Religious potential - from a psychiatric perspective

The Psychiatrist Arthur J. Deikman, M.D. sums up the phenomenon Mysticism as follows:

A mystic experience is the production of an unusual state of consciousness. This state is brought about by a de-automatization of hierarchically ordered structures of perception and cognition, structures that ordinarily conserve attentional energy for maximum efficiency in achieving the basic goals of the individual: biological survival as an organism and psychological survival as a personality. Perceptual selection and cognitive patterning are in the service of these goals. Under special conditions of dysfunction … or under special goal conditions such as exist in religious mystics, the pragmatic systems of automatic selection are set aside or break down, in favor of alternate modes of consciousness whose stimulus processing may be less efficient from a biological point of view but whose very inefficiency may permit the experience of aspects of the real world formerly excluded or ignored. The extent to which such a shift takes place is a function of the motivation of the individual, his particular neurophysiological state, and the environmental conditions encouraging or discouraging such a change.
A final comment should be made. The content of the mystic experience reflects not only its unusual mode of consciousness but also the particular stimuli being processed through that mode. The mystic experience can be beatific, satanic, revelatory, or psychotic, depending on the stimuli predominant in each case. Such an explanation says nothing conclusive about the source of “transcendent” stimuli. God or the Unconscious share equal possibilities here and one’s interpretation will reflect one’s presuppositions and beliefs. The mystic vision is one of unity, and modern physics lends some support to this perception when it asserts that the world and its living forms are variations of the same elements. However, there is no evidence that separateness and differences are illusions (as affirmed by Vedanta) or that God or a transcendent reality exists (as affirmed by Western religions). The available scientific evidence tends to support the view that the mystic experience is one of internal perception, an experience that can be ecstatic, profound, or therapeutic for purely internal reasons. Yet for psychological science, the problem of understanding such internal processes is hardly less complex than the theological problem of understanding God. Indeed, regardless of one’s direction in the search to know what reality is, a feeling of awe, beauty, reverence, and humility seems to be the product of one’s efforts. Since these emotions are characteristic of the mystic experience, itself, the question of the epistemological validity of that experience may have less importance than was initially supposed.

Any comments …

Shalom

That’s quite interesting.

I happen to believe that the deepest level of self-understanding leads to understanding of the inner-self of the “outer” universe, and a complete, deepest form of self-control may even lead to control over external, omnipresent energies.

I happen to believe that survival systems make certain forms of progress impossible. There’s allot of ignoring, suppression and obsession involved, in every fear, aggression and lust that I can ever remember. There’s a natural and slow cycle to the universe, which is usually left unobserved or it is aborted due to impatience and destraction.

I happen to believe that this cosmos/universe is alive, literally a large being of many parts. I wont call it “God”, as I find that word would be disrespectful, to something which is beyond the common and ego-baring concepts of a higher single being. It’s not a separate sort of thing, “not two”…

In some religious doctrin, they claim that one must entirely loose one’s ego and one’s self-cherishing/self-defensiveness, before one can experience the full/true-enlightenment. I have always wondered about the consiquencies of this kind of selflessness… On one hand, it may open many gates of the awareness, and one’s self-defenses/self-interests no longer get in the way of that. On the other hand, it leads away from self-empowerment and the purification of intolerance/proper-violence.

Now the question remains: Is the cause behind mysticism a electro-chemical accident, or manipulation by the hand of God? :astonished:

Either answer works for me.

EDIT: Thought I’d throw this in here, in case no one has read it.

Hi Dan,

This could be indicating what other people call “miracles” – something that we often dismiss as something unreal. It gives us an inkling that what we call “God” may be something very, very real.

How many illnesses do we cause ourselves by reacting in a way that abuses our soul (or psyche) and refuses to accept that human life has certain requirements? For what short term advantages do we sacrifice our mental, physical and spiritual health?

Deikman points to the fact that scientists have long discovered that I am built up of the same molecules as my dog and asks, is mystical awareness able to grasp this in its unusual consciousness, fathoming those realities that are otherwise too deep for us? By switching off automated perception at will, able to concentrate on the presence at hand, perhaps St. Paul’s quote about reaching out to “feel” if we could not grasp the divine presence is not so far away from the truth. The “Unity” of God (Aramaic=Alaha) is in our midst, calling us to rethink …

“Go in through the narrow gate … How narrow is the gate and how constricted is the road that leads to life, and few are the people who find it!” (Matth. 7:13-14)
The Way of Christ is narrow and constricted, it requires us to set priorities and think in long term perspectives. He requires us to take our place in a new world as new creatures, living in a “new testament” or covenant, foregoing the short-termed advantages but enjoying the long-termed benefit of a new quality of life.

The Mystic has first sat down and estimated the cost – and is under no illusion – quite the opposite to what many claim to know about him. He has this in common with Mystics of other traditions and they are the true peacemakers on this planet. They are happy to be poor, to mourn, to be meek, to hunger and thirst after righteousness, to be merciful and pure in heart – even if it brings persecution. The quality of life is worth it.

Hi Mental_Edge,

you are missing the point:

Shalom

Less than an hour ago I just felt something out.

It was inside of my heart area.

I repaired like the energy cords,
So that it could effect my mind.

Now I’m light headed and I’m… —
In sense of this, everything I’ve ever done, and everything I’ve ever seen, and everything I’ve ever known, is all wrong. All imperfect.

The bible and some other books that ancient human cultures wrote
They were alterations of an original text
That was not written by human hands.

I know that nobody else can realize this now.
They aren’t in it, so they can’t feel it, or touch it, at all…

People are closer to it when they are still young children.
If you can remember how a state of being felt, only a few years after purebirth, without abusive parents or any cultural corruption, you may be slightly close to sensing what I’m talking about. But it’s not an idea or a mental emotion. It’s not any of this crap that everybody is only capable of…

I guess I just some kind of STE.

I have to go.

Keep up your good efforts Bob.

Hi Bob,

A Very good collection of thoughts. I’ve given up saying that I lean toward mysticism, or aetheism or any of the other isms that take us away from understanding and instead simply become labels. The paradox of inwardness is that it must be borne in silence. We can say that we experience, but not what we experience. The moment we commit that experience to words, we strip it of all significance.

Whether our “experience” is a complex arrangement of various chemicals in reaction to external stimuli is yet to be proven even as we discover more detail that leads in that direction almost daily. Perhaps it is simply the defensive posture of ego, but there is still that ‘something’, and it is a something that won’t go away.

My annoyance at all the externalization of internal experience in the clap trap of religion is rather plain to see. There is too much sitting down at the table and eating the menu instead of the meal.

And the Tao says that “Broad is the Way, but people delight in tortuous paths.” Both describe two sides of the same coin.

I guess I’m preaching to the choir, we’ve been here before. :wink:

civet-cat.skandinaviskzencenter. … -light.pdf

civet-cat.skandinaviskzencenter. … -light.htm

Hi tentative,

Yes, although Deikman is interesting because he got angry at a report by his peers who just took those people who called themselves mystics and were after sensations and assumed that what they had to say was the “mystical experience”. I found the words he found helpful in sorting a jumble of information and experience in my head. His words made clear that there is a way to circumscribe what Mystics are about – even if, as you say, “the paradox has to be borne in silence”.

I spoke to our new Pastor yesterday who had made a brave attempt to explain to the congregation what Jesus meant when he said that we are here to “raise the dead”. I just said to him that a paradox is difficult to be put into words. I think he understood what I meant, but his gaze makes me think that we will be speaking again soon. I think he wants to understand and he has had years of experience in Africa – I think that we could get there with him …

Of course you are right, but you know me, the optimist. I actually used a similar allegory in a bible meeting saying, “OK, we’ve eaten the package, what was in it?” Of course everybody looked at me with an odd stare and some actually said they had the feeling that someone was turning their brains over in their skull. It seems to me that we are so one-sided that the use of both halves of the brain hurts.

And yet, what Deikman is pointing to is the fact that there is a way of using a priori evidence to validate religious experience – even if we are far off from understanding it in that way.

Shalom

Hi Dan,

thanks for the links … and the nice words …