Mystics

[Simply Puzzled]

Firstly, for the purposes of this discussion, I'm defining a mystic as one who seeks divinity through direct experience, in whatever form.

I hesitate to say this because I consider myself to be, if not a mystic, at least someone with heavy mystic leanings, but I don't think most people are mystics. I can't prove it, nor do I really want to, but the fact remains I don't think most people are mystics. The reason I hesitate to say this is because when I say this, most people are going "you're probably right, most people aren't mystics" but they don't include themselves in the category and thus apply it to themselves. Most people are always other people. At the same time, I open myself to accusations I'm climbing in the treehouse while pulling the ladder behind me. That's fair.

Anyway, onward. I think that if paganism doesn't expect people to be mystics, perhaps it encourages new practitioners to expect mystical experiences. I think far too often on MW we see people that have been worshipping the old gods for all of a year (and often less) wondering why they don't descend from the heavens to receive the praise. In this process of expecting it, we cheapen it. We are taking something that is both rare and precious and making it common and therefore, worth as little as grass in a field.

There are many negative consequences to this. On one hand, I see many people get frustrated and leave because they never have this direct experience. At first they might blame themselves for not being open enough, but eventually it turns to the gods, and they rail at them. On the other hand, I see many people turn everything into a mystic experience. They are so clueless as to what it feels like to be in their own body that every time they focus and look in, they encounter the Goddess. Or every time that quite, internal voice speaks to them, it's a deity. This stands in stark contrast to the empowerment of "Thou art God/dess." It reduces the self to nothing more than a clay pot to hold divinity, rather than turning one's self into a living avatar of divinity.

I think it also tends to create large gaps in our community. We place so much emphasis on mystic experience that it seems we have holes. I don't expect a fully-formed pagan theological school to spring into existence overnight, but looking back at the great religious philosophers both pagan and Christian, well, the phrase "can't hold a candle" comes to mind. Perhaps the person that can't find a mystical experience with a map, flashlight, and a bagged lunch might instead find it through intellectual contemplation, but we dismiss this as an "inferior" way of finding divinity. Perhaps part of the process of the pagan community maturing will be making room for these types of people.

[Darth Brooks]

Firstly, for the purposes of this discussion, I'm defining a mystic as one who seeks divinity through direct experience, in whatever form.

I can agree with this definition. It coincides pretty well with my own.


I hesitate to say this because I consider myself to be, if not a mystic, at least someone with heavy mystic leanings, but I don't think most people are mystics. I can't prove it, nor do I really want to, but the fact remains I don't think most people are mystics. I'm not sure if you will agree, but from my own observation there appears to be a certain prejudice against the term "mystic." Maybe it's just me, but I've seen some pagans - mostly people in my own area of the spiritual spectrum - draw a divisive line between mysticism and magic, claiming that mystics only "dream" of what magicians actually "do." I think this is an unfair distinction. I can't think of a magical experience that can't be described as mystical in some way, nor can I think of a mystical experience that can't be described as magical in some way. In my opinion, the two terms are practically synonymous. In ancient Egypt, for instance, there was almost no distinction between magic and religion at all, since both were considered to be forms of the same exact thing: heka.


The reason I hesitate to say this is because when I say this, most people are going "you're probably right, most people aren't mystics" but they don't include themselves in the category and thus apply it to themselves. Most people are always other people. At the same time, I open myself to accusations I'm climbing in the treehouse while pulling the ladder behind me. That's fair.I am not sure what you mean by the sentence I have put in bold above. Are you talking about self-described mystics who would agree with you that most people aren't mystics, and who probably aren't really mystics themselves, but who are too blind to see it? Or do you mean something else?


Anyway, onward. I think that if paganism doesn't expect people to be mystics, perhaps it encourages new practitioners to expect mystical experiences. I think far too often on MW we see people that have been worshipping the old gods for all of a year (and often less) wondering why they don't descend from the heavens to receive the praise. In this process of expecting it, we cheapen it. We are taking something that is both rare and precious and making it common and therefore, worth as little as grass in a field.

There are many negative consequences to this. On one hand, I see many people get frustrated and leave because they never have this direct experience. At first they might blame themselves for not being open enough, but eventually it turns to the gods, and they rail at them. On the other hand, I see many people turn everything into a mystic experience. They are so clueless as to what it feels like to be in their own body that every time they focus and look in, they encounter the Goddess. Or every time that quite, internal voice speaks to them, it's a deity. This stands in stark contrast to the empowerment of "Thou art God/dess." It reduces the self to nothing more than a clay pot to hold divinity, rather than turning one's self into a living avatar of divinity. Well, it is a person's prerogative to do whatever they like with their own self, provided that they don't do anything harmful to others of course. But I agree with you that there is a certain, delicate balance to this dance. On the one hand we have to be careful that we don't deafen ourselves to the Gods, but on the other we have to be careful that we don't fool ourselves into thinking that everything we hear is from Them. But then again, what if there is a person whose experiences really are all from the Gods? How would we really know if they were just reading too much into things or not? I think a third major part of this dance is that we have to be careful not to alienate potential friends and allies. As foolish as we might think a person to be for believing that every crack of thunder is a sign of Thor, does that person not have a right to believe such, and should they not be afforded a place with the rest of us?

However, your point is not lost on me. I do agree with you that making the mystical experience "common" is a really bad move. This is why many of the great mystic societies of history kept their methods and their experiences strictly esoteric. It wasn't just because they were clubs that only "special people" could join (e.g., the "Stone Cutters" in The Simpsons.). It was because the mystical experiences of the sects were made all the more powerful by keeping them hidden, inaccessible to the masses, literally occult. We seem to be living in an era of exoteric occultism these days (and yes, I do recognize that is a contradiction in terms), in which practically anything that was once esoteric is almost immediately available to anyone in just a few clicks of a mouse. In such a culture, how can mysticism not be cheapened and turned into a pale reflection of itself? I have met a lot of self-described occultists so far, but most of them have been anything but (IMO, at least). Not when they flaunt what is supposed to be esoteric knowledge and advertise it everywhere, for everyone to see.

Of course, the flip side to this is, if it weren't for these people flaunting esoteric knowledge all over the place, many of us would probably never have discovered it to begin with. And while the majority of people who "get into it" may really be just following some kind of fad, there are always the exceptions, the few who actually do acquire some real mystical knowledge from all of this. I think there is a silver lining of sorts, if you will.


I think it also tends to create large gaps in our community. We place so much emphasis on mystic experience that it seems we have holes. I don't expect a fully-formed pagan theological school to spring into existence overnight, but looking back at the great religious philosophers both pagan and Christian, well, the phrase "can't hold a candle" comes to mind. Perhaps the person that can't find a mystical experience with a map, flashlight, and a bagged lunch might instead find it through intellectual contemplation, but we dismiss this as an "inferior" way of finding divinity. Perhaps part of the process of the pagan community maturing will be making room for these types of people.Please elaborate on what you mean here. Who exactly looks down on intellectual contemplation as "inferior," and why do they see it that way? I'm not saying you're wrong on that point, but I do agree with you that we can always use more intellectualism in this subculture.

[Simply Puzzled]

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.



I am not sure what you mean by the sentence I have put in bold above. Are you talking about self-described mystics who would agree with you that most people aren't mystics, and who probably aren't really mystics themselves, but who are too blind to see it?

Pretty much what you just said.


Please elaborate on what you mean here. Who exactly looks down on intellectual contemplation as "inferior," and why do they see it that way? I'm not saying you're wrong on that point, but I do agree with you that we can always use more intellectualism in this subculture.

I guess it would be hard for me to fully explain the trend without writing a thesis on the topic, but to provide one example, go to any bookstore and pick-up a book on paganism. My guess is that the book will be almost all exercises designed to bring one into unity with divinity, but trying to find a good explanation of the merits of monolatry verus monotheism or a solid defense of pagan hedonism or something along those lines would be an impossible task.

I'm definitely not saying that the movement as a whole is anti-intellectual. Far from it. Simply that I feel we put so much emphasis in a few directions, such as history and mysticism that others suffer.