“Contrasting Mystical and Rational Spirituality”
by
Josh Cooper
Psychology 459
1.
Preface
My report 2
was a report on the cognitive organization of rational spirituality. It discusses
the different levels of spirituality including ritual, mystical, and rational
faith. The report discusses not only the differences between the three levels,
but also how the three levels can be identified and understood, and how a
proper understanding of the levels can be applicable to one’s life.
This report acts
as a general synopsis for the entire class. It is a review of both of the
textbooks, the lecture notes, and the presentations of the class. By doing
this, this report is able to address the general topic that pops-up throughout
the class: mystical vs. rational spirituality. This report allows one to see
the difference between the two approaches, as well as the importance and
advantages of rational spirituality. By the end of this report, in accumulation
with the other reports, one may begin to get a general idea of the concepts of
Swedenborg, as well as the importance of the approach one takes towards him.
2.
Introduction
The two main textbooks to this
course were Testimony to the Invisible Edited by James F. Lawrence and Spirituality
that Makes Sense by Douglas Taylor. The two books deal with many subjects
that stem from the works of Swedenborg. Testimony is a collection of
essays by seven different authors that discuss the impact of Swedenborg on a
number of famous literary figures including Dostoevsky, William Blake, Emerson,
William Van Dusen, and D.T. Suzuki. The book gives the reader a contextual
background of Swedenborg and how his influenced has spread through the minds of
many famous individuals. By reading Testimony to the Invisible one gets
an impression of both the quality and quantity of Swedenborg's Writings. By
reading the various essays one can see the many different interpretations and
impacts that the Writings of Swedenborg have had.
Spirituality the Makes Sense
is a book written by Swedenborgian minister Douglas Taylor. In the book Taylor
tackles many different theological concepts dealt with in Swedenborg in hopes
of "making sense" of it all. The book discusses different topics
including God, Jesus, the Virgin birth, the Trinity, Heaven and Hell, faith,
evil, good deeds, and "as-of-self". By discussing all these subjects
Taylor attempts to rationally explain all the different complications,
objections, and misunderstandings that are associated with all these topics.
Through the reading of these two
texts as well as the ever-growing pages of the lecture notes, one is presented
with plenty of material to investigate and attempt to understand the works of
Emanuel Swedenborg. That is, if one feels so inclined. By a proper
investigation of the texts and lecture notes, one is able to discuss the main
topic of this course, which is, mystical vs. rational spirituality.
Quotations from
"Testimony to the Invisible"
"There is a paradox involved in the basic quality of human
existence. Our hands touch solid objects, our eyes see shapes and colors, our
everyday horizons are narrow, yet there are times when the soul seems to stand
on hilltops and to glimpse immense vistas of meaning." -Colin Wilson 89
This passage was
caused immediate pause in thought when I first read it, for it addresses the
heart of man's dual existence. It discusses, rather poetically, the appearance
of an overwhelming paradox that every man is faced with during his existence.
Much of our existence is described and defined in terms of our five, physical
senses. Often, people describe what can be seen, smelt, touched, tasted, and
heard as the more "real". In the passage quoted, Wilson addresses the
idea that often it is that which transcends these five, limited senses that is
truly "real". Wilson goes on to describe how it is not just the
saint, philosopher, or poet that sees these sort of "mystic visions"
and recognizes the concrete world as not more "real" but simply "closer
up". It is something that everybody experiences in life.
Although I do not
necessarily agree with the description of this "hilltop reality" as
being mystical, I do agree with how it recognizes the dual existence of life.
There is a physical world, restricted by time and space, perceived only by
sensory modalities, but there is a higher existence of consciousness, ruled by
thought and feeling, which stands on the mountain and views the external world
from above, and identifies, attempts to understand, makes value judgments, and
attributes meaning to all it perceives.
"...if somebody ever proved to me that Christ is outside the
truth, and if it were a fact that the truth excludes Christ, I would rather
remain with Christ that with the truth." -Dostoevesky 38-39
This line, which
Milosz quotes from a letter by Dostoevsky, is a line that forced me to put down
the book and reflect. For it is when I first read this passage that the
mysteries of faith started to surface in my mind. Whenever I inquire deep into
spiritual matters, it is the desire for the truth that I consider as my main
motivation. In this letter, Dostoevsky explains that it is the peace he
receives from the beauty, sympathy, and wisdom of Christ that would make him
choose Christ over the truth itself. To me this is a powerful statement. For my
passion and belief in Christ stems from the idea that Christ is the embodiment
of love and truth itself.
The reflections I
have had in response to Dostoevsky's comment have caused me to hold rational
faith in the utmost importance. In no way I am suggesting that the faith of
Dostoevsky is not a valid one, but rather that his comment has made it clear to
me that any belief of mine must embody a rational understructure in order for
it to be a true belief or faith of mine. From this, it has come clear to me
that any faith or belief that I have that comes from only an emotional state,
is not a true faith, because it needs to include the rationality and
understanding to be married to that will and affections in my emotional states.
"Emerson rejected as too absolute the so-called Swedenborgian
dictionary of correspondences, which required the reader to accept as gospel
the exact spiritual meaning Swedenborg himself had placed on each object in
nature. Rather, Emerson preferred to adopt the general law to his personal
purposes." Eugene
Taylor 153
When I read this,
my first reaction was that of confusion, until my thoughts led my confusion to
mere disappointment. For Emerson's interpretation of Swedenborg's correspondences
is faulty on many levels. It first of all sees the science of correspondences
as merely literary techniques that Swedenborg used as a poetic tool to portray
theological ideas. The truth though is, that all the correspondences came from
Swedenborg's empirical observations of the spiritual world. The fact that
Emerson decided to disregard the spiritual correspondences that Swedenborg put
to natural things, and decided to invent his own, says to me, that he either
terribly misunderstood what Swedenborg was saying, or struggled immensely with
getting over the pride of his own prudence. It is this kind of interpretation
of the Writings of Swedenborg that lead one away from the rationality of the
Writings, and that is why I become disappointed with this type of response. For
removing the rational continuum that underlies all of the Writings jeopardizes
everything that it about.
Quotations from
"Spirituality that Makes Sense"
“Our idea of God governs and controls all our wishing and thinking,
whether we realize it or not.” –Taylor
4
This quote comes
from one of the first sentences of Douglas Taylor’s book. I think that what is
being said here is of the utmost importance, for if one wishes to delve into
the intellectual mysteries of faith, one must realize and understand the
importance of it. Our idea of God is what controls our thoughts and our
feelings, whether we are aware of it or not. Even if one rarely thinks about
God, or doesn’t belief in God, the idea of God, or lack-there-of, still
influences every other thought and feeling.
God is the
fountainhead of all ideas. God is the greatest possible idea that man can
fathom. God is the most important idea also. One’s idea of God determines all
of our other ideas. For if God is an idea that contains infinity, then God must
be within every other idea. For any other finite idea cannot exist apart from
the infinite idea of God.
If one trusts in
an all-loving God, then this idea floods into all other thoughts and feelings,
especially when one deals with fear. If one sees God as malign, then that idea
can cause an individual to be more harmful, frustrated, angered, paranoid, or
anxious. The idea of God affects everything in our minds, whether we are aware
of it or not.
“We are meant to
have an enlightened faith, a faith through understanding.”
- Taylor 113
This statement I hold to have the utmost importance. Faith and religion lie at the hearts of man, whether they are aware of it or not. But the direction that the modern mind is developing is a direction that relies more and more on logical coherency, reason, and understanding. If faith is going to be something that people incorporate into their lives, it needs to be a faith through understanding. It is important that an understanding and rationality is applied to faith, because if it is not, then it is merely blind, ritualistic, persuasive, or mystical. If this were the case than man would not be in true agreement with what faith he attributes himself to.
The purpose of faith through understanding is so that faith makes sense. If it doesn’t make sense then it is without substance. It is through the understanding that man is able to raise his love into higher spiritual warmth. In order to develop ones faith to higher levels, one must raise their understanding of faith and spiritual matters. For faith trying to endure without understanding is like a plant trying to grow without the light of the sun.
“The Lord never casts anyone into hell. Nor is anyone cast into hell against his or her own wishes. People freely choose to go there for eternity because, while living on earth, they have chosen hell in preference to heaven in most situations.”
-Taylor 41
I enjoy this quote for a number of reasons. The main reason is that it addresses questions that many people have when it comes to the topic of God. Such as, “How can there be evil if God is all good?” “Why is there a hell? Why doesn’t God take everyone to heaven?”
People aren’t punished by a life in hell; they choose to go to hell. While we are in this world we are blessed with the gift of freedom. Through or conscious use of our free will, we choose what to do. When we choose to do and think things that contain hellish characteristics, then we are forming hellish habits. We are choosing to look away from heavenly warmth and light. When we do this we become more comfortable with hellish things. Thus, we make ourselves spiritually nocturnal. People are in hell, because that is where they choose to be, because that is where they feel most comfortable. They don’t enjoy heavenly things, because they didn’t live that kind of life on earth, they aren’t comfortable in heaven. They choose hell.
The point of this quick discussion is to show, briefly, that many spiritual topics that man struggles with, can be explained in a way that makes sense. It can be understood. Spiritual clarity exists.
Mystical or Rational?
In a word, the two textbooks that we studied during this class represent both the mystical and rational approach to spirituality. Testimony to the Invisible is the more mystical approach, while Spirituality that Makes Sense, as its title suggests, is the much more rational approach.
Testimony to the Invisible is a mystical approach to Swedenborg because it is a collection of many people’s interpretations of Swedenborg’ Writings. Many of the authors or the people discussed in the essays were not investigators of what Swedenborg had to say, because they couldn’t get past the idea that Swedenborg had his spiritual eyes open. Because of this, they had to take on a mystical approach, or resulted in questioning Swedenborg’s sanity rather than data.
Throughout the book Swedenborg is often referred to as a “visionary” or “mystic”, which quite obviously suggests a mystical approach to the subject.
In the first quote that I cited, Wilson discusses this “mystical” feeling people can get when entering into the intangible. It is accurate in its depiction of man’s dual existence, but the description of it is airy and without substance. It recognizes that life goes beyond the five senses, but it in no way describes what exactly it is made of, what causes it, and how it functions. This is just an example of a mystical approach to Swedenborg that is found throughout the book.
The third quote I discussed about Emerson is the one that I believe displays the books lack of rationality the best. In the book, Emerson disregards Swedenborg’s correspondences and invents his own. This shows that Emerson missed the point entirely. The correspondences that Swedenborg discovered were not some sort of symbolic invention, but were based on his empirical observations in the spiritual world. If one interprets correspondences as a subjective interpretation by Swedenborg, then one is approaching Swedenborg mystically. For this suggests that Swedenborg was somewhere far away from reality, and sees him as more of a visionary, literary figure than a rationalist and scientist.
As long as one focuses only on the subjectivism, and experience of God, without referring to the rational nature of God, then one treads the line of mysticism. One can see this throughout Testimony to the Invisible because it is many people’s subjective interpretations of Swedenborg rather than the objective investigation of Swedenborg (save Suzuki’s chapter).
Spirituality the Makes Sense is a much more rational approach to Swedenborg than Testimony to the Invisible. The purpose of the whole book seems to be “making sense” of God, the Spiritual world, and many other topics such as the virgin birth and the trinity. Throughout the book Taylor quotes passages from the three-fold word (Old Testament, New Testament, and the Writings) to help explain and understand these spiritual topics.
Never once, does Taylor put a misleading interpretation or change anything that Swedenborg says. He simply describes what is being said in the three-fold word. The three quotes I took from the book allow one to see this. They are brief passages that come from Taylor’s rational discussion of the topics of God, faith, and hell. It is not mystical because it doesn’t focus only on the subjective experience of God; it describes the “why” and the “how”. It allows the reader to understand Swedenborg by discussing exactly what is being said. It doesn’t question Swedenborg’s sanity or technique, but takes it for as it is. This is a much more rational approach then the approaches we find in Testimony to the Invisible.
3.
Class Discussions and Lecture Notes
1st Report: Elizabeth Malsey’s “The Right Way to Live in Virtual Reality”
I considered this a very good presentation. The points were very clear and understandable. One of the topics was a discussion of the two concepts given to every human. These are liberty and rationality. This I am in complete agreement with. If one reflects at the differences between humans and animals, one will see that the difference boils down to freedom and rationality. Man has the ability to choose (liberty) and to discern (rationality). These are two great gifts that God has given us. Our liberty prevents us from becoming machines, and our rationality enables us to understand the world we live in.
The rest of the presentation was a discussion of the internal and external mind, and the character of people who had different degrees of the mind open and/or closed. At one point in the presentation, there is a discussion on what the character of a natural person who’s spiritual degree is not open, yet not closed. Malsey describes this person as one who “has uses but no understanding of what he/she does.” I agree with this statement. This type of person is someone who does not have their rational mind open yet. This explains children in many ways. It shows us that although children do not have their spiritual mind open, it still isn’t closed and it can still be developed. Adults who have chosen to close their spiritual mind are not in the same boat though.
Because I am a believer of Swedenborg it is difficult for me to find many parts of presentations on Swedenborg that I disagree with. But one part that I am confused about is when the presentation is discussing people who’s spiritual degree is not open, yet not closed, and it says that “the fate of the person is to go to the lowest heaven, which is not very pleasant.” What confuses me about this part is the description of the lowest heaven as “not very pleasant.” I believe that all of the degrees of heaven are pleasant, however, this statement could be referring to the lowest heaven as not being very pleasant in relation to the higher heavens.
2nd Presentation Tyrone Clark’s “Emerson: The Swedenborgian and Transcendentalist Connection”
This presentation was on the essay on Emerson from Testimony to the Invisible. At the very end of the presentation Clark sums up what the overriding theme of it all was. This was the difference of taking on Swedenborg from a rational or mystical approach. I agree with this and believe it is very important. The transcendentalist movement was one that was greatly influenced, indirectly, by Swedenborgian thought, but its approach was a mystical one. It relied on the “inner journey towards truth by way of mystical paths” rather than a rational one by systematic and scientific means. The difference between the two approaches is the difference between approaching it rationally or irrationally.
I would also like to comment on point Clark made about Emerson’s description of a Swedenborgian sermon that he went to. Emerson described it as very methodical, and like a geometry problem. I find this almost humorous. But the fact is that it makes sense, because Swedenborg was so systematic and scientific it is only true that I could see the Swedenborgian sermon that Emerson went to as being like a math class. This I can agree with. But I would also like to comment that I have been to countless Swedenborgian sermons, and the ones that I have been to are not exactly like math classes. They are personal, meaningful, and moving. They are like a math class in one-way though, that is, it is logical, rational, and makes sense. I am not saying that the Swedenborgian sermon that Emerson went to was done in this way, but I do disagree with the idea that Swedenborg can only be presented like a math class.
The presentation also comments on how “Emerson’s main theme in Nature was that the highest use of nature is to draw forth the latent energies of the soul and lead men away from self-love.” This does parallel Swedenborgian doctrine very well, but I disagree with it some, because natures greatest use not only draws the soul’s “latent energies” but also the wisdom and love of man’s spiritual being.
3rd Presentation Tricia Castro’s “Suzuki on Swedenborg”
What I am in agreement with in this presentation was the discussion of why Swedenborg is interesting. The reasons are that he traveled to heaven and hell, saw human beings after death, and his doctrine is similar to Buddhism. I myself also find these reasons to be very interested in Swedenborg; the fact that we have someone who traveled to the spiritual world is extremely interesting to me. I do agree with the fact that there are similarities to Swedenborg and Buddhism, and this is interesting to me, and even more so to Suzuki, but I do think it can be dangerous to rely to much on similarities between doctrines, because then you begin to blur them together and things get confusing and falsified.
Another topic discussed in this presentation was Swedenborg’s breathing techniques. I am not very familiar with Swedenborg’s breathing techniques so this interested me a lot. I also agree with how the correspondence of the lungs and heart were incorporated into the discussion of Swedenborg’s breathing techniques, because this is where the true meaning of breathing lies.
Another area that I am confused about is when the presentation talks about how Swedenborg regarded meat as incompatible with doctrine, because I have never directly come across this in Swedenborg, so I am in slight disagreement with it. Although I do know that Swedenborg says that the members of the Most Ancient Church did not eat meat, I have never seen him say that eating meat is against doctrine.
One area of the lecture notes that I consider to be very important was the section that describes substantive dualism. I believe that substantive dualism should be one of the first topics discussed in theistic psychology, because it shows the difference between theistic psychology and the presently functioning monistic paradigm of psychology. Studying and understanding the mind-body distinction should be the starting block of theistic psychology, and it is the direction that modern psychology needs to go in (and I believe it will be forced to one day). It is fitting that this section is at the very beginning of the lecture notes, and it is good, because it assures that further students who start to read the ever-growing pages of the lecture notes, will probably get to at least this section.
Another area of the lecture notes that I found to be of importance was the topic of the anatomy of the mind. The reason I consider this to be very important is because of the context of the subject matter. Because this class is a psychology class, it can be assumed that everyone in the class and who will be taking the class will be interested in the human mind, because psychology is the study of the mind and behavior. The diagrams that Dr. James offers are extremely helpful in understanding the anatomy of the mind. It is important in theistic psychology to distinguish between the internal and the external, because it is a ubiquitous theme in the Writings. It is also a subject that needs to be addressed in psychology today, for psychology today is predominantly monistic. That is, it doesn’t even recognize a mind-body/brain dualism, let alone a distinction between the internal and external mind. So it is the idea that there is an internal within the external that needs to be addressed in this class and in psychology. It is this idea that allows people to recognize the spiritual life within everything, the existence and importance of God, the existence of the mind as outside of the body, etc. This is why I consider this portion of the lecture notes to be important, because it helps to lay the foundation of many of the ideas that are discussed in theistic psychology.
Another are of the lecture notes that I consider to be very important is the section of self-witnessing. I believe this to be of importance for a number of reasons. One of the reasons is that it helps the reader to understand the three-fold self (affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor). This is important in both ones personal life as well as psychology in general. This subject has many implications on psychology directly. For example, this section helps display the sequence of affective à cognitive à sensorimotor. This idea of affective primacy is helpful and has direct implications on psychology today.
But the uses of understanding the three-fold self, goes beyond just psychology, but it also helps one understand Swedenborg’s Writings better. For the sequence of affective à cognitive à sensorimotor is the same divine sequence that occurs throughout the Writings (Love à Wisdom à Use / End à cause à effect / etc) Understanding the three-fold self is extremely important, because by studying it one is building a foundation for many other related topics in the Writings.
But what I consider to be the most important aspect of the self-witnessing section is its applicability to one’s life. Self-witnessing is an enormous regenerative tool that can be used for character reformation. This section in the lecture notes goes beyond just understanding concepts it allows one to put it to use, and this is where a higher level of understanding comes from. The reason that theistic psychology is so important is because it applies to everyone’s life. It is something that relates to everyone and can (and should) be used by everyone, and the self-witnessing techniques discussed in the lecture notes are one of the applicable parts of theistic psychology.
I would like to end my discussion on the lecture notes by talking about the section on learning theory. I think this is a very important section, because this is a pivotal section as to the future of theistic psychology. This section discusses the ways in which people need to learn and understand concepts of God and other spiritual matters. The future of theistic psychology can go only as far as the understanding of it goes. Developing ideas related to learning theory is what will allow theistic psychology to exist. To me, the heart of theistic psychology is that it allows people to understand the “why”. The section on learning theory discusses how people can learn to understand the “why”.
4.
Conclusion
As the semester winds to an end, and I sit here and type the final few paragraphs of my final report I can only but think of how much has happened during this past semester. I always thought that I had a good amount of insight into spiritual matters. This class has been extremely helpful in my understanding of spiritual matters. It has allowed me to delve into the intellectual wonders of faith and God, and the results were more than I imagined. My spiritual life has accelerated this past semester, and the momentum that I have gained will keep me going for a lifetime. For this I am extremely grateful.
This report has helped me identify my own personal views on spirituality in a number of ways. By examining the books, lecture notes, and presentations, I was able to reflect on the different ways in which people approach the same subject. By getting a greater view of the array of perspectives I was able to better define my own.
This report has allowed me to further distinguish between mystical and rational spirituality. What has been the most helpful for me, was not just distinguishing between the two, but also the importance of taking on a rational approach. Spiritual matters are something that are extremely important in my life, and the more I can develop my rationality the more my spiritual life will develop, and the more I can understand and apply to my life, the deeper my faith will become.
5.
Future Generations
Try to understand it! If you do not try to understand theistic psychology, then not only will you not get anywhere, but you will also miss the whole point of the class. This class has a lifetime of knowledge in it, the more you can get out of it the happier you will be. It is 100% worth the effort. Take the time to read the lecture notes, the text books, pay attention in class, and make yourself ask as many questions as you can. Dr. James will have an answer.
Approach the subject with the negative bias. Don’t allow yourself to get caught up in not wanting to believe, or more importantly, not trying to understand. If you let yourself go deeply into the subject you will discover truths that will change your life for the better in infinite ways.