keithprosser3 wrote:
Mysticism doesn't claim to explain the origin of the universe. That's not an important question in mysticism.
I can live with that. So what does mysticism claim to explain? What are some important questions in mysticism? Does mysticsm offer any answers to them?
Mysticism has succeeded in explaining quite a bit actually. Mostly about the true nature of the self. The state of being consciously aware, and how to best deal with that situation. And amazingly their conclusions are precisely the same conclusion that modern scientists are finally coming to through science.
Mysticism simply states that life and all of reality arises from something "mystical".
What does "mystical" mean? It basically means that its a mystery. The mystics hold that it's not only a mystery, but it's a mystery that can never be known. Science actually supports this observation as well, via the current theory of Quantum Mechanics where the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle guaranties that we will never be able to explain how the quantum world works in terms of standard observations and the idea of cause and effect. The EPR paradox and Bells Theorem further confirm that local ideas of cause and effect will never be sufficient to explain the quantum world. So all of this supports the mystics view that we can never know from whence our reality springs. All we can know is that it springs from something that is beyond are comprehension. And that's clearly a mystery. Not just a curiosity that we may someday solve.
The mystics like to say that "Life is but a dream" in the mind of this mysterious foundational substance that gives rise to our physical reality. And they have further reasons for proposing this postulate.
Not only do we see an unexplainable physical reality all around us, but we are also experiencing this physical reality. So then the question becomes, "What is it that is having this experience?". Well for the mystics this became a very intriguing question. After all, forget about trying to figure things out objectively as science tries to do, but instead, since we are the entity that is having this experience subjectively it makes more sense to approach it subjectively. So the mystic looks within to his or her own subjective nature.
After all, we are a being that is having a subjective experience. That's the essence of our being. From here there are two paths we can take. Both are intellectually interesting, but only one has practical value.
The First Possible Path of Inquiry
We can ask (almost in a scientific way), "What is the nature of this thing that is having a subjective experience?"
Can we describe this entity in terms of physics? The mystics have concluded that such an inquiry is only going to result in circular questions like a dog chasing its own tail. We don't even understand the ultimate nature of the physical universe around us, how are we going to understand exactly what it is that is having an experience in terms of a physics that can't even explain why quarks and electrons exist?
Moreover, even if we could explain why quarks and electrons exist, what are we left with? We are left with the conclusion that quarks and electrons are then "Having a subjective experience", when they come together to form a brain. But this then requires that we believe that, as a prerequisite, quarks and electrons are innately capable of having an experience.
The mystics prefer to believe that the quarks and electrons are manifestations of a mystical being from whence they arise, and it is this mystical being that is capable of having an experience. The quarks, leptons, and bosons, etc, that physicists have recognized are all just manifestations of this underlying mystical entity. It's called "mystical" because it is indeed a mystery. We have no idea how it ultimately works. And so we surrender to this fact rather than pretending that we could somehow explain it someday.
(
By the way, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't continue to try to explain it, but until we do it seems silly to just assume that we someday will explain it. We already have many reasons why we should never be able to explain it, and ironically the most convincing reason we currently have is the scientific theory of Quantum Mechanism itself.)
The real irony here is that scientists themselves seem to be holding out faith-based bets that we might someday be able to by-pass Quantum Theory and violate the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle to find a deeper understanding of the true nature of reality. But the reason this is so ironic is because scientists are actually betting against the predictions of science itself.
Moreover, the mystics ask, "Is this really important?" What will we gain even if we could ultimately explain the totality of existence? Well, that's hard to say because we don't know what the explanation would entail. But in the end we'd ultimately need to assign our subjective experience to some physical phenomenon. And how is that going to truly be meaningful anyway?
So we take the second, far more practical and constructive, path.
The Second Possible Path of Inquiry
Instead of trying to explain what we are in terms of physics, why not move forward to explaining what we are in terms of subjective experience?
In fact, this is the more productive path in any case. Even if we are nothing other than a fleeting emergent property that simply pops into existence because of a certain configuration and then disappears again, we can still gain much insight into the nature of this experience by focusing on the actual experience itself, rather than trying to worry about how it can be explained in terms of physics.
And so this is where the mystics turn their focus. And because of this, their insights are TRUE whether this subjective experience is a fleeting physical phenomenon or a dream of some mystical underlying entity. It really doesn't matter in terms of practicality.
The ONLY difference is that in the secular view this subjective experience will be fleeting and temporary, whilst in the mystical view it may potentially be eternal.
That's the ONLY difference.
The practical conclusions that the mystics make about this subjective experience is TRUE in either case. So their method of inquiry has nailed the TRUTH in terms of how best to analyze and improve this subjective experience.
So these mystical philosophies are valuable even in a purely secular world.
