Page:Weaving Colorful Threads.pdf/5

Page 5 of 9 Waaijman (2002) defines mysticism as:


 * […] a relational process between God and man [sic], a process which has its own language and logic […] the intimacy of mystical love purifies the intellect, the will and the memory until they are completely attuned to God. (p. 357)

McGinn (2008:47; cf. McGinn 2011), drawing on the work of Lonergan and Merton, speaks of mystical consciousness as ‘meta-concsciousness’ – a consciousness beyond – which is ‘the co-presence of God in our inner acts, not as an object to be understood or grasped, but as the transforming Other’. With special reference to Christian mysticism, earlier studies held it to be ‘a special state of consciousness surpassing ordinary experience through union with the transcendent reality of God’ (Wiseman 2006:9), with the result that mysticism was seen as an extraordinary experience, one not easily available to all. However, in recent decades, there has been a democratisation of mysticism, which makes it applicable to ordinary life and accessible to all as quotidian mysticism. One could say that each one is a mystic, or a mystic ‘in embryo’; it is no longer reserved for a spiritual elite, namely monks, nuns, hermits, et cetera. This insight regarding the nature of mysticism is applicable to adherents of diverse religions, or to those who do not adhere to a particular religious tradition. A recent contribution to the discussion of the nature of Christian mysticism is the suggestion that the term presence is better than ‘union’, particularly if the latter is seen as loss of self in a state of absorption with the divine. As a result:


 * […] the mystical element in Christianity is that part of its belief and practices that concerns the preparation for, the consciousness of, and the reaction to what can be described as the immediate or direct presence of God. (McGinn 1991:xvi, vii)

However, it also needs to be emphasised that, ‘[s]ince God cannot be present the way a created thing in the universe is present, many mystics insist that a true consciousness of God is best realised by absence’ (McGinn 2005b:19). This is a recurring theme in mystical literature and is illustrated in negation and apophasis ‘a process of negation that strips away all experiences, images and concepts to aim toward the mystery that lies beyond both affirmation and negation’(McGinn 2005b:19).

In his description of patristic and early medieval approaches to mystical theology, McIntosh (2005) notes that they witness to ‘unveilings’ that are:


 * […] an ordinary part of a divinely given cosmos in which the whole creation echoes with a divine self expression that is radiant beyond the the capacity of creatures to declare – except by pointing beyond themselves to a hidden presence. (p. 455)

By imbibing the language and teaching of this divine presence, believers are equipped ‘to pass over into the radiance of divine truth’ (McIntosh 2005:455). The paradox of ‘hiddenness’ and ‘radiance’ illustrates the limitations of language in its attempt to describe what is essentially ineffable. It is necessary to ‘transcend’ language by engaging one’s faculty of intuition in order to grasp the hidden meaning of the mystical statement. Just as distortions of grammar and syntax are the means by which the poet tries to convey something that cannot be encompassed by ordinary language, paradox is used to describe the inexpressible.

The consciousness of this ‘source’; ‘union with the divine’; or the ‘ground of being’; or ‘ultimate reality’ will vary, depending on the type of mysticism under investigation, and whether its predilections are theistic or monistic. As mentioned above, definitions of mysticism, in many cases, are closely determined by a particular religious or cultural stance; for example, certain religious traditions emphasise the ontological difference between God and creature, whereas other religious systems, particularly the wisdom traditions of the east, propagate an elimination of the subject or object polarity. Introvertive mysticism may be characterised by an inner realisation of peace; the oneness of all reality; emptiness – entering the void; or pure consciousness. On the other hand, extrovertive mysticism is often experienced in nature mysticism, which is not necessarily religious, but exhibits feelings of wonder, bliss and rapport with creation. In addition to the foregoing, the mystical experience can effect a realisation of panentheism, namely the reality of the divine in the beauty of the natural world, experienced, amongst others, as ‘transcendence of space and time […] expansive joy and bliss […] intuitive insight into the workings of the universe, luminosity, wonder and beauty’ (Parsons 2005:458). Natural mysticism can also be experienced in the reality of daily life: nature, music, literature, art, childbirth, distress, sex, anaesthetics, et cetera, can be triggers for a mystical experience, some leading to transcendent illuminative insight, and others to a more natural extrovertive mysticism (Borchert 1994:27). Given the prevalence of experiences such as the foregoing, deracinated from church allegiance and religious ideation, there has been an increasing appreciation for nonreligious mystical experience. Furthermore, such occurrences put paid to the view that mystical experience is normally an indication of an advanced spiritual life. The results of such experiences are often life-changing: ‘Increased contentment, peace, happiness, a sense of perspective, deepened love, empathy, tolerance, forgiveness, no fear of death and the importance of love’ are some of the consequences of this mystical pirituality (Marshall 2005:106).

Having described mysticism as ‘the yearning of the human spirit for utmost transcendence’ Kruger (2006) speaks of certain varieties of what he calls ‘tasting the silence’:


 * There are forms of mysticism that are feelings of devotion to God or Nature or Universe, or suffering because of being distant from that ultimate source. And there are forms that have a marked quality of intuitive, intellectual (in the old, more than rational, sense of the word) understanding about them. (p. 9)

http://www.hts.org.za