Ask Sunstone Anything About His Views On Mysticism

[Sunstone]

Sunstone, I want to share something that happened to me shortly after the lunar eclipse on the Solstice in December 2010. I am interested in your opinion and the opinions of anyone else who is interested in giving it.

But first, a little bit about me. I am 40, married, no children. I am a Christian gnostic mystic although I have much in common with mystics from all the great traditions. I am on the path of Jungian Individuation, the Bhakti path of devotion to the Great Goddess of Many Names in general and the Goddess of the Bible, Sophia, in particular. I study comparative mysticism, comparative religion, comparative mythology, and parapsychology. I have had a large number of mystical and psychic and paranormal experiences throughout my life, but the one in December takes the cake. OK. Now I'll describe the experience. The day after the lunar eclipse, I was sleeping a dreamless sleep. Something started happening.

I began to gain full conscious awareness within the dreamless sleep without waking up. I woke up without actually waking up, if that makes any sense. I was an aware, disembodied, lucid perspective within the blackness of deep sleep. The fabric of the blackness took on a whole new character. It was deep; infinitely deep and silent. It seemed to crackle with electrical energy around the rough edges of my awareness. It was beautiful and exhilarating. There were two bright glowing pulsating strobing blue round Mandalas, or "UFOs", to use modern mythological terms, that began to materialize in the blackness.

They were comprised of concentric rings of small glowing living blue spheres which flashed or strobed in unison to form different patterns. I was amazed! It was so beautiful and sublime... I think it was the efforts of the living mandalas that brought me to lucidity. I don't know how long I watched them strobe. Eventually, I began to sense that they wanted me to take an action. So I raised my soul-arm, or phantom arm, or dream-arm, or whatever it was to point to where the Mandalas or UFOs or whatever they were would be, in my field of vision, if I had been awake with my eyes open in waking. My arm looked like a thought with little lights sprinkled throughout it like stars or diamonds. It was cool! I pointed to them and sent them the thought, "that point in space is where you two would be hovering, from my perspective, if I was awake and standing up. Right there and right there. See? I'm pointing right at you. I am aware." I sensed that they acknowledged my action and thoughts.

Then they faded away and a third form began to emerge from the center of the blackness. I have a hard time describing it this third form. I can't find the words. It was outlined in a glow and was very hard to make out. I got the impression it was intelligent and powerful and Holy. I think it was God or Goddess or a Jungian archetype or something like that. But I couldn't bring the form into focus well enough to make out definite features. It was like how a shifting cloak of space and light might look in a realm of subspace and darkness. Amorphous might be a good word. Or ineffable. It was aware of me, that much I was sure of.

Time just didn't seem to register. I don't know how much time passed, if indeed the concept of time has any meaning. But I drifted back to a normal dreamless sleep for a while. Then something else happened.

It was as if I was dreaming of my bedroom in real-time. I could look around the bedroom with my dream-eyes instead of my real eyes. It was so cool! I was dreaming of it exactly as it was in the waking world, except there was a shadow form in the room. A presence made out of shadow that played a cat-and-mouse game with my awareness.

There came a point when the shadow entity was right next to my bed, near my head. Right in my face. I thought, "ah-ha! I have you now!" and I playfully shot my arm out to seize the shadow. There was only air...it disappeared. After that, I drifted back to normal dreamless sleep. I don't remember any further dreams that night.

I was altered by the whole experience. I don't know how to describe it, but I am not the same person I was. I feel different, and yet the same. For days I felt like I was getting used to being back in my body. I am feeling like I am a flower that was planted in the Garden of the Divine.

So far as I know, Student X, there are many kinds of mystical experiences. There are a few mystics who divide mystical experiences into at least two categories. In one category are "makyo" experiences. In the other category are -- for lack of any better word -- "enlightenment" experiences.

The crucial factor that is used to distinguish between these two categories of mystical experiences is that only the so called "enlightenment" experiences involve a complete and total dissolution of the perceived divide between observer and observed while awareness yet continues. All other mystical experiences are makyo.

I may be very wrong here, but from your narrative, I gather that during your experience, you were in some sense separate from the things you experienced. That is, they were not you, and you were not them.

Of course, it is very hard to describe any mystical experience, so perhaps I have misunderstood yours. But if I have understood you correctly, then I believe your experience might be called a very profound makyo experience.

Now, mystics happen to be divided into two schools of thought about the ultimate significance or importance of makyo experiences. The first school believes that those kinds of experiences can hinder us from having the other kind of experience, the so called "enlightenment" experience, if -- and it is a huge "if", Student X -- if we become attached to them.

The second school, on the other hand, recognizes the legitimacy of the first school's point, but goes further than that to claim that makyo experiences can indicate we are on the right path to an "enlightenment" experience. That is, they agree we should not become attached to them, but they also point out that they can be positive signs that we are getting somewhere, so to speak.

Does any of that help?

 

[Student of X]

So far as I know, Student X, there are many kinds of mystical experiences. There are a few mystics who divide mystical experiences into at least two categories. In one category are "makyo" experiences. In the other category are -- for lack of any better word -- "enlightenment" experiences.

The crucial factor that is used to distinguish between these two categories of mystical experiences is that only the so called "enlightenment" experiences involve a complete and total dissolution of the perceived divide between observer and observed while awareness yet continues. All other mystical experiences are makyo.

I may be very wrong here, but from your narrative, I gather that during your experience, you were in some sense separate from the things you experienced. That is, they were not you, and you were not them.

Of course, it is very hard to describe any mystical experience, so perhaps I have misunderstood yours. But if I have understood you correctly, then I believe your experience might be called a very profound makyo experience.

Now, mystics happen to be divided into two schools of thought about the ultimate significance or importance of makyo experiences. The first school believes that those kinds of experiences can hinder us from having the other kind of experience, the so called "enlightenment" experience, if -- and it is a huge "if", Student X -- if we become attached to them.

The second school, on the other hand, recognizes the legitimacy of the first school's point, but goes further than that to claim that makyo experiences can indicate we are on the right path to an "enlightenment" experience. That is, they agree we should not become attached to them, but they also point out that they can be positive signs that we are getting somewhere, so to speak.

Does any of that help?

Sure, every opinion I gather helps a little. Opinions that I have gathered about this vary of course, and I appreciate your taking the time to give me yours.

 

[atanu]

I haven't re-read the thread yet, Atanu, so I might be missing something, but I think I am still in substantial agreement with my earlier, albeit ridiculous notion, that one way -- but perhaps only one way (i.e. there seem to be many ways) -- of distinguishing between mystical awareness and conscious awareness is on the basis of subject / object perception.

Your one cent would substantially raise the value of this thread. Please feel free to have a go at it!

Hello Sunstone

I wish that I did not make it so formal by first asking your permission. Formality somehow robs the spontaneity. Thank you, nevertheless, and I will try.

Your experience (i should not call it experience though) is rare, but it is known to us (to many Hindus). In Eastern spiritual philosophy this is well documented and formalised too. This is very much valued as nearly the last step to liberation and thus this experience is sought after by many through conscious practice. May be, unlike in western world, one out of every 10 Hindu will be able to agree to you without thinking you to be out of mind. And that may be a reason why we in east are materialistically backward.

Coming to the main point, I, however, do not fully understand the reason why you would wish to distinguish between mystical awareness and conscious awareness. I think YmirGF has already touched upon this briefly. What I mean is that you are Sunstone with only one kind of process to See and know. But under one condition you cognise a divisionless awareness and in another condition you own a flesh-bone body and then cognise other graspable or perceivable objects/beings around you.

So, the seeing/knowing process is one but apparatus involved are different. Consciousness, which we call as prajna (pra=pre and jna=knowledge) is indivisible one only and at one time the prajna itself is cognised as it is (which is you) and at another time, prajna is cognised with five senses and the mind. The constant factor is you whose nature is indivisible prajna.

Everyone sees this indivisible prajna in deep sleep yet fails to know anything because of lack of any contrast in terms of touch, sight, smell, taste and also due to lack of a second being.

The dissolution of subject/object distinction with awareness intact is transcending the above ignorance of sleep.

This might be easier with an example.

Suppose you are pure air, infinitely spread and endowed with seeing/knowing capacity. The fullness will be cognised. Now, if you were the air trapped inside an opaque bottle (floating in air), with two slits to look outside -- as if, and endowed with sense of touch, then cognition of oneself as being a bottle and a separate exterior universe is likely to arise.
--------

I fully agree that dissolution of object/subject distinction is the final frontier towards removing the effects of superimposition of sensual artefacts that cover up the pure consciousness that one is and thus come to know the nature of being in its pristine form.

Any other phenomenal view is mental-sensual experience.

You may wish to read:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/vedanta-dir/109924-mandukya-upanishad-text.html

I do not know whether this post will make sense or not?

Best Regards

...

 

[Willamena]

Sure, I'll give it a shot.

When I am consciously aware of something, I experience a division between me (the observer) and it (whatever it is that I observe). In other words, when I am consciously aware of something I perceive a division between me (the subject) and it (the object). I take those two sentences to be synonymous.

And here's one way to describe in a simple way that division between me and it, between the observer and the observed, between subject and object: So far as I can see, I am not the notebook on my desk that I am looking at.

Apparently, this division of reality into me and not-me is ultimately caused by as yet largely unknown physiological processes in my brain. Yet, if that's the case, then any such processes can be interrupted. And, indeed, they sometimes are.

For instance, it appears those processes are routinely interrupted after I go to sleep -- or in any other moments when I lose consciousness. But what might happen if those processes were interrupted while I, in some sense of "I", was still awake? Or still aware?

I believe that if and when that happens there is no longer a division in perception or awareness between me and it, between the observer and the thing observed, between subject and object. Put somewhat poetically, "I and the universe become one". And this "One", this "Unity of all things", or more simply this "All", is sometimes called by some mystics, "god"; and by other mystics other words.

I believe Seyorni said it well when he somewhere mentioned that this "Unity" is the sine qua non -- the indispensable condition -- of this particular kind of mystical awareness.

I think it is important, however, to recognize that when mystics use that word "god", they are -- so far as I can see -- not talking about the Gods of non-mystics. At least not in any significant way.

I hope this has been helpful.

Awesome, thanks Phil. That makes sense.

 

[Quagmire]

May I ask how you came up with the peculiar notion that mystics come with credentials?

So wait a minute: you mean the online correspondence course I took ripped me off?

*takes certificate off of the wall*

 

[Breathe]

May I ask what your daily practices are, if you have any?
How did you "begin doing mystic things"? Excuse the poorly constructed question.

 

[sandandfoam]

Is poetry mysticism?

I think Emily Dickenson is a mystic:-
"The brain is wider than the sky,
For, put them side by side,
The one the other will include
With ease, and you beside."

To my mind mysticism is about looking inside. Do you think that if you look far enough outside you end up back inside?

 

[Sunstone]

Is poetry mysticism?

I think Emily Dickenson is a mystic:-
"The brain is wider than the sky,
For, put them side by side,
The one the other will include
With ease, and you beside."

To my mind mysticism is about looking inside. Do you think that if you look far enough outside you end up back inside?

Do I get frubals if I give you my opinion, Stephen? A lad needs some incentive, you know.

EDIT: OK, I give up. As is usual, your questions are just too interesting to hold out on, Stephen. Dang it!

First...

Is poetry mysticism?

I think, in so far as mysticism is thought of as a tradition and/or a body of teachings, then poetry can fit in rather well with that, for some of mystic teachings have been communicated via poems.

But, in so far as mysticism is thought of as an experience -- or way of experiencing -- then I do not believe poetry is any more mysticism than a word is the thing the word refers to. The Bhagavad Gita is not a path to god, it is merely the promotion -- or at best description -- of a few paths to god.

To my mind mysticism is about looking inside.

One of the first people in the West to study mysticism as a scholar -- rather than as a seeker -- recognized the world has at large two broad mystic traditions. The first is characterized by looking inside to god. The second is characterized by looking outside to nature. Seyorni touches upon the distinction between those two traditions here.

Do you think that if you look far enough outside you end up back inside?

By coincidence, Stephen, I've been wondering the same thing this past month or so. I have yet to form an opinion about it. What, pray tell, do you think?

 

[Sunstone]

First, Atanu, thank you so much for humoring me by expressing your own views in this thread -- a thread which happens to be focused on getting me frubals....eh, I mean on answering questions about my views of mysticism. I believe you have genuinely contributed to this thread by pointing out, without debating the matter, some different, but traditional, ways of looking at the topics about which I've been prostituting my worthless views. I wish everyone to know you are not hijacking the thread and that I invited you to offer us your views.

Your experience (i should not call it experience though)...

Nor, perhaps, should you call it mine.

Your experience (i should not call it experience though) is rare, but it is known to us (to many Hindus). In Eastern spiritual philosophy this is well documented and formalised too. This is very much valued as nearly the last step to liberation and thus this experience is sought after by many through conscious practice. May be, unlike in western world, one out of every 10 Hindu will be able to agree to you without thinking you to be out of mind.

Sam Harris, who is never one to be less than frank about what he thinks, somewhere says that the East has largely stood on the shoulders of spiritual giants while the West has largely stood on the shoulders of spiritual dwarfs. Possibly, an interesting idea, especially coming as it does from someone whose rejection of the world's religions (he calls for them to be replaced by a "science of spirituality") has created so much controversy that he must now travel with bodyguards.

And that may be a reason why we in east are materialistically backward.

That strikes me as a fascinating insight.

What, if anything, is the social and economic relationship between mysticism and materialism? If your kindness someday radically exceeds your common sense, I would appreciate it should you start a thread on that or some similar topic. I would love to hear your views on that.

Coming to the main point, I, however, do not fully understand the reason why you would wish to distinguish between mystical awareness and conscious awareness. I think YmirGF has already touched upon this briefly. What I mean is that you are Sunstone with only one kind of process to See and know. But under one condition you cognise a divisionless awareness and in another condition you own a flesh-bone body and then cognise other graspable or perceivable objects/beings around you.

So, the seeing/knowing process is one but apparatus involved are different. Consciousness, which we call as prajna (pra=pre and jna=knowledge) is indivisible one only and at one time the prajna itself is cognised as it is (which is you) and at another time, prajna is cognised with five senses and the mind. The constant factor is you whose nature is indivisible prajna.

Everyone sees this indivisible prajna in deep sleep yet fails to know anything because of lack of any contrast in terms of touch, sight, smell, taste and also due to lack of a second being.

The dissolution of subject/object distinction with awareness intact is transcending the above ignorance of sleep.

This might be easier with an example.

Suppose you are pure air, infinitely spread and endowed with seeing/knowing capacity. The fullness will be cognised. Now, if you were the air trapped inside an opaque bottle (floating in air), with two slits to look outside -- as if, and endowed with sense of touch, then cognition of oneself as being a bottle and a separate exterior universe is likely to arise.

I believe I followed you rather handsomely until your example. At that point I became as lost as a country boy in the big city. However, that's not uncommon.

Everything but your example has given me much to think about, and I will go back and study your example a bit more.

To some extent, I wish to point out the possibility that we are in a bit more agreement than might seem, but use different words -- or at least define our terms a bit differently. There might be some of that, but I suspect that does not account for every difference in our views.

But please allow me to ask you whether the sort of Consciousness -- consciousness with a big "C" -- that you refer to is thought to exist apart from the brain?

I do not know whether this post will make sense or not?

I wish you to know that if your best effort to explain something to a fool like me does not make sense to the fool, then it's all your fault. Besides, I am an American and consequently I have every right for things to make sense to me with as little study on my part and more quickly than I can be served a hamburger at a fast food restaurant.

 

[Sunstone]

May I ask what your daily practices are, if you have any?
How did you "begin doing mystic things"? Excuse the poorly constructed question.

Thank you so much for your interest, Odion! I intended this thread to be much more about my views of mysticism, than about anything I might have to do with mysticism. But I've already answered one or two of the latter questions, so I think it fair to answer yours -- but by PM from now on. Again, thank you for your interest!

 

[sandandfoam]

Do I get frubals if I give you my opinion, Stephen? A lad needs some incentive, you know.

Lol. Of course!

By coincidence, Stephen, I've been wondering the same thing this past month or so. I have yet to form an opinion about it. What, pray tell, do you think

I think so. But I've gone at it the other way 'round. I've been thinking about bundle theory, Nietzsche and phenomenology. I've been looking inside for a while and I think I've come back outside. I'm stuck on the image of a mobius strip.

 

[Willamena]

The poet's möbius strip.

 

[atanu]

But please allow me to ask you whether the sort of Consciousness -- consciousness with a big "C" -- that you refer to is thought to exist apart from the brain?

Hi

I will not derail the thread more than I have.

I will create a thread to deal with this more exhaustively but here I say that I believe that consciousness (small c) is the sprouting of the Consciousness (big C), which is seed and is unmanifest (to the knowing Mind).

Just as a seed can remain separate from earth (field) which is needed to sprout itself to a full plant, fully sprouted Consciousness is reflected in Mind through the medium of a field which we have come to call brain.

Brains perish but consciousness that is aware of "I am" never perishes.

Thanks
...

 

[sandandfoam]

I think that the argument that human consciousness requires language and culture to exist is a strong one.
In a very real sense I think consciousness extends beyond the body and exists apart from the brain in the space between people.

 

[atanu]

In one upanishad it is said that everyone travels over a goldmine everyday (in deep sleep) not recognising it. You have that goldmine in your possession. I can only pray that you hold on to it and let some of the joy and peace be transferred to my bank account (my mind).

...