MYSTICISM THOUGHTFULLY REFORMULATED

It is conventional wisdom to subdivide the thinking class of humanity into rationalists and mystics, but, in my view, this subdivision is simplistic and unfair to the thinking class. It should be a logical deduction from this that the two subclasses have to be overlapping, and that’s where the best grapes in the world are grown, for our unrestrained enjoyment and marvel.

The reader is already familiar with my treatment of mysticism as a complement, rather than antipode of rationality. Mysticism can also be called irrational experience, and this connection allows us to connect the obviously related concepts of mysticism and irrationality. Using this as our point of departure, we ought to remind ourselves of one particular thorny issue that used to baffle the ancients, namely, the necessary presence of irrational numbers in mathematical calculations starting exclusively with rational numbers. If this is not a good reason to explore the above-stated overlap, I do not know a better one.

As I also insisted elsewhere in my discussions of rationality and irrationality, God excels in both, and in the combination thereof, as otherwise that would have implied a deficiency in the Deity, an irreconcilable contradiction. Man being made in the image of God, and divinely inspired, must emulate God in this respect.

The best of all philosophies is such that combines elements of rationality and irrationality in approximately equal measure. Rationality is best characterized by logic; irrationality, by mysticism. I have recently come up with this new definition of mysticism:

Mysticism is a forceful infusion of irrationality into an otherwise rational philosophical contemplation.

I am wholly happy with this reformulation of mysticism, which is significantly different from the standard dictionary definitions, such as these, in Webster’s: “(1) The doctrine that it is possible to achieve communion with God through contemplation and love without the medium of human reason.” And “(2) Any doctrine that asserts the possibility of attaining knowledge of spiritual truths through intuition, acquired by fixed meditation.”

My definition is simpler and better, as it requires the introduction of the irrational element, while insisting on the retention of the rational basis. It resolutely refuses to bestow the name of mysticism on such events as, say, the ancient Orphic orgies, or the rants and ravings going on in the Charismatic Evangelical churches of modern America. It is, however, impeccably consistent with the character of Russian religious mysticism, or with the classic Jewish mysticism of the Kaballah. Come to think of it, this is also consistent with the general tradition of Western philosophy. Alas, I cannot make the same claim about Eastern philosophy, because I do not know it enough to make any claims about it whatsoever.