Mystics: Which god and religion is right?

[doppelganger]

Give ear then to that which hath been revealed by the pen of glory."

"Only the hand that erases can write the true thing." - Meister Eckhart

 

[YmirGF]

Mystics: Which god and religion is right?

Asking the question only proves that the writer knows little about mystical experience.

As experience deepens, thoughts of religion and god take a back seat and eventually become irrelevant.

 

[HCSpirit]

You've experienced god, which one is it? I NEED to know! Please do not lie

There are good reasons that you are not getting what appears to be a "straight" answer from anyone here.

Lets take a random common object, say, a dirty sock. Try to describe those socks in their particulars, so that a space alien or a mrmber of an isolated tribe in the Amazon would be able to reproduce them. Describe what yarn is, then what weaving is, then the details for every yarn, how it is wearing, and how it is fraying, every bit of lint and every broken yarn. Describe the chemistry of the sock and of the dirt on it, every unfortunate odor from its previous wearer and the environment it has been worn in. Describe every wrinkle and every angle of the sock's orientation.

This task would prove insurmountable for anything short of an intensive effort the size of an Apollo Project or a Manhattan Project, and even they might not succeed at describing a dirty sock with sufficient detail that it could be reproduced by someone who had no idea what such an object is. If a number of uncoordinated individuals tried to do such a thing, in all probability what would emerge is a several clusters of descriptions-- some descriptions focusing on the weave, others clustering around the chemistry, others clustering around the geometry, some clustering around the methodology for producing dirty socks, etc.-- and a lot of descriptions so general as to be useless to our hypothetical alien friends.

Dirty socks are a whole lot easier to describe than essential Truth.

When it comes to matters of spirit, what we see are a lot of well-intentioned efforts to describe essential Truth and methodologies for approaching it, which cluster in a manner reflected by the very divisions you can see on this board.

This is then complicated by many people who, lacking a clear idea of essential truth, take "their" particular cluster of partial description to be "more" true than another cluster. They "contribute" to their cluster more "description" based less on insight than on fantasy and impulse and sometimes even fear and hatred of other clusters, making their cluster both more distinct from the others and less authentic. Still others get a glimpse of truth and try to describe what they saw with the best clarity they can muster, but since it was only a glimpse, their sincere efforts to enhance or reform the description cluster they work within don't add much towards a general description of essential Truth.

Then, of course, you have the charlatans, who make up whatever they need to add to the collective effort to describe essential truth whatever they need in order to gain more money and/or power. Sometimes their fraudulent contributions end up inadvertently capturing something of Truth. And several generations after the founding charlatan is dead and gone, the descriptions they created often begin to bend back towards Truth, as sincere followers "interpret" their religion more in keeping with their own glimpses of Truth.

Small wonder then that one answer to your question went "all of them, and none of them".

Of course all that describing begs the question of whether it is even possible to describe essential Truth. Mystics tend to come down on the side of "no, neither language nor human reason can capture Truth". You can point to it, try to evoke it, but you can't actually put it into words and manufacture theories of it. There is in fact a great deal of agreement about essential Truth among mystics. If you were to put together a gathering of authentic mystics of differing faiths, it would probably be more harmonious than a gathering of mystics and non-mystics within any single faith. A gathering of mystics however would not lead to the One True Description of the Truth.

There is another problem with your question. You presumed everyone who considers themselves a mystic has had an encounter with Truth of the most profound sort, and that's simply not the case. Most mystics have had only partial, incomplete glimpses, and many people who call themselves mystics merely want to have direct experience of essential Truth. People who have direct knowledge of Truth of the most profound sort do certainly exist, but they are a minority among those who call themselves mystics, just as master electricians are a minority among those who do electrical work.

 

[chinu]

You've experienced god, which one is it? I NEED to know! Please do not lie

Bollywood actress: Ashwaria rai.