What is mysticism for?

[Catherineanne]

This relates to another thread, but isn't exactly the same. I have asked in the Anglican bit, but Orthodox may have a greater knowledge on this one.

What is mysticism for? Is it for the person who experiences it; to be kept quiet, or is it to be spoken or written about, so that others can also know about it?

What is the purpose? I would be grateful for any comments.

 

[truefiction1]

Mysticism is a process that heals the wounds that a person has been afflicted with by other wounded persons and then also by their own doings. In other words, it works to undo the effects of "sin", and free the person of it. It is also called Theosis.

 

[Catherineanne]

Mysticism is a process that heals the wounds that a person has been afflicted with by other wounded persons and then also by their own doings. In other words, it works to undo the effects of "sin", and free the person of it. It is also called Theosis.

So it is personal to that person? It isn't for anyone else, or to do with anyone else?

 

[ArmyMatt]

So it is personal to that person? It isn't for anyone else, or to do with anyone else?

that depends on what God wants that person to do with that experience.

 

[Catherineanne]

that depends on what God wants that person to do with that experience.

That makes sense. But how would they know?

I suppose they could ask, but what if they don't get a reply? Who would be the right person to ask?

 

[ArmyMatt]

That makes sense. But how would they know?

I suppose they could ask, but what if they don't get a reply? Who would be the right person to ask?

God let's them know, however He wants them to

 

[Cappadocious]

I was once told that, when in doubt, one does not go around talking about personal mystical events.

 

[ArmyMatt]

indeed. if they happen, they happen, but it is not on us to seek them out.

 

[~Anastasia~]

It seems that some of the Saints (and those that may become Saints) have had a tendency to share some of their experiences at the end of their lives, or their spiritual children have shared some of their knowledge after they repose.

But no, it's not openly talked about. On the one hand, it may be too personal to help anyone else by being not applicable to others. On another hand, if there is delusion involved, it ought not be shared at all. And again, if it is pure, it can possibly tempt the person experiencing it to pride. There may be more pitfalls as well, but that's what I can think of offhand.

It's also just the kind of thing the person experiencing it usually WANTS to keep to themselves, as a kind of private thing. Most don't like to be asked about their private prayer. There's also the case where - if a person speaks too much about what God does with them, it often happens that whatever it is is lost as a result.

Generally they are kept private unless there is good reason and God intends it to be shared.

There are plenty of books that touch on such things though.

 

[Catherineanne]

I was once told that, when in doubt, one does not go around talking about personal mystical events.

No, I would agree with that one. This is about the level above that; if a person ever did say anything to anyone, what would be the right context.

 

[Catherineanne]

It seems that some of the Saints (and those that may become Saints) have had a tendency to share some of their experiences at the end of their lives, or their spiritual children have shared some of their knowledge after they repose.

That sounds reasonable.

But no, it's not openly talked about. On the one hand, it may be too personal to help anyone else by being not applicable to others. On another hand, if there is delusion involved, it ought not be shared at all. And again, if it is pure, it can possibly tempt the person experiencing it to pride. There may be more pitfalls as well, but that's what I can think of offhand.

Pride is not good. And if one happened to be Catholic, taking the chance of being buried in a glass case with wax on one's face would also not be good. Fortunately Anglicans don't do that, however saintly anyone has been.

It's also just the kind of thing the person experiencing it usually WANTS to keep to themselves, as a kind of private thing. Most don't like to be asked about their private prayer. There's also the case where - if a person speaks too much about what God does with them, it often happens that whatever it is is lost as a result.

Perhaps some things are best not spoken of at all.

Generally they are kept private unless there is good reason and God intends it to be shared.

Good. Quite right.

There are plenty of books that touch on such things though.

So maybe write it down and let others decide what to do with it when we are out of reach of pride? Or not write it down. Either way is good.

 

[Catherineanne]

Mysticism is a process that heals the wounds that a person has been afflicted with by other wounded persons and then also by their own doings. In other words, it works to undo the effects of "sin", and free the person of it. It is also called Theosis.

I still like this answer best; a process of healing from sin and the effects of sin. That works.

 

[buzuxi02]

So it is personal to that person? It isn't for anyone else, or to do with anyone else?

Its personal in that the goal of mysticism is union with God, each individual will struggle differently to attain that goal, its not a one size fits all. Its common to all to want to strive for deification. A person who has attained such level of spirituality though will keep it to himself for a number of reasons. He does not look to flaunt it (a sign of vanity and pride) instead the mystic will give advice to those that seek him out in proportion to that person's walk. In christianity the fullness of the mystics struggle will be revealed after his death in hagiography (a vita), or through one of their spiritual children.

The biographer of the great mystic St Silouan explains:
Between "born" and "died" there seems very little to say; but to speak of someone’s inner life before God is a forthright, audacious act. To open up the "innermost heart" of a Christian on the world stage is almost sacrilege. But in the knowledge that for the Elder, who left this world a victor over it, there is nothing to fear; nothing will disturb his eternal rest in God, so we — who also search for righteousness — can attempt to discover his morally rich life.

In the case of Starets Silouan, an extreme example of a mystic, his biographer explains how many who visited him (and other monks) left unimpressed:
Many who come into contact with monks and with Elder Siluan in particular, do not see anything particular in them and thus remain unsatisfied and possibly even disappointed. This occurs because they approach monastics with the wrong scales, with improper demands and expectations.
The monk is engaged in endless struggle, and often very pitched struggle, but an Orthodox monk is not a "fakir". He is not interested in the acquisition, through special exercises, of specific psychic powers, which is what so many ignorant seekers of mystical life expect. Monks engage in difficult, constant battle, and some of them, like Elder Siluan, engage in a titanic struggle, invisible to the outside world, to destroy within themselves the proud beast and to become men, real men in the image of the perfect Man — Jesus Christ — humble and meek.
This is a strange life, incomprehensible to the secular world; everything in it is paradox, everything is in a form opposite to the order of the secular world, and it is impossible to explain it in words. The only way to understand it is to perform the will of God, that is, to follow the commandments of Christ; the path, indicated by Him.

 

[buzuxi02]

Of course the mystic of extreme example like St Silouan is but a small handful of persons. We do not pray unceasingly for the world, we do not have constant struggles wrestling with demons on a nightly basis, we do not take it upon ourselves to imitate Christ to the point of living and praying where we become a vessel for the defeat of cosmic evil. But we can all attain a level of mysticism

Vladimir Lossky in his book Theology and Mysticism in the Tradition of the Eastern Church explains how mysticism and theology are to be lived:

The eastern tradition has never made a sharp distinction between mysticism and theology; between personal experience of the divine mysteries and the dogma affirmed by the Church. The following words spoken a century ago by a great Orthodox theologian, the Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow, express this attitude perfectly: 'none of the mysteries of the most secret wisdom of God ought to appear alien or altogether transcendent to us, but in all humility we must apply our spirit to the contemplation of divine things'.[1] To put it in another way, we must live the dogma expressing a revealed truth, which appears to us as an unfathomable mystery, in such a fashion that instead of assimilating the mystery to our mode of understanding, we should, on the contrary, look for a profound change, an inner transformation of spirit, enabling us to experience it mystically. Far from being mutually opposed, theology and mysticism support and complete each other. One is impossible without the other. If the mystical experience is a personal working out of the content of the common faith, theology is an expression, for the profit of all, of that which can be experienced by everyone. Outside the truth kept by the whole Church personal experience would be deprived of all certainty, of all objectivity. It would be a mingling of truth and of falsehood, of reality and of illusion: 'mysticism' in the bad sense of the word. On the other hand, the teaching of the Church would have no hold on souls if it did not in some degree express an inner experience of truth, granted in different measure to each one of the faithful. There is, therefore, no Christian mysticism without theology; but, above all, there is no theology without mysticism.