process with which we are already familiar.

 

5.15 THE TWO MODES AS MUTUALLY COMPLEMENTARY

 

Although our conscious experience may seem to be a mixture of these different modes, in a certain basic sense, the modes appear to be complementary. The term ‘complementarity’ was introduced by Niels Bohr to account for the fact that two different conditions of observation could lead to conclusions that were conceptually incompatible. For example, in one set of experiments light behaved as if it were composed of particles, while in another set of experiments light behaved as if it were a continuous wave. Bohr suggested that there was no intrinsic incompatibility between the two results because they were functions of different conditions of observation and no experiment could be devised that would demonstrate both aspects under a single condition. ‘Enlightenment’ has been likened to an open hand. When you try to grasp it, you transform your open hand into a fist. The very attempt to possess it (the ‘logos’ action mode) banishes the state because it is a function of the receptive mode.

 

5.16 SUMMARY

 

Our ordinary and habitual mode of consciousness can be called the action mode, which is organized to manipulate the environment and features an acute consciousness of past and future time. Its basic reference point is the experience of a separate, personal self. In contrast, we have the capacity for a different organization, the receptive mode, which is oriented towards the present, in which the personal self as a preoccupying orientation fades away and the world tends to be experienced as more unified and satisfying. As the action mode is used for problem solving and manipulating the environment, the receptive mode is used for receiving, for providing nutrition and satisfaction.

 

Which mode is better? Deikman proposes that if we think in such terms, we are missing the point. His claim is that we gain nothing by restricting our functions to one mode or the other. Rather, we need the capacity to function in both modes, as may suit the occasion.

 

What stands in the way? Deikman points out that the first barrier is a cultural bias (Quadrant 4), that tells us that ‘mystical states’ are unreal, pathological, crazy, or regressive. Without knowing it, under the banner of the scientific method, (Quadrant 2), our thinking (Quadrant 1 & 4), has been constricted. He proposes that we have been indoctrinated to avoid looking closely at these realms, but that it is time to make the receptive mode and the experience which it engenders, a legitimate option for ourselves. If we do so, we will be able to see more clearly the psychodynamic barriers that limit this option: defences against relinquishing conscious control, defences against the unexpected and the unknown, defences against the blurring and loss of boundaries defining the self. We will be able to discriminate those instances in which the pathological or regressive are indeed present, but we will not miss seeing and exploring those phenomena that are truly mature and life promoting.

Deikman speculates that our survival as a species may depend on being able to utilize our receptive-mode function so that we can experience the basis for humanitarian values. The action, ‘logos’ mode that pervades our civilization does not support selflessness, whereas the receptive mode that is ordinarily the specialty of mystics, does. From this point of view, mystics have been the guardians of a potentiality that has been ours and that it is now time for us to reclaim it. We can integrate or synthesise this realm with our present knowledge, making it less exotic and less alien. By doing so, we can explore and regain a functional capacity that we may now need for our very preservation.

 

In the end, Deikman’s very valuable contribution explains mysticism largely in terms of quadrant 1 with reference to other quadrants. He does not address whether the Divine actually exists ‘out there’ or not, but talks rather in terms of different modes of perception. We will return to this discussion of objectivity in due course.

 

5.17 MADNESS AND MYSTICISM: CLARIFYING THE MYSTERY

 

Psychologist Isabel Clarke, in her study ‘Madness and Mysticism: clarifying the mystery’ suggests that a simple (probably far too simplistic!) way of understanding the dichotomy between the two modes of experiencing the world could proceed as follows; perhaps the everyday mode is one where the rational, analytical ‘logos’ mode and the intuitive, implicational ‘mythos’ mode are working nicely together in balance, whereas the spiritual/psychotic state is one where the two are disjointed and the person is essentially driven by the implicational ‘mythos’ mode or subsystem. The characteristics of this subsystem and some of the characteristics of this area of experience match well. The implicational subsystem deals in relatively undifferentiated wholes and cannot manage fine discrimination; it is overwhelmingly emotional and swings between sharp dichotomies such as euphoria and terror, or is, somewhat paradoxically, unemotional or beyond emotion. It is centrally concerned with the self and threats to the self.

 

5.18 THE EXPLANATORY POWER OF THIS MODEL

Whilst being aware that all this is rather speculative, she appeals to the explanatory power of the model in making sense of puzzling aspects of both psychotic symptoms and of spiritual experience. Operating within a personal construct system, such as the one listed earlier in the Repertory Grid experiment, that is, operating between the ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’ modes with the ‘logos’ mode being dominant, represents the usual mode of human functioning. For most people, either some sort of a jolt, or a carefully designed process is needed to move them into another state. This could be a crisis, a ritual or religious ceremony designed to shift consciousness, a drug or meditative practice. The boundary, which makes this sort of experience hard to access for most of us, is, for the person with psychosis, dangerously loose. Clarke suggests that where this mystical/psychotic/’mythos’ state is entered fully, the personal construct system, in its usual precise mode of operation, is essentially left behind. She therefore refers to this state as ‘beyond the construct system’ or ‘unconstrued’.

5.19 THE SPIRITUAL, MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE

 

When this boundary is passed in spiritual practice, the experience of the unmediated whole is usually reported as one of euphoria. Clarke argues that this stage is sometimes (but certainly not invariably) present in psychotic experience also. Peter Chadwick testifies to this (Chadwick 1992 and 1997), and she herself has met it in the accounts of people she has had in therapy. It is possibly underreported in the literature as it is not asked about in standard interviews and the dismissing of personally significant experiences like this as a phenomena of illness will tend to inhibit their communication. However, Clarke is equally clear that many psychotic breakdowns do not pass through this stage of euphoria. The characteristic psychotic experience could be understood in terms of the loss of bearings because of having drifted out of reach of the belief construct system, or the propositional ‘logos’ subsystem, which people rely on to make sense of their environment. The often-cited timelessness of the mystical experience shows that time is one of the parameters lost in this transition. In the case of a mystical experience attained through spiritual practice, (or, as often happens, occurring spontaneously, but within a spiritual context that gives it meaning for the experiencer), managing the transition back to construed reality, to the ‘logos’ mode, after the experience, generally (but not invariably) occurs naturally and after a short space of time. Where the same state is achieved by taking a drug, the return again usually (but not invariably) occurs when the drug wears off.

 

5.20 THE PSYCHOTIC EXPERIENCE

 

In psychosis (and drug experiences that go wrong, or shade into psychosis), the orderly return does not happen. The individual is stranded beyond the reach of their constructs or prepositional, ‘logos’ subsystem, but still trying to operate in the world. Not surprisingly this is extraordinarily difficult. The familiar boundaries between people, events, time and space are not accessible as they were before. Telepathy seems normal: other people can read, or worse, interfere with, the individual’s thoughts; coincidences abound – everything is connected and everything is disconnected, everything is possible and nothing is possible. Whilst this new reality might be exhilarating for a short while, the sustained experience is terrifying. The desperate sufferer tries to make sense of the unfamiliar environment, clutching at whatever connections come to hand. In this way delusions, which usually have their origin in the early stage of the breakdown, are born. In another dissolution of normal boundaries, internal concerns are experienced as external communication and the person hears voices. Normal thought is disrupted – or as the psychiatrist would say, disordered.

 

5.21 THE LOGIC OF THE ILLOGICAL

 

Thus, Clarke starts to sketch the way in which a human being who is encountering reality unmediated by the construct system, or without benefit of the prepositional, ‘logos’ subsystem, will make sense of it. In both psychotic material and accounts of spiritual experience and religious ideas from different faiths, a parallel logic can be discerned that is strikingly different from and frequently opposite to, our usual day to day commonsense and scientific logic. Possibly this parallel logic was and is better understood and utilised in other cultures and in former times. Perhaps this is because through science, we have gained unprecedented control over the material world and, at least in the affluent northern hemisphere, created greater comfort and security for ourselves than any of our forefathers. The logic of science has unlocked so many secrets that, as we have seen, we have downgraded the whole area of human experience that lies beyond the reach of its logic. Clarke suggests that this other area, the ‘mythic’ mode, has its own logic, which is even more compelling, but more difficult to pin down: It is the logic of archetypes; of myths and stories – full of paradox and a sense of mystery. As we have seen, science and rationality discriminates – things are ‘either – or’, but in the ‘mythos’ mode, two contradictory things can be simultaneously valid – a world of ‘both – and’. In archetypal stories, such as traditional fairy tales, the ordinary transitions of every human life, like leaving home and ‘seeking your fortune’, falling in love and marrying and death, are invested with cosmic significance. In Christianity and indeed most religious traditions, the individual is both supremely precious and insignificant in the context of the whole; God is distant, transcendent and simultaneously concerned for the individual. Such paradoxes could be elaborated endlessly.

 

There is an interesting parallel with a characteristic strand in the psychotic experience here. The sufferer may have a conviction of their great personal importance – such as seeing themselves as Jesus Christ or related to the Queen for instance. This is a common element in delusional systems, as is a conviction of personal worthlessness, often reinforced by derogatory auditory hallucinations. The common theme here concerns the self and the position of the self in the family, in society and in the cosmos. The construct of the ‘self’ is among the concepts to be lost in the transition from ‘logos’ to ‘mythos’ modes, which can lead to an exhilarating feeling of unity and interconnectedness, as well as the bewilderment of loss of self. Clarke argues that the characteristic themes of psychotic material, whether in the form of voices or delusions, concern issues of self worth, acceptability, sexuality and personal significance, which are all relevant to understanding the self. The paradoxical characteristic of logic beyond the constructs is the simultaneous significance and insignificance of the self. In religious traditions this is a mystery to be pondered and is normally experienced as a positive, whether in the form of Buddhist negation of self, or Christian assurance of the love of God for the undeserving sinner. These ideas differ in subtlety and flexibility rather than in content from the psychotic themes. Grandiose delusions fix on the supreme importance of the self, while persecutory voices denigrate and crush. Both of these can be experienced by the same individual, but they are not somehow held in balance. Clarke agrees with the many writers, including Laing and Peter Chadwick (already cited), who suggest that the well-foundedness or otherwise of the ‘self’ of the individual undergoing the experience will predict whether it is a temporary, life enhancing spiritual event, or a damaging psychotic breakdown, from which there is no easy escape.

 

5.22 PUTTING THE MODEL IN PERSPECTIVE

 

This interior, cognitive model (quadrant 1) does not deny a physical aspect (quadrant 2) of psychosis involving some disruption of brain function. In the case of drug taking there is a simple physical cause and indeed some ascetic practices such as fasting can create a physical precondition for mystical states in the context of spiritual practice. This model offers a complementary psychological understanding of the experience of the person suffering from psychosis as one who is trying to make sense of the world, as all human beings do, but with their usual bearings removed. It is in the tradition of the normalising exposition of psychotic symptoms in Cognitive Therapy for psychosis. Indeed, emphasising the overlap with spiritual experience brings psychosis in from the cold region of the utterly alien and incomprehensible where it is traditionally relegated. Our society’s particular illiteracy in the area of spiritual experience contributes to the even greater isolation of the person with psychosis. In ‘Recovery from Schizophrenia’, Richard Warner (1985) notes that in societies where experience of the spiritual/psychotic realm is valued, people diagnosed with schizophrenia have a far better prognosis than in modern Western Society. This research bears out the significance of a sympathetic spiritual and cultural context for outcome of an encounter with the unconstrued, whether labelled spiritual experience or psychosis; mysticism or madness.

 

Clarke concludes with the suggestion that this way of looking at things has implications for the extension of knowledge across the discontinuity – i.e., into the spiritual and the supernatural, having outlined the type of logic she sees as relevant to this area: the logic of ‘both – and’, not ‘either – or’. If we adopt this perspective, any enquiry into the unconstrued needs to be pursued with this logic in mind, together with its implications of radical provisionality and paradoxicality. Certainly in my experience, I have worked out many Personal Construct or Repertory grids, and I have only struggled and ultimately failed, with one. This concerned a grid mapping constructs of the Divine. The grid could not be completed because preferences in bipolar constructs could not be made. The Divine was both Light and Dark for example. The Divine transcended bipolar constructs, or to put it another way, the Divine could not be construed and remained unconstrued.

 

5.23 QUADRANT 2: THE MYSTIC – BRAIN AND PHYSIOLOGY

 

The upper right quadrant, quadrant 2, is concerned with the objective individual: with brain states and activity, neuro-physiology and so on and the objective measuring of these states and conditions, via techniques such as brain scanning e.t.c.. It is in this quadrant that we look for the development of drugs to cure illness; and it is here that we map out the human genome and seek genetic modifications to combat illness and vulnerabilities.

 

The mystic enters a non-usual mode of consciousness or perception and this mode may arise spontaneously, may be the result of internal conflict, release, listening to music, meditation practice, the use of drugs, dance and so on. In such modes there are changes in brain waves and activity, and this is what we would expect. Some scientists think that they have achieved a victory for materialistic rationalism when they portray mystical experience as ‘nothing but’ changes in brain physiology and function. ‘Nothing buttery’ is just another name for reductionism. As we indicated at the start of this study, we cannot reduce any phenomena to just one quadrant. Rather the quadrants have correspondences: if I have an experience: a thought, an emotion, an action or response, there will be a corresponding effect in my brain; if something affects my brain, their will be a corresponding effect in experience. The fact that a mystical experience or something like it can be produced by the administering of certain drugs or by the electrical stimulus of parts of the brain does not invalidate mystical experience or reduce it to ‘nothing but’ biochemical reactions.

 

Even so, we obviously cannot ignore quadrant 2. Within this quadrant, Bicameralism is a controversial hypothesis which argues that the human brain once assumed a state known as a bicameral mind in which cognitive functions are divided between one part of the brain which appears to be ‘speaking’. and a second part which listens and obeys.

 

In his 1976 work The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, Julian Jaynes proposed that human brains existed in a bicameral state until as recently as 3000 years ago. Jaynes builds a case for this hypothesis by citing evidence from many diverse sources including historical literature. He took an interdisciplinary approach, drawing data from many different fields.

 

Jaynes asserts that until roughly the times written about in Homer’s Iliad, humans did not generally have the self-awareness characteristic of consciousness as most people experience it today. Rather, Jaynes argued that the bicameral individual was guided by mental commands believed to be issued by external ‘gods’—the commands which were so often recorded in ancient myths, legends and historical accounts; these commands were however emanating from individuals’ own minds. This is exemplified not only in the commands given to characters in ancient epics but also the very muses of Greek mythology which ‘sang’ the poems: Jaynes argues that while later interpretations see the muses as a simple personification of creative inspiration, the ancients literally heard muses as the direct source of their music and poetry.

 

Jaynes inferred that these ‘voices’ came from the right brain counterparts of the left brain language centres—specifically, the counterparts to Wernicke’s area and Broca’s area. These regions are somewhat dormant in the right brains of most modern humans, but Jaynes noted that some studies show that auditory hallucinations correspond to increased activity in these areas of the brain. ‘Who then were these gods who pushed men about like robots and sang epics through their lips? They were voices whose speech and directions could be as distinctly heard by the Iliadic heroes as voices are heard by certain epileptic and schizophrenic patients…The gods were organizations of the central nervous system’.(p.73-4).

 

For example, he asserts that, in the Iliad and sections of the Old Testament, no mention is made of any kind of cognitive processes such as introspection, and he argues that there is no apparent indication that the writers were self-aware. According to Jaynes, the older portions of the Old Testament (such as the Book of Amos) have little or none of the features of some later books of the Old Testament (such as Ecclesiastes) as well as later works such as Homer’s Odyssey, which show indications of a profoundly different kind of mentality—an early form of consciousness. Perhaps the most well known story in the west that uses this bicameral mode is the Genesis story of Adam and Eve, with Adam hearing God walking in the garden, God talking to Adam, and with Adam talking to the serpent. I want to suggest that this story is not just a made up fable or myth that we should dismiss, neither should it be taken literally, as the Christian Fundamentalists do. It is an example of the Bicameral mind and a story concerning the origin of consciousness as we know it: ‘their eyes were opened and they knew that they were naked…’. The idea of the bicameral mind fits in with our earlier discussion concerning evolution and consciousness.

 

Jaynes noted that in ancient societies, the corpses of the dead were often treated as though they were still alive (being seated on chairs, dressed in clothing, and even fed food) and he argued that the dead bodies were presumed to be still living and the source of auditory hallucinations (see ancestor worship). This adaptation to the village communities of 100 individuals or more formed the core of religion. Unlike today’s hallucinations, the voices of ancient times were structured by cultural norms to produce a seamlessly functioning society. In Ancient Greek culture there is often mention of the Logos, which is a very similar concept. It was a type of guiding voice that was heard as from a seemingly external source.

 

In ancient times, Jaynes noted, gods were generally much more numerous and much more anthropomorphic than in modern times, and speculates that this was because each bicameral person had their own ‘god’ who reflected their own desires and experiences.

 

Even in modern times, Jaynes notes that there is no consensus as to the cause or origins of schizophrenia (the subject is still hotly debated). According to Jaynes, schizophrenia is simply a vestige of humanity’s earlier state. Recent evidence shows that many schizophrenics don’t just hear random voices but experience ‘command hallucinations’ instructing their behavior or urging them to commit certain acts. As support for Jaynes’s argument, these command hallucinations are little different from the commands from gods which feature so prominently in ancient stories. Indirect evidence supporting Jaynes’s theory that hallucinations once played an important role in human mentality can be found in the recent book Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Rethinking the History, Science, and Meaning of Auditory Hallucination by Daniel Smith.

 

5.24 THE BREAKDOWN OF BICAMERILISM

 

Jaynes theorized that a shift from bicameralism marked the beginning of introspection and consciousness as we know it today. According to Jaynes, this bicameral mentality began malfunctioning or ‘breaking down’ during the second millennium BC. He speculates that primitive ancient societies tended to collapse periodically (as in Egypt’s Old Kingdom and the periodically vanishing cities of the Mayas) due to increased societal complexity that could not be sustained by this bicameral mindset. The mass migrations of the second millennium BC created a rash of unexpected situations and stresses that required ancient minds to become more flexible and creative. Self-awareness, or consciousness, was the culturally evolved solution to this problem. Thus cultural necessity (that of interacting with migrating tribes, or surviving as a member of such) forced humanity to become self-aware or perish. Thus consciousness, like bicamerality, emerged as a neurological adaptation to social complexity.

 

Jaynes suggests that the unprecedented stresses of the 2nd millennium B.C. forced the individual into isolation, within which a sense of I-ness appeared to fill the void left by the inadequacy of the god. This hypothesis posits a relatively homogeneous and stress-free existence prior to the development of consciousness. In short, Jaynes must posit that there really was an Eden, from which humanity Fell.

 

To establish the gods’ disappearance, Jaynes cites a number of illustrations and cuneiform tablets dating from Sumerian times. He shows a stone-carven image of the King of Assyria kneeling in supplication before an empty throne, from which his god is conspicuously absent. The accompanying cuneiform script reads, ‘One who has no god, as he walks along the street,/ Headache envelopes him like a garment’. Another tablet reads,

My god has forsaken me and disappeared,

My goddess has failed me and keeps at a distance.

The good angel who walked beside me has departed.

Jaynes interprets this as evidence of a new subjectivity in Mesopotamia. The bicameral mind has begun to collapse into the modern unicameral mind of the self-willed, self-aware “I”, and as a consequence the gods no longer speak to people, as they did in the days of old (p.223).

 

Jaynes further argues that divination, prayer and oracles arose during this breakdown period, in an attempt to summon instructions from the ‘gods’ whose voices could no longer be heard.  The consultation of special bicamerally operative individuals, or of casting lots and so forth, was a response to this loss, a transitional era depicted for example in the book of 1 Samuel. It was also evidenced in children who could communicate with the gods, but as their neurology was set by language and society they gradually lost that ability. Those who continued prophesying, being bicameral according to Jaynes, could be killed.

 

Leftovers of the bicameral mind today, according to Jaynes, include religion, hypnosis, possession, schizophrenia and the general sense of need for external authority in decision-making.

Responses

 

Jaynes’s hypothesis remains controversial and has lacked discussion by mainstream academics. The few criticisms that have been made include:

1)     the idea that consciousness is a cultural construction is hard to take seriously.

2)     the conclusions Jaynes drew had no basis in neuropsychiatric fact at that time.

3)     difficulty with the idea that auditory hallucinations played a significant role in a previous human mentality .

 

Richard Dawkins discussed Jaynes’s theory in his recent book The God Delusion. In his chapter on the roots of religion, Dawkins writes: ‘It is one of those books that is either complete rubbish or a work of consummate genius, nothing in between!’. Many considered Jaynes’s hypothesis worthy and offer conditional support, arguing the notion deserves further study.

 

In a 1987 letter to the American Journal of Psychiatry, Dr. H. Steven Moffic questioned why Jaynes’s theory was left out of a discussion on auditory hallucinations by Drs. Assad and Shapiro. In response, Drs. Assad and Shapiro wrote, ‘…Jaynes’ hypothesis makes for interesting reading and stimulates much thought in the receptive reader. It does not, however, adequately explain one of the central mysteries of madness: hallucination’. Drs. Assad and Shapiro’s comment that there is no evidence for involvement of the right temporal lobe in auditory hallucination was incorrect even at that time. A number of more recent studies provide additional evidence to right hemisphere involvement in auditory hallucinations. Recent neuroimaging studies provide new evidence for Jaynes’s neurological model, i.e. auditory hallucinations arising in the right temporal-parietal lobe and being transmitted to the left temporal-parietal lobe. This was pointed out by Dr. Robert Olin in Lancet and Dr. Leo Sher in the Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, and further discussed in the book Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness.

 

The philosopher Daniel Dennett suggested that Jaynes may have been wrong about some of his supporting arguments, especially the importance he attached to hallucinations, but that these things are not essential to his main thesis. Gregory Cochran, a physicist and adjunct professor of anthropology at the University of Utah, wrote: ‘Genes affecting personality, reproductive strategies, cognition, are all able to change significantly over few-millennia time scales if the environment favors such change — and this includes the new environments we have made for ourselves, things like new ways of making a living and new social structures. … There is evidence that such change has occurred. … On first reading, Breakdown seemed one of the craziest books ever written, but Jaynes may have been on to something.’. Author and historian of science Morris Berman writes, ‘[Jaynes's] description of this new consciousness is one of the best I have come across.’. Danish science writer Tor Nørretranders discusses Jaynes’s theory favorably in his book The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size.

 

Evidence taken to contradict Jaynes’s proposed date of the transition from bicameralism is the Gilgamesh Epic: although the story of Gilgamesh was recorded centuries before the Old Testament, and though its setting is contemporaneous or earlier than the Old Testament stories, the Gilgamesh story describes such features as introspection. Jaynes himself, noting that the most complete version of the Gilgamesh epic dates to post-bicameral times (7th century BC), dismisses these instances of introspection as the result of rewriting and expansion by later conscious scribes and points to differences between the more recent version of Gilgamesh and surviving fragments of earlier versions. (‘The most interesting comparison is in Tablet X.’ – detailed in The Origin of Consciousness, 1982 edition, p. 252f.) Others, such as science fiction author Neal Stephenson, have since conjectured that heroic epics and myths may be rooted in isolated individuals who became self-aware early and could accordingly outmatch and manipulate their fellows.

 

Brian McVeigh maintains that many of the most frequent criticisms of Jaynes’ theory are either incorrect or reflect serious misunderstandings of Jaynes’ theory, especially Jaynes’ more precise definition of consciousness. Jaynes defines consciousness — in the tradition of Locke and Descartes — as ‘that which is introspectable’. Jaynes draws a sharp distinction between consciousness (‘introspectable mind-space’) and other mental processes such as cognition, learning, and sense and perception — which occur in all animals. This distinction is frequently not recognized by those offering critiques of Jaynes’ theory.

 

A collection of Jaynes’s essays on bicameralism combined with those of contemporary scholars was published in 2007, in a book entitled Reflections on the Dawn of Consciousness: Julian Jaynes’s Bicameral Mind Theory Revisited. Included in this book is new support for Jaynes’s theory by Marcel Kuijsten, psychological anthropologist Brian J. McVeigh, psychologists John Limber and Scott Greer, clinical psychologist John Hamilton, philosophers Jan Sleutels and David Stove and an expert in ancient Chinese customs and linguistics, Michael Carr. The book also contains an extensive biography of Julian Jaynes by historian of psychology William Woodward and June Tower, and a Foreword by neuroscientist Michael J. Persinger. Additional essays on Jaynes’s theory can be found in The Jaynesian, the newsletter of the Julian Jaynes Society.

 

5.25 SIMILAR IDEAS

 

The neuroscientist Michael Persinger studies the role of the right temporal lobe in the feeling of a sensed presence and god beliefs. The neuroscientist V.S. Ramachandran discusses cases of hyper religiousity in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. Other theorists have also made the claim that consciousness is a social construction, including Lev Vygotsky, Rom Harré and George Herbert Mead. Cognitive psychologist David R. Olson has written on the impact of reading and writing to cognition and the mind. Lloyd deMause and the psychohistorians have advanced a model that aims to understand the ubiquity of the schizotypal personality in the Old World. The main difference between psychohistorians and Julian Jaynes is that psychohistorians focus on childrearing modes as the main cause of the schizoid personality.

 

Like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder also has physiological aspects. The mood changes from depression to mania are created by an interchange between the environment and brain physiology: there is a complex genetic component that gives a predisposition to this condition. The inherent instability of mood that arises in bi-polar disorder may provoke in the individual sufferer a search for stability and foundation, because changing moods, especially if reasonably acute or if they alternate fairly rapidly, are destabilising. They may affect the sufferer’s sense of identity: they are an extrovert showman at one time, and withdrawn and glum at another – just who are they really? It affects their view of the world: at one time it is a bright, vibrant place with each day an opportunity to be seized, and at another time it is a dull, miserable cruel place full of hopelessness, despair and frustration. This search for foundation, stability, meaning and identity may well drift into spirituality, since other explanations and philosophies may appear too shallow and inadequate. But now we are drifting in to quadrant 1, the interior individual.

 

5.26 QUADRANT 3: THE MYSTIC IN MODERN WESTERN SOCIETY

 

For our purposes, quadrant 3 is concerned with the objective measurement of phenomena in a collective, or society and how those collectives are structured. So here we might be concerned with the gender distribution of those who have these experiences, or in the age distribution of the people who have these experiences, their geographical and temporal location and so on. Thus when we say that trans-rational levels of consciousness are only experienced by 0.1 percent of the world population or even less, then we are in this quadrant. It is here that we might also ask, how many of this 0.1 percent suffers with bi-polar disorder or schizophrenia, what the age, gender and geographic distribution is of mystics with bi-polar disorder or schizophrenia. In this quadrant we might ask if there are particular situations or contexts when these experiences are more prominent in a given group: for example, there appears to be an increase of mysticism in the Middle Ages in Europe. This may be related to political or religious changes and uncertainty arising in a previously stable religious community for example, to a crisis of meaning or identity for the group, in which case we drifting into quadrant 4. Quadrant 3 is about objective, measurable research concerning mysticism, mystics and its prevalence and distribution in society. It is also about how a group of such mystics might organise themselves, or what their ideals would be about the way society should be organised, led and structured: are they egalitarian, or authoritarian? Are they democratic or theocratic? It is in this quadrant that we can note gender differences with regard to spiritual growth: the male tends to see spiritual growth in terms of moving upwards, whereas the female tends to look at spiritual growth in terms of increasing inclusivity – more and more is included.

                                                                 

5.27 QUADRANT 4: THE MYSTIC IN COMMUNITY

 

Quadrant 4 is concerned with the meanings and values that the collective, group, community or culture holds. As we have seen, the modern western community is influenced by rationality, objectivity and science, but also, as we have seen, science can have the conviction that the inside cannot be studied or measured and as a result we can lose sight of the interiority of the world and as a result everything in our life and culture loses or has a reduced meaning. It is in this quadrant where we find evolutionary theory having the dominant hold and creationism being dismissed or marginalized as myth by those in government and setting the education syllabus for example. This is the quadrant where we can see how a person with mystical experience is valued and respected (or not) and what meanings and value the collective group gives to such individuals. In being in a considerable minority and in embracing the trans-rational, which is often confused by the collective with the pre-rational or irrational, the mystic is seen as unorthodox and often marginalized. In the days when religion had a stronger presence, orthodoxy, or the idea of one correct religious belief dominated a given culture and to question this was to be a heretic or apostate. Such spiritual ideas as a mystic might proclaim were often seen as a threat to the prevailing religious order and it’s authority. Thus we find persecution and inquisitions as attempts to maintain the religious status quo. As a result, mystics were often recluses and hermits, or couched their ‘unacceptable’ ideas within the framework of the accepted orthodoxy as best they could. Even so, notable mystics such as the Dominican Meister Eckhart found themselves accused of heresy and brought to trial. Often, unorthodox ideas are couched in ‘secret’ or hidden practices and writings. Thus European sexual mysticism (unity with the Divine through sexual practices as in Eastern Tantric disciplines) can be traced in the coded writings and practices of alchemists and Christian Gnostics. Nevertheless, even when such persecution is less of a threat, as in modern western culture, mystical ideas and practices are often embedded within the particular world-views of the mystic’s religious and spiritual traditions. These cultural contexts determine to a great degree the forms of the content of the mystical experiences. The perennial philosophy advocated by Wilber sees important similarities between seemingly different mystical traditions, whilst the constructivist demonstrates the essential differences between various traditions and cultures.

 

Today the rational, scientific outlook may also marginalize the mystic as being ‘mentally’ ill. As Thomas Szasz pointed out in his book, ‘The myth of mental illness’, the idea of ‘mental illness’ is itself a misnomer and mixed metaphor: the mind is an abstract concept but illness is concrete. People in western society often see psychology and psychiatry as an objective science, clearly defined and objective, yet the assumptions behind the different theories within these disciplines reveal different approaches to spirituality: some are neutral towards it, some are supportive, some are opposed, even hostile to spirituality. Psychology and psychiatry are not objectively neutral in their outlook, because here too, culture has its influence: many will be familiar with how Russian political dissidents in the early and mid twentieth century were branded as mentally ill and incarcerated in mental institutions just because they did not accept or opposed the dominant communist political ideology. The danger for psychiatry and psychology is that merely unconventional, non-conformist or unorthodox beliefs and behaviour may be categorised negatively as deviant, mental illness, mental disturbance and so on, which is a value judgement that may not be based on objective measurement of bio chemistry or brain function. Psychology and psychiatry, in as far a they portray themselves as an objective scientific discipline step out of this boundary when they make such judgements. Both psychology and psychiatry step out of this boundary in making value judgements that are inherent in the assumptions of their respective theoretical bases. To make things worse, the psychologist or psychiatrist tends to be seen as an authority figure by reason of their expertise and the role that western culture gives them. For example these are people, along with doctors, who decide whether you are fit for employment or not.

 

5.28 SUMMARY

 

This is just a select overview of the mystic using Ken Wilber’s model. In quadrant 1 we have seen that we have two modes of operating on the world – the usual and dominant rational active mode and the less common mythos receptive as described by Arthur Deikman and others. Whilst a Repertory grid of bipolar constructs can be made from the rational mode, the mythos mode uses a different, non rational kind of logic that cannot be construed in this way. We have also seen corresponding issues in brain physiology and Julian Jaynes’ theory of the physiological development of the brain from the Bicameral mind. Both of these relate to psychotic functioning – where rational constructs may fall apart such that the psychotic has difficulty construing the world and thus finding orientation in an unconstrued world-view. It appears that different parts and configurations of the brain come into play in psychosis. Mysticism and psychosis are often confused and lumped together as regressive and primitive by ‘experts’ and non experts who lean towards a restricted, reductionist materialistic scientific and rational outlook. However, whereas psychotics may fall into the non usual mode spontaneously, with its resulting unsettlement, mystics often train themselves in a religious/spiritual context to develop this mode. Whereas psychotics may be unable to return to the rational active mode, and be stuck in the non usual receptive mode, mystics are able to return to the rational active mode and apply it to analyse and understand in a fuller way, the nature and content of the experience and perception. Psychotics make up 1% of the community but mystics 0.1% – they are both in the minority. As such they are often marginalized, with both groups possibly being classified as ‘mentally ill’. Mystics may often live a solitary life.

 

5.29 SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PSYCHOSIS AND MYSTICISM

 

Let us return to our list in chapter one to help us to tease out and summarise some of the differences between psychosis and mysticism:

 

The following list gives indications of schizophrenia, (as opposed to mysticism):

 

The person’s thoughts are not easily understandable ie. what they say doesn’t make sense. They are irrational.

The person has difficulty functioning, or is unable to function, in everyday life: they are stuck in a ‘mythos’ mode of functioning that does not seal with practical issues. They lose touch with material reality and are stuck in a world of fantasy or delusion.

Auditory hallucinations are more common than visual hallucinations.

Episodes are generally prolonged.

Social relationships are impaired due to the person withdrawing socially. May respond inappropriately to the needs and concerns of others.

There may be a history of mental health problems in the individual or the family.

The person has usually exhibited mental health problems previously.

The event often has a negative outcome: hallucinations and delusions are considered a disruption to the normal functioning of the person’s consciousness.

The tendency is one of regression and pathology

1% of people suffer this disorder

They may feel alone and isolated

 

The following list gives indications of mysticism, (as opposed to psychosis):

 

No evidence of thought disorder or disorganised thinking. Though entering a recptive, ‘mythos’ mode, they are able to return to the active, rational mode of being. There is an integration or synthesis of the ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’ modes.

They enter the ‘mythos’ mode as a mature adult, and return to the rational mode. The experience is trans-rational and paradoxical.

The person is able to continue functioning in daily life.

Visual hallucinations are more common than auditory hallucinations.

Episodes are generally brief.

No impairment to social relationships. Responds empathically to the needs and concerns of others.

There is often no family history of mental health problems.

There is often no history of mental health problems within the individual.

The event often has a positive outcome, resulting in improvement in the person’s functioning and their growth. It has a healthy effect.

0.1% of people experience this.

The mystic may have a supportive social network

 

The following list gives indications common both mysticism and psychosis:

 

Both enter the receptive ‘mythos’ mode

Both appear unmediated or Immediate and Real

Both have biological effects in the brain

Both are non-rational and cannot be construed or remain unconstrued

Both involve a unified perception and loss of boundaries

Both involve a deeper quest for meaning.

Both may give rise to a loss or orientation of the self

Both can be unsettling and disorientating

Both are marginalized by modern western secular society and even health professionals

Both may lead to a heightened sense of perception

 

In terms of mysticism and bipolar disorder:

 

Both may lead to euphoria, ecstasy, elation and joy

Both may lead to preoccupation and withdrawal, even depression

Chapter six Theoretical models of God-as-Spirit

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

CHAPTER SIX

 

THEORETICAL MODELS OF GOD-AS-SPIRIT*

(Diagrams are not included in this chapter, but are separate)

 

6.1 THEORIES OF GOD

 

My own personal mystical experiences led to ideas that God is Spirit and Energy, present in all persons and pervading all that is. One interpretation of this is that this is literally true: that God exists as a Real, Formless Spirit and Energy Entity-out there. Wherever I am, physically, mentally, in my body or in my mind, there God IS. When God speaks in my mystical encounters, it is from this perspective, from the Absolute, Always. Similarly, when God is said to roll out the material universe like a carpet it may mean just that: a Divine Spirit/Energy created the material universe. But my mystical encounters also indicate that this Spirit/Entity is diffuse and not a ‘Mind’ or ‘Consciousness’ out there. (Mythical thinking). But there is another interpretation of the experiences, one that is similar to Arthur Deikman’s: that God is our Consciousness-as-Such: the very quality of our consciousness itself. In this view, from the first moments that my Consciousness encountered the material universe however near or far, in reality or imagination, Undifferentiated Consciousness was there at the unfolding of experience as Witness. In this view, in the slightest contraction, or form-u-lating of these encounters by the active, rational mode to labelling and ordering, to conceptualising and forming and to language, Undifferentiated Consciousness IS as the Eye of the eye and the Mind of the mind. The Divine, the Ultimate is Consciousness itself.

 

In either perspective, the Divine connects with all that I encounter and do, be it good or bad, light or shadow. Thus, when my rational active mode is suspended and I gaze at God-as-Spirit, (be that a real diffuse Entity-out-there or my own Undifferentiated Consciousness) then it is no surprise that everything seems unified and connected. The Ignorance that veils us from the experience and perception of this expansive Unity is the distance that we are from merging with our true Nature. But what are the pros and cons of these two models of the Divine? Which, if any of these two models seems to be the best?

 

6.2 A GOD AS ‘CONSCIOUSNESS’ MODEL

 

A map drawn out from my mystical encounters using the perspective that God is Consciousness is shown in (Figures 7-9) below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 7

 

In Figure 7, we see ordinary consciousness, which is situated in the unconscious. The eye sees everything but itself and so too, consciousness illumines all but itself. The attention of the self-system, in the light of consciousness, directs the will and attention as best as it can and the self-system organises, directs, identifies, chooses, recalls, represses and protects, forming deep structures of consciousness as the person develops. Generally people tend to identify their own self solely as an individual, body-bound organism: a mind housed in a body. As we have seen, there are two modes of waking consciousness: first, the active ‘Logos’ mode, geared to analysis, action and manipulation of the environment. This is the mode that is most dominant in western culture. Second, there is the receptive ‘mythos’ mode, made more use of in some eastern cultures. This mode is receptive, accepting and holistic. It is this mode that a person uses or seeks to enhance in meditation. These two modes are in constant interplay to varying degrees. The ‘I’, the core self, feels centred in the active mode – what one sees is how things are – and ‘I’ identify solely with my body, emotions, values and beliefs – that is who I am.

 

We may have a Peak Experience stimulated by the environment: the beginning of nature mysticism perhaps. This is the experience of being taken out of oneself as one gazes at a beautiful scene for example. Attention is drawn to the passive intake of the environment. This dominates for a while, drawing attention away from the active mode. There is a greater sense of connection with the environment, and attention moves in the direction of being undifferentiated and connected. I feel connected with the greater scheme of things: hurting the planet hurts me.

 

 

 

Figure 8

 

Figure 8 shows a similar effect but in this case attention is drawn inwardly to the receptive mode of consciousness itself. Again, this dominates attention and there is some detachment from the active mode and from the external environment, to a position of Zen-like acceptance. Attention moves to a greater depth. I become more intuitive, creative and deep, I see the total picture and become more receptive and accepting. Here the person is beginning to focus on inner processes, especially Consciousness itself. This is a primal, primitive process or faculty within us, existing prior to language and concept, always-present, witnessing all that is manifest to us and appearing God-like. This is our core self, but this process of inward focus is not regressive because I come to it as a fully developed adult who regularly returns to the fully developed active rational mode of consciousness with its analytical thought and practical action. As attention moves to greater depth, one becomes aware that God is very near and openness to ‘spirituality’ increases. Here, presentations of the expansive Consciousness may appear as gods, wise guides, spirits e.t.c. that appear Deep, Meaningful and Real. This is because we are moving to a direct, unmediated experience of our immediate consciousness itself. As we have seen, these presentations of gods and spirits may be reified such that we believe them to be external beings or forces capable of acting on us. Language and form begins to be transcended.

 

 

Figure 9

 

 

Figure 9 shows further depth of attention towards the inner self, coupled with a further detachment from the active mode. Here, the person has penetrated beyond language and form to pure Witness or ‘God-as-Pure-Consciousness’. They may experience complete Emptiness in the Here-and-Now. As attention moves to this position, I may identify with God, or lose my identity in Total Unity with all-that-is. Notice that all this is taking place within the physically bounded organism. If a person had this experience in the middle of a motorway and was hit by a truck, they would die, no matter how transcendent the experience seems. In this interpretation then, these experiences are rooted in and originate in the physiological with changes in brain pattern and activity, (Quadrant 2). This has the corresponding effects of unity and timelessness in our subjective experience, (Quadrant 1). It is quite appropriate then that these may be ecstatic experiences. The word ecstasy means to displace, to move something from its proper place and here, the attention is moved or displaced from its usual place of differentiation and analysis to undifferentiated attention with Consciousness itself.

 

6.3 LIMITATIONS CONCERNING OBJECTIVE INFORMATION

 

With this model, this mode of consciousness is not the place to explore the material universe. It has a perspective on the material universe and may give some insight into it. More appropriately it gives insights into how I, deep down, perceive the material universe. Though things appear Lucid and Real because they are unmediated by action mode conceptualisations, they may not be as they appear. Inner Wise Guides do not make accurate predictions about the material world, as we shall see. Rather, it seems that they give insights about how I really feel, what I would really like, where my affections lie, how I really see situations and people. But how I see them may not be how they really are. Nevertheless, such insights, properly used and evaluated may be very useful. Just as science can only tell me so much about the experience of God-Immediacy, so God-Immediacy can only tell me so much about the material universe. It is an integrated balance or synthesis of both modes that begins to move us to a more complete, holistic view. Thus, after the ecstasy – the laundry. Figures 1-3 illustrate the nearness of the Divine which in this case is the Undifferentiated Witness of our Pure Consciousness. The journey is about realising and experiencing what is already. It is about penetrating the thin veil of unconsciousness to look at our own eye of Pure Consciousness. The routes are many and well recorded: Contemplative meditation, Prayer, Yoga, Service, Music, Drugs, the vivid landscape, anything that disengages or reduces the active, analytical, ‘logos’ mode of consciousness.

 

6.4 TRANSCENDENT OR REGRESSIVE?

 

So, does this interpretation regard the experience transcendent or regressive? Is it an evolutionary step forward or a return to the primitive? Typically, the answer is both and neither. It is not transcendent in the sense of uniting with an objective Supreme Being-in-all-things. But the experience is one of being caught up, of liberty, of expansiveness, of deep Reality and Meaningfulness. In this sense it feels evolutionary, a deeper stage, a moving forward to a more complete picture and greater tolerance. Yet it appears to be focussing on a quality of our being that has been with us always and that is in that sense primitive. Here is the paradox: We focus more and more narrowly on Pure Undifferentiated Formless Pure Consciousness until we identify with it in Unity, but the experience of it is one of being lifted up to fill the universe.

 

 

6.5 A ‘LITERALLY EXISTING GOD’ MODEL

 

But mystical experiences can also be interpreted literally. One problem with the Undifferentiated Consciousness model is that nowhere does my own mystical experience or encounter use this terminology: Nowhere is God described as ‘Consciousness’ or ‘Pure Mind’. Though I entertained the Pure Consciousness model for about a year, it did not seem fully correct, it seemed as though some parts of my experience were having to be stretched to accommodate this interpretation. It did not seem truly boundless, but rather an illusion of boundlessness; it was not God or the Divine, but merely a subjective experience of an internal physiological process. As I began to write a commentary on my experiences, I found that a number of my interpretations and assumptions were challenged such that I returned to the more literal interpretation (Figure 10).

 

 

Figure 10

In this interpretation not only is there a phenomenological experience that has meaning; not only are the mind, emotions and consciousness affected; but it is argued that God exists ‘out there’ as a Real Entity, though not in the form of a reified Consciousness: my encounters argued that it is a mistake to see God-as-Spirit as a ‘Big-Person-out-there’ in this way. God is more diffuse than this: like the ocean, God-as-Spirit has no central nerve centre or focal point of consciousness. But if this diffuse God-as-Spirit exists ‘out there’ then we can also draw a philosophy and theology from what has been said and look to science to see if we can support the arguments and positions presented. But this is not an easy matter.

 

6.6 THE DIVINE: A SINGLE UNITY OR A CONSTRUCT OF CULTURE-BOUND MYSTICS?

 

Wilber emphasises the unity of mysticism: he stresses the common themes that run through the accounts of diverse mystics, in diverse places at diverse times. The constructivists emphasise the differences and diversity in these accounts that arise they say because of the effect of culture and context. Who is right? Well, both are. The thirteenth century Sufi mystic, Ibn al-Arabi argued that when it comes to the Divine, we all worship our own beliefs. This is because the Divine, the Absolute, is Formless. Eckhart described the Divine as the Empty, Silent Desert and Shankara, expounding an Advaita Vedanta view within Hinduism, argued similarly that the Absolute is attributeless: without qualities of any kind. Thus the mind cannot encompass the Divine, it cannot fathom the depths of Divine – the Absolute is the absolute Depth and absolutely Transcendent of form and concept. We have also seen the idea of panentheism – the idea that the Divine is both immanent: expressed in all things and Transcendent: across all things. Mystics such as those above declare that as Spirit, the Divine is Formless, Transcendent Unity. However, for some of them and other mystics, the Divine is expressed in all form, in all that exists. Yet the Divine is not fragmented or diluted. As Spirit, the Divine is Boundless or Expansive and the universe – all that materially, physically exists – is brought into being by a process which we can call contraction: the Spaceless, Timeless, Formless Divine contracts to form in time and space. In Essence then the Divine is One, but in expression (through contraction) the Divine is many. Thus any existent is in Essence Divine, Eternal and Real, but in expression is temporary, not finally real and limited in time and space. In this view then, in Essence we are each Divine: our Self and the Absolute are one, Atman and Brahman are one, we are Unity, but in expression we appear as distinct creatures in time and space, we are diverse and many. The, illustration often used is that of a drop of ocean spray – it is of the same nature as the ocean itself, yet for a moment it has a separate and distinct appearance before it again merges with the ocean itself.

 

Being creatures of form, we think in terms of form and separateness – we use conceptual form, linguistic form and so on. It is no surprise then that we think of the Divine in terms of form and very often as big-human-in-the-sky or in anthropomorphic form. All these forms are absolutely relative to the Absolute and since the mind cannot encompass the Divine, they are only aspects and facets of something too big too understand and grasp. They are in fact metaphors and allegories constructed by us to stand between us and that which is ultimately Unknowable and Inexpressible. They are useful ways of orientating ourselves to the Absolute to cultivate humility and journey towards truth. In addition to this, the process of contraction brings about Ignorance, such that we do not realise our True Nature or the nature of Reality, mistaking temporary forms for Ultimate Reality. Thus we operate under an Illusion brought about by Ignorance as a result of contraction. This means that we can often mistake allegorical and metaphorical concepts of the Divine for concrete reality: we can think that there actually is a ‘Big-Man-In-The Sky’ looking down on us, judging us, ordering events in the world and so on. At the moment we just need to recognise that the Divine is in Essence, Attributeless One and Unity, but in contracted expression, is many and diverse. Thus in mysticism, there is both Unity and diversity, there is even contradiction because all forms are partial aspects of the Unknowable and are still steeped in a certain degree of Ignorance despite the degree of depth of enlightenment that the mystic has.

 

Initially, Wilber presented his model as an evolution towards spirituality: the higher the stage or level: the nearer one was to God. There was a progression from material body, to mind, to spirit. Mystical experience was seen as a leap to a higher stage. But there were problems with this and Wilber has altered his views since. But the above mystical world-view suggests a broad progression like this: Spirit to material (body) to mind, with each stage containing the previous stage rather like a Russian doll. Thus Formless Spirit contracts to but remains the Essence of material existants. The material, following laws of physics, evolves to mind, which itself goes through stages of development. Mind emerges from the material, it’s Essence being Spirit. Thus, wherever one looks, whatever stage one is at, there God is.

 

6.7 IS THE UNIVERSE CONSCIOUS?

 

We have come across this debate a little bit earlier: how far does down does consciousness go? Is the universe itself conscious? Mythical and magical stages of thinking sometimes suggest that it is, and New Agers, in returning to magical and mythical levels of thinking may also claim that the universe is conscious. Thus there are ideas such as ‘everything works together for good to those who love God’, or if Jesus were to be silenced, then ‘even these stones would declare the glory of God’. We find ideas in Christianity such as the whole of creation groaning and waiting for the redemption of the sons of God, and the trees of the field ‘clapping their hands’ at the revealing of the glory of God. This idea of consciousness going all the way down is also present in the more modern theory of Carl Jung, in his idea of synchronicity. In part these ideas arise from the perception of the Essential Unity of the universe. But does the universe have consciousness? Does it have intention, or awareness? Is there intelligence inherent in the universe? Or is the universe blindly following natural ‘laws’ of physics?  Perhaps the idea of the process of contraction can shine some light on this. The Absolute-as-Essence has all the potential within itself to be expressed as all that is and more, including intelligence and consciousness. The Divine is often portrayed by mystics as having Knowledge, Will and Purpose. Yet even these are emergent attributes from the Essential Formless Absolute that is perfectly Still in the Eternal Now, so these attributes too form an early part of the process of contraction. As already indicated, the process of contraction, of expression of the Formless to form, involves restriction, constraint and limitation. The One Formless Divine undergoes a Self-Delimitation into the manyness of form, in time and space. In Essence the Formless remains, but in expression to form there is delimitation with the arising of a corresponding Ignorance. If there is any kind of fall from an Original Perfect State, then this is it. Thus, in contracting to material existence; in being formed in time and space; the Formless, Timeless, Spaceless Divine Essence is expressed in a delimited way that involves a loss of consciousness and the arising of Ignorance. The universe is not static, but dynamic and evolving, as the lines of development in Wilber’s quadrants show and one of the qualities that evolves or emerges as part of this development is consciousness. Thus a human appears to be more self-consciously reflexive than a stone. Nevertheless, the Essence of both a stone and a human, their True Nature, is the Absolute One. This means that we can accept both the scientific idea of evolution of the universe over billions of years to more and more complex organisms and structures via the ‘laws’ of physics and so on, as well as the Essential Unity and Original Intelligence and Consciousness of the Universe.                                                                  

 

6.8 RELATING SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE AND OBJECTIVITY

 

But is the mystic’s experience what s/he thinks it is? When Sufi mystic Ibn al-Arabi contemplates the origin of the universe in the first movements of contraction of the Divine Formless Spirit in will and intention, as a Potentiality for all that is, is he describing a literal event, an objective reality; or is he actually describing phenomenological experience and the roots and foundations of Pure Awareness within himself? We are all probably aware that what we perceive is not how things are. Our visual sensory perception is limited to certain wavelengths of light such that how we see the world and how an insect sees the world are quite different. Similarly our audible perception is limited: the dog may hear the dog whistle but we may not. What the mystic sees so Clearly and Vividly, what appears so Certain and Real and True them in an unmediated mode of receptiveness, may not be how things are ‘out there’ at all. The room may appear to spinning to a person under the influence of alcohol, it may even appear to spin for a group of people under the influence of alcohol, but in reality, it is quite still. In other words, we asking: Is the mystic merely turning in on themselves, turning their attention and gaze to the roots of quadrant 1, to the Internal Witness of Pure Consciousness, or are they journeying to see the centre of all the quadrants in the whole diagram, to the Foundation of the Universe?

 

6.9 TESTING SPIRITUAL CLAIMS

 

Of course, testing spirituality is notoriously difficult. Objective measurable tests do not lend themselves to non-material Formless Spirit. Many mystical claims are unfalsifiable: that is, they cannot be proved correct and neither can they be disproved by usual objective testing methods. As we have seen, this is refuge for those whose overt prophesies appear to fail. Nevertheless, this idea of failed prophecy means that some inferences present in the content of mystical experiences can be tested. For example, a prophecy made in a state of mystical communion with the Divine may be able to be tested with regards to the success of its outcome or not.

 

6.10 AN EXPERIMENT

 

If the mystic is drawing near to an expansive Spirit, then communication with such an Entity or forms of such an Entity may give insights into what is going on in other places, or what will happen in the future e.t.c. Certainly, this kind of information has been intimated to me on my request. I have asked about my future employment for example and was told in no uncertain terms that my future employment would be in books. This has not turned out to be correct seven years on, where I have gained other employment. On another occasion, I inquired about the gender of an unborn baby and was told that it would be a boy. This too was incorrect.

 

Hypothesis: The mystic is contacting the Essence that transcends time and space and that this Essence will give answers concerning secret information that will be significantly more successful than those resulting from chance.

 

Null Hypothesis: Results obtained will be no better than those obtained by chance.

 

METHOD

 

I shuffled a deck of real playing cards and then took the top ten cards face down. Using a standard approach of relaxing the active, rational mode and increasing receptive attention to internal imagery, I (in my imagery) went into a classroom and sat down opposite Ramurabi, my Wise Guide and manifestation of the Divine and asked Him to tell him whether the suit of each card in turn card was red or black and according to his answers, each of the ten cards were one by one placed into one of two piles (in the meditation practice room). At no time was I aware of the face of the cards. This procedure was repeated five times. For the second and third set of ten cards, Ramurabi was joined by another Wise Guide, Yaroth and they had to agree on the colour of the card before it was allocated to a pile. They were often confident of their choices and enjoyed the game. For the last two sets, they were invited to bring anyone that they wished to help them in their choice. Ramurabi took me out of the classroom, into the streets to a domed temple, wherein resided the Seer. The Seer, I was informed, saw what men could not: this was his role. He was an old man, with a long grey hair and beard. He sat in a dark room at a table on which there was a lighted candle and a crystal ball. Again, predictions as to the colour of the cards were confidently made.

 

RESULTS

 

                 Number of guesses         Number of hits

Set 1                 10                                      7

Set 2                 10                                      5

Set 3                 10                                      6

Set 4                 10                                      4

Set 5                 10                                      3

 

Total                50                                     25

 

Out of 50 cards used for prediction, 25 were predicted correctly and 25 were incorrectly predicted, exactly what would be expected by chance. This supports the null hypothesis.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Following these results, in another meditation imagery session Ramurabi, Yaroth and the Seer were asked again about their ability to see what others could not and they affirmed their roles as being able to do this. When confronted with the results they could not explain why they had not achieved better results: they shrugged their shoulder in perplexity and mumbled.

 

What is being questioned here is the relation of these encounters to objective material truth and whether what the mystic is encountering is part of an objective, independently existing Reality that stands above or across time and space.

 

6.11 SUBLATION

 

On waking, the reality of a dream is sublated to real/not-real: the dream is real in that it existed but not-real in that on waking, a person cannot and did not fly or walk through walls as they may have done in their dream. Those who have transcendent spiritual experiences describe them as Clear, Vivid and very Real and often, this spiritual awakening sublates the reality of the material, objective world.  Nature may seem to shine with deeper beauty and richer hues but the pre-occupations of the world may seem empty and futile. The once single, objective reality of the material world may come to be questioned and/or the contents and forms of the mystical experience may be questioned.

 

6.12 SUBLATION AND DEEPER REALITY: GOD AS PURE CONSCIOUSNESS MODEL

 

Models based around consciousness argue for a continuum of modes of consciousness: different modes of awareness and being, of different depths of reality such as dreaming, waking consciousness and God-Immediacy for example. In consciousness-based models, my mystical encounters seem to describe these different modes as different worlds. There is a very real sense in which the spiritually minded person is on a different planet to the materially minded person. The mystic is described as walking in two worlds – the material and the spiritual. Whatever mode of we are in tends to sublate the other modes. Sublation, as we have seen, is the process whereby one mode of awareness overrides the ‘reality’ or ‘truth’ perceived by another mode of awareness. Thus to a dreamer, the dream content appears real and true, but on waking, this content is sublated: it is less relevant to functioning and interacting in the material world. Similarly, the content of the experience of God-Immediacy or Mysticism may appear very Real, Vital and True, to the point of sublating our usual referents of truth and reality which we use in our usual rational, active ‘logos’ mode of waking consciousness in the material world. The sublation process is not sealed and watertight however. The contents of one mode may spill over and pervade another. Thus, those who have a mystical experience may find their values concerning what is important, meaningful and real, significantly and permanently altered even when they return to the usual active, ‘logos’ mode. This is a similar experience to waking from a vivid dream that appears so real and has such an impact on us that even on waking, we cannot shake it off for a while: its visual and audible content and its emotional tone spills over and remains with us in the waking world, perhaps unsettling and disturbing us.

 

6.13 SUBLATION AND DEEPER REALITY: THE ‘LITERALLY EXISTING GOD’ MODEL

 

My mystical encounters describe the spiritual and the material as two different worlds. They do not present a multi-layered reality, but a two layered reality: the spiritual and the material. Neither do they mention the idea of sublation: rather, these mystical experiences refer to the ignorance of the spiritual that dominates the material world-view. This is an ignorance that arises from God-as-Spirit contracting to material form, such that human beings identify themselves solely as material beings bounded by space and time.

 

6.14 OBJECTIVE TRUTH?

 

However, history is full of those who, on receipt of inspirational experience in the ‘mythos’ mode, make bold declarations, even predictions, only to find that it all comes to nothing. Jonathan Edwards was involved in the Great Awakening: a revival of the Christian religion in the mid 1730’s and early 1740’s in New England. To read his accounts of the revival is to read of a community caught up by Transcendent experiences that are interpreted and expressed in the then dominant ideology or form of Calvinist Protestant Christianity. Edwards was cautious of error and he wrote concerning Immediate Inspired directions: ‘It is strange what a disposition there is in many well-disposed and religious persons to fall in and hold fast with this notion. It is enough to astonish one that such multiplied, plain instances of the failing of such revelations in the event, do not open everyone’s eyes. I have seen so many instances of the failing of such impressions that would almost furnish a history. I have been acquainted with them when made under all kinds of circumstances and have seen them fail in the event, when made with such circumstances as have been fairest and brightest and most promising….and yet all has most manifestly come to nothing, to the full conviction of the persons themselves.’. (Edwards, J. (1974) Works Vol. 1 p.404) As we have seen, in such cases of failure, the prediction may often be re-framed into an unfalsifiable position such that it’s meaning changes to accommodate the unexpected outcome. The experiences seem Real and Vivid, because they are unmediated by the active, rational mode, yet the information contained or predicted in the experience has no verification in the objective, material world, a world that cannot be ignored or negated. It appears then that the Vividly Clear, Numinous, Transcendent experience is real/not-real also. It is a real experience, like a dream, but the content of it may not fall out as predicted in the material world, thus proving it to be not-real.

 

Can we then elaborate a reasonable philosophy, theology or cosmology from the content of such mystical encounters? Such systems have indeed been formulated, as we shall see later, but are they reasonable? Are they objectively true or they more like delusions, illusions and hallucinations? The above experiment seems to cast real doubt on the objective truth of such systems.

 

Indirectly influential in the creation of Ken Wilber’s system has been the Indian philosopher, Sri Aurobindo, who outlined a level-by-level hierarchy of reality culminating in non-dual Essence. However, as Mundschenk (1995 p272) points out, ‘there is a very imprecise separation in Aurobindo’s thought between descriptions of the levels of reality on the one hand and the levels of human consciousness of that reality on the other. It is easy to reify Aurobindo’s concepts into a concrete hierarchy describing Reality itself, but that is a trap to be avoided. In the final analysis, his descriptions are attempts to articulate his own experiences.’. This is another way of saying that they are Real/Not-Real.

 

It would appear then that these experiences are not of an objectively existing ‘Essence in all that is’ but rather may be interpreted as an experience of  suspending the rational, active mode of being, thus allowing an experience of the Unitive Self: of Pure Consciousness that has Witnessed all and which appears Eternal because it has existed as long as ourselves because it is our Self. This is the sort of position that Deikman took earlier. Thus as our Witness Self contracts to a voice it often appears harmonious and conducive to us and more and more United because it is our True Self, the ‘I’ that just IS – the I AM, that does not differentiate or formulate, but Observe. As we have seen, various meditative, Yogic, Zen or similar practices may facilitate this shift of mode, causing consciousness to behold Pure Consciousness in Transcendent, Unitive Emptiness. This mode may be either right or wrong, but either way it appears to communicate with Final Authority – the authority of Unmediated, Direct Witness. This Witness has seen all and the self-system in active, rational ‘logos’ mode has patterned those observations into a coherent perspective: a framework of constructed beliefs in order for the us to function and act upon the world around us. In meditation, as the active ‘logos’ mode is surrendered, the unmediated, Direct Authority of the internal Witness is less questioned and begins to take on a Divine-like Authority. Ultimately, perspective taking itself is Transcended for the True Self just IS in Perfect Emptiness in the Eternal Now.

 

As we have seen, pronouncements and predictions concerning the material world can be tested in the real/not-real objective world. But in this interpretation it is not a concrete, objective Entity that is being engaged with, rather, it is the journey to the True Inner Self, to the Observing Self or Witness. In some ways, this is a downward, elemental journey, a stripping away of the active, rational mode, surrendering such qualities to allow the process of receptivity to come to the fore, and to even gaze at this Internal Witness directly. This core element of our being is brought from the background to the fore. Yet the experience itself appears Transcendent. In this view, the mystical experience is a journey in an Inner Universe, which sometimes makes pronouncements about the outer universe. More accurately, it is a pronouncement about the perception of the Witness concerning the outer universe. To focus on the truth or accuracy of these perceptions of the material world then, is to miss the point. The fact that most of those who follow a certain meditative practice report similar levels of experience, or similar characteristics does not alter the case at all with regards to objective reality. Three people may take alcohol and all of them report that the room is spinning but his does not mean that the room is in fact spinning. In this interpretation, the relationship of these experiences to objective reality is an indirect one. These experiences are not totally divorced, separated or isolated from the material world. But this present experiment shows that there is not a direct link with the material level: physical time and space are not transcended such that hidden information is revealed. Nevertheless, drawing close to one’s Core Self will give personal insights to core views held by the person as other active processes of ‘logos’, such as the need to conform, are eased. These core views will feel harmonious because it is closer to our true, central view. Approaching the Core Self may offer lateral problem solving opportunities.

 

This simple experiment impinges then on a very important matter: Does God exist? Is there an objective Entity ‘out there’? Many of the major religions objectify or reify God: they insist that God is a real Being ‘out there’. Quite logically following on from this the major religions encourage prayer, seek the presence of this Being, praise and worship this Being and seek guidance, forgiveness and assistance from the Entity-out-there. Ultimately, they seek to dwell with this Entity in an afterlife. As with mysticism, these forms are contradictory.

 

6.15 SCIENCE AND RELIGION

 

It seems to me that the true source of many religious systems is found in non-usual states of consciousness obtained by mystics and gnostics, which are then reified into real objective entities and encounters. Events such as the transfiguration of Christ (Luke 17 v 1-8, Mark 9 v 2-8, Matthew 17 v 1-13) and Moses meeting God (Exodus 33 v 18-23, 34 v 29-35) are examples of this. We could argue that those who reify God in this way have fallen into the very trap described by Mundschenk: they have reified internal experiences and consciousness structures to a point where such reification has become institutionalised in their culture and community. Organisations, rituals, ceremonies, traditions and customs have become embedded in society in the form for example, of churches and temples. These hold fast to and defend this reification, this ‘God-out-there’ with a set of orthodox doctrines, even though they may be a mere shadow of their founder’s experiences:- a form without the spirit. Those who have transcendent or mystical experiences within these institutions may well interpret their experience in a reified way, as confirmation that God-out-there exists. If we are going to insist on an objective God-as Being-out-there, or on spiritual beings as real entities, then objective, empirical science, which relies on evidence, validation and proof, should be able to go some way to proving the existence of such entities. But this has not happened.

 

The fact is that when I have inquired for secret or hidden information, the results have been just plain wrong, or, no better than that which would be expected by chance. If I asked my Inner Wise Guide or the Divine for the next winning set of lottery numbers, they would not be correct – I would not become a millionaire. Even when, in a ‘mythos’ mode, I asked for more harmless information, information not involving self gain, such as the gender of an unborn baby, or the colour of ten hidden, random playing cards, the information was wrong or no better than that which we would expect by chance. In a similar way, predictions about the nature of my future employment have been wrong. So, this too could be because either:

 

a)      God does not exist ‘out there’ and this whole idea is an illusion, a mistake, a deception of the mind. Or:

b)      God does exist ‘out there’ but the experiments attempted are based on false premises.

 

Now there is some truth to proposition (b). Firstly, these experiments were based on the idea that God is ‘Mind’ or ‘Consciousness’ out there. This idea is flatly rejected in my mystical encounters in favour of the more diffuse God-as-Ocean, with contracted God as Ocean Spray. Thus, God-as-Spirit is not standing above all and looking down on all, consciously organising and arranging the universe. Secondly, some of these experiments were based on the idea that God somehow stands above time, looking down on time as if it were a measuring rod with a little cursor travelling along it indicating the present moment. It was as if God could look ahead of the cursor to see what was mapped out ahead, in the future. This idea of the relationship of God-as-Spirit to time is flatly rejected also.

 

Now it may be because of these assumptions that these experiments at prediction and discernment failed – prediction of the future and discernment of hidden knowledge are simply inappropriate, mismatched concepts when applied to God-as-Spirit. Such ideas reveal the ignorance and misunderstanding of the inquirer concerning the True Nature of God-as-Spirit. They are hangovers of magical and mythical thinking.

 

Now this would be fine if, say, on the occasion of inquiring about the colour of the playing cards, my Wise Guides, Ramurabi, or Yaroth, or the Seer has declared that such questions were inappropriate. If Ramurabi had said to me that God-as-Spirit does not answer such questions, or entered into teaching with me that exposed my misunderstanding of the nature of God, then we would have no problem. But this did not happen. Instead, one way or another, answers were given. In the case of the gender of the unborn child, a strong impression of a particular gender was given. In the case of future employment, Wise Guide Yaroth is emphatic that my future is in books. He says it a number of times, asking me to mark his words. In the case of the experiment with the cards Ramurabi, Yaroth and the Seer enthusiastically join in the game and make confident and seemingly authoritative predictions that subsequently prove to be no better than chance expectations. If such information is in doubt and no reason or principle can be found to explain this situation, then this whole interpretation is in doubt and we may have to accept the God-as-Consciousness viewpoint.

6.16 A SPIRITUAL JOURNEY

My mystical encounters insist that they are a spiritual journey, a journey about aspects of who and where I am, a journey to Absolute God-as-Spirit because I am God. Therefore it is a spiritual journey. It is not a discovery about the material world, politics, science, mathematics or psychology. The whole narrative is about my relationship to the Absolute and about the spiritual realm. It uses form: images, ideas and concepts drawn from the material world and language, in this case the English language, as descriptors. If it did not do this, nothing could be conveyed or communicated. By definition, it has to use the material world to declare the Ineffable. Because it uses material and anthropomorphic descriptors, it is therefore an easy trap to fall into thinking that the encounters are describing the real, objective material world and God as a ‘Big-Person-in-the-Sky’. But the whole journey: its language, form and style, is a metaphor for my approach to the Absolute. The question still remains: is the Absolute Pure Consciousness or a real Entity-out-there?

6.17 DEEPER REALITY AND OBJECTIVE REALITY

One aspect that emerges from these encounters is the concept of a Deeper Reality. In my mystical encounters, rituals and ceremonies are described as shadows of a Deeper Reality for example. The implication is that the experience of God-Immediacy is, whilst we remain physical beings, a deeper or the Deepest Level of Reality. God-Immediacy carries with it a sense of reality with a capital ‘R’. God-Immediacy is Real, Deep, Clear, Vivid and Meaningful. Yet I have had this experience at different times such that the qualities that are sensed as Real are in fact contradictory and mutually exclusive. For example, in one instance, the experience arose from a perception of the Christian doctrine of the sovereignty of God. The idea of sovereignty is that God, as Big-Person-in-the-Sky, is in complete and absolute control of all events and circumstances, moulding and shaping the thoughts and hearts of both believers and sinners, ordering all to God’s glory and purpose. This concept appeared so Clear and Real, so Immediate and True that it elevated my mood and outlook and energised my whole being. I was in no doubt that God was in complete control of the universe in this way. Yet later experiences point to a view where God is Not Big-Person-in-the-Sky and does not intervene and shape the affairs of the universe in this way at all. Once again, despite the strong sense of Reality and Clarity, it seems that the relationship of the content of this experience to objective reality is indirect or even completely divorced from that objective reality.

 

6.18 DEEPER REALITY AND THE ‘GOD-AS-PURE-CONSCIOUSNESS’ MODEL

 

The ‘God-as-Consciousness’ model presents the idea that there are a number of modes of consciousness such as waking consciousness in active and receptive modes, dreaming sleep, dreamless sleep, as well as sub conscious and unconscious influences. It is argued that in the mystical experience of God-Immediacy the usual mode of awareness: the active, analytical ‘logos’ mode of operation of the mind together with the conceptualisation processes of the self-system are being suspended to varying degrees. Experience is no longer, or less mediated by concepts, forms, language, hierarchical ideas and reality-testing. Because experience is less mediated by the self-system and passively received, it appears more Immediate and Real, more Direct and Unmediated. The experience then is one of the Reality and Clarity of things perceived or sensed, quite regardless of the objective reality of what is perceived.

 

6.19 DEEPER REALITY AND THE ‘LITERALLY EXISTING GOD’ MODEL

 

The content of my mystical encounters describe two broad levels of reality: the transcendent non-material or spiritual, that which lies beneath, Absolute God-as-Spirit; and secondly the material level, the level of matter and objectivity. In this view, our Divine-like Pure consciousness, (if not reified to an external quality) like dreams, the unconscious and the subconscious, is firmly placed in the material level: all of these arise from the physiological processes of the material, physical human organism. The literal model accepts the modes of consciousness but argues that God cannot be reduced to Consciousness or matter, but is at a Deeper Level of Reality, that of Spirit or Energy.

 

6.20 REALITY AND DIFFERENT WORLDS THE GOD AS ‘CONSCIOUSNESS’ MODEL

 

Dreams may be seen largely irrelevant to the world of usual waking consciousness. What I mean is that the principles of behaviour, abilities and progression of narrative in a dream do not follow the principles that we encounter in usual waking consciousness. In a dream I may fly or see a floodlit arena on the moon, people may appear and disappear and so on. It is true that dreams may help with insight and creativity in certain problem solving areas and that they may reflect inner conflicts and difficulties and so on. But we do not tend to resort to dreaming in order to solve the problem of an overflowing water cistern for example. Similarly, the mode of consciousness that approaches the Inner Witness is largely irrelevant to the solving of direct, material world problems: this receptive mode of consciousness will not help me to mend the broken water cistern. It may give me a calm attitude, but it does not give me the methodology to solve the problem. Nor will it predict the future, reveal hidden information or directly help me to function in the material world. Internal Witness is not the place to go to understand or solve scientific problems or social problems or economic problems or car maintenance problems. Like dreams however, this mode of consciousness is not completely irrelevant. Those who have worked with dreams will know of the insights that dreams can give. Similarly, the approaching of Internal Witness will have a lateral, indirect relationship with our functioning, understanding and acting in the material world. The lasting sense that God-Immediacy gives of feeling that this is how things ARE, permeates our being, our nature, our orientation, our perception, our approach, our inclinations, our morals, our actions, our thinking and reasoning. When it comes to an instinctive, internal experience of what Reality is, nothing beats the receptive mode of ‘mythos’.

 

6.21 REALITY AND DIFFERENT WORLDS – THE ‘LITERALLY EXISTING GOD’ MODEL

 

By definition, spirituality is about our relationship to the non-material Absolute. The mystical experiences I have had argue that these two worlds are not reconcilable, not in terms of world-views and perspectives at least. The spiritual realm does not present us with an ideal political solution, an ideal structure of society or this kind of thing. The Absolute transcends morals, space and time – aspects and qualities that are unique to material form. These two realms are different like a solid object is different from a gas: they behave differently and have different properties. There is a very real sense in which the spiritually minded person is on a different planet to the materially minded person. The mystic is described as walking in two worlds – the material and the spiritual. Since the spiritual, the Absolute, is expressed in all that is, these realms are not wholly separate, but rather, aspects of the spiritual spill over into the material. The contents of mystical experience may spill over and pervade the material world-view. Thus, those who have an experience of mysticism may find their values concerning what is important, meaningful and real, significantly and permanently altered even when they return to the usual material world-view and active, rational mode of knowing. This is a similar experience to waking from a vivid dream that appears so real and has such an impact on us that even on waking, we cannot shake it off for a while: its visual and audible content and its emotional tone spills over and remains with us in the waking world, perhaps unsettling and disturbing us.   

 

6.22 THE DOMINANT REALITY

 

In consciousness based models, as we have seen, the modes of ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’ are not equal. The usual waking mode of active ‘logos’ is the most dominant. This is because it is the one that we are most aware of and spend most time in. We spend less time in the ‘mythos’ mode, less time in sleep and even less time in a dream mode and very often on waking, most people do not remember their dreams or only remember them occasionally or in fragments because the waking active ‘logos’ mode largely sublates the dream content. Waking consciousness then, especially in the rational, active mode, becomes the ‘norm’ and the referent by which other modes are assessed such that other modes may be dismissed altogether as completely irrelevant: dreams mean little or nothing and are just the random idling of the mind, and spiritual experience is just an illusion based upon physiological changes of brain function.

 

In the literally existing God model, the material perspective is the dominant perspective because of the Ignorance that arises from contraction which veils the spiritual from view. We identify ourselves as a person bounded in a physical body that exists in space and time, and thus think and act accordingly, often dismissing the spiritual as an illusion.

 

6.23 ‘TRUTH’ IN SPECIFIC WORLDS

 

But another approach suggests that both the ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’ modes of consciousness, or, in the literal model, that each of the two levels of material and spiritual, are true in their own world and their own right and that the crossover effect: the infiltration of one world upon another, helps to give us insights and a more holistic way of functioning. The mystic does walk in two worlds. In the consciousness-based models, one mode of consciousness does not negate another. In the literal model, the spiritual world does not negate the material and the material should not negate or ignore the spiritual. The Mystic avails himself of both worlds, just as a therapist and their client may avail themselves of dream work and may synthesise them with waking reality. But ultimately, these worlds cannot be reconciled. Dream awareness, dream logic, does not allow us to function in the material world: I cannot levitate as I please. In the literal model, spirituality, the non-material Absolute, is contracted to material form and is immediately divided, not in terms of nature, but in terms of expression into separate forms: God is partially divided against God. Formless Spirit cannot be fully reconciled with material form. What is true of the Absolute God-as-Spirit Essence, is not true for contracted material expressions. The Absolute Transcends morals, but humans do not, for example. The very nature of these realms then necessitates only a limited crossover.

 

6.24 SPIRITUAL AND MATERIAL WORLDS

 

In either model then, the two different worlds are ultimately irreconcilable and operate along different lines and rules. In consciousness models, the process of sublation by the current mode of awareness, and in the literal model, the Ignorance that arises from contraction, further obfuscates communication between worlds. Add to these the fact that the mystic is on a spiritual journey and this all means that the content of mystical encounters is not the place to look for practical issues regarding the material world. Any such insights that are present are indirect, lateral and oblique. The sense the mystic has of unmediated Realness does not alter the case at all: though spiritual experience has the sense of Clear Realness, it is a world that is spiritual and has a lateral relationship to the material. The Reality and Clearness is a result of the experience not being mediated by the active ‘logos’ mode. Thus the boundary between truth and illusion is hard to discern, because the truth of one world is the illusion of another. Materialistic perspectives of God are, from the spiritual perspective, shadows and illusions. The material itself is an Illusion because it has no substance of it’s own – it’s existence is dependent upon the Absolute. For the materialist, it is God that is the Illusion. The ‘truth’ to which we hold is always only partial, seen from a particular perspective. This is true within the material perspective alone, let alone between worlds.

 

This suggests that we can still support a degree of literal interpretation of the theology that arises from mystical encounters but as soon as we move out of the spiritual world and try and use these spiritual approaches and ideas to inform us about the material world: to predict lottery numbers or future jobs; to repair a broken water pump; we enter into real problems, because these areas are not appropriate to the spiritual world. However, the barrier between the material and spiritual worlds is not sealed and watertight and so some lateral insights may be gained, but such direct questions and interrogations about the other world will result in error and difficulty, despite the sense of Reality. Wise guides may give information, but it is not appropriate to the material world. The Wise Guides will answer, to the best of their ability, but the questions are misplaced.

 

6.25 LEARNING TO BE WORLD SPECIFIC

 

What questions then are specific to the spiritual world? Questions about the self and the Absolute: ‘You are seeing aspects of where and who you are….you are God contracted in space and time’. Questions about the pathway to God: ‘a journey to God that transcends material things.’… a journey in which material matters encroach upon a Golden Path to God.

 

6.26 CONTRADICTIONS AND PARADOX WITHIN A WORLD

 

So far we have seen that each of the two worlds: the material and the spiritual, the ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’ has its own ‘truthfulness’, its own area of application of information: the spiritual world is not centred on how to maintain a car engine for example. But there is still yet another problem: contradictions within a world. Over a period of thirty-five years, I have encountered a number of mystical experiences. A number of these were experienced at a time when I was involved in Fundamentalist Christianity and some were experienced at a later stage when the Christian world-view had been rejected. For example I have already referred to my experiencing clear views of God’s sovereignty only to later find such a view dismissed. Now this is a contradiction within the spiritual world.

 

Here is a description of such an experience in my Christian phase:

 

‘The first Sunday of September 1975, was unlike any other. I entered the morning prayer-meeting of our church anniversary service very much with these concerns of the dryness and legalism of our church and pastor on my mind. I had given the pastor a book to read which seemed to express my feelings perhaps better than I could, in the hope that in some way he might perceive the problem. But as he prayed, I sensed immediately a difference in his approach: for the first time it seemed, he talked about the presence of the Holy Spirit and the need for his blessing. My heart and mind soared. There was such a sense of elevation and release that when we came out of the vestry I felt as if I could barely contain it and that it was as if I was walking about six inches off the floor. We entered the service and began to sing the opening hymn: one of the traditional ones. As I sang the words I had such a perception of the power and awesomeness of God which the words were describing, together with His Mercy and Gentleness that I could scarcely physically stand under the weight of the perception of these qualities of the Divine, which were almost overwhelming me. After the hymn, we sat down and the pastor then led in prayer and this perception of the attributes of God continued with such a weight that I felt completely melted, humbled and an awe. I KNEW, in an immediate and direct way the power of God to bring an instant revival and awakening. In the mere click of fingers, the power of the Holy Spirit could be poured out to hill the hearts and minds of all around such that they would perceive and be filled with the Love of God. This experience lasted for about twenty minutes, but the after effects lasted much longer: I joyfully began increased study, prayer and diligence; old habits that I felt God disapproved of fell away for months, yet before, I could not shake them with all my efforts; bitterness and animosity that had grown towards the pastor fell away; and the sense of a need for Christians to unite in love filled my mind and heart.

 

Here is the same incident described in another account:

 

During the course of the prayer meeting, the pastor prayed as usual, but I noticed a change in his words and attitude. Suddenly this man had shaken off some of his legalistic tone and seemed to embracing the Holy Spirit. It was as if I was being transported upwards out of the room. My heart and mind lifted as I was filled with the perception that God had changed this man. I was filled with a perception of the power of God over men’s hearts and minds. It was like the floodgates of heaven were opened and a torrent of blessing was poured into my soul. I walked out of the prayer meeting as if my feet were six inches off the floor…I was filled with optimism, expectancy, energy and joy. The service that morning was as many had been before it in form: the pastor briefly opened in prayer and we then sang a hymn. Alas I cannot remember what the hymn was, but it was a typical school anthem type hymn of praise. All I can remember now is that I sang the words of that hymn as I had done many times before, but now, again, it was as if a door in my mind had opened and I perceived clearly and plainly the depth and reality of the words of praise and descriptions of the character of God. These qualities of God, His Power, His Omnipotence, His Love, His Eternity, were so immediately Real, Deep and Powerful, so Clear to my mind that I groaned under the weight of the perception of them and could barely physically stand under the glory of what they described. I could barely sing because of my strong emotions, and tears filled my eyes. It was as if God was pouring out not just a shower of blessing but also a flood of power into my soul. At the end of the hymn I all but collapsed into my chair and the minister then lead us in prayer. He was a university-educated man, a qualified teacher, and by no means ineloquent. Even so, the prayer was like many that had been uttered before it, yet this time, my perception of the meaning of the words was so great that I was groaning under the weight of them. Words like Immortal, Sovereign, Merciful, Eternal, Lord, Love, Pardon, Ransomed, Healed, Forgiven, were so Rich and Deep, and I felt their meaning keenly in my heart and mind. I was hardly conscious of anything else. I felt their application to the Church and to me. I KNEW I was saved from the just deserts of hell, and that my heavenly Father who seemed very near and loving to me, loved me without question. After the prayer, the experience subsided, the immediate experience lasting about fifteen minutes. I don’t think I have ever felt so clear headed and balanced as I did then. The immediate perception was of God’s Almighty Power: that at any time, as it pleased Him, He could pour out such a torrent of blessing and turn people’s hearts no matter how indifferent or rebellious they were to Him. A revival and awakening could occur in the time it takes to snap one’s fingers and the Holy Spirit could pour out his blessing on one or a thousand with irresistible power, and this no matter how dark or oppressive the circumstances seemed. Though powerful, this experience was in no way frightening. It was coupled with such a sublime sense of God’s Supportive and Protective Love that my heart opened and rejoiced in this experience. At no time was I afraid. I should point out also that there was no self-exaltation or pride in this experience. Rather there was an experience of lowliness, of humbleness and unworthiness. This was a gift of God to me, an unworthy and undeserving servant.

 

Compare this with a later experience outside of Christianity:

 

Etheria flew down the corridor towards the room with the Water of Life. In the shadows at the end of the corridor, just beyond the bathing room, I realised that there was a locked door. I tried my key, which fitted the lock, and before I knew it, I was in a vast, cathedral-like room. Pews were laid out on a black and white tile floor. The vaulted roof was resplendent in gold and blue. There were ornate gold carvings everywhere, and at the front of the room, covering the ceiling and made of black stone, there was a huge eagle with wings outstretched. Etheria flew around the room. In the place where one would expect the altar to be, there was a stone table. From each corner of the table there rose a column and these supported a polished stone slab and dome. Between the four pillars was a glass globe, blue in colour, in which specks of light were swirling around. I became aware of a pulsating humming sound, like the sound of an electrical generator or vast electrical power. I asked Etheria what this was and she told me that it was the Hub of the Universe. I felt impelled to touch the globe, and this overcame my apprehension about getting an electrical shock or being hurt in some way. To my surprise, my hand went through the globe into the blue energy, and in a moment, I had entered it completely. I became the energy, and expanded out being the specks of light that infused the whole Cosmos. I began to lose my centre of being and feel that I was in all places at once. I heard Etheria say ‘As God fills the Universe, so God’s energy fills the Universe as the source of all life.’.  Then, the light seemed to dissipate and I found myself standing by the globe again. Etheria began flying in front of me and said ‘Come!’. I grabbed her ankles and together we flew out of the Treasure Room, high into the sky, until the Golden City appeared as a small dot below us. Up we went, beyond the Earth, the Solar System, the galaxy, to the outer reaches of the Universe. ‘All this is God’s Treasure’ said Etheria. Twice now I had felt as if I had expanded in space, but now the notion of time came to me. Did God transcend time? Etheria brought us back to earth, not in the Treasure Room, but in a park in the middle of the Golden City. The lawns were laid out formally, and there were benches to sit on. The paths converged to a clock tower, and I found myself sitting on one of the benches in the warm sunshine.  On both of the occasions of my expansion I had remained acutely in the present moment. As I sat on the bench in front of the clock tower, I wondered if God transcended time. I became aware as I sat in the warm sunshine that Etheria had now gone. Then, almost immediately I found myself taken up to a new place that words cannot describe. I felt as if I was caught up in space, yet it was not the same as the edge of the universe where I had just been. This was a place, a location, and yet no location. I heard a man’s voice saying ‘God exists in the eternal present. God does not stand outside of time, or above time. God does not look down at time like a measure or ruler where some things are in the past and others yet to come, somehow standing above both past and present. This idea is a mistake. God rests in the eternal present, continually enjoying the Bliss of the immediate Now. God is in a position of eternal, Self-sufficient rest. There is no need for God to move or act, and there is nothing that exists which exists outside of God. Rather, God enjoys the Now for ever. However, God chose to contract, to enfold downward into manifold forms and time came into being.’

 

Although there are similarities in these accounts, there are also differences and contradictions. When a systematic Christian theology is compared to the theological implications and statements of later mystical encounters, these differences become more obvious. Compare the two following systems:

 

1) Human beings are affected in the totality of their being by a principle of disobedience and selfishness such that they cannot earn favour with a Just and Pure God, and are helpless and doomed to God’s Judgement. Pure and Holy Commands and laws given by God only serve to compound the problem because this principle of disobedience present in all of us uses such commands and laws to create yet more disobedience. But before the foundation of the universe, God chose to save some from their deserved punishment, a remnant elected to salvation. This is accomplished by the giving, work and sacrifice of the God-man, Jesus Christ, whom God sends to be a sacrifial offering in order to atone for the transgressions and failures of this limited group of the elect. Thus Justice is satisfied because the God-man acts as substitute and takes on the punishment that the transgressions and failures of the elect demand. Mercy and Love is also satisfied because this deliverance is a free gift of God and the elect are saved. Those whom God has elected to salvation cannot resist the free favour that God bestows and all of them will be effectively delivered, not one of them being lost. Those who are delivered will persevere in their state of grace for all eternity. The rest of humanity pays the wages that their transgressions have earned: an eternity of judgement and loss for offending an infinitely pure God. At the end of the age, the present universe will be rolled up like a scroll and destroyed, and a new heaven and earth will be established. The dead will be resurrected to an eternal physical existence either in a state of grace or judgement.

 

Compare the above world –view with that below:

 

2) The fact that God exists is known primarily by the direct experience of God’s Immediacy, an experience that is then expressed in terms partly determined by the culture, tradition and historical location of that person. However, not every person experiences this Immediacy because when God-as-Spirit contracted in space and time to form the universe, Ignorance came into being. Thus it is that some people rest satisfied in empty things such as material wealth. Those who pursue negative or dark virtues do so as a result of this ignorance and further compound it. Nevertheless, God is in all things, including the Dark Virtues and Ignorance.

 

God is Real, and Unique. God is Imperishable, and Indestructible. God is not an object, but Spirit. God is also described as Energy and again as Light or Clear Light Emptiness. All things are an expression of God be they living or dead, light or dark, truth or lie. God is all things by contraction and therefore unifies all things. God is Unity. Nothing can exist without God. The Energy of God fills the universe as the source of all life. God is Sufficient in and of God’s own Being and is always the same, unchanging. God is transcendent of the human mind, concepts, language and ideas, and transcendent of time and morals, existing above all polarity in a position of Absolute, Eternal self-sufficient Rest in the Eternal Now. As God contracts to various manifestations, attributes and qualities of God can be seen. The very description of God in terms of characteristics capable of description and naming is a contraction in itself, because God is Formless Absolute Spirit.  God may be manifest in masculine or feminine form, or in mythical symbols or animals and becomes expressed in moral dimensions. Thus God is described as moral or virtuous and God’s Names are Beauty, Love, Compassion, Balance and Purity. Such Light Virtues arise out of Unity, whereas the Dark Virtues arise out of contraction and the separateness and Ignorance that result from contraction. In contracting from the Absolute, God is the Author of suffering. God is also expressed in the emotional dimension as being passionate and sensuous.

 

In the beginning there was only God-as-Spirit unmoving, formless and changeless in the Eternal Now. There was no material at all. Then, in an act of contraction itself, God-as-Spirit chose to contract further, into material form. Thus God-as-Spirit is like a vast Ocean and God’s separate contracted forms like the ocean spray. These contracted forms of God make up the whole Cosmos. The Cosmos is of the same substance with God and is the product of God contracting, or enfolding and subsequently unfolding or expanding in an evolutionary process. God’s Energy is the very Hub of the Universe. In this contraction, God is not fragmented, or distributed by measure. The total essence of God-as-Spirit, without diffusion or division fills the universe in all its parts, the whole of God in every place, present at the same moment in all. The universe is preserved and remains in existence by God’s pleasure in continual contraction.

 

There is no realm of spirit beings or spiritual principalities. Neither do the spirits or souls of dead persons continue to exist in a disembodied spiritual community. Rather at death, God returns or expands to God-as-Spirit.

 

Human beings are fallible, and a pinnacle of natural processes of evolution. They are an expression of contracted God. They are agents in a moral dimension. They are compound individuals of matter (physical), emotion, sexuality, mind and spirit. They are evolving back to God-as-Spirit. Because of contraction they are ignorant of and separated from the Immediacy of God-as-Spirit. Some people rest satisfied in this ignorance, resting on and identifying solely with the comparative emptiness and trinkets of the material world. Some further their ignorance of God-Immediacy by pursuing materialism and dark virtues. Because humans are agents acting in relation to the universe, they operate in a moral dimension. But God does not issue commands or laws. Rather, people act in the intrinsic moral dimensions of light and dark virtues.  Extrinsic laws and codes are necessary for society because of those who follow the Dark Virtues, but when it comes to approaching God-Immediacy, extrinsic laws are considered inferior to the intrinsic Virtuous Path followed by Pilgrims. Since all mankind is evolving towards God-as-Spirit, humans are on a journey and therefore known as Pilgrims.

 

The Virtuous Path consists of Love, Beauty, Truth, Compassion, Wisdom, Peace, and Respect, which lead to Unity. Failure to lead a life of virtue may lead to a sense of Guilt and separateness. The dark virtues are Deceit, Pain, Betrayal, Secrecy, Ugliness, Hatred, Anger, Imbalance, Lack of Mercy, Foolishness, Contempt, War and Lies.  Pursuing these virtues leads away from Immediacy to Ignorance, sorrow, destruction, division, separateness and isolation.

 

The journey of each Pilgrim is unique and each person travels alone with God-as-Spirit ready to manifest to them as their Faithful Companion, Who prepares them to enter the Golden City.

 

At death God returns to God-as-Spirit, yet God remains contracted in the physical remains, because the whole universe is one substance with God. At death, all things become new in that all earthly and human institutions cease. Thus there is no marriage, or law courts, or society of disembodied spirits in an afterlife. Rather, God returns to God-as-Spirit in the Transcendent Unity of Clear Light Emptiness, Resting in the Bliss of the Eternal Now. The Universe and time itself will cease when God chooses to cease contraction. At the end of time, all things will return to God-as-Spirit in Transcendence.

 

These are two quite different, contradictory and mutually exclusive systems of theology, yet both form the content of the apparently Real and Clear mystical experiences of one person.

 

In the material world we are quite used to such contradictions, even with specialised knowledge. Scientist in exploring the nature of light find that it seems to behave like a wave and also like a particle. Light cannot be reduced to one or the other, yet seems to have the qualities of both, so they have invented a new word to describe the nature of light: wavicle. This kind of thing reveals our ignorance, our lack of full understanding but we are quite used to this ambiguity. In the global warming debate, some argue that global warming is being caused by excessive amounts of industrial pollution. Others argue that it is a natural part of cyclical movements and changes on the planet over a long period of time. At this time we are ignorant as to the true cause. There is much about our material world that we do not fully understand, but we form some sort of theory or schema concerning these events in order for us to make predictions and function effectively. Some issues, like the nature of light do not really affect most of us – we note the ambiguity but get on with cutting the lawn and doing the shopping. Other issues do affect us because we need to make a decision or prediction. We use our schema and if it works, it does matter too much if it is ultimately right or not – if it works we are able to function. Thus for years it was believed that the sun revolved around the earth and this approach was useful enough to predict seasons and times in order to plant crops. I am arguing that contradiction within the material world is exceptionally common and that we are used to it and in many ways function alongside it until a clearer understanding comes along. Such contradictions reveal our ignorance and misunderstanding.

 

Now it is exactly the same in the spiritual world. We have already seen an incident where a mystic enters the cathedral in which the Hub of the Universe is situated. Around the Energy that is God-as-Spirit, there is a structure: a religious building. God-Immediacy is essentially an ineffable experience. It cannot be described, but almost immediately, our mind does create structure and form in order to attempt to describe it, communicate it and order the experience so that we can orientate ourselves. The immediate surroundings of the Hub of the Universe are the structures that we all create in this way: supporting columns of theories supporting a view of Transcendent God, religious and spiritual ideas that are polished, refined and set in stone, black and white dogmas and doctrines on which we stand, ornate rituals and ceremonies and other constructs concerning the Absolute. These structures are almost inevitable. They serve to structure, orientate us and allow us to function in the light of our spiritual experience. They are evidenced in the multiplicity of extrinsic religious faith systems word-wide. What makes these contradictions more unusual is the sense of Reality, Clarity and resultant Assurance or Certainty that accompanies the experience of God-Immediacy. It appears to be true that the Veil of Ignorance has been lifted momentarily to varying degrees in different experiences of God-Immediacy, but almost immediately we try and grasp with our mind what we have experienced. We translate our experience into language, form and concept. But the Transcendent cannot be grasped by the mind any more than a stone can understand a human being. God can only be seen when we transcend the mind, the active, rational, analytical ‘logos’ mode. To see God, we must let go of this mode of the mind. All thought and organised structure by which we understand the world must be surrendered.  All our thought and logic cannot encompass God’s Immediacy. In some ways the situation is the same as the material world: we do not know fully. However great our knowledge and understanding, however deep our insights, they cannot encompass God and the experience of God-Immediacy is ineffable, such that in the area of our mind we still remain in considerable ignorance and such ignorance gives rise to contradictions. The mystic’s attainments and knowledge in spirituality can be compared to an anthill next to Mount Everest. Even though the experience is Deep and Real compared with our perception of the material world, it is still wholly inadequate when it comes to encompassing the Absolute. Our mind imposes form on the Formless, anthropomorphic qualities on the Divine, language on the Indescribable, boundaries on the Boundless. It is part of our human nature that we do this and we seem to need to do this. What we must remember is that the forms that we use are inadequate, culturally and historically determined in part and partial in their scope, such that each Pilgrim truly comes along their own unique path. No wonder then that there are contradictions!

 

6.27 PERSONAL CONCLUSIONS

 

I find in myself a desire, almost a need, to externalise, to objectify God-as-Spirit. Ultimately for me, the ‘God-as-Pure-Consciousness’ approach seemed to be lacking despite the ease with which it dealt with some difficulties. It presents God as an illusion of consciousness processes, it bounds the Boundless into physiological processes. However, neither do I think that our consciousness exists ‘out there’, somehow transcending death and existing independently of us. I consider this kind of thinking to be a reification of consciousness, a remnant of mythical thinking. Psychologically, for me at least, it feels more comfortable and right to take the external, literal approach bearing in mind the limitations of each of the worlds and the ignorance that remains despite any insights gained. The literal approach feels more faithful to the content of the experience. Science will not tell me what God says – the spiritual approach does that, the experience of God-Immediacy does that, but this spiritual approach does not prove God’s objective existence. The fact that another person may go through the same discipline or approach and encounter similar experiences and concepts does not make any difference. The proving of the existence of an objective, fundamental energy that forms and sustains all that is, that is the domain of science. But this is my path; it is the way that I come from MY position of Ignorance and with the Ignorance that remains so very much in me.

 

Of course it may be that both these perspectives are true and correct. It may be that Deikman’s approach of mystical experience being explainable in physiological terms and modes of awareness is correct. It may be receptive awareness of awareness or Witness. It may also be that the way that this process is presented to the subjective mind is in terms of a literally existing God-as-Spirit which is both our Essence and also the Essence of all that is.

 

6.28 TWO MODELS, INTERMEDIATE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

 

The content of mystical experience is capable of supporting two broad models with regard to the nature of God and spirituality – a literal model: namely that God really exists; or a ‘God-as-Pure-Consciousness’ model whereby all that is experienced in connection with God is reduced to the subjective experience of physiological effects within the human organism. The mystical experience itself seems to lean to the literal approach but we have had to examine difficulties with regard to erroneous information given in such mystical experiences about the material world. The ‘God-as-Pure-Consciousness’ model more easily overcomes these difficulties, but nowhere do my own mystical experiences refer to God as Consciousness, Pure or otherwise. However, the contents of such experiences on their own on are not sufficient to decide between these two approaches.

 

If we think in terms of a literal approach: that God is a diffuse non-material Entity from which all that exists is formed, then we can begin to look to science to seek the existence of such an entity. Even though God is Spirit, that is non-material and more like energy, such a force or entity should be discernible by scientific method at least by implication from what IS seen and measured. Some scientists talk about the ‘God-Particle’ but my own mystical experience seems to talk about God-Energy. Now this kind of scientific study is way beyond the scope and ability of this study. We merely observe and note that IF we take a literal view of mystical experiences then this is the kind of area that seems to be being pointed to. Thus we enter the area of quantum physics in quadrant 2. We begin to look at the strange ideas in quantum physics such as there being eight or nine dimensions, parallel universes and problem issues such as dark matter where the known, detectable material in the universe only accounts for about ten percent of the way the universe behaves.

 

If we think in terms of the ‘God-as-Pure-Consciousness’ model, then we look only at brain physiology, brain states and activity, neurone firing, bio-chemical reactions and our receptive subjective, introspective experiences of our own processes of awareness and so on, firmly declaring that whatever is experienced, however Real and external it seems, the root and foundation of the experience lies solely within the physiology of the human organism. In this model, God is the result of a physiological process. This interpretation  argues that God exists not as an objective entity, but as the Inner Self gazed at directly as Pure Consciousness. If this is correct then it is indeed true that the path of each Pilgrim is an individual one. But because we are all human and have similar physiology then there will be similarities for many Pilgrims and we may find the journeys of others useful and edifying.

 

6.29 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CONSCIOUSNESS MODEL, THE REIFIED CONSCIOUSNESS MODEL AND THE LITERAL DIFFUSE MODEL OF GOD

 

 

The polarity in spirituality between the internal/abstract; and the external/concrete, between God-as-subject and God-as-object is more acute now than a few decades ago. In our own British culture, certainly until recently, the idea of God-as-Object has been the standard position that has underpinned our religious practice. It was taught in schools, by parents and in Sunday schools and churches. The moves towards a multi faith culture coupled with the decline in Christianity and the rise of esoteric approaches have altered this state of affairs.

 

Some of the implications of these two positions are indicated below. In each case, (a) the God-as-Pure-Consciousness position is stated, and then (b), the traditional reified form. This is followed by (c) an external, objective interpretation of my own mystical experience. The reified position has a bias towards a fundamentalist Christian perspective because that is my background, but I think that the application to other reified positions can easily be drawn.

 

 

1)                  God and the spiritual realm.

 

a)      God is consciousness-as-Such, which may present to the mind in symbolic form.

b)      Principalities of objective spiritual beings or forces in nature. e.g. God, Goddess, gods, goddesses, Demons, Spirits, Angels, Ancestral spirits, Fairies, Woodland spirits, Goblins, Mother Nature, Ley lines, Energies.

c)      God is Spirit and Energy, existing in all that is, but not as Mind ‘out there’ or Consciousness ‘out there’.

 

 

2)                  Approaches to God

 

a)      Consciousness-as-Such is the True Self and is approached and communicated with by the use of intuition, insight, sensitivity to Self, wisdom, creativity, enlightenment, illumination, and inspiration, all of which spring from the True Self. In practices such as meditation, attempts are made to clear the barriers created by identification with ego, though communications may be spontaneous. Use may be made of the writings of those who have trod the path before, but ultimately, each person’s path is unique.

b)      God or spiritual beings exist as objective entities above time and place. Therefore there may be concerns about prophecy, predictions, foreknowledge, predestination, and foreordination. There may be concerns about how to maintain favour and avoid the wrath of these entities. Approaches are usually made in prayer, ritual and ceremony and through awareness of sacred literature or holy teachers. There is conformity of practice. Forces and energies of fate or destiny exist.

c)      God is ‘Entity out there’ contracted to all that is. But God-as-Spirit does not exist as Mind or Consciousness and does not stand above time as if looking down upon a measure or ruler with a cursor running along it to indicate the present moment. God does not punish and there is no Final Judgement. There are many ways of approaching God such that each Pilgrim follows a unique path. There are no spirits, demons or forces of destiny.

 

 

3)                  The communication of Truth

 

a)      The self-system translates Consciousness-as-Such into symbols and forms which are partly determined by the individual’s experience, culture, and location in time and space. Such forms and symbols are attributed meaning and values by the self-system. Thus each person’s path to God or Consciousness-as-Such is unique. The Truth is in myself such that I develop a personal orientation, personal schema and theories regarding God within. These symbols may include a wise guide, God as Father, Angels, and Archetypes such as the Fool, Death, Queen, and word plays. Folklore and all spiritual or wisdom traditions and practices may help insight. These terms and processes are used as metaphors for phenomenological experience of contact with Consciousness-as-Such.

b)      God, or spirit beings are fixed entities and so the Truth is ‘out there’. This truth is usually set in codes, approaches, and ceremonial symbols e.t.c., and often encapsulated and fixed in Scripture, Sacred Manuals, Traditions, Wisdom literature, Folklore or Myths. There are diverse religious traditions worldwide, but non-conformity to the one that is prevalent in one’s own culture may result in Inquisitions, Crusades, holy wars, excommunications, burning or other forms of executions of heretics, martyrs.

c)      Truth is within and without, inside and ‘out there’. Truth cannot be comprehended by the mind and thus is always perceived in a partial way and also partly determined by culture, location, time, personality and so on.

 

 

4)                  Walking the righteous path

 

a)      Consciousness-as-Such presents Inner virtues and seeking to follow and balance them is to follow the Virtuous Path based on seeking consistency with the Inner Light. Walking in the Spirit, listening to conscience and the heart. Attending to inner dissonance between my Self and my actions, thoughts and feelings. Self-integrity.

b)      The use of external codes, laws or commandments, especially those enshrined in sacred literature. Objective God or spirit beings are considered moral judges that may issue judgements now and or at the end of the age against transgressors. There may be a belief in Natural Law as a force in the universe.

c)      A real, external God-as-Spirit that is contracted to all that exists presents Inner virtues to the mind. to seek to follow and balance them is to follow the Virtuous Path based on seeking consistency with the Inner Light of God-as-Spirit as the True Self. Walking in the Spirit, listening to conscience and the heart. Attending to inner dissonance between my Self and my actions, thoughts and feelings. Self-integrity.

 

 

5)                  Unity and interconnectedness

 

a)      Consciousness-as-Such is present in all experience and unifies all things. By various approaches such as meditation, a person may begin to attune himself or herself to Consciousness-as-Such. The nearer one approaches to Consciousness-as-Such, the more interconnected, transcendent and Unified a person’s perspective becomes. But there is no objective synchronicity of external events.

b)      The essential, real, objective unity of all things as appealed to in quantum physics. A belief in the synchronicity of events. An omnipresent objective God as Mind or Consciousness ‘out there’, or a community of spirit beings orders all events. A philosophy of ‘As above so below’. The development of systems or of ‘gifted’ individuals who can divine the will and purpose of objective spirit beings or God, or of the forces of destiny. Systems of harnessing and displaying synchronicity and interconnectedness: I Ching, Tarot, Runes and other forms of divination.

c)      God-as-Spirit is present in all experience and unifies all things. The essential, real, objective unity of all things. By various approaches such as meditation, a person may begin to attune himself or herself to God-as-Spirit. The nearer one approaches to God-as-Spirit, the more interconnected, transcendent and Unified a person’s perspective becomes. But there is no objective synchronicity of external events.

 

 

6)                  Omnipresent and Transcending time and space.

 

a)      Consciousness-as-Such precedes all experience as Witness before experience is ordered by the self-system. Therefore Consciousness-as-Such precedes concepts, ideas, language and feelings, desires, needs and emotions. Consciousness-as-Such exists in the Eternal Now, always present and equally near to all, no matter what deep level of consciousness structure they are at.

b)      God as an objective entity has created all that is, pre-existed all and is eternal, transcending all human knowledge and time and space, looking down on time past, present and future. God is omnipresent and dwells in all people. A community of gods or goddesses or objective spirit beings exist beyond time and space.

c)      All that exists is an expression of contracted God-as-Spirit. Therefore formless God is manifest in all form. We do not experience this because of the ignorance that arises from contraction together with our sole identification with the material. God-as-Spirit exists in the Eternal Now transcending time in this way as opposed to looking down on time from above.

 

 

7)                  Order and purpose

 

a)      The self-system orders and makes sense of experience to give purpose, meaning, order and value in order that we may function in the material universe.

b)      God orders all things for God’s own glory and purpose. Spirit beings have plans and influence on the world. The material universe itself has an intrinsic order, meaning and purpose.

c)      In contraction to the material, a natural order, system and process of evolution back to God-as-Spirit is created.

 

 

8)                   Providence, fate and destiny

 

a)      Though the material universe, following the characteristics of physics has an ordered evolutionary principle that is holarchic in nature, there is no specific providential intervention. Attempts to control providential events, such as safety on a journey, healing from illness, and the provision of food or good weather e.t.c. are only effective at a psychological level. There is much anecdotal evidence for such providential interventions, but hard evidence is poor. There is a tendency to exaggeration, the effects of coincidence, as-yet-unknown processes, superstition, mistaken perception, the influence of belief frameworks e.t.c.. There are some genuinely hard to explain events, but they are few and difficult to test.

b)      An objective God or panoply of spirit beings orders the universe and the events in it. Providence. Belief in forces and powers, such as the influence of the stars, fate or destiny. Attempts to influence the will and purpose of these beings and forces: Prayer, Amulets, Miracles, Spells, Charms, Voodoo, Healing rituals, Astrology, Numerology, Clairvoyance, Palmistry, other forms of divination/intervention.

c)      Though the material universe, following the characteristics of physics has an ordered evolutionary principle that is holarchic in nature and though all that exists is an expression of God, God does not specifically providentially intervene. Attempts to control providential events, such as safety on a journey, healing from illness, and the provision of food or good weather e.t.c. are only effective at a psychological level. There is much anecdotal evidence for such providential interventions, but hard evidence is poor. There is a tendency to exaggeration, the effects of coincidence, as-yet-unknown processes, superstition, mistaken perception, the influence of belief frameworks e.t.c.. There are some genuinely hard to explain events, but they are few and difficult to test.

 

 

9)                  The post death state

 

a)      Annihilationism. At death, the person, including consciousness, ceases to exist except as decaying physical remains and a continuation in the consciousness and memory of friends and acquaintances that are still alive.

b)      People have an immortal soul or spirit entity that survives death. This soul may wander in a netherworld, purgatory, heaven, hell, limbo or face final judgement by an objective spirit being that has moral authority and or perfection. Salvation. Damnation. Evangelism. Spreading the gospel or good news of deliverance from post death punishment.

c)      The Energy of God that underpins all that is manifest returns to Formless God-as-Spirit.

 

 

10)              Ritual and Ceremony

 

a) This may be used as a discipline, perhaps to:-

 

-create time and space for spiritual contemplation

-create mindfulness by putting away egoic functioning

-create a pathway to the Unity of Consciousness-as-Such

-create balance/openness to the True Self.

Confession may be included as part of this balancing and opening.

Acknowledgement of conscience and the heart. (See 4a above)

 

b)  Used as service and to appease objectively existing spirit entities.   They are carried out to:-

 

-fulfil obedience to commands. (See 4b above)

-approach and serve the spirit entity or entities correctly.

-create spiritual mindfulness.

-possibly to appease the wrath or displeasure of spirit entities or to invoke favours.

 

c) This may be used as a discipline, perhaps to:-

 

-create time and space for spiritual contemplation

-create mindfulness by putting away egoic functioning

-create a pathway to the Unity of God as Spirit

-create balance/openness to the True Self.

Confession may be included as part of this balancing and opening.

Acknowledgement of conscience and the heart. (See 4a above)

 

 

11)              Prayer

 

a) May serve a number of functions, including-

- use as contemplative meditation.

- to create a pathway to the Unity of Consciousness-as-Such

- to create space and time for spirituality.

- may include confession as 10a above.

- may include music, singing, dancing, praise.

 

b) Serves a number of functions, including-

- communication with objective spirit entity or entities.

- praise/worship of objective spirit entity or entities.

- a means of atonement and reconciliation to spirit entity or entities.

- protection and favours from the objective spirit entity or entities.

- forgiveness when failing to adhere to laws or scriptures. (See 4b above)

- confession

- may include music, singing, dancing, praise.

 

c) May serve a number of functions, including-

- use as contemplative meditation.

- to create a pathway to the Unity of God as Spirit

- to create space and time for spirituality.

- may include confession as 10a above.

- may include music, singing, dancing, praise.

 

 

12)              Guidance and Alternative and complimentary systems of healing

 

a)      Some openness to the systems in 12b below, but some scepticism since they really require better evidence to support their claims. Acknowledgement of a tendency in these systems to psychological effects such as psychosomatic and placebo effects.

b)      Auras, Energy systems, Chakras, Acupuncture, Reflexology, Crystals, Body energies, Laying on of hands e.t.c.. Belief in these as real, objective energy systems.

c)      Some openness to the systems in 12b below, but some scepticism since they really require better evidence to support their claims. Acknowledgement of a tendency in these systems to psychological effects such as psychosomatic and placebo effects.

 

Guidance The card experiment revealed that there is no special guidance to be obtained with respect to knowledge of the future, or what is going on in other places e.t.c. However, drawing close to God strips away or surrenders rational, ‘logos’ thought for a while allowing deeper insights to come to the fore, often in symbolic form. In this sense, coming close to God offers a lateral problem solving opportunity and different perspectives that on later logical reflection may offer insight. When seeking guidance then, it is a matter of framing the question correctly. In this experiment, experiences at different levels of consciousness were reified, as if there was an external Consciousness or Mind Entity standing above space and time that could reveal hidden information. But the results show no ground for such a position. The question that should be asked is not ‘Is this card red or black’ but ‘What do I really believe this card is – red or black?’ Similarly, it is not ‘Is this unborn child going to be a boy or a girl?’ but ‘What do I really believe, deep down, that the gender of this child is going to be?’. Neither is it ‘What is my future job going to be?’ but ‘Deep down, what do I really think and feel that I would really like to do as a job?’. The interrogation is not of external facts and incidents but an inquiry of the Self of one’s own Core perspective, of what one is saying to oneself not only in the rational mode but also in the receptive, intuitive mode. What issues is the rational mode repressing or suppressing? Reframing the question in this way makes no difference to the outcome in terms of accuracy of predictions. But it changes to the appropriate focus of the question: the Self.

 

13)              Categories of approach

 

a)      Phenomenology, Hermeneutics, Psychology, Consciousness studies, Existentialism, Experiments, An embracing of rational and non-or trans-rational approaches. Science. Philosophy. Divinity.

b)      Doctrines, Theology, Ontology, Cosmological and Teleological arguments, Natural theology, Ultimate appeals to Authority texts such as Scripture. (See 3b above) Appeals to 13a approaches only in so far as they conform to or appear to support sacred literature.

c)      Phenomenology, Hermeneutics, Psychology, Consciousness studies, Existentialism, Experiments, An embracing of rational and non-or trans-rational approaches. Science. Philosophy. Divinity. Doctrines, Theology, Ontology, Cosmological and Teleological arguments, Natural theology.

 

14) Forgiveness, sin and guilt A major difference between reified and non-reified perspectives is revealed in the area of sin, and guilt. In reified positions, concern often centres on the turning away of the wrath of an external God by an offering or sacrifice for the cancellation of sin. The Old Testament for example is full of laws concerning this sort of thing. For some religions, this involved human sacrifice. The ultimate sacrifice is of course God, a central idea in Christianity, where the Son of God as the second person of the Godhead, is sacrificed at Calvary, taking on God’s wrath and averting it for the believer and rising again to show his victory. However, there is no such system outline in my own later mystical experiences, according to which, guilt arises when there is a sense of moral failure in a person’s relationships with other people, or the material universe or themselves. Darkness is a necessary counterpart of Light and thus it is with all moral dimensions. Light creates dark shadows. Love brings Hate into being, for without Love there is no Not-Love. Since there is no external sacrifice to alleviate guilt, the pursuit of negative virtues may result in an earthly hell, at spiritual, psychological and material levels. There is no final judgement and no external wrath to be turned away. There is no external sacrifice required to appease an external God. But it is probably quite true to say that the Self may exert an influence that results in internal conflicts, self-defeat, depression, despair and so on. It seems to me that the only source of forgiveness is Self-forgiveness. Such forgiveness may involve acts of repentance, recompense, good works, confession to oneself and others to obtain the virtue of Balance. Of course, it would be easy to compile a list of appropriate recompenses for certain moral failures, but this is to fall into the trap of creating an extrinsic, outward path. Whilst useful for society at large in the forms of civil laws the fact remains that the path for each Pilgrim is intrinsic and unique.

 

These categories are by no means exhaustive, but the distinctions between reified, Consciousness-as-Such and God-as-Spirit interpretations of my own mystical journal of experiences is, I believe, a key way to tease out some of the differences between trans-personal approaches and pre-personal approaches to spirituality.

 

However, it may be that God-as-Spirit does exist in all things exactly as the mystical experience declares. It may be that God is the Foundation, the Warp, Web and Woof of all that is manifest: Spirit contracted to matter. But whereas I was originally thinking of a Consciousness-Entity or Mind-Entity: a Spirit with a focal point of awareness, consciousness and agency, the experiences present a picture of God-as-Spirit as being like water or diffuse light. Neither of these forms have a central focus, point of awareness or agency: they are more diffuse than that. My mistake may be not that God exists ‘out there’, but to create an anthropomorphic view of God-as-Spirit and to think that God is a ‘Consciousness out there’ or ‘Mind out there’ that presents information to us about the material world or the future. Perhaps I had not only misunderstood the nature of God as a Mind, but also misunderstood the nature of the Transcendence of time. To ask God what will happen in the future is not to fall into the mistake of reifying God, but to presume an anthropomorphic view of God and a linear view of time: the question is wholly misplaced.

 

6.30 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS

 

Two mistakes then are either to reify levels of subjective consciousness to structures and entities that exist ‘out there’, or to allow that God exists ‘out there’, but to have a concept of God as ‘Mind’ or ‘Consciousness’. God exists at the core of each individual as the Self. In the first view, the relationship of the Self to the external, material world is indirect, reflecting a person’s perception at that level, rather than the objective material world. Therefore predictions and revelations concerning the material world, no matter how Certain, Real, Vivid and Assured, are no better than predictions made by chance. The focus of inquiry is therefore not the material world, but the person’s perception of that world. It is not ‘Is this card red or black?’ but ‘What do I really believe this card is – red or black?’. In the second view, such questions about events in the material world are wholly inappropriate.

 

For almost a year I held the position that God is Pure Consciousness and that ‘God-as-Pure-Consciousness’ is grounded in the material, physiological organism. Ultimately, the above position felt restricted and I have felt that I had been bending the meaning of words to accommodate the above interpretation. Let me summarise this position….

 

It is as if Pure Consciousness, which in this formulation equates with God-as-Spirit, is the eye. The eye looks on an object and we see it. The one thing that it does not see  or reveal is the eye itself, but through accident or the practice of techniques, we can begin to gaze on consciousness itself, which gives us an expansive, omniscient-like experience. Since Pure Consciousness is in all that we encounter, it unifies all that we witness. But the eye, like the rest of the body, is material and eventually decays and loses its power. The analogy to this is that once a person dies, consciousness dies with them, because it is grounded in and emerges from physiological processes. In this model, the Reality and Immediacy that we experience is linked to the fact that the more analytical rational ‘logos’ mode is surrendered or suspended for a moment, such that our knowing is a receptive, immediate one, an intuitive holistic expansive knowing. Ultimately then, this means that God is an illusion, perishing with us at death. This idea of God as an illusion was partly reinforced by the failure to predict hidden information as outlined in the above experiment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter seven – Does God exist ‘out there’?

March 21, 2009 by pilgrimsimon

CHAPTER SEVEN

 

DOES GOD EXIST ‘OUT THERE’?

 

7.1 PUTTING IT TOGETHER: THE REALITY OF THE MYSTIC – ILLUSIONS, IGNORANCE AND THE REAL

 

We are concerned with the issue of whether God exists ‘out-there’ or not. We are asking whether the mystic, in moving to the ‘mythos’ mode of consciousness perceives reality accurately, or in a deeper way; or whether such perceptions are the merely result of this changed mode, of different brain functioning. In other words, is the content of such experiences no more real than a dream? This question is important, because one of the ‘distinguishing’ factors of psychosis, of schizophrenia and in some cases bipolar disorder, is losing touch with reality. We have said earlier, that if we are using such a criteria, then we need to have a good definition of what reality actually is. For the materialist, for the empirical scientist, reality is that which is objectively measurable, the visions of mystics are an illusion. In other words, reality is the material. Many mystics however reverse this idea and suggest that it is the material that is an illusion, that is not Real, and that the only Reality is the Absolute Spirit or Energy. The material is an illusion and not real in the sense that it has no existence in and of itself, but rather it’s existence is dependent upon the Divine, since all that is is an expression of the Divine. The material is not real because it has a finite, temporary existence, whereas the Divine is Eternal. For the Mystic, it may well be that it is the scientist, psychologist and psychiatrist that is suffering from illusions and delusions, because in spiritual Ignorance, they misunderstand the nature of Reality.

 

7.2 FAITH VERSUS DIRECT KNOWLEDGE

 

Mystics emphasise Immediate Experience or Tasting of the Divine as the source of spiritual authority. They stress the inner experience rather than an objectively measurable object. The many sources of authority that we have in religion: Scripture and sacred writing, Tradition, Ritual and ceremony, Rules, Laws and Moral Codes, Teachers, Leaders, Founders of movements, Gurus e.t.c., Ideology, Theology, Philosophy, Rationality, Community and Fellowship are all external, objective forms of spirituality. Interior, mystical spirituality offers individual and personal resonance and relevance: God meets us where we are and this personal revelation takes primacy and precedence for many mystics over and against the mediated, objective, external qualities listed above. These external means of spiritual authority are not necessarily rejected, but they are seen as inferior: as shadows, Illusionary and potentially restricting, burdensome and a hindrance in the spiritual walk, even as dangerous.
But these interior manifestations and forms of the Divine are partial: they are relative views from a particular perspective. More than this they are symbols and allegories of That which cannot be understood or encompassed. Therefore, such symbols should not be reified, or turned into a concrete existing object-out-there which is capable of exerting an influence over us. In addition, the mystical experience has different degrees of depth, so that the content such experience varies both in category and in assurance.

 

Even so, mystics stress knowledge: immediate knowledge, tasting or experience over and against faith. The world’s religions are often talked about in terms of world faiths, but mystics may not use the word ‘faith’ except in critical reference to martyrdom and ideology. The mystic does not talk about faith and belief, but about knowing, tasting and experiencing the Divine. Thus the following quote from my own mystical journal: ‘I asked what the Dark Hills and Valley were. “It is the darkness of Ignorance.” said the Faithful Brother. “Those who do not come through the Valley remain in ignorance, they have never seen, they do not know, they have never tasted and rest satisfied in empty things.” ….. “You must understand this,” he said, “God is in all things, living or not. God is as much in those people in the Field of Illusions, or in Fool’s Gold, as in you, or as in the most spiritual person. God does not live in people by measure, in some more than in others. God is in all equally. But your eyes have seen, and your ears heard. You have tasted the Immediacy of God.”……‘In being enlightened by this teaching you find yourself in two worlds. You have seen and tasted that you are God. You have experienced the Immediacy of God and your perspective and vision has been correspondingly widened.’…… ‘I am here to show you that you know nothing. I know that you have sat at the Footstool of God. But such experiences are like the worm on the plain that has risen just a few grains of soil, whilst God is the Everest that sits by the plain.’…..‘But I began to wonder if any of this was real. Perhaps absolutely everything in the Field was an illusion. Perhaps, Atonement and Purity and even the Hand of God were an illusion. I asked Michael if this was so. “You have sat at the Footstool of God haven’t you?” said Michael, in partial disbelief and partial rebuke. “And you know that this experience required no further proof or test, for you were self evidently in the Presence of God. And you know that others have met God in similar ways and reported similar experiences. You know that God is real. This was the most clear and perceptive experience that you ever had.’……“In the Immediacy of God, our concepts and understanding are deepened, yet they are transcended.”.

 

Even so, the mystic does have faith in the unprovable, unfalsifiable, indescribable Absolute Spirit as Final Reality.

7.3 ENTHUSIASM

 

This kind of thought places the mystic in the tradition of religious enthusiasm with regard to religious and spiritual movements. The word ‘enthusiasm’ was originally a critical and negative term and has been applied to a wide diversity of movements such as religious revivals, Quakers, the Charismatic movement, Mysticism, Gnosticism and so on and is usually used by those who place emphasis on rationalism and orthodoxy. Orthodoxy and rationalism will never sit easily with enthusiasm. The mystic’s reliance on personal revelation and experience is non rational or irrational to the rationalist and presents a rival authority to the orthodox, who want to confine their spirituality to certain sets of sacred literature and traditions which they have selected. Thus such ideas of personal revelation are dismissed by the orthodox and rationalist as vain belief, feverish imagination and the exaltation of fancy, or even, by the mythic level orthodox person,  as the work of the devil. However, to take Christianity as an example, the Apostle Paul put his revelation of Christ on the Damascus road on an equal footing to personal, physical encounters with Jesus by the other disciples: thus he needed no further authority or any sanction from the other Apostles. He did not try to justify his experience. (See Armstrong, K (1983) The first Christian. St. Paul’s impact on Christianity. Pan London p.55). Orthodoxy itself is based upon such claims to revelation by people like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Paul and so on, and on the contents of such revelations. If Christian orthodoxy is to dismiss any subsequent revelations then it has to show:

a) That such revelation has indeed ceased, or,
b) That later revelations, if they do exist, are somehow inferior to Biblical ones, and how and why they are inferior.
c) That their revelation is right and that other claimed revelations are wrong, together with principles of assessment.
 

 

Remember, orthodoxy only seems united because it effectively stifled alternative revelations such as the Gnostic gospels, by banning and outlawing such literature and punishing those who advocated them as heretics and blasphemers.
In his book ‘Interpreting charismatic experience’ (SCM Press) David Middlemiss looks at some of the qualities of groups that are accused of enthusiasm. He suggests that some of these qualities are positive and that some of them are negative.

 

a) They claim to restore primitive or pure spirituality.
b) They are denounced and opposed by mainstream (orthodox) groups.
c) They often become schismatic and divided. (Contradictory reified forms)
d) The supernatural is an expected part of life.
e) A transformation of the personality is expected.
f) There is a separation from the material or worldly and a desire for purity.
g) Spirituality is an affair of the heart (internal) as opposed to following outward (objective) traditional form.
h) There is an impatience for grace, for heaven on earth now.
i) Direct insight and experience of God (Immediacy) may be accompanied by a degrading of human reason.
j) The enthusiast has a new status and authority
k) The enthusiast always hankers after theocracy. (God ruling society)
l) Such a group may retreat into the wilderness to set up its own society and sub culture.
m) There may be a conviction that the end of the world, and thus the new age, is shortly to be expected.
n) There may be a host of unusual phenomena (tingling of hands, weeping, laughing, falling over, changes in breathing e.t.c.).

The mystic then may give primary importance to experience: to the immediate experience of the Divine. Their perspective or philosophy is justified mainly on these terms which are presented as relative perspectives on the Formless. Middlemiss suggests that any belief can be justified on these grounds, that in fact, in some groups, there is the idea that the less ground there is for faith, the better the faith is, which he suggests is insane. As we have seen, the mystic does not talk about faith but about knowing the Unknowable through direct experience. They argue that the Ground of Knowledge about the Divine is through such experience and that the beliefs, philosophy, doctrine and theology that is declared is accountable to this experience rather than external, secondary authorities. That is why there is sometimes quite a bit of talk by mystics about faithfully recording what was seen, or heard, or experienced.

 

I agree with Sufi mystic Ibn al-Arabi, that ultimately people worship their own beliefs: their own forms of the Divine, some of which arise from such direct experiences and which are in fact projections of form onto the Formless Unknowable Absolute. These forms are metaphors and it is a mistake to reify them: to turn these forms into concrete, independently existing realities and objects. This experience cannot be verified, any more than I can verify to you that I got wet in the rain yesterday. But I know I got wet – I experienced it.

Middlemiss, in looking at the justification for belief, declares that this branch of philosophy, called epistemology, is in crisis. He eventually argues, after a critical survey of different approaches, that to rely on just one criteria is problematic and that though none of them by themselves are fully waterproof as it were, the more criteria that are taken together, the better the support. It is like taking three cups each with a hole in them. Put them inside one another and they will hold water better.
After seven years of consideration, I do think that the content of the spiritual journal recording my own immediate experiences with the Divine has these qualities or criteria that Middlemiss lists:

 

a)      It has both internal consistency and fits external facts.

b)      I do not consider myself to be anti-rational.

c)      It is also a general philosophy: it has an expansive explanation, yet retains a certain simplicity and elegance in its philosophy.

d)      It sits alongside mechanistic claims and explanations, such as evolution.

e)      It argues against theological monopolies and orthodoxy and is tolerant of multiple theologies, even contradiction and paradox. It does not advocate syncretism, but allows for cultural and temporal differences with its view of relativism and perspectivism.

f)        With regard to spirituality and issues such as healing, wealth/poverty, peace/joy/happiness, success, unusualness, the safety/danger of its ideas and experience, it is ambivalent or silent.

g)      It advocates balance, proportion, symmetry, simplicity, elegance and the fruit of love, peace and unity – the positive virtues, although in fact, it inevitably makes divisions and distinctions.

h)      It is related to fideism, which bases faith in experience, but as already indicated, it does not talk about faith, but rather knowledge of the Ultimately Unknowable.

i)        The philosophy of my mystical journal finds a strong parallel in the Hindu Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta, and a very good modern outline of this philosophy, expanding on some of the issues discussed above, can be found in ‘Advaita Vedanta – A philosophical reconstruction’ (1973) Eliot Deutsch University of Hawaii Press.

 

The traditional Christian view of course is that we possess, as our core essential nature, a soul or spirit, an eternal, immortal incorporeal self that survives death to eventually be rejoined to a superior resurrection body that then appears before God in Judgement. Similar ideas emerge in other religious traditions. The idea of rebirth, of Karma also suggests some core quality in human nature that is eternal or immortal which, dependent upon the moral quality of our life here, is reborn into one form or another. Both of these ideas are firmly rejected in my own mystical encounters. There is no soul or spirit in this sense that makes up a core self and there are no spirit beings, no Final Judgement, no Karma.

 

What my experience does say is that we are of the same nature of God: that we are God expressed in a particular form. Ultimately, God is Spirit or Energy. At death, God, Spirit or Energy returns to God, yet God still remains in the body because God is expressed in all things. This Energy or Spirit underpins all that is in fact more than this, all that exists is an expression or manifestation of this Spirit or Energy. The illustration given is that of the sea: the waves turn over themselves and form spray, but that spray is of the same nature as the sea and returns to it from a constricted droplet back once again to the expansive ocean. This, says my mystical experience, is how we should understand death and the afterlife. In this view, God is not a reified big ’Entity-out-there’; God is not a ‘Big Intelligence’ somehow looking down on all that is. This is the mistake that I make in my understanding throughout my encounters and in this experiment with the cards. The very basis of this experiment is that God is a ‘Big Intelligence out there’ or ‘Big Consciousness out there’ that somehow looks down on our affairs, orders circumstances for our good and is in a position to give us hidden information from this over-arching position. But in my mystical experiences, this whole idea of providence is countered: God is expressed in the material and in this general sense has created and provided for us. But God does not provide for us in specific, providential instances. But the question: ‘Can God tell me what these hidden cards are?’ reveals a mistaken view of the nature of God-as-Spirit, reifying a personality structure to ‘God-out-there’. God is not a ‘big personality’, or a ‘big intelligence’. We use anthropomorphic terms to describe God because language and concept is not adequate to convey God-as-Spirit. These terms are mere shadows that vaguely point to the Divine: as Ibn al-Arabi says, they both reveal AND VEIL the Divine.

 

What then are the conclusions? Reification remains an important aspect in the consideration of spiritual issues. The fact that what we experience seems Real and Vivid yet may have little relation or an indirect relation to the material world remains a valid point. This debate shows how narrow or particular the spiritual way is and how easy it is to stray from what the content of mystical experience says and to imbue it with meanings and slants that it does not in fact contain. I note that when I have caught myself struggling with a concept and then found that the answer is in the journal of my mystical experiences it has surprised me, even though I wrote it. I have written it and the answer is there, yet I have so quickly overlaid it with my own assumptions and those of others and found myself in a cul-de-sac off the Pathway

 

 

If God cannot be verified and is Unknowable in Essence, how can we know anything about God? How is an invisible God perceived?

Proof or verifiability of the Absolute Formless Spirit is impossible because the Divine per se is Ineffable and Unknowable. Trying to prove Subtle Spirit using the methods of Gross material scientific inquiry is ultimately inappropriate: therefore on the basis of scientific and rational inquiry, the existence of Spirit is uncertain – it is neither proved nor disproved.

Many spiritual approaches describe the Divine as Unknowable. When I say that the Absolute Spirit per se is Unknowable, what do I mean? Firstly I am talking about the Absolute Spirit, as opposed to any manifestation or form of Spirit. I am not talking for example about Jesus Christ, who may claim Divinity, but who is also a man. As a man, I can begin to know something about him: records of his existence, accounts of his life and so on. Rather I am talking about Absolute Spirit, Formless Essence, as being Unknowable. By Unknowable, I mean that that this Essence cannot be encompassed by the mind: this Essence is too Transcendent to be encapsulated. This Essence cannot be bounded, conceptualized or understood in a final, complete or total sense. Does this then mean that we cannot know anything about Essence? Is Absolute Spirit Unmanifest: not apprehensible, not able to be grasped in any way? Is the Divine hidden and obscure? As Absolute Spirit, yes. The Formless Divine is Unknowable, Unmanifest, not apprehensible, hidden, obscure, and cannot be grasped materially or conceptually.

However, many spiritual traditions, including my own mystical experiences, suggest that the Divine does manifest Itself. In the terms of the my own mystical experience, the Formless Divine Spirit manifests in all form in a process of contraction or delimitation. As a result, existents are expressed in knowable, delimited, bounded form, yet the Essence remains, undiluted and unfragmented in all forms. Thus:

The One becomes many
The Formless assumes form
The Hidden becomes revealed
The Unity becomes diverse
The Unbounded is bounded
The Essence is expressed.

To put it another way, the Unbounded, Hidden, Formless, One Unity, Essence of all is expressed and revealed in many bounded diverse forms. But this cannot be proved or verified, because the Unbounded, Hidden, Formless, One Unity, Essence of all is Unknowable. Therefore the Divine can only be understood in contracted terms, be they material or conceptual, but cannot be verified. But how can we make this statement that the Unbounded, Hidden, Formless, One Unity, Essence of all is expressed and revealed in many bounded diverse forms if the Essence is Unknowable and unverifiable? How can it we know that the universe is a contracted expression of the Divine?

 

As we have seen, this cannot be known by scientific inquiry or method. The gross material cannot demonstrate and verify the subtle Spirit. Neither can it be demonstrated by rational argument, philosophical inquiry, the use of reason and logic, or by deduction and analysis. As we have suggested, the mind cannot encompass the Divine. But this lack of verifiability does not mean that knowledge is impossible. Knowledge and verification are not the same thing. The unknowablility of Absolute Spirit per se does not mean the impossibility of relative knowledge of the contracted, manifest Divine. Many spiritual traditions suggest that the Unknowable Spirit is manifest or revealed in form. The question remains though: how is this known? Revelation is the basis of this knowing.

 

What is revelation? Primarily it is an unveiling of the veiled, a disclosure of the hidden. Its means is the non-usual ‘mythos’ mode of perception. Our usual ‘logos’ mode of perception is an active, analytical, deductive, reasoning mode, however subtle that process may be. Revelation involves a less usual, passive, holistic, intuitive mode of perception. It is an immediate and direct form of knowing, of experiencing. In it, it is claimed, the Absolute Spirit per se is not perceived: it cannot be, but higher, hidden, veiled, realities are apprehended and perceived: aspects and facets of reality not apprehended by our usual mode of perception.

 

Such immediate and direct experiences, modes of perception and consciousness do not offer validation of the Divine, for the reasons that we have already seen. If a person has such an experience, whereby they apprehend something of the Divine, the skeptical inquirer may ask whether the experience is what the person thinks it is. The person declares that they have encountered God, the skeptic asks whether they are deceived or mistaken, whether there is proof. Well there is no proof. If I dream about meeting Elvis, I cannot prove the content of my dream to you. There is anecdotal evidence: I can tell you about it, and there is secondary evidence: my character and truthfulness, how I have been affected by the experience and so on. But that is all, and it is the same with such non-usual modes of consciousness and perception. I may begin to talk much about Divine things, I may begin to attend religious services, I may begin spiritual practices such as prayer and meditation. I may appear earnest and enthusiastic, my life may change such that I abstain from immorality, I may have great confidence and assurance and spend a great deal of time praising God, but all this may arise from a mistake, an error, a delusion, and offers no verification as to the existence of Absolute Spirit.

 

The best that one can do in terms of verification, is to follow the practice of those who have learned to cultivate such non-usual modes of perception and consciousness, so that one gains this perception, this consciousness, this apprehension, this revelation for oneself. What one experiences can then be compared with what others have found when they attained a similar experience. But of course, this may simply mean that you are entering into the same delusion…or not. It remains uncertain because the Essence per se is unknowable and subtle Spirit is not susceptible to rational and material inquiry. It offers you insight, but not verification. The fact that brain states can be measured, and that it can be demonstrated that such non-usual states produce a predictable change in brain waves and patterns means nothing in terms of verification. Similarly, the fact that imbibing certain substances, certain drugs like Mescalin, may result in initiating such non-usual modes of perception means nothing. Materialists love to think that they have explained away this ‘revelation’ in purely biological terms: it is not revelation they say, it is a change of brain activity. But this proves nothing one way or the other in terms of the existence of Absolute Spirit: it merely demonstrates a change of brain activity.

 

Revelation then is a non-usual passive mode of perception and consciousness whereby aspects of reality that are veiled and hidden to the usual mode of consciousness become revealed or unveiled. This is an immediate and direct experience the contents of which cannot usually be verified. I say usually, because it depends upon what is revealed. The contents of the revelation may refer to material events: If it is revealed that a meteor will hit the earth tomorrow, then because it refers to a material event, this statement is highly verifiable. We will know after tomorrow whether it was correct or not. If the content is spiritual: ‘The Spirit is Immanent in all things’, then this is not verifiable, or falsifiable, because the Spirit is Unknowable. This experience contains elements and aspects which cannot be verified to others, just like the contents of a dream. Ultimately, such immediate experiences are personal and individual. They offer an individual assurance and persuasion concerning the Divine. The recipient may say ‘If this is not God, I cannot imagine what is, I cannot imagine anything beyond it’. Others, on hearing the account and knowing the person e.t.c. may choose to believe in and subscribe to the forms revealed and related. But this would be a faith based upon secondary events: on anecdotal evidence.

 

For many spiritual traditions, personal revelation forms the connection of one’s True Self – one’s Essence, one’s Immanent, Formless Divine within to either/or

a) The Immanent Essence of other existents in the universe – thus producing a sense of oneness, connectedness and unity with the universe
b) The Transcendent Essence – the Formless Silent Desert, the Attributeless Formless Spirit Transcendent of all.

 

Revelation, or non usual modes of perception, overcome the Ignorance that arises through the process of contraction, overcomes the veiling of Essence that arises in form, and sees through the illusion that the surface material universe is the final and only reality.These revelations are personal. The Divine meets us where we are, in our time, place and culture, according to our personality, experience, history and situation. What is revealed to one may contradict what is revealed to another. This is part of the Infinity of the Divine, the Paradox of the Transcendent, the Theomorphism and unrepeatability of God. Thus when we talk about revelation, we are talking about an individual’s Personal Lord and it is probably better that we use terms like:

 

‘It was revealed to [Moses]’
[Simon] had it revealed to him that…’
[Mohammed] had a revelation that…’
[Andrew] received a spiritual insight that…’

Because they are spiritual, unverifiable, unfalsifiable insights, the contents or forms of revelation tend to be simply declared: ‘God is in all things!’. The statement is made without recourse to means of verification. What is received, what is seen, what is heard is faithfully declared. It is like stepping out into the rain and declaring ‘I am wet!’. Revelation does not depend or fall back on rational deductive logic to support it claims. It does not fall back on scientific verification – it cannot. It simply declares what is received.

 

7.4 UNCERTAINTY – THE FOUNDATION OF SPIRITUALITY

 

What is the basis on which we can build a spirituality? Can we have assurance and certainty about the Divine? Can we prove God? If not, on what foundation can any spirituality be constructed? This article takes a challenging look at these issues.

7.5 TRYING TO GRASP AND KNOW THE UNKNOWABLE

My own mystical accounts, like the accounts of many other mystics, declares that God-as-Spirit; the Absolute, is Unknowable. The Absolute is so Transcendent that the human mind cannot encompass the Divine. Now if the Absolute Spirit cannot be known with certainty, if the Absolute Spirit is Formless, Attributeless, Beyond Concept and Ineffable, then we are by definition operating from a principle of uncertainty when it comes to spirituality. The base, the foundation of spirituality must be uncertain, even if we accept that the Divine exists and is the Essence of all things. If we cannot know the Divine Essence, then any formulations of the Divine, any conceptual forms of the Absolute Spirit are going to have paradox and contradiction, because not only is the Absolute Unknowable, but finite form cannot grasp or encompass the Infinite. Therefore, any theology, any religious philosophy or set of doctrines that act as a basis or foundation of and for spirituality is also, by definition, uncertain and prone to paradox and contradiction. My own mystical journal, and even this scheme that I am now writing is uncertain with regard to its foundation. Accepting the existence of Ineffable Essence means that any resolution of contradiction and paradox, together with Unity can only be found in the Unknowable Absolute Spirit.

 

7.6 CONTRADICTION AND PARADOX

This contradiction and paradox of forms of the Divine by no means nullifies spirituality nor does it mean that spirituality or the Divine have to be dismissed. The co existence of the apparently contradictory phenomenon of fire and water does not mean that creation or existence is void: they both exist separately – and when together, fire may consume water or water may extinguish fire, but both fire and water are existents. Fire and water exist quite well in their respective suitable circumstances. But fire and water together do not co-exist easily. So it is with spiritual concepts and forms; with different forms of the Divine; with different religions and different religious systems. It may be that they arise from the same Essence, but in their expression, they may not co-exist easily together. Syncretism, that is, the drawing out of shared religious ideas from different religions to make one unified, or uniform religion will never work…it merely creates another religious framework, another set of religious forms, which for some, will be incongruent: an unacceptable compromise of forms of the Divine.

7.7 UNCERTAINTY AND FAITH

 

The uncertainty, which is at the very base and foundation of spirituality, means that spirituality demands faith: the typical foundation of religion and spirituality. Faith is a near universal quality – it does not demand high intellect, or education, both the educated and uneducated may have faith, neither does it demand wealth and privilege but rather, faith is open to rich and poor alike.

7.8 THE MATERIAL UNIVERSE

Working on the assumption that the Divine Absolute Spirit exists, (which as we have seen is Unknowable and cannot be verified), if we want to say anything about the Divine Spirit in material or physical terms, then many religious/spiritual traditions encourage us to look at the universe. Most spiritual traditions refer to the universe as displaying the Divine Absolute Spirit in some way. But the universe is not and cannot be a ‘proof’ of the existence of the Divine which cannot be demonstrated by appeals to the material. If there was such a demonstrable, replicable proof of the Divine Absolute Spirit by using the physical, the material or the universe, you can be sure that we would all know about it. The best that the person of faith can say is that when we consider the qualities and characteristics of the universe, then the universe may seem (to them) to be a witness to or seem to point to the existence of the Divine. But it is uncertain; it is indirect. Those who have adopted a way of thinking that accepts the existence of the Divine may see in the universe metaphorical and analogous forms that indirectly point to That which is Unknowable. Thus, for one already accepting the existence of the Divine:

a) Taken as a whole, the expression of the universe reveals the invisible Spirit to the full capacity of, and within the limits of the material.
b) Any individual or particular existent within the universe:
1) In it’s expression is seen by the person of faith as declaring and revealing the Unknowable Absolute Spirit according to it’s aspect and capacity.
2) In itself as it’s Essence, the person of faith may consider it to be the full, undiluted, undivided, unfragmented Absolute.
 

 

7.9 CONCEPTUAL FORMS OF THE FORMLESS

Because the Divine Absolute Spirit is Ineffable, beyond being able to be encompassed by the mind, Transcendent of form, then any statements about the Divine Absolute Spirit are going to be metaphorical and analogous. Any statement about the Divine Absolute Spirit is artificially delimiting of the Divine. Form, by its nature, places boundaries on something: form says an object is this, not that. Form, whether it is physical or conceptual, by its nature, has boundaries. Thus, when we give form to the Divine Absolute Spirit, we are placing illusionary finite boundaries on the Infinitely Formless or Boundless. Such forms help us to conceptualize and relate to the Unknowable Divine Absolute Spirit, but they also veil or obscure the Unknowable Divine even more by projecting onto the Essence illusionary boundaries. The construction of such delimited perspectives of the Absolute lead in turn to delimited perspectives of how the Absolute Spirit interacts with the world and very soon a framework of theology is created. This may be systematic and consciously thought out by us, or it may be a more sub conscious process. However it is arrived at, such a framework can only accommodate a limited number of congruent, related, finite forms together with their related conclusions. Insistence on maintaining such a set of finite forms of the Divine Formless Spirit results in further limitations as to how the Divine may be perceived. Religious and spiritual orthodoxy is just such a limited set of finite forms of the Infinite.

 

7.10 SUBJECTIVE RELATIVITY

 

Uncertainty at the base or foundation of spirituality means that a principle of relativity operates in spiritual matters: All forms and concepts of the Absolute are only relatively true with regard to the Absolute. If the Divine Absolute Spirit exists, then there is no one form that is able to define Ineffable God, yet all forms have a relative truth. What we have is subjective relativism: where we make the statement ‘This is true for….’ For example, ‘This is true for me’, or ‘This is true for me at this time’, or ‘This was true for him as he saw it’. (Incidentally, even subjective relativism is subjectively relative). The result of this is that there are an infinite number of paths to God, because all approaches and forms of the Infinite Divine Absolute Spirit are delimited and relatively true in an infinite and absolute sense. The illusionary delimiting forms of the Absolute Divine Spirit, the metaphors and allegories held by an individual as pointers to the Unknowable Essence, make up that individual’s Personal Lord. The individual’s Personal Lord then, is made up of that individual’s own delimited metaphorical and allegorical forms of the Formless and Unknowable. There are as many Personal Lords as there are people. It is correct what Ibn al-Arabi says – when a person worships their Personal Lord, they are worshipping their own forms of belief. But such forms enable us to relate to the Formless. As creatures of form in a universe of form, we tend to need a Form to relate to. It is difficult for us in most circumstances to worship Silent Attributeless Emptiness. The emphasis then of ‘Personal Lord’ is on congruent, personally meaningful forms of the Divine, which resonate with the individual concerned. Gnosticism is a tradition that encouraged such diversity of form and which encouraged creative and novel use of metaphor and analogy. Ibn al-Arabi, an Islamic Sufi, talked of Theomorphism: of a God Who continually and infinitely changed Form. Such a position is of course the very antithesis both of traditional religious orthodoxy where a unified form is insisted upon, as well as the literalism that is associated with religious and spiritual fundamentalism.

 

7.11 SACRED WRITING AND SCRIPTURE

 

Religions tend to appeal to Scripture: to holy or sacred writings: the writings of prophets and seers within their tradition, as a basis for their faith and theology. Some Scriptures, such as the collection of writings that make up the Bible are a mixture of historical narratives, hymns and poems, setting out of laws, rituals and ceremonies, and encounters with the Divine. Other traditions may have less historical narrative and more in the way of Divine encounters. With regard to the Bible, modern textual criticism and analysis has shown that some books have more than their one claimed author, that some texts are not written by their claimed author, that historical accounts are often those versions written down by the predominant, ruling, victorious priestly class who had their own agenda, that there are some errors and contradictions in and between writings and so on. Textual criticism at least shows that the Bible cannot be taken literally, at face value and that it is not inerrant or infallible in its accounts and teaching. There are also problems with the selection criteria used to decide which writings were included in the Bible and which were excluded. Those who want to explore these issues in greater depth will find more articles at http://leavingchristianfundamentalism.blogspot.com/

 

7.12 IMMEDIATE AND MEDIATED

 

We have been looking at the mystical encounter: the direct experience of the Divine. The writings of these seers, mystics, Gnostics, prophets and visionaries form the basis of much sacred writing and therefore ways of thinking about the Unknowable Absolute Spirit. For those who have not had a mystical experience of the Divine Spirit, the writings of those who have had such an experience often form the only tangible base on which to build their faith. It is rather like a desert nomad who travels off to some far away land and ends up in a polar region of ice and snow. He sends back a report describing what he has experienced. His friends back in the desert, who have never even heard of snow or ice, marvel at what they hear. Some of them may believe the account, some of them may not believe. Those who do believe take on board these descriptions of cold, ice and blizzards, but they do so from a position of second hand knowledge: through the medium of their companions descriptions. But this knowledge and acceptance by these desert nomads of the descriptions of this other, ice-world is quite different from actually standing there in a blizzard. The means of knowing is different: one is mediated via reports, via language, the other is not mediated, but immediate. If you really want to know what snow is like, you have to go out and walk in it, hold it in your hand, feel it on your skin e.t.c. Many, in fact probably most spiritual and religious minded people are like the desert nomads – they have little or no direct mystical experience of the Divine, but rather, they take by faith the report given in their sacred literature as given by those who have had such Divine encounters.

 

7.13 ORTHODOXY AND AUTHORITY

 

From these experiences and this sacred literature, forms and concepts of the Unknowable Divine become established, certain ideas come to the fore and also become established and eventually meshed into a theological framework. Such a framework of concepts and ideas of the Divine form a religious tradition and dogma: a set of religious or spiritual ideas that may reach a point of rarely being questioned. It may be that to question these ideas is seen as doubting God, or to doubt or even challenge the institution and it’s leaders. Entire religious institutions are built and maintained on such dogmatic traditions. This dogma and tradition may soon creates a false certainty, (it is rarely questioned, and there may be penalties if you do question: the authorities accept it, they always have….), it creates authority, (or perhaps authoritarianism and power), uniformity of belief and practice, (orthodoxy, orthopraxy, conformity), and discipline, often out of a fear of perceived chaos and disorder, either ideological or moral or both.

 

7.14 MYSTICISM: DEPTH, CERTAINTY, TRUTH, REALITY AND ASSURANCE

 

Mystical experience, as we have seen, carries with it a strong sense of assurance or certainty arising from its Direct or Unmediated perception. However, when we look at the content of mystical encounters: the forms and concepts used to describe the Divine, or the afterlife, or the means of being accepted by God, then we find contradiction and paradox. Mystical experience is not limited to any one religion; it is to be found in Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, native religions and so on. Thus one mystic declares that salvation is obtained through knowledge, another declares it is through faith in Jesus Christ; one mystic declares that there will be a Final Judgement and a heaven and hell, another declares that there will be cycle of births, deaths and rebirths until attainment of perfection, while yet another says there is neither resurrection nor reincarnation, only a return to what one already is in Essence– the Divine Absolute Spirit. Some declare that there is only God, others declare a panoply of spirit beings while yet others talk of many deities. The content of mystical experiences are full of paradox and contradiction. As we have seen, I can testify myself to having mystical experiences within Christianity, where forms of Christianity (Calvinistic), appeared sure and certain, but yet I have also had mystical experiences outside of Christianity, where the content and form, which appeared equally certain and true is not compatible with the earlier Christian forms. (The account of the non Christian mystical experience is set down in the Song of Simon at http://songofsimon.blogspot.com/ ). Yet these experiences appear powerfully Certain, True and Real. I have suggested that the certainty arises not from the expression of forms, but from the Essence of the unmediated experience. Mysticism is a non-usual mode of awareness, a passive-receptive mode of knowing involving a more holistic perception which is usually experienced as boundless even formless and timeless, and quite uplifting. I suggest that the forms and concepts are something that the mystic projects onto the experience and that this may happen almost instantaneously, even unconsciously, or from deep within the subconscious, or such formulations may take some time cohere. Such forms appear deep, meaningful, real and authentic. They may even appear to be received, as if not arising in one’s self. But it is also not unusual for mystics to struggle to conceptualize their experience, any concepts or even language itself appearing inadequate to convey what has been sensed. Having perhaps written down the form of their experience, they may then find that they take some time: weeks, months or years to understand what they have written. This of course does not offer proof of the existence of the Unknowable Absolute Spirit. Though Deep, Meaningful and Real, such experiences can say nothing about that which is Absolutely Unknowable. They may say nothing about any objective ‘Being-out-there’.

 

7.15 SUBJECTIVE OR RELATIVE PERSPECTIVES

 

In addition to what we have seen about form being relative to the Absolute and subjective relativism, most spiritual traditions agree that there are levels of spiritual growth and development – there are differing depths. What this means for this discussion is that perspectives change as one moves into different, deeper modes of Enlightenment or Realization – different views or perspectives are obtained by going deeper into the territory. In other words, the views of the Divine, and therefore the forms of the Divine used by the spiritually ignorant or immature are different from those who attain maturity. This seems unfashionably elitist in these days of ‘equality’, but as far as I can tell, all spiritual traditions use this idea. What we have then is subjective perspectivism. If subjective relativism is ‘True for…’, then subjective perspectivism is ‘True from….’, for example, ‘This is true from where I am standing’ or ‘It may be true for you over there, but not for me here’.

 

What cannot be denied is that the forms and concepts which mystics use have both contradictions and similarities, but the forms cannot be reconciled. Even one mystic may use contradictory forms in a number of experiences over time, therefore, though the nature of the experience may be the same, or be part of a closely related group of experiences, the forms that mystics use reflect the perspective of the person at that place and time. I am trying to draw out a difference between the Essence of the experience, and the expression of the experience. It may or may not be that mystics experience the Divine Unknowable Spirit directly, but their expression of the experience is conceptually delimited and bounded. Many mystics describe the inadequacy of language to describe their experience: they struggle to put their experience into words and concepts that adequately describe the sensation. In effect, it may be that they are trying to bound the Boundless, formulate the Formless and conceptualize the Ineffable. In the end, mystics propose delimited forms within the capacity of their language, knowledge and culture. The forms are bounded within the mystic’s subjective relativism and subjective perspectivism. In other words, the forms are uncertain, but the Essence of the experience may be an encounter with the Divine. Thus, with regard to mystical experience and its apparent Certainty, Reality and Truth we may say that:

 

a)      Taken as a whole, mystical experiences may be an encounter with the Divine to the full capacity of, and within the limits of the material and the human ability to conceptualize.

b)      Any particular mystical experience:

In its expression may be a declaration and revelation the Absolute according to the mystics aspect, perspective and capacity to formulate and conceptualize the Divine.

In itself as it’s Essence, it may be union with the full, undiluted, undivided, unfragmented Absolute.

 

7.16 FORM, REVELATION AND PROOF

 

Even if we accept an assumption that the Ineffable Divine Spirit chooses to be revealed to us in our imagination and experience via allegorical forms, via analogies and metaphors, this makes no difference with regards to proof of the existence of the Ineffable Spirit-Essence, because the Spirit-Essence by its very nature cannot be known. Therefore, as in the case of the universe being declared to be a revelation/manifestation of God, we cannot validate any such claim, because half of the equation as it were, cannot be known. We cannot check or test any claimed relationship or correspondence between form and the Unknowable Formless. If Formless Absolute delimits to form, be it material form or metaphorical conceptual form impressed upon our minds and imagination, the best we can say is:
 

 

a)      There is relative knowledge: we know something of the forms, be they material or conceptual.

b)      There is relative lack of knowledge: we know nothing of the Essence per se, to which these known forms are claimed to point.

 

7.17 PERSONAL SPIRITUAL GROWTH, ENLIGHTENMENT AND REALIZATION

 

Personal growth in spirituality includes Realization of what one’s true nature really is and Enlightenment concerning the Divine. We can now see that this is always a partial and relative perspective. This is partly because the Absolute is Unknowable and partly because, even in the highest mystical experience, the mystic or Gnostic does not abandon his or her body to become pure Absolute Spirit: they stay in the body no matter how elevated their mind (or spirit). Because the mystic/Gnostic does not attain pure Spirit; because the Spirit is unknowable; because form and concept are always partial and delimiting of the Limitless Absolute, Realization and Enlightenment and the insights of mystical experience are always uncertain and partial. Despite the Certainty, Assurance, sense of Reality and Truth that arise from these experiences, their expression in concept and form remain as allegory and metaphor, indirectly pointing to something Unseen and Unknowable. The forms of Scripture and Mysticism provide an uncertain foundation of metaphorical form and concept of the Divine.

 

7.18 YES AND NO, REAL AND NOT-REAL

 

The Unknowabilty of the Absolute Spirit with its necessary uncertainty, the Immanence of the Essence, together with subjective relativism and subjective perspectivism, means that the answer to spiritual questions is often ‘yes and no’ or ‘Real and not-Real’. Even accepting an assumption that the Unknowable Absolute Spirit exists and is expressed in all-that-is, there is no question that can be answered with certainty. ‘Is this stone God?’ ‘Yes and no’ ‘Is this stone real?’ ‘Yes and no’. ‘What is the material universe?’ ‘It is Real and not-real.’. For the spiritually minded, sometimes it is the difference between expression and Essence. Theology deals with the unknown using illusionary bounded forms of the Unknowable: who am I, where do I come from, where am I going, is there life after death, is there a judgement, does the universe have meaning? Ultimately, theology answers from a position of uncertainty and illusionary delimitation of the Absolute. It gives relatively true answers. It gives answers from a particular perspective. The answer may be ‘yes and no’, ‘real and not-real’. The answer in relation to the Ineffable Formless Absolute is ‘I don’t know’. The answer is ‘These forms, these ideas and illustrations may point indirectly to that which we do not know – then again they may not’. In the end, theological debate is a debate about metaphorical forms; how metaphorical forms cohere into a system; what metaphorical forms mean and imply, which metaphorical forms are congruent with other metaphorical forms.

 

7.19 LITERALISM, METAPHOR AND REIFICATION IN SPIRITUALITY

 

What about the literal approach which religious and spiritual fundamentalists are so often fond of? Can we interpret spirituality and scriptures literally? It may be useful to identify what any statement under consideration is referring to. Is it:

a)Referring to the material or physical.
b) Referring to the Spiritual or Divine
 

 

And also to identify the means of reference:

a) Is it a metaphorical or allegorical statement concerning one of the above.
b) Is it a literal or concrete statement concerning one of the above.
Lets briefly consider these statements as examples of what I mean:
a) ‘Jesus Christ lived and preached in Galilee’
b) ‘Zeus and the gods live on Mount Olympus’
c) ‘Zeus exists as the father of the gods’.
d) ‘Jesus Christ is the God-man’

 

What we have here are a series of statements ranging from statements about material reality and historical events, to statements about divinity and spirituality:

 

Statement a) is a literal material statement referring to the material: we can try to verify this statement using corresponding material evidence. Are there public records of such a person at this time? Are these records trustworthy and reliable? Are there many or a few statements? How independent are they? And so on.

 

Statement b) needs further clarification. It could be a metaphorical statement referring to the spiritual. It could be that Zeus is seen as a metaphor and that tales of his activity on Mount Olympus are seen as allegories that point indirectly to an Unknowable Essence. Zeus, as such, does not exist, except as an imaginary or conceptual form which may (or may not) point to the Ineffable Divine. The material, physical Mount Olympus is drawn into the allegory.

 

But others may argue that Zeus is a spiritual being that actually exists, who cannot be perceived with our physical eyes. Such a statement then becomes a reified spiritual statement. The process of reification is the turning of an abstract or metaphorical concept into a concrete object. In this case turning the metaphor of Zeus into an objective, externally existing God or deity, a spirit-being which is then seen as being capable of acting on the subject. The existence and activity of this reified spirit-being Zeus, is now seen as literally true. Thus, if this process of reification occurs, statement b) becomes a literal statement referring to the spiritual. However, even if Zeus is a spirit-being that cannot be seen, Zeus must be able to make himself known to our senses, otherwise a declaration of his existence and activity on Mount Olympus cannot be made with certainty. If Zeus cannot be detected, proved or evidenced, the literalness of this statement enters into uncertainty – at best it is neither proved nor unproved – it cannot be verified. Religion and spirituality at this point usually fall back on seers, prophets, visionaries, mystics, Gnostics and their writings – i.e. those who, it is claimed, are able to see – the spiritual elite who we have already looked at earlier.

 

Statement c) is just such a reified spiritual statement declared in more overt terms. This is not a metaphorical or allegorical statement: it is a literal statement referring to the spiritual: the literal objective existence of a spirit-being called Zeus – father of other spirit-being-gods. Such a statement is based on uncertainty because ultimately, the spiritual cannot be proved in material terms.

 

Statement d) is a literal statement partly referring to the spiritual. We need to tease out the elements of this statement: We may accept that there is reasonable evidence that a person named Jesus existed: we may say that there is enough evidence to show that a physical person named Jesus was literally alive. (Material, literal). But in addition, a spiritual statement is made about him: that he is or was the full expression of God in material human form. Once again, this cannot be demonstrated since God (spiritual) is ultimately Unknowable and therefore unverifiable and uncertain.

 

7.20 GENESIS – AN ACCOUNT OF THE MATERIAL WITH REFERENCE TO THE SPIRITUAL

 

How does this kind of analysis relate to say, the creation story? How do we understand the Genesis account as a so-called revelation in the light of modern discovery and knowledge? The Genesis account refers to both material, physical domain, but does so in reference to the spiritual – to God. If taken as a literal statement referring to the origin of the material, physical universe and particularly the way and stages in which the world was created, this story is open to being checked; it is subject to verification using material, physical evidence, and as such, it is in doubt. It appears to conflict with the evidence that physics, astrophysics, archaeology and other specialist sciences are able to analyse and present. I think we can say quite safely that it is not a literal account of creation as it literally took place. Relative perspectivism also comes into play: people who had quite a different perspective and understanding than we do wrote this account. But the creation story in Genesis is not just or even a literal account of material events. It is at least in part, if not totally, a spiritual narrative. It is an account of creation told from a spiritual perspective. As such a spiritual account, it is uncertain, because Absolute Spirit is Unknowable, and unverifiable in material terms. It is possible to understand this narrative in metaphorical and allegorical terms – as giving us symbols and pictures that may (or may not) point to aspects of the Unknowable in relation to origins. But the story does seem to have a definite literal leaning, as if it is talking about real perceived events. One option of course is that it is describing a perception of events as seen by primitive humans who are only just developing language and emerging into self-consciousness. This is a position described by Julian Jaynes in his book ‘The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind’. The bicameral mind, the pre self-conscious mind, perceives God walking in the garden, is not aware or ashamed of nakedness, sees and hears talking serpents and so on. Because this is in part a spiritual statement, and because it is a very old portion of writing, set down by those with quite a different perspective, we are find ourselves in the world of probabilities

 

7.21 VERIFYING SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE

 

We should not be surprised at this lack of ability to provide proof of the spiritual in material terms: at this lack of ability to verify the spiritual. If I have a dream of Marilyn Monroe and remember it on awaking, I am aware of the experience. The experience is real – it happened in my head as an experience, but yet it is not-real – it did not happen in a material way (except as chemical reactions in my brain) – I did not physically meet Marilyn Monroe. Furthermore, I cannot prove the content of my dream to you. I could have been wired up to a machine measuring my brain waves e.t.c., and there may be evidence that I have been dreaming. But I cannot prove or verify the content of my dream: I cannot demonstrate to you that I met Marilyn Monroe in my head. I can only give you anecdotal evidence – I can only tell you about it and you can only weigh up what I say based on my tendency to be truthful, or otherwise. You might wire me up to a lie detector and so on, but I cannot demonstrate the content of my dream. If this cannot be done on a mental level, on the level of internal subjectivity, then how much less can it be done on the subtle spiritual level?

 

For these reasons, the foundation of spirituality is uncertain. Those who declare that God cannot be proved have not won any victory: they are stating the truth. Those who declare that because God cannot be verified He therefore does not exist press their argument too far. The lack of ability to verify spirituality does not prove anything other than uncertainty. Spiritual existence is neither proved nor unproved.

 

For our study of psychosis this means that the idea of ‘losing touch with reality’ is not as simple a statement as it might first appear. Nevertheless, the mystic is able to return to the mode of functioning that is common today, especially in the western world, that of rational, discursive analytical reason. They are able to emerge from a meditative state and make a cup of tea, prepare a meal, do the laundry and tend to the garden. It would appear that those suffering from psychosis are less able to do this. They may be stuck in a mode that bears little resemblance to practical functioning in the world, with all the disorientation, fear and unsettlement that it may cause. This is what people mean when they say that such people and psychotics are not in the ‘real’ world: they either choose to focus and train in a different mode of awareness, or are stuck in it by reason of physiological disorder.

 

7.22 SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PSYCHOSIS AND MYSTICISM

 

Let us remind ourselves of our list that helps us to tease out and summarise some of the differences between psychosis and mysticism:

 

The following list gives indications of schizophrenia, (as opposed to mysticism):

 

The person’s thoughts are not easily understandable ie. what they say doesn’t make sense. They are irrational.

The person has difficulty functioning, or is unable to function, in everyday life: they are stuck in a ‘mythos’ mode of functioning that does not seal with practical issues. They lose touch with material reality and are stuck in a world of fantasy or delusion.

Auditory hallucinations are more common than visual hallucinations.

Episodes are generally prolonged.

Social relationships are impaired due to the person withdrawing socially. May respond inappropriately to the needs and concerns of others.

There may be a history of mental health problems in the individual or the family.

The person has usually exhibited mental health problems previously.

The event often has a negative outcome: hallucinations and delusions are considered a disruption to the normal functioning of the person’s consciousness.

The tendency is one of regression and pathology

1% of people suffer this disorder

They may feel alone and isolated

 

The following list gives indications of mysticism, (as opposed to psychosis):

 

No evidence of thought disorder or disorganised thinking. Though entering a recptive, ‘mythos’ mode, they are able to return to the active, rational mode of being. There is an integration or synthesis of the ‘logos’ and ‘mythos’ modes.

They enter the ‘mythos’ mode as a mature adult, and return to the rational mode. The experience is trans-rational and paradoxical.

The person is able to continue functioning in daily life.

Visual hallucinations are more common than auditory hallucinations.

Episodes are generally brief.

No impairment to social relationships. Responds empathically to the needs and concerns of others.

There is often no family history of mental health problems.

There is often no history of mental health problems within the individual.

The event often has a positive outcome, resulting in improvement in the person’s functioning and their growth. It has a healthy effect.

0.1% of people experience this.

The mystic may have a supportive social network

 

The following list gives indications common both mysticism and psychosis:

 

Both enter the receptive ‘mythos’ mode

Both appear unmediated or Immediate and Real

Both have biological effects in the brain

Both are non-rational and cannot be construed or remain unconstrued

Both involve a unified perception and loss of boundaries

Both involve a deeper quest for meaning.

Both may give rise to a loss or orientation of the self

Both can be unsettling and disorientating

Both are marginalized by modern western secular society and even health professionals

Both may lead to a heightened sense of perception

 

In terms of mysticism and bipolar disorder:

 

Both may lead to euphoria, ecstasy, elation and joy

Both may lead to preoccupation and withdrawal, even depression