Mysticism anti-dogmatic?

[Quiddity]

Is it? It's come across that way to me. Or is it just me?

Layman terms please......I don't speak French.

 

[doppelganger]

Is it? It's come across that way to me. Or is it just me?

Layman terms please......I don't speak French.

What do you consider "dogmatic"?

 

[Random]

No, the only rule I have found with mysticism is that there are no rules.

Why? Because the subjective Self is limitless, and does not appreciate external or internal limitations being imposed from any source, be it a book or that self's own mind. In any case, nothing you decide is the case will be, so the mystic is constantly disproving his own preconceptions about what he is doing: otherwise, he is not doing it right!

Mysticism is the science of the soul, as has been said, viewed through the tapestry of things in manifest reality that reflect it.

If you need rules and regulations, your mysticism will destroy them. If you fear being cut loose from the parameters of consciousness you erect for yourself in mundane life, you will find yourself challenged in ways that might bring you great fear and dread.

But all of that is to be surmounted.

 

[Quiddity]

What do you consider "dogmatic"?

A fixed concept. Something set in stone. That help?

What is it to you?

 

[doppelganger]

A fixed concept. Something set in stone. That help?

Then no, not anti-dogmatic. If someone wants a concept set in stone, that's up to them.

What is it to you?

I'm a mystic and you're asking a question in the mysticism DIR. So I'm trying to find out what you want to know. What's it to you?

 

[Quiddity]

No, the only rule I have found with mysticism is that there are no rules.

Why? Because the subjective Self is limitless, and does not appreciate external or internal limitations being imposed from any source, be it a book or that self's own mind. In any case, nothing you decide is the case will be, so the mystic is constantly disproving his own preconceptions about what he is doing: otherwise, he is not doing it right!

Mysticism is the science of the soul, as has been said, viewed through the tapestry of things in manifest reality that reflect it.

If you need rules and regulations, your mysticism will destroy them. If you fear being cut loose from the parameters of consciousness you erect for yourself in mundane life, you will find yourself challenged in ways that might bring you great fear and dread.

But all of that is to be surmounted.

I said I didn't speak French...

You are going to have to bare with me because I don't capture the full meaning of what you are trying to say. Let's try again...

 

[Quiddity]

Then no, not anti-dogmatic. If someone wants a concept set in stone, that's up to them.

Then my impression is indeed flawed.

I'm a mystic and you're asking a question in the mysticism DIR. So I'm trying to find out what you want to know. What's it to you?

LOL...I meant what does dogma mean to you.

 

[doppelganger]

LOL...I meant what does dogma mean to you.

I know. I'm joking. Your definition works fine.

 

[Quiddity]

I know. I'm joking. Your definition works fine.

That's it? That was easy.

 

[Random]

I said I didn't speak French...

You are going to have to bare with me because I don't capture the full meaning of what you are trying to say. Let's try again...

That's okay, I am frequently informed that I do not make much sense to people when earnestly trying to explain something. It is my curse, but alas I cannot say what I have said any other way that makes sense to me and yet carries the depth of the meaning I am (with futility) attempting to convey, so perhaps you've a much better chance with the eloquent Doppleganger.

 

[yuvgotmel]

Answer/Excerpt cut & pasted from another thread
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=48412

Unlike a preacher or missionary telling me what to think, I watch my surroundings and I also monitor my reactions to it (my thoughts, feelings, etc.). I could read a thousand pages and understand nothing, unless I have first experienced it. The words on the pages have no meaning except the value that comes from my interpretation. Therefore, the books have no value except when needing quotes later on. The same sentence can change meaning many times for a single individual as they move forward on their spiritual and/or intellectual path. I can only comprehend what I already know.

​

Short answer: Mysticism is not dogmatic.

 

[Quiddity]

Answer/Excerpt cut & pasted from another thread

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=48412

Unlike a preacher or missionary telling me what to think, I watch my surroundings and I also monitor my reactions to it (my thoughts, feelings, etc.). I could read a thousand pages and understand nothing, unless I have first experienced it. The words on the pages have no meaning except the value that comes from my interpretation. Therefore, the books have no value except when needing quotes later on. The same sentence can change meaning many times for a single individual as they move forward on their spiritual and/or intellectual path. I can only comprehend what I already know.​

Short answer: Mysticism is not dogmatic.

Then that makes me wonder what you think dogmatic is.

 

[lunamoth]

For another perspective a good book is Ascent to Truth by Thomas Merton, which discusses the mysticism and theology of St. John of the Cross.

I think that mysticism and doctrine/dogma/theology can go hand in hand to the betterment of both.

 

[yuvgotmel]

Then that makes me wonder what you think dogmatic is.

My definition of "dogma" is an interpretation or set of interpretations that are established to be viewed through a narrow focus without exception of multiple paths/directives. Dogmatic systems are usually inflexible and, from what I have observed, eventually come to a dead-end when it comes to supplying answers.

Dogma is limited...and limited understanding (if any).

Dogmatic systems often attempt to corral their adherents into a single-minded body/organization. It is rather presumptuous to do so; and, in my opinion, it is hypocrisy at the least.

Dogma is not of the heart; and it appears to be adhered to, mostly, because of conditioned responses, taught behaviors, and brainwashing.

 

[Sunstone]

I think it depends on the mystic. Some mystics are dogmatic, some aren't dogmatic. Some behave as if they have the whole truth and no one else does, while others are quite flexible and still open.

 

[Quiddity]

I think it depends on the mystic. Some mystics are dogmatic, some aren't dogmatic. Some behave as if they have the whole truth and no one else does, while others are quite flexible and still open.

That's what it's looking like to me.

 

[Quiddity]

My definition of "dogma" is an interpretation or set of interpretations that are established to be viewed through a narrow focus without exception of multiple paths/directives. Dogmatic systems are usually inflexible and, from what I have observed, eventually come to a dead-end when it comes to supplying answers.

Dogma is limited...and limited understanding (if any).

Dogmatic systems often attempt to corral their adherents into a single-minded body/organization. It is rather presumptuous to do so; and, in my opinion, it is hypocrisy at the least.

Dogma is not of the heart; and it appears to be adhered to, mostly, because of conditioned responses, taught behaviors, and brainwashing.

Yeah, we do indeed see it differently.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Mysticism isn't really anti-dogmatic. It's more like supra-dogmatic--which in English means it is above it. By above, I do not mean it is superior, only that it explores everything. Mysticism must necessarily explore the POVs of others. In exploring the Self, there is no better place to look than Its relationship to the outside world. Mysticism itself isn't held by any dogma. How could it be? It must envelope the whole of existence.

Simply put, mysticism is the search for meaning. There shouldn't be anything exclusive or supernatural about it. It is open to all that exist, and I have begun to believe that everyone is their own mystic.

 

[Blindinglight]

A fixed concept. Something set in stone. That help?

While that isn't my definition of dogma/dogmatic, that is still a difficult yes or no.
Everything should be questioned, explored, and no rock left unturned. That can be considered a policy set in stone. But the ends, of which are learning, and bettering your understanding, and even changing ideas that are set in stone, make it anti-dogmatic. Are you able to follow this? I'll attempt to break it down further if needed so.

My defintion of dogma is forced acceptance of ideas, laws, and believes, and are not to be questioned for the most part.

 

[Quiddity]

While that isn't my definition of dogma/dogmatic, that is still a difficult yes or no.
Everything should be questioned, explored, and no rock left unturned. That can be considered a policy set in stone. But the ends, of which are learning, and bettering your understanding, and even changing ideas that are set in stone, make it anti-dogmatic. Are you able to follow this? I'll attempt to break it down further if needed so.

My defintion of dogma is forced acceptance of ideas, laws, and believes, and are not to be questioned for the most part.

It's a common view by either non-theist or even theist whole are anti-big church. I'm used to hearing it so it doesn't surprise me in the least. But that's not what I consider dogma.

I would like you to elaborate on what you said though.