• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Towards a Mystical Understanding of Altruistic or Selfless Love

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
We might speculate thus:

Normally, we perceive a distinction between ourselves and other things. A distinction between the subject (ourselves) of perception and the things perceived by us.

Now, there are various kinds of mystical experiences, but one kind of mystical experience involves an abrupt cessation of subject/object perception while some kind of experiencing yet continues. That is, subject/object perception is replaced by a perception or sense of the One or the oneness of all things. In this kind of experiencing, there is no psychological self, no "I" distinct from the things perceived.

Also, if one loves during this sort of experiencing, when one is making no distinction between oneself and other things, one's love is selfless, or altruistic.

Of course, mere intellectual understanding of this sort of loving is not the same as experiencing it. Without experiencing it, all discussion is at best speculation.

Please discuss.
 
Last edited:

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
Staff member
Premium Member
We might speculate thus:

Normally, we perceive a distinction between ourselves and other things. A distinction between the subject (ourselves) of perception and the things perceived by us.

Now, there are various kinds of mystical experiences, but one kind of mystical experience involves an abrupt cessation of subject/object perception while some kind of experiencing yet continues. That is, subject/object perception is replaced by a perception or sense of the One or the oneness of all things. In this kind of experiencing, there is no psychological self, no "I" distinct from the things perceived.

Also, if one loves during this sort of experiencing, when one is making no distinction between oneself and other things, one's love is selfless, or altruistic.

Of course, mere intellectual understanding of this sort of loving is not the same as experiencing it. Without experiencing it, all discussion is at best speculation.

Please discuss.

I agree and have similar conclusions of oneness from mystical experiences. I admire your post, it touches on love from this concept which I have not felt during this experience, so, like you said, I have only speculation to rely on about the altruistic emotions. I will approach with caution.

To me it seems that the feeling of Oneness is very, very common among mystical experiences, nearly universal. Some don't reach the oneness, but my theory is that the oneness is recognized on the Astral level, that is where perception is omnipresent, and that those mystics who haven't found the oneness have simply not reached the Astral level.

It's interesting how you have introduced the concept of love to it. Love has never been an element of any mystical experiences of mine, aside from similar emotions of awe, euphoria, serenity, and pride. I can't imagine love during the feeling of Oneness, though. I have always imagined love to exist on the Illusional level of reality anyways (separation/personhood/the un-mystical/not-oneness).

When one experiences love while sensing Oneness, how can it be selfless, if there is nothing present but You?
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
I find love to be far too complex of a thing to be compatible with the extreme states of identity dissociation which take place during deep meditation.
 

Orbit

I'm a planet
I have felt the unconditional love of God in a mystical experience, but I'm not sure what your question actually is....
 

roger1440

I do stuff
I agree and have similar conclusions of oneness from mystical experiences. I admire your post, it touches on love from this concept which I have not felt during this experience, so, like you said, I have only speculation to rely on about the altruistic emotions. I will approach with caution.

To me it seems that the feeling of Oneness is very, very common among mystical experiences, nearly universal. Some don't reach the oneness, but my theory is that the oneness is recognized on the Astral level, that is where perception is omnipresent, and that those mystics who haven't found the oneness have simply not reached the Astral level.

It's interesting how you have introduced the concept of love to it. Love has never been an element of any mystical experiences of mine, aside from similar emotions of awe, euphoria, serenity, and pride. I can't imagine love during the feeling of Oneness, though. I have always imagined love to exist on the Illusional level of reality anyways (separation/personhood/the un-mystical/not-oneness).

When one experiences love while sensing Oneness, how can it be selfless, if there is nothing present but You?
No explanation would suffice. At this very moment you are experiencing one type of reality. You are asking to explain another type of reality. They are incompatible. All I can say is love is the thread that joins all things. Synonymous with the word love is the word attachment. If we can be attached to something, is this attachment a verb or noun? It is both. It is dependent upon what plain of reality we are on at the moment.
 

roger1440

I do stuff
“Orthodox adherents of monotheistic traditions draw clear boundaries between themselves and God. The Jewish theologian Martin Buber could speak to God as “I and Thou,” as a relationship between creature and creator, but he could not have said. “I am Thou.” As a devout Hindu might say, “Thou art that”, collapsing boundaries that separate human from divine.” (Elaine Pagels, Revelations, Chapter three, Other Revelations: Heresy or Illumination? Pages 100-101)
 
Last edited:
Top